General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPalestinians Have a Right to Defend Themselves!
I just wanted to point that out. Because I have listened to our elected officials and I may be wrong, I could have missed it, but I hear them say, correctly, that Israelis have a right to defend themselves.
Then I wait to hear them say that Palestinians also have a right to defend themselves but I never hear that.
So I wanted to say it because I believe everyone has a right to defend themselves.
If any of our elected officials have said it and I missed it, then someone can correct me and I will be happy to hear it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)250,000 homeless. 300 children dead. 11 UN humanitarians losing their lives in defence of the defenceless. 10,000 wounded, some very gravely. A lunar landscape of precision munitions. Disease rampant because the power plant was a nonhuman shield and was taken out. Who is the aggressor?
I think I know because I can think, I am not blinded by hate and kept snuggling the hate by soothing propaganda.
I believe children are children, not terrorists to be killed in their sleep. I am not good with a missile slamming into a 30 apartment block to take out one apartment, I do not think the families dying there are human shields, I do not think they are innocents and they also deserve to die for living so close to the target, and I think the propaganda justifying this murder is evil.
onenote
(42,693 posts)except maybe you.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)onenote
(42,693 posts)No.
If you cite to some specific examples of actual defensive military actions, we can discuss their validity.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)are intercepted.
Rockets are symbolic, dead children are real.
Easy pickings when the lobbing of tank, artillery and drone missiles and bombs is into a prison.
Children are the fish, fish in a barrel.
onenote
(42,693 posts)Or are you just disappointed that they are successful in doing so.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)response?
Obviously, it is indefensible.
NoMoreRepugs
(9,412 posts)the Hamas 'unguided' rockets are aimless explosives of a quality not in the same league as the Israelis weaponry fired against a practically impenetrable shield
I'd compare Hamas to street rioters facing off against an endless array of heavily armed & trained troops and throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails - they know its fruitless and their asses are going to get kicked really bad but they do it anyways because their level of frustration is beyond comprehension
Chemisse
(30,809 posts)The response to it is mass slaughter.
How do you really justify this? Does your loyalty to a certain country or a certain group of people have no limits? Can't you still care about them yet condemn their barbaric actions?
onenote
(42,693 posts)and kills Israeli civilians, will Hamas "symbolically apologize"? I ask because I don't remember Hamas apologizing for killing and wounding Israelis with rocket attacks conducted before the Iron Dome was installed (or, for that matter, for hitting a school bus in 2011 and killing a 16 year old Israeli student). Or for the "symbolic" (?) suicide bombings for which Hamas took credit that killed dozens of Israeli citizens on buses and in cafes in the early 2000s.
If Hamas wants to make a symbolic gesture that would garner them sympathy in the world, maybe they should try something other than rockets.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)its not symbolic when Hamas, deliberately places them using the innocent as shields...
These aren't mobile launchers, they are put exactly where they think Israel won't strike.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)You seem to be contradicting the official talking point which has been that Israel is JUSTIFIED in striking densely populated areas because Hamas puts its weapons there.
Are you saying that is not correct now? That Hamas DOESN'T want civilians killed, isn't using them as Human Shields? Because this is what we are being asked to believe.
And since Israel DOES strike civilians and then blames Hamas for forcing them to do so, what you are stating would mean that Hamas hasn't noticed what the whole world has noticed. That doesn't make sense.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Does Hamas have military bases from which they can fire rockets to defend themselves? You are forgetting, Netanyahu lied about the deaths of three young Israelis and used it as an excuse to attack Gaza. There were no rockets fired until after that attack. Palestinians have a right to defend themselves just as Israel does. If Israel didn't want rockets fired, they should not have attacked Gaza.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)Of course Israel has a right to intercept those rockets. Any country that had such technology available to it would have a right to use it under similar circumstances. BUT, the fact that Israel is able to intercept most of those rockets means that Israel has already neutralized most of the actual threat those rockets pose to Israel.
The right of a nation to defend itself is not without constraints as to proportionality of its response relative to the actual threat it is facing. And to paraphrase Henry Siegman, former president of the American Jewish Congress, in statements he made in an interview on Democracy Now! last week, while it is true that no country would tolerate rockets being fired onto its territory, it is also true that no people would tolerate being forced to live under the conditions in which the Palestinians have been forced to live.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)one Israeli life is worth more than a thousand Palestinian lives. What I would like to know is why these people feel this way?
At least one poster here has admitted that Hamas rockets are not a significant threat to Israel. so the only thing that I think there is left to assume is that Israel is using the "they keep firing rockets at us" excuse as justification to exterminate more of the Palestinian population.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #90)
Post removed
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)lives are not worth anything.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Maybe we needed to see the stark reality in order to stop making excuses, overlooking disappointment after disappointment and continuing to repeat the same mistake, over and over again. Maybe now we can begin to think about what to do in order to really change things.
EX500rider
(10,839 posts)Unfortunately that's does seem to be the going exchange rate, at least that was the exchange rate to get the Israeli solider Gilad Shalit
freed, 1,027 Palestinians.
On 18 October 2011, he was released in a deal that secured his freedom after more than five years in isolation and captivity, in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners, including some convicted of multiple murders and carrying out terror attacks against Israeli civilians (according to Israeli government sources, the prisoners released were collectively responsible for 569 Israeli deaths)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Shalit
delete_bush
(1,712 posts)If so, perhaps they should change their symbolism to something less destructive. After all, they're just a symbol, correct?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)on the people of Palestine, which killed close to 2,000 people, one third of those were children. Whatever initiated this conflict going way back, has lost any significance at this point. The point is, hundreds of innocent children are dead. What should those who lost their children DO? What would WE do?
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Killing children.....by the hundreds....is evil...accepting massive civilian casualties...when did that become acceptable?
onenote
(42,693 posts)So you don't need to exaggerate by making 300 into one third of 2000.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)was more than 300.
onenote
(42,693 posts)But unless you saw a number approximately 600, you're assertion that 1/3 of the nearly 2000 killed were children is an exaggeration borne either out of poor math skills or for some other reason.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)onenote
(42,693 posts)But if I posted here that the number of children killed was 150-200, you and others would be all over me (justifiably) for misstating the actual number. So why is okay for you to overstate it by an similar amount?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)by the Palestinians, my first reaction would be OUTRAGE. It definitely wouldn't be quibbling over the accuracy of the body county. So why is it that those who support Israel's Right Wing Govt show so little compassion for the children of Palestine and immediately jump to argue over trivia in light of the enormity of the subject matter?
louis-t
(23,292 posts)goes after the criminals (after all, this latest thing started with a kidnapping) and doesn't use it as an excuse to destroy an entire section of the country. If Israel wants to destroy tunnels they can do that, but leveling neighborhoods and lobbing missiles into civilian areas under the guise of 'protecting' themselves is a bit much.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)Seems like if Hamas was intentionally seeking to get civilian casualties to use them for propaganda to sway opinions it had the desired effect...
get the red out
(13,461 posts)Against Hamas, who obviously is quite pleased with getting them killed.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Hamas forced Israel to kill hundreds of children? You do realize that most decent people around the world abhor the killing of innocent children regardless of excuses? THAT is the reality, Netanhayu's brutal reaction to this has caused people to focus on the lives of the Palestinians and to wonder why they were unable to protect their children?
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)And don't intentionally stage rocket launchers and military installations in densely populated areas as a strategy to discourage attacks or incur casulties for propaganda.
A decent organization doesn't make it's headquarters in a hospital using the sick and wounded as armor. The facts that the senior Hamas leaders base thier operations from a hospital so the Isrealis won't get them tells you all you need to know about what kind of people they are.
The fact that using the hospital as a shield has kept them alive also shows that yes, the Isrealis showed restraint and were not bombing anything and everything- the most viable and legitimate target is a headquarters, had the Isrealis been half as bloodthirsty as some claim that hospital would have been bombed to hit that headquarters- but they didn't.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)far more civilians than fighters. Decent people don't try to excuse the killing of children by claiming someone else forced them to do it.
