General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[Doctor Evil]

I see some news commentators conflating the Israeli policy of targeting the houses of militants' families with the collateral damage that might be caused by Israeli bombs missing rocket launch sites and hitting houses instead. The deliberate targeting of the houses of people associated with militants has nothing to do with any Hamas rocket positions.

Also, does everyone agree that this incident more or less precipitated the recent cycle of rockets and airstrikes?

November 8:
Israeli forces cross into Gaza, exchange fire with Gazan fighters, and a kid is killed. There is also an explosion in a tunnel that injures an Israeli soldier (in Gaza?)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/08/palestinians-israel-violence-idAFL5E8M8AWS20121108

From the cited link, this followed a two-week pause in violence.

Not really. First more on that incident:

A closer look at the reports of the clash (not quoted by Abunimah) reveals the IDF’s side of the story; namely, that soldiers were carrying out a routine patrol along the border fence in central Gaza, discovered three explosive devices and neutralized them, before returning fire into an adjacent field. Later that day, a soldier was lightly injured by mortar shells fired at an IDF force on the border with southern Gaza. It’s true that the events of November 8th did lead to a spike in the violence (there had been few rockets during the previous fortnight; and one mentally ill Palestinian man had been killed by IDF troops when he approached the border fence), which is why it’s important that we try to understand what happened. ]

So Israeli forces only entered after they identified explosives planted near the fence. But identifying this as the source of violence will still give you the wrong answer. This is actually typical of the superficial level of coverage that one get from the international media.

The current exchange of fire has is a result of a trend which has been going on for quite a while. Its roots are actually in the Egyptian revolution and the resulting change of leadership. After cast lead Hamas had to curb the amount of rockets fired from the Gaza strip. This involved not only stopping its own attack, but also encouraging other organizations to hold their fire. Rocket fire never stopped completely, but it was relatively rare. This did not made Hamas popular. Quite the opposite, shooting rockets on Israel makes you popular.

The period where Hamas operatives avoided shooting rockets, while more extreme organizations continued to do so has created some tensions between Hamas and those organizations. My guess is that when a Muslim brotherhood government was formed in Egypt Hamas saw a chance to change the rules of the games. Since then there have been a steady increase of involvement of Hamas in attacks on Israel, as well as more and more attacks by other organization. IMO, this slow escalation ensured that something like we see today will happen sooner or later. Identifying a particular incident as the starting point is misleading here. If that incidental would not have happens, another would have. The change of tactics from Hamas essentially ensured that.

One can ask why did Hamas changes their approach. I can only guess. I think that they thought that the fact that Egypt is controlled by the Muslim brotherhood would give them cover, and would prevent a strong Israeli response. This would allow them to tune the level of violence without a risk of being exposed to the superior fire power of the IDF. It did not work as planned.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I see some news commentators conflating the Israeli policy of targeting the houses of militants' families with the collateral damage that might be caused by Israeli bombs missing rocket launch sites and hitting houses instead. The deliberate targeting of the houses of people associated with militants has nothing to do with any Hamas rocket positions.

If these houses are used as bases, that makes them legitimate targets by anyone's standards. Osama bin Laden hid out in an ordinary house (okay, it was a walled compound, but still), remember. The practice of using human shields (in this case family members) is terrible, but hardly the fault of the IDF.

I also suppose (layman's opinion) that the IDF does its best not to injure innocent civilians, by for example only targeting houses when non-combatants are away from them.

 

[Toontown]

The Joint Arab/Persian Plan For The Development Of The Palestinian State is currently in the Buildup Phase, during which a large number of thick concrete high-rise apartment buildings are being built in Gaza, facing Israel, where Palestinians can lounge comfortably on their balconies, sipping tea and watching Hamas/Persian rockets streak overhead into Israel.

Return fire from Israel will of course be forbidden by International Law.

The plan has a few glitches, but Jew recalcitrance is being systematically worn down. Soon the Jews will submit.

It has not yet been determined how the Palestinians will make a living after the Jews are gone and the Palestinians lose their currently profitable professional victim status. Presumably the U.S. will be required by International Law to support the Palestinians, since it is all the U.S.'s fault.

Eventually the former Jew homeland is slated become a tourist attraction. The Palestinians will then wax wealthy, and the dishonor of humanity will be complete.

