General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[JihadJane]

Nice dodge attempt, but no cigar. Try again. If you feel my replies in the thread aren't meaningfull, please, do tell me why. For example, my reply where I detailed what the Geneva Conventions say about the legitimacy of attacking hospitals and houses used as military bases. Since the "pro-Palestinian" side ignored my entire post, as well as most other posts I've made, then please, do tell me how it didn't contribute to the discussion.

I also note that my Finland Question has been ignored. Again. Telling.

Who is this post addressed to?

 

[The Don]

Do you support the right of all people who have lost lands in the 40's or later to "defend their country" with HAMAS' approach? Would you support the Finns if they elected a terrorist organization into power and started firing rockets into towns in Russian-occupied Finnish territories? What if Finnish kids ran in front of Russian tanks throwing rocks at them? What if Finland's government had as its official stance the destruction of Russia? What if the Finnish army refused to wear uniforms and used civilians, including children and bedridden hospital patients and medical staff as human shields?

I hate taking part in Israel/Palestine threads because I find it difficult to sympathise fully or blame fully either side.

Your Finnish example is incomplete, you need to add something to the effect that Russian settlers are occupying the most fertile parts of Finland and that the Russian government while saying that they are against the settlement process provide protection, support and a whacking great wall for the settlers.

In the context of Northern Ireland, large sections of the U.S population, particularly those of Irish descent didn't (and still don't) have a problem supporting organisations doing exactly what you suggest in your example.

 

[DreadNiK]

As much as there is some weird and sometimes quite outrageous claims made by Israel, Right or Wrong supporters, the lunacy probably is bigger on the "Viva Palestina!" side.

How much can you stomach of George Galloway on Iranian TV and a bunch of phone-in morons before you have to switch it off.

Listening in the background now. He's such an awful person.

ETA: Made it half way through but can't go any further

 

[Doctor Evil]

The Israeli Ministry of Defense in Tel Aviv is mere blocks from a high school.

And? What kind of conclusions do you draw from that?

I think I can guess what you are implying, and I do not buy it. You are implying that since Israel has a base which is inside a city then it is OK that Hamas hides its military operations inside civilian areas.

This is not serious analysis. A few facts.

1. Bases such as the Israeli ministry of defense are fenced, and in general clearly marked. It is easy to identify them as military installations. An enemy using reasonably accurate weapons should be able to hit them without harming nearby civilians.

2. The large majority of Israeli military installations are not located inside residential areas. By far. And the IDF is moving more and more bases away from cities because of economic reasons.

All this is not different from what typically every army would do. The upshot is that IDF activity is not made to look like civilian activity. And here I would agree with you that such bases are legitimate military targets.

And, other than one time where Hamas asked people to go onto the roof of a Hamas official's house to avert an Israeli airstrike, I haven't heard much credible evidence of Hamas deliberately using human shields. The fact that they seem to enjoy some considerable support in Gaza belies this fact.

My problem with your post is here. There is plenty of evidence to the contrary, but you need to look for it.

Let me ask you a simple questions. Where are all the rockets in Gaza stored? Just to give you an idea about the numbers. According to estimates Hamas had around 12000 rockets prior to the latest round of fire. In the latest round Hamas fired a 1000 or so, and the IDF destroyed a similar number. A huge number of rockets are sill located somewhere in Gaza. Are you going to claim that these rockets are stored in military bases, and that the IDF simply never bothered to bomb them? In fact, it is well know that the rockets are stored supposedly civilian buildings.

One way to confirm that munitions are stored in places which are not marked for military use is to look for secondary explosions following an Israeli strike. The same conclusion can be reached if the resulting explosion is very strong, compared to the munition used. A very short search allowed me to find a few videos of air strikes on munitions stores in civilian areas, and of Hamas shooting rockets out of neighborhoods.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv7WzsL2mQc&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg&index=3&feature=plcp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DM27rKItRQ&feature=BFa&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1Um3xJWGso&feature=BFa&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

 

[DreadNiK]

I hate taking part in Israel/Palestine threads because I find it difficult to sympathise fully or blame fully either side.