Don't you realize the world isn't buying this anymore?
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)The only ones all up in arms are the same crowd who are always up in arms about anything and everything that Israel does.
Some from pure hate driven by anti-semitism.
Some from a misguided idea that they are pulling for an underdog.
Some because, well because it's a cool bandwagon to jump on.
Some because they just don't understand what kind of monsters Hamas are.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)And outside the US? Public opinion is not on the side of Israel.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)No longer is the world responding to the Right Wing Israili Govt talking points. They are looking at the bodies of all those dead Palestinian children. Thank Netanyahu for that.
All over the world boycotts are starting to oppose Israeli policies in Gaza.
Dead children is a 'cool bandwagon to jump on'? Really?
DEAD CHILDREN! Do you UNDERSTAND the impact of this latest brutal assault on Gaza? No amount of talking points is going to erase those images.
Trying to defend it only angers people more. There IS no defense for this.
If you care about Israel at all, you need to start working on dumping it's war mongering right wing Governemtn, two members of which are on record as demanding the annihilation of an entire population. '
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)Some that are doing it because Israel can do no wrong.
Some that are doing it for political expedience.
Some because the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim.
We can make lists too! And our lists aren't covering up for the murder of 300 children, some of whom there's no possible way any sane person could honestly claim were being used as human shields.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)of how the IDF fought for the right to use children as human shields:
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/neighbors-won-t-be-serving-1.171577
brush
(53,764 posts)Response to Lee-Lee (Reply #124)
Tumbulu This message was self-deleted by its author.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)
EX500rider
(10,839 posts)Are you saying Franklin Delano Roosevelt wasn't a decent man? 'Cause he bombed WAY more civilians then the Israelis.
totodeinhere
(13,058 posts)though he authorized dropping two atomic bombs that killed thousands of children. It's not the political leaders in wars that are indecent, it's war itself that is indecent.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)EX500rider
(10,839 posts)....in the US Air Force in WWII, none of them were decent men either?
Vattel
(9,289 posts)EX500rider
(10,839 posts)....but not the guy who ordered it?
Although I doubt if the orders to bomb cities came from the top but the Prez certainly could have stopped it.
(not being flip, asking for some clarification of your position)
Vattel
(9,289 posts)of the chain of command. Truman had the information he needed to see that he shouldn't have population-bombed every major city in Japan. He chose to do it anyway. He had no excuse for what he did.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)sure who you are comparing to whom.
EX500rider
(10,839 posts)I said do you think FDR was a decent man-he bombed WAY more civilians then the IDF...
I didn't compare anybody to anything, just asked a question about your premise...
(and FYI, he bombed more Japanese then Germans)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)That is a far more relevant question to the actual topic of this OP.
If you want to talk about the ethics of WW11 start your own thread and I will answer on that question where it is the actual topic of your OP.
This one is about the right of the Palestinians to defend themselves.
Did this child deserve to die, or the eight other members of her family over, WHAT?? Based on a lie, that Hamas was responsible for kidnapping three young Israelis, when in fact that did not happen.
So where is the justification for the deaths of these beautiful children?
http://humanizepalestine.com/2014/08/01/in-memory-al-farra-family/#comments
This one, 8 years old:
?w=334&h=296
Or this one, 4 years old:
?w=183&h=368
Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #115)
Tumbulu This message was self-deleted by its author.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)continues to be used to excuse the killing of Palestinian children. I am truly sorry to say that I had forgotten about it. I really appreciate your remembering and posting the link. I guess you didn't get a response yet. If you don't mind, I will refer the next person who uses that talking to your link! 
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I'd like to hear from somebody defending the death total by using the 'Hamas uses Human Shields' argument. It would be nice to see that argument abandoned because of the hypocracy.
Response to bravenak (Reply #241)
sabrina 1 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)
Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)with the news. Israel has bombed hospitals in this conflict and using the excuse that Hamas was hiding inside. BS!
Google it.
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)clearly you arent reading/seeing enough videos out there showing this
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)At least here on DU. Our elected officials as well as a plurality of Americans seem to know better.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Lobbing missiles at civilians, with no strategic defensive purpose is the same, no matter what holy symbol is on your flag - magen david or shahada.
using 500 pound bombs to blast apart entire neighborhoods? Israel lost 3 civilians. The proportionality , oh wait there is none.
brush
(53,764 posts)if you watch it all the way through it'll give you a different perspective on the unfairness of the Israeli/Palestinian situation.
It should also make it clear that there won't be any peace until a legitimate two-state solution is arrived at.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017207419
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Please, i want to see. And I already know your stance on rockets, so you don't need to reiterate. When do they get to defend themselves, and through what means?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)about 67 Israelis, mostly military. By my figures that's a death ration of 25 to 1.
onenote
(42,693 posts)And Israel's response to Hamas' rockets has been disproportionate.
But what troubles me is that there are some here in DU, some on this very thread, that persist in equating Israel's actions to those of Germany during World War II.
So here are some numbers: 6.000,000 Jews killed by the Germans. 2000 Palestinians killed by Israel.
By my figures that's a ration of 3000 to 1. It doesn't get more disproportionate than that, yet I see people defending the comparisons.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)
NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)Hitting an artillery position would be defense. Lobbing a rocket without specific aim in the hope that it hits a house isn't.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)when he lied about the three young Israelis who were tragically murdered and used it as an excuse to attack Gaza, after which the rockets were fired, that is what they have to use.
Seems to me from the reports that Hamas hit soldiers mostly so they clearly were not aiming at civilians. Israel hit hundreds of children and hundreds more civilians, so it's clear who was trying to abide by the rules of war.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Do they have the right to encourage small children to want to kill Jews?
Galraedia
(5,022 posts)Memri - described by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman as "invaluable" - supplies translations free of charge to journalists, politicians and others, particularly in the US.
Though Memri claims to be "independent" and maintains that it does not "advocate causes or take sides", it is run by Yigal Carmon, a former colonel in Israeli military intelligence. Carmon's partner in setting up Memri was Meyrav Wurmser who in 1996 was one of the authors of the now-infamous "Clean Break" document which proposed reshaping Israel's "strategic environment" in the Middle East, starting with the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/may/15/arabicunderfire
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)adults in Israel are all IDF or reservists who could be recalled to fight, any minors would still be civilians.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)I swear I've see this logic before...
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Except maybe you and Bibi.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)children? I hope to hell not.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)--George Armstrong Custer
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Fred's mistake is he does not realize it is not true that Israel sent only "precision munitions." Much of Israeli fire were inaccurate artillery. Also taking out the power plant was effective in reducing the number of rockets Hamas could launch. He also does not appreciate the videotapes Israel produced of the missions that were aborted out of concern there would be civilian casualties. Sometimes you have to take out an apartment of 30 to knock out one terrorist, though "30" is an exaageration of what happened since Israel says about half the Palestinian deaths were militants. The United states would have saved many lives if it took down the airlines before they hit the World Trade Center. Fred would of course complain that there were more civlian human shields on the plane than terrorists. But you have to look at the big picture at what happens if you give terrorists carte blanche.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)we would do far more than launch some rockets. The racists refuse to acknowledge that obvious fact.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I would think that very few Americans would support launching rockets that could hit civilians under any circumstances. Certainly not liberals/progressives.
I think most liberals and progressives would adopt a non-violent approach rather than a violent one.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)firing mostly ineffective rockets with so much force that they killed hundreds of children and hundreds of innocent civilians?
It would probably depend, for many Americans, on WHO the government was killing. Eg, if they were killing Liberals, the far right would be applauding.
Otoh, Liberals would most likely be outraged regardless of who the targets were.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Most Palestinians similarly do not support killing Israeli civilians.
Those would be the folks would I stand with (as I wrote to the other respondent).
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Clearly violence appears to be the popular answer to disagreements. Certainly THIS country seems to think so.
You stated that 75% of Israelis did not vote for Netanyahu, which is encouraging, yet he is in power. If they do not want him, what do they have to do to remove him? As for the Palestinians, they too will have to try to elect leaders who oppose any more violence as a response to violence and who choose the political route from now on. In my opinion of course.