Then Heaven will open, and a great voice will be heard to utter "It is finished." And fire will rain down out of Heaven and consume all men, great and small. And in those days men shall weep and wail, and they shall curse the God of Heaven for their torments; for their torments shall be exceeding great. But they shall not repent of their evil deeds, even unto death.

Then all the graves will be opened, and the souls of all men will come before God, and God will judge them, each one according to his nature. And the greater part of men will be condemned to the eternal flames of Hell, because their natures are evil. And the Meek shall inherit the Earth. And only the very elect shall see Heaven.

Anyhow, that's the plan.

 

[Doctor Evil]

During this current exchange, approx 740 rockets have been fired out of Gaza.
Iron Dome has intercepted approx 240 of them. Figure 15% of the missiles are not worth calculating a solution (the system ignores non threatening targets) the array has knocked down about 40% of the attack. Which is incredible, all things considered. If this rate of improvement continues, the implications for defense are profound.

Actually, your numbers are off. The rockets from Gaza are not well aimed. The vast majority fall in open areas. The iron dome system actually calculates a solution to all rockets but does not try to intercept the rocket if it is not directed to populated areas.

This the system try to intercept only a fraction of the rockets. Out of those the system had around 85% success rate, why is way better then I expected. The result is that while in the current exchange of fire Hamas has shot more rockets compared to cast lead, less of them managed to hit populated areas. It is too early to say if the system will force Israel neighbors to change their strategic approach (meaning using rockets to attack Israeli cities) but the system may prove very important in the long run.

 

[Almo]

And here we go again.

retaliations for retaliations for retaliations etc etc etc.

Then a big military action lasting weeks, a thousand plus dead Palestinians, lofty military objectives not reached, international condemnation, pull out, parliamentary inquiry about failure to meet goals, trickle of cross border rocket attacks from Gaza, targeted assassinations from Israel, slow escalation, big military action lasting weeks etc.

Surely humans must be capable of breaking such a cycle?

As long as all the condemnation lands on one side and not the other (should land on both sides, in my opinion), I fail to see why it would stop.

 

[Almo]

From the above, I take it that you implicitly agree that sometimes one side is more at fault/needs to stop shooting first.

What do you think of the postulated:

If Palestinians unilateraly give up violence: both Israelis and Palestinians would live long and prosper (as the Israelis would stop shooting too and economic growth would boom).

If the Israelis unilateraly give up violence: the Palestinians (and/or sorrounding Arab states) would kill them all.

Is that still a "both sides need to stop shooting equally"?

Your Israeli case is BS. Supposing they did give up violence, say for a 3-month window. If there were Israelis killed during that time, it would give them the moral high ground. As it is, they just keep pummeling each other.

There are two important things: the US unilaterally supports anything Israel does, which means they have a UN Sec Council Veto on their side, and that they are vastly more in control of the situation with their superior military, economy, and political organization.

Hamas is more than a terrorist org. They are also responsible for managing public services in Gaza. Given them a means to talk, and they will marginalize the terrorists as more terror attacks would undermine the political side. This is what happened with Sinn Fein in Ireland. Over time, as political discourse became more useful, they had to shun the violent people.

But since Israel can Do No Wrong, their current strategy is working fine, and they have no reason to change tack.

 

[Giz]

[qimg]http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll247/stout38/tumblr_mdmkttf6xo1qb3o80o1_1280.jpg[/qimg]

Something about that photo doesn't seem legit... do they really have laboratories in Gaza?

 

[Giz]

Your Israeli case is BS. Supposing they did give up violence, say for a 3-month window. If there were Israelis killed during that time, it would give them the moral high ground. As it is, they just keep pummeling each other.

Really, what do you think would happen if Israel announced that it would not return fire under any circumstances for the next 3 months?

Hamas is more than a terrorist org. They are also responsible for managing public services in Gaza. Given them a means to talk, and they will marginalize the terrorists as more terror attacks would undermine the political side.

How do they not have a means to talk? Do they not have cell phones (used them all as bomb detonators)?

And as for "more than just a terrorist org" I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't give Nazis a break just because they were also responsible for managing public services in Berlin.

But since Israel can Do No Wrong,

I don't think anyone has said that. What has been said is that Israel is far less at fault.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Your Israeli case is BS. Supposing they did give up violence, say for a 3-month window. If there were Israelis killed during that time, it would give them the moral high ground.