So you only like to take part in discussions of black-and-white issues? Doesn't that get a bit boring?

In the context of Northern Ireland, large sections of the U.S population, particularly those of Irish descent didn't (and still don't) have a problem supporting organisations doing exactly what you suggest in your example.

And they should be appropriately ashamed that they did so, in my opinion (although I don't have a lot of knowledge in this area)

 

[JihadJane]

U.N. Special Rapporteur Calls for Global Protection of Gaza Civilians from U.S.-Backed Israeli Assault


Video and rush transcript - Democracy Now


***Richard Falk, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, calls on the international community to help defend the people of Gaza from the ongoing U.S.-backed Israeli assault. "It’s time, it seems to me, for the international community to take some responsibility for protecting the people of Gaza," Falk says. "The responsibility to protect norm was very self-righteously invoked in relation to Gaddafi’s Libya, but there’s utter silence when it comes to the people of Gaza."***

 

[The Don]

So you only like to take part in discussions of black-and-white issues? Doesn't that get a bit boring?

It's not that, it's because both sides are so entrenched that there is no discussion and I get sick of the name calling and one-eyed view each side has.

 

[Ziggurat]

You think the pro-Israel side has a lot of meaningful things being said? Much of it amounts to little more than snide references to "I've decided you're an anti-semite, so can I treat you like ****".

I think a little trip down memory lane is in order. Remember that thread, AUP? Where you claimed that Israel used nerve gas against Palestinians, when it was only tear gas?

You haven't changed a bit in all these years.

 

[Giz]

and a whacking great wall for the settlers.

What is it about the wall that outrages people? It was built in response to terrorist attacks and it reduced suicide bombings by over 90%. It's an amazingly succesful construct that should be applauded by anyone who is against murder.

 

[The Don]

What is it about the wall that outrages people? It was built in response to terrorist attacks and it reduced suicide bombings by over 90%. It's an amazingly succesful construct that should be applauded by anyone who is against murder.

I can only speak for myself.

The Israelis are perfectly entitled to build a wall around their own country, within their own country so that "no mans land" is still in their country. The way I understand it, at least some of the wall is built on the occupied West Bank, completing the annexation of that territory. That's the bit I don't like.

There have also been claims (that I am not in a position to verify) that the route of the wall has been designed to separate Palestinians from their assets:

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/unescwa/unpan035390.pdf

 

[Giz]

I can only speak for myself.

The Israelis are perfectly entitled to build a wall around their own country, within their own country so that "no mans land" is still in their country. The way I understand it, at least some of the wall is built on the occupied West Bank, completing the annexation of that territory. That's the bit I don't like.

There have also been claims (that I am not in a position to verify) that the route of the wall has been designed to separate Palestinians from their assets:

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/unescwa/unpan035390.pdf

Maybe. But it wouldn't have been built at all if the Palestinians hadn't been launching suicide bombers at Israel - so I am less troubled by it. (Just as I am les than troubled by Russia slightly reducing the size of Germany post WW2 - these things should serve to deter international assholery).

 

[The Don]

Maybe. But it wouldn't have been built at all if the Palestinians hadn't been launching suicide bombers at Israel - so I am less troubled by it. (Just as I am les than troubled by Russia slightly reducing the size of Germany post WW2 - these things should serve to deter international assholery).

And the suicide bombers wouldn't have been launched if [something the Israelis did] hadn't happened.

....and the Israelis wouldn't have had to do it if [something the Palestinians/Arabs did] hadn't happened.

....and the Palestinians/Arabs wouldn't have done that if [something else the Israelis did] hadn't happened.

....and the Israelis wouldn't have had to do that if [something the Palestinians/Arabs did] hadn't happened.

and so on since ever.

From my poorly-informed point of view it seems that the Palestinians seem to launch more attacks. Israelis don't attack as often but when they do, they kill a lot more Palestinians. Neither number of attacks nor body count gives an indication as to right or wrong IMO.