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)just to clarify.
The Green Manalishi
(1,054 posts)If that rocket landed anywhere near me, the government would have my full approval to (assuming they could) locate where it was fired from and turn everything within a 20 mile radius into a radioactive crater. OK. maybe just anything within a few hundred meters into rubble... Regardless of it being launched from Tel Aviv, Moscow, Gaza or Beijing. I think that if I or my family were ever under attack I'd give the worst government in the world my full blessings to make a world class horrific example of the area it was fired from. A few months later my progressive instincts would manage to get the upper hand on my sense of self preservation, but not until 100 percent of any probability of future attack was removed; regardless of what percentage of what population had to perish.
At least that is how I believe my "thought" process would run if I were in the situation of EITHER the Israelis or the Palestinians. Hard to know for sure having been born and raised in Northern California; I just have the feeling that having to undergo anything like what is going on over there would make me trade my true blue bleeding heart for a 'kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out' in a couple of nanoseconds.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)members of your family, including several beautiful children, see here for just such a real life tragedy:
http://humanizepalestine.com/2014/08/01/in-memory-al-farra-family/#comments
The family is/was the family of one of the doctors btw.
I'm not sure what I would do to be honest. It is unimaginable to even think of what one would want to do after such a tragedy, other than maybe die because living would be just too unbearable.
Would you then want Hamas to do whatever they wanted to do in response?
And the above family is just one of hundreds.
Violence only guarantees more violence so I hope I would emerge from the intolerable grief of such losses begging for peace, for no more killing. Regardless of which side I was on.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)so if we were imprisoned by an outside power that had a long history of brutal aggressions against us, the vast majority of Americans would support the rockets, if that's all we had. That isn't unique to American or Palestinians. Just about any group in the world would do the same thing. It's human nature to strike back at their abusers.
It isn't necessarily human nature to abuse ones neighbor, as Israel is doing. Most people behave much better.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Those would be the folks I would stand with.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)because you are trying to rationalize Israel's behavior.
Unprovoked shock and awe:
Against Civilians
I totally oppose the Israeli attack on Gaza.
If I was an Israeli, I would refuse to serve in the army and would go to jail for life if I had to rather than take part in the killing.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)There aren't any.
What I do object to is comparing Israel to Nazi Germany or suggesting that Israel is specifically and deliberately attempting to kill as many children as possible or to commit genocide against the Palestinian people. I have called posters to task on these fronts (and I am sure you and I don't agree on those topics), but I have never once expressed support for the attack and have consistently said that what Israel is doing is wrong and ought to be condemned. I would certainly have no part of it myself (nor would I have taken part in the US attacks on Iraq or Afghanistan, etc.)
Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)The Dahiya doctrine is a military strategy put forth by the Israeli general Gadi Eizenkot that pertains to asymmetric warfare in an urban setting, in which the army deliberately targets civilian infrastructure, as a means of inducing suffering for the civilian population, thereby establishing deterrence. The doctrine is named after a southern suburb in Beirut with large apartment buildings which were flattened by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during the 2006 Lebanon War. Israel has been accused of implementing the strategy during the Gaza War.
I'd say that was deliberately trying to kill children among other innocent civilians.
totodeinhere
(13,058 posts)And those attacks have been authorized by presidents from both political parties.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)This is false. What more does the poster imagine Americans would do?
totodeinhere
(13,058 posts)cpwm17
(3,829 posts)but it is the perception that they are different that makes it racist. Many supporters of Israel (and some Israelis) in the US consider Israelis to be white and the Palestinians to be brown.
To be more accurate, I could just call them bigots.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Taitertots
(7,745 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)or are you suggesting that those deaths were somehow justified and Palestinians need to just accept that every few years or so Israel is going to invade and kill more of their children? When does that old 'rocket' excuse wear out and the focus on the innocent lives lost begin?
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Or are you suggesting that firing rockets into Israeli cities is an acceptable act of self defense
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Fyi, this latest brutal assault has caused the world to view this situation in a very different light. The old 'rocket' excuse has little effect anymore.
This assault has created a new beginning in the minds of people all over the world. NOW Palestinians are viewed as victims of a brutal government which has killed hundreds of their children. THAT is the starting point for many who have not been closely involved in this situation. THAT is the reality now. You can thank Netanyahu for that. And as a result, the question of Palestinians right to be able to defend themselves against further brutal assaults has gained momentum.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)Self defense.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Mass Media uses terms like "raining rockets" to make it seem like hundreds every year are being killed by them. The reality is they have caused 28 (+3 since the July 8) deaths in 13 years and very little damage. The Iron dome was activated in 2011.
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)The rockets started first.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)before any rockets were used. He blamed Hamas, they denied it, it turned our he either lied or just wanted an excuse and didn't wait for the facts. After that invasion, the rockets were in defense.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Picking one side as the "bad guys" doesn't work in this scenario.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)targets are not self defense'.
I thought you disagreed with me. I thought you said that what preceded it WAS important, I thought you were saying that Hamas just started firing rockets for no reason which preceded Israel's attack on Gaza.
But now you seem to be acknowledging that was not the case at all. That it was Israel who attacked Gaza and the rockets were a defense, aimed at and mainly hitting military personnel. Whereas Israel struck at homes and schools and UN designated shelters.
Thanks, glad we agree ....
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)onenote
(42,693 posts)Is not legitimate. Period.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)onenote
(42,693 posts)No, i would not "rather" they have guided missiles. I would "rather" that they would acknowledge Israel's right to exist and actually work towards a peace agreement.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)past year? You do know Hamas won the elections, then united with the opposition? A single voice now in negotiations....can not have that, said the right wing government of Bibi, the warmonger, who can not even utter the word "peace" without choking on the word.
War ends negotiations, that is why, in case you were not aware.
onenote
(42,693 posts)Seems like something one has to do before any serious negotiations can take place.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)onenote
(42,693 posts)precondition to negotiations for finding a way to co-exist peacefully. You don't.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)louis-t
(23,292 posts)Bibi's goal is the same as Hamas, to wipe the other side off the planet.
2banon
(7,321 posts)And what about Israel acknowledging Palestinian's "right to exist" (terribly worded meme, imo) and actually work towards a peace agreement?
JaydenD
(294 posts)What do you mean, do you mean the Palestinians shouldn't defend themselves because they don't have the state of the art weapons that Israel does.
Are all the guided strikes by the IDF mean they are purposefully slaughtering women and children and families? Please clarify because it sounds to me that a certain group of people are worth less as human beings as another certain group of people and they should just lay down and give up all their land and what is left of the tatters of rights they have so Israel and the settlers can have it all.
When it is all you have.
hack89
(39,171 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)they cannot have offensive weapons like rockets or trans-border tunnels.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)They have guns and rockets...primitive rockets. They don't have the ability to get effective defensive weaponry.
The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)The people of Arab Palestine have the same right to weapons of offensive character as anyone else. The old saw that 'the best defense is a good offense' is an apt one, and so is the observation that whether a weapon is an offensive or defensive one depends on which end is pointed towards you'.
What they have no more right to do than the Israeli forces is to disregard humanitarian law in what they do with what weapons they possess. I expect you would agree that attacks on soldiers in uniform on active duty, even if from ambushcade, are no breach of the laws of war. I am sure we agree that attacks whose object is the killing of non-combatants are breaches of the law of war.
hack89
(39,171 posts)as long as we are not talking about Hamas being able to acquire all the military hardware they desire. That would be a disaster for the Palestinians. I mean, a honest to god conventional war in Gaza can't possibly be worse than the latest fracas. At least there will be plenty of Israeli civilian deaths to make things "fair".
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I would like to see no wars, no weapons, no hatred of each other. Hamas sucks, but what Israel is doing is not right.
hack89
(39,171 posts)there would be thousands dying every day, not every month. You put water on fires, not gasoline. Arming Hamas is gasoline.
The Magistrate
(95,244 posts)Would not be likely to make any use beneficial to the cause of Arab Palestine, let alone it people, of a full suite of modern weaponry. The results, though, might be sobering all around....
