Israel bombs Gaza killing 200+

[HughRuss]

Originally Posted by JaJae

This is watered down history of the region, but it's far more balanced than anything else posted in this thread.

Yes, if you consider "Jews good, Palestinians bad" a legitimate fulcrum for a scale, then it is "more balanced"...

At the end of the 3rd Crusade, the three major religions, primarily Christianity and Islam, formed a truce to allow entrance into the holy land of Jerusalem (which was a city fought for business rather than religion, mostly). That lasted until the early 1920s.

My time line was providing a brief history that the Islamic extremists use to justify their ridiculous acts. It wasn't a scale for the area.

[motivez]

Joe Scarborough got owned today by Zbiginew Brzeznski, who called him "stunningly superficial"

msnbc.com Video Player

I have to say that really adequately describes the opinion of some on here towards this situation.. stunningly superficial.

[motivez]

Btw, the picture on the front page of that newspaper says it all.. a Palestinian women crying because her 5 daughters were murdered by Israeli airstrikes into civilian population centers.. and another Israeli woman crying because a missile landed in her city.

Pretty big difference there in what people have to live with.

Israel has killed a huge number of innocent people, including at least dozens of innocent children this time around. Way to go, Israel.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by motivez

Btw, the picture on the front page of that newspaper says it all.. a Palestinian women crying because her 5 daughters were murdered by Israeli airstrikes into civilian population centers.. and another Israeli woman crying because a missile landed in her city.

Pretty big difference there in what people have to live with.

Israel has killed a huge number of innocent people, including at least dozens of innocent children this time around. Way to go, Israel.

Yep I agree. War sucks.

However, when the enemy specifically uses the public as a shield, what are you supposed to do?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Swift-Bass

Yep I agree. War sucks.

However, when the enemy specifically uses the public as a shield, what are you supposed to do?

Why should they base their police headquarters outside of a public area? That makes no sense.

Why should they base their town hall / civic type facilities outside a public area? They are the legitimate elected government.

And that's what Israel has been attacking. Police stations and government buildings, killing women and innocent children.

Our town halls are usually down town in heavy urban population centers as well, and we certainly don't house our police officers 10-15 miles outside city limits.. what a ridiculous suggestion.

Israel has committed war crimes and violated the Geneva Conventions and should be held responsible for their actions.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by motivez

Why should they base their police headquarters outside of a public area? That makes no sense.

Why should they base their town hall / civic type facilities outside a public area? They are the legitimate elected government.

And that's what Israel has been attacking. Police stations and government buildings, killing women and innocent children.

Our town halls are usually down town in heavy urban population centers as well, and we certainly don't house our police officers 10-15 miles outside city limits.. what a ridiculous suggestion.

Israel has committed war crimes and violated the Geneva Conventions and should be held responsible for their actions.

Hold up. You're saying that the legitimate elected government is sponsoring/allowing rockets to be shot inot Israel? If that's the case then Israel is more then justified in their actions since they have to go against the government not just a "terrorist faction".

I wasn't suggesting anyting aobut where to put their town halls and what not. But if the government is what's causing the problem, where would you suggest they strike?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by HughRuss

Yes, if you consider "Jews good, Palestinians bad" a legitimate fulcrum for a scale, then it is "more balanced"...

At the end of the 3rd Crusade, the three major religions, primarily Christianity and Islam, formed a truce to allow entrance into the holy land of Jerusalem (which was a city fought for business rather than religion, mostly). That lasted until the early 1920s.

My time line was providing a brief history that the Islamic extremists use to justify their ridiculous acts. It wasn't a scale for the area.