 

[bikerdruid]

U.N. Special Rapporteur Calls for Global Protection of Gaza Civilians from U.S.-Backed Israeli Assault


Video and rush transcript - Democracy Now


***Richard Falk, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, calls on the international community to help defend the people of Gaza from the ongoing U.S.-backed Israeli assault. "It’s time, it seems to me, for the international community to take some responsibility for protecting the people of Gaza," Falk says. "The responsibility to protect norm was very self-righteously invoked in relation to Gaddafi’s Libya, but there’s utter silence when it comes to the people of Gaza."***

america was concerned about libyans only because of libya's oil.
gaza has no oil.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Your Finnish example is incomplete, you need to add something to the effect that Russian settlers are occupying the most fertile parts of Finland and that the Russian government while saying that they are against the settlement process provide protection, support and a whacking great wall for the settlers.

Of course not. The wall is a response to Palestian aggression -- if there was no hostile intent from Gaza, there'd be no need for a naval blockade or wall in the first place.

Not that it matters, because no matter how "incomplete" the scenario, terrorism is still not justified. I used far more grievous examples earlier in the thread -- the Tibetans and Indians who lost all their land to foreign occupation, for example. Would Gandhi have been justified in launching a large-scale terror campaign against Britain? Of course not.

america was concerned about libyans only because of libya's oil.

Evidence?

gaza has no oil.

And?

And the suicide bombers wouldn't have been launched if [something the Israelis did] hadn't happened.

Wrong. Israel has faced hostility from day one for simply existing -- its mere foundation incited invasion from neighboring countries, and the Palestinians have never recognized Israel as a country.

What is it about the wall that outrages people? It was built in response to terrorist attacks and it reduced suicide bombings by over 90%. It's an amazingly succesful construct that should be applauded by anyone who is against murder.

It'll be interesting to see what HAMAS thinks of next, if Iron Dome eventually grows to intercept 90-100% of incoming missiles.

 

[dudalb]

THere are now around Five Million Jews in Isreal, and they are giving no signs of wanting to move elsewhere.
Look, whether or not the founding of Israel was a good or bad idea is water under the bridge because of that fact.
Endlessly rehashing 1948 04 1949 serves no real purpose. Question is how do we deal with the situation as it exists.
And note how often "Anti Zionism" shades into general purpose Anti Semitism?

 

[bikerdruid]

america was concerned about libyans only because of libya's oil.

Evidence?

history, man...history.

 

[Cobalt]

history, man...history.

Fascinating. How about you, y'know, add some facts? Else I'm just going to assume that's ********, because, history, man...history.

 

[richardm]

It'll be interesting to see what HAMAS thinks of next, if Iron Dome eventually grows to intercept 90-100% of incoming missiles.

It's already supposed to be around 90% successful, according to the Jerusalem Post. I'd have thought that the obvious solution would be to make a cheaper version and saturate the batteries. They're supposed to be around $800 a pop to make, but I'd have thought it would be possible to do it cheaper. It's not like they need to be particularly accurate, and a smaller rocket would still be a damned nuisance.

I don't know though, I'm not a terrorist.

 

[Morrigan]

Yup. Firecrackers.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4308023,00.html

Funny how your article doesn't even support your claims. The PRC claims that these rockets have real warheads on them and dismiss the "empty shell" claims as propaganda meant to reassure the population. Unbelievable... so now you believe "IDF propaganda" when it suits your purposes?

(By the way, a friend of mine lives in Israel and his parents found shrapnel in their parking lot in Ashdod.)

Yes. Something about the perverse logic of IÜA bloc on this forum is kind of amusing, on a dark and twisted kind of way

I see. Well, so much for rational discussions.

 

[Ziggurat]

america was concerned about libyans only because of libya's oil.
gaza has no oil.

If you had given this as a reason for why the west might cuddle up to a tyrant like the mad duck, I'd accept it as a reasonable supposition.

But when you're claiming that's why we helped overthrow that tyrant, thereby plunging the country's oil production into uncertainty and possible ruin, well, that doesn't make any sense at all. You're basically claiming that we did things the hard way in order to reduce our access to oil. I don't care how cynical you are about US motives, that just doesn't make sense on any level. If we acted out of malice, it wasn't because of oil. That should have been obvious if had spent even one moment thinking about the implications of what you said.

Oh....