"Battle creates clarity."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Israelis on a strip of land, would Israelis have the right to build tunnels to bring in food and other supplies?
hack89
(39,171 posts)are you ok with the massive human toll a real war would inflict on Gaza?
There is room for common sense here. Hamas will never be able to militarily defeat Israel by conventional means. They are too few in number and their territory too small. All they could possibly do is goad Israel into a devastating war.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Life is equally valuable on both sides. Unfortunately one side is given weapons by us and the other has very little access to weapons. Just because a country is stronger does not make it okay for them to slaughter and destroy the other.
hack89
(39,171 posts)letting Hamas arm is pouring on gas. It may be "fair" but the results are predictable and catastrophic for the people of Gaza.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)And they have poured far more gas on the fire. Every time they kill someone in Gaza or take someones land in the West Bank they just create more hatred, more anger. This last round of slaughter will leave them with many homeless, jobless people who have seen friends and family blown to bits. Universities gone, many schools gone or damaged, hospitals and medicines destroyed. This has done nothing except shatter lives and create more extremists.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Is that not war to you? Or, is everybody just havin' a little paintball game? I take issue with your nomenclature, and find it cynical and offensive. It certainly does not excuse the excessive use of force by Israel or make it more palatable.
hack89
(39,171 posts)With several orders of magnitude more deaths. War like in WWII.
I will henceforth refer to the events of the past month as the 2014 Gaza Paintball Skirmish in which one side used up a hardware store worth of red paint.
hack89
(39,171 posts)that the last four weeks in Gaza represent the worst that war has to offer. If Israel had used all the fire power at their disposal, there would have been thousands of deaths per hour, not per month. Single bombs would have destroyed entire city blocks instead of single buildings.
My point is simple - as bad as things were, they could have been much much worst. The notion of arming Hamas out of a sense of fairness would result in a truly devastating war with massive casualties on both sides. Is that what you want?
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)there is an ongoing siege of a prison camp going on, and which will not cease even though the people residing in that prison camp have elected a government which the nation conducting the siege refuses to negotiate with. Siege is an act of war and it a particularly horrible one. Combine the choking off of a people from basic necessities and assault them with advanced weaponry makes the siege even more horrific. You cannot force people into a small area, refuse them a place to flee to, and then complain that they are just forcing you to slaughter them.
hack89
(39,171 posts)lets not forget that for years Palestinians from Gaza routinely commuted to Israel for decent paying jobs. Then the suicide bombings started and the wall went up. Then Hamas started shooting rockets and the blockade was imposed.
If Hamas was to demilitarize then there could be peace. Not before.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)you really think Hamas' plan was to sneak a shit load of civilians through an Israeli high security zone to .....???
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Same response in Warsaw?
hack89
(39,171 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Dead children or tunnels used for nothing I can see...let's us talk about the tunnels...sure...
hack89
(39,171 posts)why do you think they did that? Bored? Too much time on their hands? No better way to spend a lot of money in Gaza?
Rex
(65,616 posts)safely (since everything above ground is getting bombed into rubble) you know...they are being used for evil 24/7. No doubt.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)themselves. Why is Israel keeping a whole people imprisoned? THAT is a question that has become loud around the world since this latest assault on a people who CANNOT GET OUT?
hack89
(39,171 posts)is a massive attack on Israeli towns that would kill many civilians self defense in your mind?
Rex
(65,616 posts)It must be evil 24/7 right?
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)'evil lurkers 24/7'. Those evil tunnels and the people who made them. Evil. Evil. Evil. 
hack89
(39,171 posts)Are you really suggesting that Hamas is running a major smuggling operation through an Israeli high security military zone?
Besides, most of the tunnels into Israel were not build with exits to the surface to ensure they remain hidden until Hamas decided to use them.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)What would anyone do? Build tunnels, rafts, boats, whatever it took to get supplies to their families.
Why won't Israel allow human rights activists to bring supplies to Palestinians? Why do they ration the food Palestinians are allowed to have, by calorie count??
Rex
(65,616 posts)above ground trying to get supplies! 
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)You, off topic btw: 'How are tunnels into Israel self defense'?
Me, playing along: 'How is sending an army with bombs and guns into Gaza killing hundreds of children self defense'?
The topic is, do the Palestinians have the same right of self defense as the Israelis? Considering how many of their people have been killed, it seems they NEED some kind of defense. So why do our elected officials not view Palestinians as equal human beings who have all the rights of any other people?
hack89
(39,171 posts)They are a group with a long history of terror attacks including suicide bombers. Giving terrorist groups powerful weapons is insane. The Palestinians are suffering because their choice to elect Hamas.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)when allowed free passage into Israel. Did the many, many episodes of terrorism go down the memory hole? What do you think the reaction is going to be?
They should be free to go though but Egypt has closed it's border and forced many to be refugees over the years in the first place to exacerbate exactly this tension as has Jordan and statistically swamp the Jewish population.
A plan that dictates returning to conditions of 10, 20, or 30 years ago is not going to be attractive to the population at all probably because it is irrational and takes on significant risks, real life and death downside, and psychological challenges with no reward.
Plus, it isn't just grudge holding, the same folks will tell you to your face that they will continue to drive the Jews out and they are joking and would seem super unlikely to change their minds any time that can be foreseen based on the often far worse internal sectarian violence which is condemned but with orders of magnitude less ire even our own heinous acts are looked at with less intensity of emotion, it seems to me. Repudiated? Absolutely but the visceral level is several notches down for all other players and I find it curious and it only reinforces my belief in Zion.
There is something seething below the surface of a considerable portion of humanity that has reared it's head and grown monstrous consistently throughout recorded history, the Holocaust just being the latest and greatest. I had a great grandfather who had to get out of Russia a generation or so before and it isn't just religion either, a Jewish can be an atheist or even Christian and will generally catch the same persecutions.
I don't know what the deal is but as far as I'm concerned humanity is on a 5 or 10 thousand year probation, at gunpoint if necessary.
Never again to face genocide, to be conquered, or dispersed and to always have a home of last resort is the only way forward for these people because we cannot be trusted with them and I do not blame them a bit for doing whatever it takes to makes sure and in fact believe it is our duty as restitution to help them.
Hell, I can even understand not wanting the next Islamic Republic on the doorstep but I am not unsympathetic to the Palestinians and if they wish to form a nation of their own and live in peace then it is our (the world) and Israel's duty to help them to do so but they will have to accept Israel and they never have before and there will likely still be no peace and the killing in result will be massive, making this last go around look like the age of Aquarius but it must be attempted because there is always a chance even of it is slim.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)a few decades ago decide out of the blue, to suddenly feel the need to get this angry. And what did Palestinians have to do with the horrors and evil of the Holocaust? Surely any anger among Israelis should be directed at those who necessitated their finding a home of their own, which most decent people support?
What is confusing here is that the Israelis have ALIGNED themselves with the very people who are responsible in one way or another, for them needing a safe place to go. The US eg, refused to take in Jewish refugees from Europe airc. How can they trust these people to continue to support them for ever? We don't have a good record of remaining loyal to our allies.
And how do these brutal attacks on the Palestinian people do ANYTHING other than create even MORE anger. What if YOU lost a child or several as in some cases. Would you care one bit about history, would you even want to hear about why you should understand?
This is not helping. Obviously, or by now things would be much better. Instead they are only getting worse for both Israel and Palestine.
So they've tried the meeting violence with violence policy. It hasn't worked. They have not tried the path of peace, except once, and that DID work.
Seems to me if they really want to be safe, the best way to do so is to get new leaders on both sides. If Palestinians in general are able to live normal lives, groups like Hamas will not have much support. The ONLY reason they do is because the Palestinian people feel hopeless.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)There is no moving forward until that is accepted and nothing to negotiate which brings us to the present circumstances and not coincidentally the current reactionary government in Israel because all hand wringing aside other approaches were way less effective in keeping Israelis safe and under less immediate threat.