That "truce" also involved people being killed, and attempts to prevent the Jews from immigrating. The Jews were coming in, buying up a lot of land and forming their own sub-communities. As soon as the Palestinians saw that the Jews were coming in and building hospitals, schools, etc they realized that they were settling there for good and would be coming in large numbers and violence ensued.. by both sides. Neither side was more guily than the other. I've said that repeatedly. The Palestinians lobbied to the British to stop the immigration of Jews. The Jews lobbied the British to give them their own state within Israel. The end result was a crap load of tension and theh British were afraid of getting involved knowing whatever they did would end up in war. If they did nothing there would have been war. If they attempted to divide the nations, neither party would be happy and it would go to war. So they gave the rights to the land to the UN to do with as they wished. The UN then screwed things up royally. The Jews and Palestinians went to war in a land struggle(again, no party was right or wrong here, they were equally wrong). The Palestinians lost and became refugees from the war. That was then and this is now. That war happened, it's over. Neither party was anywhere near innocent and neither party has less guilt in the actions that occurred. However in the here and now, decades later, we are nowhere near a peaceful resolution.

The two regions are what they are. I don't think another large scale displacement is the answer, and neither is terrorist activities. The only way this has a chance of ending is if Israel/Palestine go to war (which is dangerous considering countries like Iran may use the dirty bombs we've been told they wouldn't ever make) or they need to figure out a means to live in peace. The elected government of Palestine, Hamas, obviously wants war. This is evidenced by the 200 mortor rounds fired into Israel as well as the preparations for future terrorist activities. If Hamas or the Palestinians were to make any real attempts at diplomacy I may change my tune. But for the past decades we've been seeing Israel getting instigated/pushed and then pushing back by multiples. This is the consistent theme of the region. Some people justify this behavior for the Palestinians because they have sympathy for their plight. Others believe Israel has the right to defend themselves from such attacks. There's no right or wrong answer here, but when one party pokes the dragon and gets burned it's hard for me to blame the party on the defense. Also when one party intends to target military positions and the other intends to target civilians my sympathy will not be handed to the group that purposely fires rockets at civilians. Does Israel overreact? Absolutely and they shouldn't. Are these blockades of goods overboard at times? Absolutely, but it is necessary to defend their homeland. If Palestine doesn't want blockades they shouldn't be importing weapons to fire into Israel. If Hamas doesn't want their tunnels bombed they should keep using those tunnels in their attacks against Israel. If they've done that trick over and over again what do you think Israel is gonna do when they catch them doing it again? Wait for another one of their soldiers or civilians to be kidnapped/killed? Absolutely not, we'd do the same thing and we'd be right for doing it.

Israel's primary responsibility should be to protect its people. And that is basically what they do. Hamas's primary role in this has been to pick and prod at Israel until Israel retaliates.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by Swift-Bass

Hold up. You're saying that the legitimate elected government is sponsoring/allowing rockets to be shot inot Israel? If that's the case then Israel is more then justified in their actions since they have to go against the government not just a "terrorist faction".

I wasn't suggesting anyting aobut where to put their town halls and what not. But if the government is what's causing the problem, where would you suggest they strike?

They're defending themselves after Israel broke the truce on November 4th. Are you suggesting they have no right to defend themselves from Israeli aggression when Israel murders its citizens?

Why is it acceptable in your mind for Israel to murder dozens, even hundreds of innocent civilians in response to a non-deadly rocket attack, but the second the Palestinian people defend themselves.. they're terrorists?

An incredibly inconsistent definition you're using there.

And you were suggesting it by saying they're trying to use the public as a shield. When you have public institutions such as schools (which Israel bombed), government ministries (which Israel bombed), and police stations (which Israel bombed).. you place them in places accessible to the public.

Considering the complete blockade of Gaza over the last 18 months, including medical supplies, etc.. and taking into account the fact that Israel often blocks access to individual roads leading in / out of areas of Gaza, it makes even more sense to place those offices inside the city where citizens can access them.. there's no need for a "sinister" motive.