Which is exactly what Israel is doing. They sit there doing pretty much nothing as HAMAS showers them with rockets. Then they finally reach a point where they take military action, and they're condemned by the world community.

Think back to 9/11, when the USA was attacked by a terrorist organization harboured by Afghanistan, who also refused to surrender Osama and his men. There were protests when we invaded Afghanistan, of course, but nothing that comes close to the scale levelled at Israel whenever they lift a finger against HAMAS.

What is the IDF supposed to do? They've walled the Palestinians in, blockaded their coast and even set up their own miniature Star Wars project to intercept incoming missiles -- there's not many other options left besides military force.
Now, before you say "oh, but they could tear down the wall, drive the settlers out of the occupied areas and let HAMAS import goods and weapons as it pleases", let me remind you that Israel has faced hostility from Palestine since day one. Playing nice, unfortunately, is hardly going to change anything, except make it easier to kill innocent people.

Hamas is more than a terrorist org. They are also responsible for managing public services in Gaza.

Unfortunately, yes. The terrorist group that has vowed to wipe Israel off the map, fires countless rockets into their territory, use human shields and refuse to build bunkers for the civilian populace...

...is also the Palestinian government. Oh, and by the way, was voted into power by the Palestinian people. A whole nation of hostages, as it were.

It's like the Norwegians choosing Anders Breivik as minister of defense...

Given them a means to talk, and they will marginalize the terrorists as more terror attacks would undermine the political side.

Far as I know, HAMAS refuses to negotiate with Israel as a matter of principle.

But since Israel can Do No Wrong, their current strategy is working fine, and they have no reason to change tack.

"Israel can do no wrong"? They're among the most hated countries on the planet.

 

[Praktik]

Which is exactly what Israel is doing. They sit there doing pretty much nothing as HAMAS showers them with rockets. Then they finally reach a point where they take military action, and they're condemned by the world community

If one were to take the same selective snapshot, then yes, boggling perhaps, but the Israelis were doing far more than "nothing":

For example, in 2011, the projectiles fired by the Israeli military into Gaza have been responsible for the death of 108 Palestinians, of which 15 where women or children, and the injury of 468 Palestinians, of which 143 where women or children. The methods by which these causalities were inflicted by Israeli projectiles breaks down as follows: 57 percent, or 310, were caused by Israeli aircraft missile fire; 28 percent, or 150, where from Israeli live ammunition; 11 percent, or 59, were from Israeli tank shells; while another 3 percent, or 18, were from Israeli mortar fire.

Through September 2012, Israeli weaponry caused 55 Palestinian deaths and 257 injuries. Among these 312 casualties, 61, or roughly 20 percent, were children and 28 were female. 209 of these casualties came as a result of Israeli Air Force missiles, 69 from live ammunition fire, and 18 from tank shells. It is important to note that these figures do not represent a totality of Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza but rather only Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza which cause casualties. The total number of Israeli projectiles fired into Gaza is bound to be significantly larger.​

Now this is apart from judgment as to the whether the IDF actions in Gaza is justified or not (like a snake eating its own tail we can go back and back in terms of "who started it") - I post this merely to point out that chronologies saying Israel was "doing nothing" are just as intellectually bankrupt as chronologies placing all the blame on Israel and saying Hamas was "minding its own business" before the IDF did something or other. It is also a useful corrective to accounts highlighting how Israel has "left Gaza" and "this is the thanks we get" - well according to those stats above, Israel may have left, but comes knocking fairly regularly...

 

[Stout]

Something about that photo doesn't seem legit... do they really have laboratories in Gaza?

Curious, isn't it ?

On one hand we're presented with an image of Gaza as being the world's largest open air prison camp where people are ( supposedly ) chasing rats around with sharpened sticks while having to endure Israeli "genocide"

On the other hand, we see that they have hospitals, and universities ?

So do you think that sign is a fake and if so, who faked it. I plucked it off electronic intifada as evidence of Israeli propaganda which it could possibly be.

Or, it could be Palestinian propaganda.

 

[Morrigan]

No. That would be a logical fallacy on your part.

It was a question, not a fallacy. Okay, so you do agree that Hamas categorically refuses peace. And yet you still place the blame on Israel, why?

Fake.

I really do hope that it was just a mistake, because otherwise, using a child you killed yourself by your own incompetence as a way to score political points against your enemy is just a whole new level of appalling.