The cycle is vicious and can only be broken with some buy in from those who have the most to gain and the ante is truly accepting the Jewish State is going to be there and will be left in peace in exchange they get the same.
A peace can only be negotiated from there and can only be maintained if stuck to.
So, I think your big ONLY is dubious, at best. It seems to me there were no shortage of attacks when there was freedom and opportunity. Seems like war was on the doorstep as soon as they had stepped in it too.
I think there is some Pollyanna in your analysis of the situation which puts too little stock in that a none too tiny portion are not as easily appeased as we would like to think. Far from all for sure, probably most people feel as described but we probably also have to accept in our calculus that it is a fairly significant, widespread and fervent percentage that is "death to Israel" without conditions and as can be seen when we pull back our scope a bit that in the area there are no few that are pretty fucking serious about their little sect and will murder any who don't agree and that is driving a lot of the I/P situation just in the background.
No, even if a wand could be passed over the Palestine situation, peace and safety are only enforced at gunpoint, it's a tough neighborhood with people in it with a deep cultural memory that they take way more seriously than most of us can relate to.
No Sabrina, it is not at all about present conditions nor self determination (the next state of Palestine will be the first), no doubt both are legitimate stress points but they are only part of the story no matter how tight and compelling it makes a narrative to pretend it is so.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)keep things 'peaceful'. I don't believe that. See N.Ireland eg, the same was said of that situation which had an 800 year history and where memories on both sides were long.
A vast majority of people WANT to live in peace no matter where they are, or how long a history might be.
Sooner or later it will have to end, these things always do.
And you left out Israel's radicals who also need to be reigned in. They as much as the other side's extremists are responsible for the continuation of the situation.
Of course it won't happen overnight, and it definitely won't happen with Netanyahu, but I don't agree with you that it can't happen. But that would take the US getting out of it, and some other entities who actually WANT to see peace there, taking over the role of peace-makers. I do agree that under the current leadership, here and there, nothing is going to change.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I haven't been able to locate any numbers. I'm trying to get an accurate count of deaths on both sides since 2005.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)EX500rider
(10,839 posts)In the 2006 Gaza cross-border raid, Palestinian militants used a tunnel to abduct Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
On July 17, 2014, Hamas militants crossed the Israeli border through a tunnel near to the farming village of Sufa but were stopped by Israeli Defense Forces. Israeli authorities claimed the purpose had been to attack civilians.
On July 21, 2014, two squads of armed Palestinian militants crossed the Israeli border through a tunnel near Kibbutz Nir Am. The first squad of ten was killed by an Israeli air strike. A second squad killed four Israeli soldiers using an anti-tank weapon. The Jerusalem Post reported that the attackers sought to infiltrate Kibbutz Nir Am, but a military source interviewed by the Times of Israel argued "the Hamas gunmen were not in motion or en route to a kibbutz but rather had camouflaged themselves in the field, laying an ambush for an army patrol."
On July 28, Hamas militants attacked an Israeli military outpost near Nahal Oz using a tunnel, killing five Israeli soldiers. One attacker was also killed.
Aug. 1, 2014 Hamas militants emerging from a tunnel attacked an Israeli patrol killing 2 Israeli soldiers. Israel at first believed that the militants had abducted Lieutenant Hadar Goldin and were holding him, but Israel later determined that Goldin had also been killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_tunnel_warfare_in_the_Gaza_Strip
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)And soldiers dying in war is what soldiers do. How many civilians? How many
Israeli children?
EX500rider
(10,839 posts)And the Israelis pounced them coming out of the tunnels.....what their objective was is unknown.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)I repeat, 300 children ripped of their lives to satisfy the blood lust. Are they now satiated?
Not to mention the massive infrastructure damage, the massive injuries of thousands more, the displacement of a quarter million people without water and power, zero damage in Israel...please, sir, shed one tear for the children...
hack89
(39,171 posts)Hamas is not stupid. You have to believe that they diverted so much money and material to build over 30 tunnels for something more important than minor attacks on Israel. Hamas needed a game changer to break the status quo and truly shock Israel. A massive, simultaneous attack on an Israeli town where Hamas captured and held it for several days would be such a game changer. The tunnels were to be Hamas' secret weapon to be used at the right time.
onenote
(42,693 posts)It was directed at German military.
But then again, you may believe, for all I know, that the Nazis rounding up Jews was a legitimate "defensive" tactic to defend Germany and German civilians.
Rozlee
(2,529 posts)And we have yet another poster trying to equate criticism of Israel's murderous policies against the Palestinians with anti-Semitism. Hey, I've criticized the policies of my own country and sending troops, of which unfortunately I was one, to fight wars of choice in the Middle East, all because our oil had the misfortune to be sitting under their sand. I've called our own leaders child-killing, genocidal fuckfaces. And I'm proud to be an American! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! So, excuse me if I call out yet another first world country for bombing people living in the 16th century into the Stone Age. Israel has smart bombs, fighter jets and nukes. The Palestinians make homemade rockets with no guidance systems. Our country destroyed its native inhabitants. Israel is doing the same as it tackles the Palestinian Question.
onenote
(42,693 posts)First, I've not tried to equate criticism of Israel's tactics with anti-Semitism. In fact, I've made clear I don't agree with how Israel has proceeded.
Second, what I have criticized is attempts to equate what has transpired in Gaza with anything related to the Holocaust -- a comparison that is, in my opinion, beyond obscene.
Third, I can only surmise from your post that you think the only reason the Jews of Warsaw did not attack innocent German civilians was a lack of access to them. Which might lead one to conclude that you also think that the Germans in Germany were at risk from the Jews and thus justified in rounding them up and putting them in concentration camps.
Rozlee
(2,529 posts)Israel isn't being as clinical and systemic as Germany in killing the Palestinians. They aren't putting them in death camps, crematoria or making them do slave labor. They are using the American colonial system of purging the land of them. It's still genocide and ethnic cleansing. And you're mixing cause and effect. German civilians never were at risk from being attacked by Jews before the Nazis started rounding them up and killing them and their families. History has shown that the opposite happened instead. That Jews suffered pogroms at the hands of European Christians for centuries. Which is why it's so distressing to see them visiting such a horrific practice on another ethnic group now. You'd think a people that had experienced mass exterminations wouldn't have a stomach for committing them.
onenote
(42,693 posts)We agree that Israel's response to Hamas' attacks on Israeli civilians is disproportionate.
But you think that systematically murdering 6,000,000 Jews is comparable to the death of 2,000 Palestinians.
Interesting.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)in people's mouths, the posts are right here for people to read for themselves so aside from anything else, it is pointless, and doesn't help you make your case at all.
onenote
(42,693 posts)"mass exterminations" being committed by Israel. Even accepting the idea that Israel is engaging in "exterminations" that are comparable to the systematic murder of Jews by the Nazis, the idea there is a proportional relationship between a mass extermination of 6,000,000 and the "mass extermination" of 2000, particularly by someone who claims that the killing of 2000 is disproportionate to the killing of a few Israeli citizens. I agree that the Israeli response has been disproportionate. But, I'm sorry, using the same term -- mass exterminations -- to compare killing 6,000,000 in ovens, gas chambers and firing squads to the death of 2000 Palestinians by the Israelis disproportionate assault is beyond ridiculous.
Rozlee
(2,529 posts)This campaign has killed 2,000 Palestinians. One campaign doesn't reflect the entirety of the ethnic cleansing and killings of Palestinians. In 1948, there were almost 5 million Palestinians in Israel. Today, there are 1.5 million. Many have been forced to leave their homes due to loss from Israeli settlements and shellings, most of them have spent their entire lives in refugee camps. Nazis were the most organized killers in history and have never been outdone in the scientific clinical destruction they visited on ethnic groups they hated in the hands-on extermination they perpetuated. Don't think that just because death is being dealt with modern weapons of destruction that it makes it any less humane, especially for those wounded, which in just this one campaign are in the several thousands and medical care almost non-existent. Your attempt to lessen the suffering of the Palestinians is farcical. Israeli Jews, with the exception of the very ultra Orthodox, live very prosperous safe lives with higher life expectancies than Americans. The same can't be said for Palestinians who live in desperate poverty and all keep a 'bug out bag' in case they have to flee in the night.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)Since the constant, random shelling of Israel by Hamas rockets is never mentioned by Hamas supporters,
we should probably assume that such activity is morally acceptable and perhaps even morally correct.