[Swift]

You mean the Israeli response to the tunnel?
Six die in Israeli attack over Hamas 'tunnel under border to kidnap soldier' - Times Online

Originally Posted by Story

The Israeli military described the operation as a “pinpoint” raid to destroy a 250-metre tunnel that it said the hardline Palestinian movement was digging under the border to try to kidnap an Israeli soldier – as it did in the summer of 2006.

And I'm sure you can go back before that and find something the Israeli's did and on and on.

But you didn't address my original point in that post which was the governemnt is sponsoring/allowing militant and/or terrorist actions against Israel.

[motivez]

Building a tunnel on Palestinian land is none of Israel's business, it didn't cross into the border at the time of the attack, and Israel doesn't employ the use of precogs like in Minority Report, so their justification for what "might happen" is irrelevant.

The fact remains that Israel went on to Palestinian land when they launched an attack which killed 6 people, violating the ceasefire. Israel is to blame here.

You've ignored the rest of my post attacking your extremely hypocritical and inconsistent definition, I see.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by motivez

Building a tunnel on Palestinian land is none of Israel's business, it didn't cross into the border at the time of the attack, and Israel doesn't employ the use of precogs like in Minority Report, so their justification for what "might happen" is irrelevant.

The fact remains that Israel went on to Palestinian land when they launched an attack which killed 6 people, violating the ceasefire. Israel is to blame here.

You've ignored the rest of my post attacking your extremely hypocritical and inconsistent definition, I see.

Oh come on.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by motivez

Building a tunnel on Palestinian land is none of Israel's business, it didn't cross into the border at the time of the attack, and Israel doesn't employ the use of precogs like in Minority Report, so their justification for what "might happen" is irrelevant.

The fact remains that Israel went on to Palestinian land when they launched an attack which killed 6 people, violating the ceasefire. Israel is to blame here.

You've ignored the rest of my post attacking your extremely hypocritical and inconsistent definition, I see.

So Israel has to wait until Palestine uses their tactics to kill/kidnap Israelis before they respond? The "precogs" argument is laughable at best. Anyone who has been following the events in the middle east doesn't need a precog to know what is going on when there are armed terrorists digging a tunnel towards Israel. The idea that Israel should wait until those terrorists manage to get across the border in their underground tunnel and open fire is quite silly. Israel should protect their homeland. We would do the same thing if Al Qaeda were digging a tunnel into America through the Mexican border... especially if they had used that move half a dozen times in the past few years.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

Oh come on.

What business is it of theirs?

Israel needs to give the Palestinian people autonomy over their land and stop trying to micromanage everything they do when it comes to trade, border control, sea control, and even neighborhood control.

If the government here did as much shit to you as the Israeli one does to the Palestinian people you'd be joining the ranks of the libertarian horde claiming the government is responsible for everything.. but you'd be right.

There's nothing inherently aggressive about a tunnel, and they shouldn't act unless it crosses into Israeli territory.. It's not their place.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by JaJae

So Israel has to wait until Palestine uses their tactics to kill/kidnap Israelis before they respond? The "precogs" argument is laughable at best. Anyone who has been following the events in the middle east doesn't need a precog to know what is going on when there are armed terrorists digging a tunnel towards Israel. The idea that Israel should wait until those terrorists manage to get across the border in their underground tunnel and open fire is quite silly. Israel should protect their homeland. We would do the same thing if Al Qaeda were digging a tunnel into America through the Mexican border... especially if they had used that move half a dozen times in the past few years.

I'm sorry to see you've bought into the Bush doctrine of "Lets shoot first without knowing all the facts."

The precog argument is exactly what you're suggesting they follow. They should take aggressive action, in violation of ceasefire agreements, with no hostile action taken against them in order to go after what's not even a threat to them at that point.

That's devoid of intelligence and leads precisely to the situation we're at now, with Israel having committed war crimes and killed more innocent children, perpetuating the violence for generations to come as people grow up angry at the fact that they no longer have their brother or sister.

Many of those tunnels are used to smuggle in humanitarian aid and medicine that Israel has denied the people of Gaza access to for the last 18 months with their barbaric blockade.