 

[bit_pattern]

It was a question, not a fallacy. Okay, so you do agree that Hamas categorically refuses peace. And yet you still place the blame on Israel, why?
.

Again with the fallacies, I never agreed to any such thing. The premise of your question is flawed.

 

[Morrigan]

Sigh. Back up a little here. You were asked:

With these declarations in mind, can you think of anything Hamas or the Palestinian Authority could do to foster peace?

Then you said:

Considering Israel is not a a willing partner in peace and has a strategic interest in perpetuating the status quo that is probably a very instructive question to ask. Maybe its time for the Palestinians to remove Israel from the equation all together.

So in other words, you didn't answer the question, and instead suggested placing the blame on Israel for "not being a willing partner for peace". This is a pretty mind-boggling to say, because not only it's not true, but it's definitely Hamas who is outright unwilling to see peace as a solution.

 

[bit_pattern]

Sigh. Back up a little here. You were asked

That's got nothing to do with you saying Id agreed with the premise you said I'd agreed to

This is a pretty mind-boggling to say, because not only it's not true, but it's definitely Hamas who is outright unwilling to see peace as a solution.

Hamas has only been a major player in this conflict for the last 10 - 15 years, there's been plenty of opportunity and plenty of other players. Israel prefers to empower terrorists (Arafat, Hamas) than deal with moderates because it gives them justification to perpetuate conflict. Israel has always been playing a long game.

 

[dudalb]

Damn those Israelis! Why don't they just let themselves be slaughtered like Good Jews...........

 

[Giz]

I really do hope that it was just a mistake, because otherwise, using a child you killed yourself by your own incompetence as a way to score political points against your enemy is just a whole new level of appalling.

It's done all the time:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/r...hy-of-death-the-western-media-suckered-again/


Just drives home how utterly depraved Hamas are. (Very much in the mold of the apocryphal crusader who declared "kill them all, God will know his own").

 

[Giz]

Damn those Israelis! Why don't they just let themselves be slaughtered like Good Jews...........

Wasn't that Gandhi's suggestion?

 

[dudalb]

That's got nothing to do with you saying Id agreed with the premise you said I'd agreed to




Hamas has only been a major player in this conflict for the last 10 - 15 years, there's been plenty of opportunity and plenty of other players. Israel prefers to empower terrorists (Arafat, Hamas) than deal with moderates because it gives them justification to perpetuate conflict. Israel has always been playing a long game.

So somehow Israel convinces the Palestinians to elect radicals to office in place of moderates?

Wow, the Jews are even smarter then I thought.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Your Israeli case is BS. Supposing they did give up violence, say for a 3-month window. If there were Israelis killed during that time, it would give them the moral high ground. As it is, they just keep pummeling each other.

There are two important things: the US unilaterally supports anything Israel does, which means they have a UN Sec Council Veto on their side, and that they are vastly more in control of the situation with their superior military, economy, and political organization.

Hamas is more than a terrorist org. They are also responsible for managing public services in Gaza. Given them a means to talk, and they will marginalize the terrorists as more terror attacks would undermine the political side. This is what happened with Sinn Fein in Ireland. Over time, as political discourse became more useful, they had to shun the violent people.

But since Israel can Do No Wrong, their current strategy is working fine, and they have no reason to change tack.

First tell us how many jews need to be killed before it is morally expectable for them to defend themselves. I would really like someone to answer this questions. It's funny too how people who make this argument never suggest Hamas stop firing rockets at civilians.

"There are two important things: the US unilaterally supports anything Israel does"

No, they don't. But they, unlike you, don't simply object to Israel simply for being Jews and no other reason. The US actually looks at the situation and evaluates if for what it is. They support Israel having the right to defend itself and Israel is doing so in a way that leaves the least amount of casualties. Hamas targets anything it possibly can, while Israel uses precession strikes to minimize casualties. Hamas stores their weapons in civilian population to use the civilians as shields and get people like you to support them when those decisions result in more civilian deaths, and Israel sets up early warning and missile defense systems to minimize casualties.

The US vetos proposals which seem to always only condemn Israel and never Hamas. The US has no problem with Hamas breaking resolutions and violating al of the Geneva conventions, but they are more than happy to blame Israel. The US however won't stoop to that level. The US wants fair resolutions, not simply anti-Israel resolutions.

The UN is the biggest scam ever, but some people love to use it when it comes to Israel.