Very well - then Israel, in the name of defending itself, should respond by lobbing its own rockets. But
wait, you say, Israel has the advantage of the Iron Dome, which purports to intercept 90% of incoming
rockets. Also very well: for each ten rockets Hamas sends over, Israel is entitled to send one of its own.
Since random rocket fire is evidently the right of a government to unleash, what is sauce for goose should
be sauce for the gander.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)2 deaths....not 2000.... Some scorched pavement, some field with holes in it...Gazans would be grateful.
Excellent suggestion.
4Q2u2
(1,406 posts)So technology seems to be the problem. Israel's is better so they are the bad guy.
Sooting a sling shot at someone that owns a Howitzer seems pretty Stupid.
So Israel Bad Guy, Hamas Very Stupid Guy.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)300 dead children are shouting the truth from their graves.
4Q2u2
(1,406 posts)You make a great point. Those 300 dead are shouting from their graves. Hamas is not listening, they will send more of their people to their deaths for ideology.
Did they even debate about the risk of exposing THEIR people to such retribution. It is THEIR responsibility to act in the best interest of their people.
Israel thinks they are. Brutal as it is. What did Hamas expect? They gave Bibi the excuse he was looking for to crush them.
Who is more wrong? The Bad Guy or the Very Stupid Guy.
We know who is more dangerous.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)/ignore list.
4Q2u2
(1,406 posts)What an open minded person you are.
No where in my statements did I say that one side was right and the other was wrong.
I stated that is was irresponsible, stupid, and dangerous to engage a far superior force in conflict that would result in the harming and deaths of the most vulnerable of that society.
I did state that one side was deadly and the other stupid, then I asked who was more dangerous. I see you had no answer, just an uninformed attack.
So Bravo Mike to you
Following his father in swearing to reclaim the Silmarils from anyone who took and kept them, he led the war against Morgoth, and brought eventual ruin upon himself and his brothers
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)fascist state would wave away the deaths of so many innocents, only a fascist state...or America.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)That makes Israel the aggressor, by definition. Aggressors have no right to self defense against their victims.
Ignoring the fact that Israel was already the aggressor, Israel also started this particular conflict with their assaults against the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. These are facts you couldn't care less about. The Palestinians are using the most precise weapons available to them. Same with Israel, which Israel is using to target homes, hospitals, ambulances, and children, who are locked up in a prison by a racist, apartheid state. A state that has ethnically cleansed them off of their own land.
You are wrong on so many levels.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)when it's merely your opinion. An opinion held with utter moral certitude is still...wait for it...just an opinion.
And your argument of "racism" is ridiculous on its face, especially when, assuming one could conceivably argue that
the two aggressors are of completely different races, it's HAMAS who wants to destroy the Jews as a matter
of POLICY.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)He will be shot. They are under occupation. That is a hostile act which makes Israel the aggressors. International law supports this fact. Israel controls the Palestinians and they are stuck in their prison.
If our neighbors did that to Americans, we would have no trouble determining who are the aggressors.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Who has more credibility - some propaganda mouthpiece on the Internet, or the International Court of Justice?
The precarious and unstable conditions in the Gaza Strip from which Palestinians suffer are Israel’s responsibility. Israel argues that it can invoke the right to self-defense under international law as defined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. The International Court of Justice, however, rejected this faulty legal interpretation in its 2004 Advisory Opinion. The ICJ explained that an armed attack that would trigger Article 51 must be attributable to a sovereign state, but the armed attacks by Palestinians emerge from within Israel’s jurisdictional control. Israel does have the right to defend itself against rocket attacks, but it must do so in accordance with occupation law and not other laws of war. Occupation law ensures greater protection for the civilian population. The other laws of war balance military advantage and civilian suffering. The statement that “no country would tolerate rocket fire from a neighboring country” is therefore both a diversion and baseless.
Israel denies Palestinians the right to govern and protect themselves, while simultaneously invoking the right to self-defense. This is a conundrum and a violation of international law, one that Israel deliberately created to evade accountability.
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)though you replied to the wrong post.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)
BKH70041
(961 posts)Well, except for the 10:1 part. I'm of the opinion that (speaking in generic terms) if one has an army of 10,000 and they are going to battle someone with 100,000, you calculate your chances *prior* to mounting an offensive or doing things that might inflict harm upon yourself.
But as far as the uproar, the ancient Greeks and Romans would be rolling their eyes at some of the world reaction, and rightfully so.
BainsBane
(53,031 posts)There has not been constant shelling of Israel by Hamas. In fact there had been very little rocket fire during the 19 months preceding this current conflict, according to IDF intelligence reports. People have posted links to the reports.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)for over a year until Netanyahu wrongfully accused them of kidnapping three young Israelis, used it as an excuse to rampage through Gaza despite the denials by Hamas, which turned out to be true. Netanyahu lied, people died, Hamas began firing rockets again.
Anti Palestinians always forget the details when using the rocket excuse.
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)when you make claims about the supposed trigger event that make it easier.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)So there's that.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)I doubt that there's a so-called "Hamas" shill/sympathizer to be found around here, and very few that sympathize or empathize with the continuing plight of occupation, etc, of the Palestinian people, that don't or haven't condemned the manner in which their elected leaders there, Hamas, as well as the indie fighters, have conducted themselves with the rocket use.
What's amusingly stupid about your effort here is not just the "who started it nature" of it which ignores who actually did historically as well as recently, but also the fact that you have to just make crap up like that in lieu of any reasonable or sustainable arguments.
It's like all those "racist!" etc charges some of the dimmer or more dishonest bulbs around here have tossed at Obama critics from time to time. While it can simply be dismissed as the desperate dishonesty that it is, it does serve the rather distinct purpose of identifying the character flaws in those that employ such lowbrow and largely self-refuting tactics.
well done
Israel is more than welcome to, as a matter of "tit for tat", to "lob" rockets of the unguided kind in retaliation. But just to more unfair to the baby/women-killing/Israeli supporters around here, such factors as population density, who fired the rockets like Hamas or those overwhich they have little to no control,
The Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center estimated that in 2007[36] the proportions of rockets fired from the Gaza Strip were:
34% – Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Al Quds)
22% – Hamas (Qassam)
?8% – Fatah (Kafah)
?6% – Popular Resistance Committees (al Nasser)
30% – unknown
etc, ought to have a role in determining the ratio of rockets fired by the open air prison wardens. We'll just put you down as a supporter of collective punishment and disproportional killing.
Most school children could figure out looking at a detailed map that so many rockets are lobbed as a means of increasing the chance of hitting something, and that targeting schools, hospitals with guided ones make a much better statement on what and who those that pulled the trigger intended to hit, and their moral character as well.
Feel free to applaud their accuracy and the toll taken.
Fozzledick
(3,860 posts)"Defending themselves" doesn't really apply to a policy of aggression and terrorism.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)"defending" with missiles or rockets?
I don't see how indiscriminate damage and killing on the part of anyone constitutes 'defense'. You don't 'defend' yourself from a mugger by blowing up the apartment building next to the alley where he mugged you, nor do you 'defend' yourself from him by pointing a crappy rocket with no guidance system in the general direction of the alley from a few miles away.
Palestinians would have a far stronger case against the oppression of the RW Israeli governments if they actually worked to stop the idiots who want to shoot off rockets, kidnap people, or do suicide bombings. Go the political route, take Netanyahu and the IDF to the ICC, and quit giving them excuses to pretend they're just 'defending themselves' by destroying 40% of Gaza.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Just like the US.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)One can question the tactics but it is clear to me they have the right to defend themselves.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)The poster is right that it is simple murder and a violation of international law, when the Palestinians defend themselves the way they are doing, and Israel is justified in stopping it.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Both sides have committed war crimes and the leaders of both sides need to go to jail imo.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)There is no dispute that Hamas intends to hit civlians. This is a war crime.