You can act like Stephen Colbert's character and think your gut feeling is an acceptable substitute for facts, but without proof you have no rational justification for anything.

[kinggovernor]

Originally Posted by Dylith

Much of Gaza is aid dependant (the powerplant and hospital certainly are and almost half of the population is food aid dependant). In addition to this 80% of the Palestinian economy is dependant on the ability to trade.

then it would be helpful to make peace with their neighbors.

Go ahead and take a guess as to how a total blockade of the region would affect the every day life of Gaza citizens.

and rocket fire/mortar attacks doesn't affect the every day life of Israeli citizens?

Not to mention that Israel controls Gaza's sea and air space as well as the borders (including control to a certain extent over the Rafah crossing).

see point #1

The criticism that I have been placing against Israel has less to do with them targeting actual rocket launch sites and more to do with the fact that Israel is engaging in war crimes by specifically targeting places and buildings that have nothing to do with rocket attacks such as political and police buildings as well as the Gaza metal foundry and back in 2006 the Gaza powerplant and bridges.

they are part of the war effort, they are legit military targets.

Such acts constitute not only a crime under international law (the Fourth Geneva Conventions) but under Israeli domestic law as well.

no they do not.

For such things, Israel deserves criticism as well as for practices such as collective punishment and for a complete failure to engage in any sort of productive peace process with the Abbas government.

the collective punishment idea is a joke, it can be applied to any war.

Hamas won the 2005/2006 elections with 44% of the vote. Also, do you happen to have any idea why they won and what the platform they were running on was?

I do, perhaps you could enlighten us with some of your wisdom?

right, what would America do. I forgot that the US was perfect and akin to Jesus.

Whatever the Bush administration says/supports must be the right and moral thing.

Obama said it himself

I am sensing that you didn't follow the elections very closely now did you?

if you have a point to make, then make it rather than trying to insult me.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by motivez

Building a tunnel on Palestinian land is none of Israel's business, it didn't cross into the border at the time of the attack, and Israel doesn't employ the use of precogs like in Minority Report, so their justification for what "might happen" is irrelevant.

The fact remains that Israel went on to Palestinian land when they launched an attack which killed 6 people, violating the ceasefire. Israel is to blame here.

You've ignored the rest of my post attacking your extremely hypocritical and inconsistent definition, I see.

I ignored it because it's futile.

Some others have addressed the whole "precogs" point. But this is a Holy war, pure and simple. For every wrong the Israelies have done I can give you one the palistenians have done.

The question here is if these attacks are state sponsored? If they are, why on God's green earth should they let up the blockade? Yes, it's cruel but it's a national security issue. They don't know how that aid is going to be used and what not.

Seriously motivez, I'm not saying Israel is innocent. But they are acting in the best interests for their nation. How would you react? How would you have handled the situation in 2006?

This situation is much more complex then the latest cease fire. So to keep it in the boundaries of it is a bit inane.

Israel killed women and children. That's 100% wrong. But they had no choice. Why? Because hamas consistantly hides behind civilians hopeing Israel won't attack due to world opinion. It seems Israel no longer cares about world opinion.

[LetTheTruthBeTold]

Originally Posted by motivez

Btw, the picture on the front page of that newspaper says it all.. a Palestinian women crying because her 5 daughters were murdered by Israeli airstrikes into civilian population centers.. and another Israeli woman crying because a missile landed in her city.

Pretty big difference there in what people have to live with.

Israel has killed a huge number of innocent people, including at least dozens of innocent children this time around. Way to go, Israel.

Hello Motivez, I totally agree with you their is major comparison between the woman crying because she lost 5 daughters and the one to the right crying for a lame reason that as a missle landed in her city. THE WHOLE PROBLEM IS THAT PEOPLE ARE BLIND, DUMB, AND IGNORANT TO NOT SEE THE TRUTH TO FACE VALUE.