Under international law, some risk to civilians is proper. For instance, if a guy has his triger on a nuclear bomb that would kill millions, a country can legally demolish his entire building, killing thousands. So it is not clear cut that Israel has committed a crime. The issue of proportionality is clouded. In fact, according to Israel 50% of the Palestinian deaths have been militants.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)It may not be clear cut for you but it sure as hell is for me.
Jail the leaders of both sides.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)It is not clear to other people too. The NY Times reports today: "Politicians have been saying that 47 percent of the dead were fighters, citing a study by an Israeli counterterrorism group that is impressive in its documentation, using photographs and Internet tributes."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/world/middleeast/civilian-or-not-new-fight-in-tallying-the-dead-from-the-gaza-conflict.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSum&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
malaise
(268,929 posts)What a planet
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)The poster is correct. It is a strange planet where only one side says it is intentionally targeting civilians.
Garthem
(128 posts)I agree. K&R.
onenote
(42,693 posts)If a group of Native Americans started lobbing rockets at random into Manhattan, would that be a legitimate act of "defensive resistance"?
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)And the prison had already been decimated and thousands killed in the years before, that part also.....
SnakeEyes
(1,407 posts)like the one in Gaza City? What about the restaurants, shops, and malls in Gaza? Street vendors as well.
It's interesting that there is all this attention on Gaza being occupied and the violence there when Israel's real occupation still lies in the west bank.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Oh, 300 dead children blown apart by bombs....a paradise.....
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)weapons they would still own their land. Good example actually of what happens when a less powerful group of people don't have the means to defend themselves against a far more powerful force. They would have been perfectly justified in defending their culture, their land IF they had had the means. Sadly they did not.
Do you think that what happened to Native Americans should be the fate of the Palestinians then?
onenote
(42,693 posts)Hamas should recognize Israel's right to exist and there should be a negotiated peace agreement.
Igel
(35,300 posts)In a way, even if you throw the first punch it's not unreasonable to say you're allowed to defend yourself against the punches that are thrown in return.
There's no guarantee of victory. And moral responsibility tends to reside with the person who throws the first punch.
What people shouldn't do is back up to find the first suitable punch to call the "first" or shift the basis for self-defense from "attack" to "inconvenience". Both are oft-played games. "Well, yes, Hamas fired a number of missiles over the course of the previous couple of months, but we're going to only go back to this date, when Israel fired these missiles." Or "Israel has no right to be threatened by tunnels, instead Hamas is defending itself from the economic attack of having limited imports."
It's also not reasonable to shift between motivation and intent and consequence as necessary to justify or condemn an attack. "Israel hit a school near a target" looks at consequence and often tries to infer intent from consequence; "Hamas missiles mostly hit open land and don't cause damage" plays the same game, when Hamas would have no purpose in aiming at desert. But the "motivation" is "self-defense", so maybe it doesn't matter?
In war, accidents happen. Equipment malfunctions. Intelligence goes astray. Attention falters. "Mistakes are made." Passives are to be avoided and mediopassives mislead.
You seldom hear--that's not true, it's just in some forums you seldom hear--that the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves. They certainly do. But often it's said in an attempt to justify violence by pointing out when they're attacked.
Israel tends to make its attacks short and intense. Perhaps a few weeks of very intense fighting. Perhaps a few seconds, as 3-4 missiles find their target with little warning. Typically there are fewed "failed attacks". "Israeli jets attempted to fire on a Hamas target today, but failed." "Israel attempted to attack Gaza with tanks and infantry today, but the attack went astray and landed in the Mediterranean sea without injury." Not just something you're likely to hear.
The Palestinians tend to make lots of efforts, often against civilians. Often intentionally against civilians. Their attempts often fail and are to be ignored and forgotten. It's like an attempt against Obama that fails--"A RW militia planted a bomb near where Obama was to speak, but it was defused. No hurt, no foul, and although we know who planted the bomb we're going say only good things about the militia." When they do succeed, it's usually an individual who's responsible, even if the killer's face is plastered on official pronouncements of praise, streets are named after him, and he's a national hero.
In many cases it's hard to tell who threw the first punch. We usually assume the first person we notice did. That's often wrong. We usually make excuses for those we agree with and find reasons to fault those we don't like.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)a side, any side.
But both cannot logically claim to be on the defensive.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Seems intellectually dishonest to me.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)murdered. Should his ass be kicked now having killed so many innocent civilians and who should kick it? I agree with you btw. Regarding starting fights and getting your ass kicked.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Firing rockets at a neighboring country qualifies as aggressive action even if the rockets are crude and ineffective. Assigning blame, even if incorrectly does not.
I don't see it much differently than personal self defense - you can't assault someone for insulting you and then claim self defense.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The occupation, apartheid, settlement building, etc.
On top of that, Israel also made the first acute act of aggression, when they used the kidnapping of the teenagers as an excuse to go around arresting large numbers of Hamas members.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)Shots were fired. Palestinians were killed, including a 14 year-old boy. 350 Palestinians were arrested based on the false declaration that Hamas orchestrated the kidnapping. Human Rights groups called it a war crime. Israel was the first aggressor, without any doubt.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/is-israels-operation-to-find-kidnapped-teens-a-war-crime/
The thing is, like I said, Israel is a constant aggressor. When Hamas shoots rockets that kill three Israeli civilians, people start talking about "aggression". But Israeli violence against Palestinians happens all the time.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)As to the question of was the aggressor, and the answer is, obviously, Israel. Hamas didn't do anything, and Israel launched an invasion, went around arresting and shooting people.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Were they shooting at the Israelis when it happened? The IDF was in the West Bank, so why were rockets fired from Gaza? I don't know, but I do believe there should be an independent review of the facts. There is another thread today about review by international courts - I support that.
ETA: There is a very informative article in today's Wall Street Journal about this conflict and the Egyptian connection. I believe you need to be a subscriber to view it, but if you are, here's the link.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/unlikely-alliance-between-israel-and-egypt-stoked-gaza-tension-1407379093?mod=WSJ_hp_RightTopStories
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)ProgressiveJarhead
(172 posts)and they get it. They also have a right to shit can Hamas for using them too. They also have a right to not have their peace activists be murdered. The goal of combat operations is to destroy the enemy or his will to fight. Neither side in this case will win peace. They get no sympathy from me.
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)I think both sides will agree that we cannot allow the civilian deaths to go unpunished.
The only question is how specifically to bring punishment.
As I see things, there were three types of civilian deaths for which justice must be brought:
1) Israeli civilian death caused by Hamas rockets.
2) Palestinian civilian death caused by Hamas rockets that fell short of their Israeli targets.
3) Palestinian civilian death caused by Hamas firing from civilican areas, using human shields.
So how do we bring justice, as the victims deserve?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)Especially # 3 suggesting Hamas forced Israel to shoot civilians- as if Israel has no choice in the matter.
Embarassed is what I would be if I were that poster. SMH
In the United States, there are a lot of judges, prosecutors, policemen, and prison guards, who oppose the death penalty, but do their job and apply it. Some prosecutors have the choice of either quitting or arguing death penalty cases. Some policemen have opportunities to let the bad guys go, or investigate thoroughly, knowing a death penalty may follow. Not everyone blames them.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)You do realize that Israel has killed 100 times more innocent civilians than Hamas in this conflict, right?
This is not quite true. the ratio is not 100:1, when you add in the deaths from Hamas rockets that fell short of Israel and killed Palestinians civilians.
In any event, the ratio is irrelevant. One must consider how many deaths were prevented by Israel, for instance how many deaths could come from tunnel operations and rocket launches, if there were no deterence. If the US had taken down the 9/11 planes, there would be more civilian death than terrorist death. But in sum total, more lives would have been saved, as the guys in the world trade center would have been spared.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)terrorists that is will breed by slaughtering civilians the way it has, then the ratio will probably exceed 100:1. As far as deaths prevented by Israel, I think you've been drinking a little too much Likud kool-aid.