[motivez]

The latest ceasefire is what matters. If Israel had actually wanted peace, their first reaction to the tunnel would not have been to violate the ceasefire and kill Palestinians.

It would have been to contact the legitimate Government of Palestine to inquire about it, and if they received no response, to get a 3rd party involved for some sort of acceptable, non-violent resolution. They didn't do any of that, they simply violated the ceasefire unilaterally and killed people. That's their fault, anyone who was hurt as a result of Hamas defending itself is also on them.. because Hamas abided by the ceasefire. Israel did not.

You are saying Israel is innocent and apologizing and attempting to justify whatever they do. I find that reprehensible. They had no choice but to kill women and children? Right.

I'll point it out again: Hamas has a civil structure in place because they are the elected government. Their various ministries, the police force, etc.. is all within civilian population centers and rightly so.. that's where they're supposed to be located.

Israel hasn't confined its attacks to military targets, they've expanded them to include the civil structure of the Palestinian government, knowing full well that it would lead to the deaths of innocent people. Even the timing of their attack to coincide with children being released from school is barbaric.

The only way you can conclude Israel "had no choice" or was "justified" is if you've bought into a completely one sided view of the situation perpetuated by our shitty media and the pro-Israel lobbies which exert an undue influence over it.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by motivez

The latest ceasefire is what matters. If Israel had actually wanted peace, their first reaction to the tunnel would not have been to violate the ceasefire and kill Palestinians.

It would have been to contact the legitimate Government of Palestine to inquire about it, and if they received no response, to get a 3rd party involved for some sort of acceptable, non-violent resolution. They didn't do any of that, they simply violated the ceasefire unilaterally and killed people. That's their fault, anyone who was hurt as a result of Hamas defending itself is also on them.. because Hamas abided by the ceasefire. Israel did not.

Right, and while all that is going on they get to relive what happened in 2006. Sounds like a smart plan to me.

You are saying Israel is innocent and apologizing and attempting to justify whatever they do. I find that reprehensible. They had no choice but to kill women and children? Right.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. That israel is innocent...

Just like the USA was "innocent" when we dropped the bomb on Japan, twice. Or when the USA bombed the mess out of germany killing many civilians. Right, that's exactly what I said.

Again, war sucks. Sheesh. If you want to call me an apologist then more power to you.

I'll point it out again: Hamas has a civil structure in place because they are the elected government. Their various ministries, the police force, etc.. is all within civilian population centers and rightly so.. that's where they're supposed to be located.

Why would the public freely and knowingly elect a part that supports state sponsored terrorism?

Israel hasn't confined its attacks to military targets, they've expanded them to include the civil structure of the Palestinian government, knowing full well that it would lead to the deaths of innocent people. Even the timing of their attack to coincide with children being released from school is barbaric.

Yeah, remember back in 2006 when they actually dropped flyers saying they are going to bomb a certain area? And how well that worked?

The only way you can conclude Israel "had no choice" or was "justified" is if you've bought into a completely one sided view of the situation perpetuated by our shitty media and the pro-Israel lobbies which exert an undue influence over it.

Actually no. I think Israel is as much at fault as Hamas. But since Israel has the larger capacity to cause damage, you seem to be siding with Hamas. That's your right to your opinion.

[motivez]

Also inconsistent in your opinion is the justification of what Israel "needs" to do but no allowance for the Palestinian people to do what they need to do simply to survive.

If you were confined to an area with limited natural resources and there were food, fuel, medicine shortages on a daily basis.. would you not build a tunnel to try to get those things? Or would you allow yourself and those you love to die from a barbaric blockade of humanitarian aid and the basic supplies needed to survive?

Have you ever spent time with anyone who's lived over there for an extended period? Known people who've volunteered in the refugee camps (which Israel has bombed)? I have, and the picture of what happens on a daily basis is so different from the limited view we get to see on TV here.