But then, I imagine you were also a big fan of the Iraq War.
Enjoy your stay on DU.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)So every time a terrorist murders someone, you want to convict Israel instead of the terrorist, upon a theory of inspiration or breeding.
International law says that, if Israel kills a civilian, it is still a crime to retaliate by killing a civilian yourself upon an inspiration theory.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)When Israel murders someone, I blame Israel. When Hamas murders someone, I blame Hamas. And Israel has obviously murdered far more people than Hamas. It's actually hilarious that you bring this up just two posts after you tried to blame Hamas for the civilians that Israel has killed.
Still, it's obvious that the way Israel has been and continues to treat Palestinians is the major reason why there is so much terrorism against Israelis to begin with. You know, you repress people for decades, occupy their territory, steal their land, occasionally invade them and blow up their schools and hospitals, people will get upset and some will resort to violence.
But again, when I say "so much terrorism" we still have to keep in mind that Israel murders far more innocent civilians than Hamas, so many more that it's almost absurd to discuss the two in the same sentence.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)It is correct to blame Hamas for the civilians Israel killed because human shields were used.
It is not correct to blame Israel for murder by inspiration.
Under United States law, if A and B rob a bank, and the police kill A, then B is guilty of murder. The proximate cause of death is said to be the decision to rob the bank, not the police doing its job.
On the other hand, if the police arrest A and B, and then murder A for revenge, B is not blamed. The police are guilty of murder, even if they were provoked by the bank robbery.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)This is not a bank robbery, and murdering children is not Israel's "job". It is a war crime.
Israel murders innocent civilians in large numbers, and the predictable result of those actions, as well as the occupation, settlement building, etc, is more terrorism. Pointing this out isn't justifying terrorism. The extent to which Israel is morally responsible for the terrorists it creates may be debatable, but obviously Israel is responsible for the war crimes it commits directly.
At the end of the day, Israel murders far more innocent civilians than Hamas.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Israel might have killed (not murdered) more civilians than Hamas did, but this ratio is irrelevant.
Say a terrorist grabs a child as a human shield, and starts shooting up a crowded market place. Say the police have two choices: let the terrorist kill 10 people, or shoot the terrorist through the human shield, and kill the terrorist and kid.
Under such scenario, the police have a duty to kill the innocent kid and terrorist, as 1 civilian dies instead of 10.
The number to focus on is not how many civilians Hamas killed. This is low precisely because Israel defended itself. The number to focus on is how many civilians were protected because the tunnels were destroyed and 3,000 rockets were destroyed on the ground.
If Israel had no deterence, then Hamas would have killed many more civilians. The tunnels were effective.
So the United States would have been justified in shooting down the 9/11 planes. It would have killed hundreds of civilians, but saved thousands on the ground.
Incidentally under United States law, say the police bullet killed the kid / human shield, and only wounded the terrorist. The terrorist would actually be guilty of murdering the kid, and the police would be innocent of it.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)It is only irrelevant to people looking for excuses for Israeli war crimes. When Israel blows up a building with ten children in it based on the suspicion that a Hamas member might be visiting, that is murder. When Israel bulldozes the homes of the families of people it thinks are terrorists, that is a crime. Blowing up schools, hospitals, etc, these are crimes.
What is actually irrelevant are your hypotheticals about someone shooting up a market place with a hostage. And your speculation about what might have happened had Israel decided not to murder hundreds of Palestinian children is also irrelevant. Although I will say, I find it pretty shocking that people even try to pretend that the mass murder of civilians by Israel was necessary for "self-defense". Yes, I'm aware that's what Bibi Netanyahu claims, but I didn't think that there existed people gullible enough to believe him.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Had the US taken down the 9/11 airplanes before they hit the World Trade Center, there would surely be gullible people complaining about the murder of children on the plane, despite the larger number of lives that would have been saved.
It is no shock that similarly a few gullible people complain about what Israel did, believing that no one could have died from Hamas' rockets and tunnels.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The thing about Israeli war crimes is that they are not hypothetical. They really do routinely murder hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians. We're talking about kids, not terrorists in control of airplanes. Obviously the lives of Palestinian civilians don't mean any more to you than they do to Bibi. Which is why I suspect that your stay here at DU will not last too long.
Although I may be wrong. Israeli war crimes and the NRA are the two areas where naked right wing trollery is permitted on DU. Lemme guess, are you an NRA member? LOL.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Perhaps my stay here will not be long, but I find censorship cowardly.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to legally use innocent civilians as human shields?
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/neighbors-won-t-be-serving-1.171577
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)If only most Palestinian resources were directed toward non-violent, instead of terrorist, means.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)The Palestinians don't have all that many resources and it's time the world step in and help them.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Any help could be funneled to more violent means. Palestinians received a lot of help in the form of cement intended to build hospitals, but ended up building tunnels, which were effective in killing. The need to destroy these tunnel led to much Palestinian death.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If Israel wants to commit war crimes, let them do it without US support.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)Israel has not been convicted of a war crime for this year's Gaza military steps.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I assume you're a big Dick Cheney fan, given your general right-wing pro-war outlook. Am I right?
stonecutter357
(12,695 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I think it's very negative to deny some people rights while giving others rights.
But then I'm one of those 'lieberal' types, who just wants equal rights for everyone. Sue me.
Rex
(65,616 posts)She posts all kinds of positive stuff on DU...maybe it is just the fact that you don't like what she posts?
RedstDem
(1,239 posts)Posting anything that the fascist trolls think is pro Palestine, will bring a mountain of anti Semites shouts.
Even though you state that Palestine and Israel both have the right to defend themselves, that will be interpreted as pro Palestine, which in turn means, pro hamas, which in turn switches to anti semitism, all in a split second.
Common sense is suspended. Support for a ultra right wing government is fine as long as its Israel
I've never seen democrats or progressives shame themselves to such a degree as here, and now on this forum. .
MineralMan
(146,286 posts)I've not seen any.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)throughout the Bush era.
I was eg, a Saddam Lover, a Terrorist Supporter, a Traitor, among other things, considering the sources, I was flattered. God knows I would not have wanted approval from them, that would have worried me to death.
Now I'm a 'Putin Lover' etc etc , and one of my favorites, because it was so creative, 'a descendent of the oppressors of women'. Lol
I know what you mean, but I have a conscience, and will never be bulled by people whose only defense for their support of inequality of any kind is to resort to name-calling.
I am surprised to find some of that here though.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)Adam051188
(711 posts)[link:
|sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)If you're arguing that Palestinians have a right to violently resist their occupation, that's another matter entirely.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)point out to me where any member of our Government has acknowledged that not only Israelis, which they tell us over and over again, have that right, but Palestinians also, I would appreciate it.
I have not yet heard one member of our Govt state that Palestinians have the same rights as Israelis, have you?
randys1
(16,286 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)ago and lived in peace with their neighbors and today self-defense for all would be a matter of course. Aggression against anyone would be unnecessary.
Sending rockets and suicide bombers and building tunnels under your neighbors land are not defense measures. They are offensive measures.
If a country has grievances that they want to settle with rockets and suicide bombers and building tunnels under the land of a neighboring country, they need to try to mediate it, give and take.
Because none of those tools are defensive.
Palestinians need to sit down at the table and deal with Israel. It will be very difficult, but it is the only answer.
840high
(17,196 posts)
chrisa
(4,524 posts)little bird that's totally innocent and is being attacked by a big mean bully.
There are no good guys here. If anything, Israel and Hamas have a lot in common. They both treat Palestinian civilians as disposable pawns.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)There can be no doubt that Hamas treats Palestinian civilians as pawns. There was a NY Time article gathering evidence that Hamas actually takes steps for the purpose of exposing more Palestinian civilians to Israeli fire, on the theory that the more Palestinian civilian death, the more political points Hamas scores in world opinion.
But it is wrong to call Israel as bad just because Israel is willing to cause civilian death that is proportionate to the threat. Causing civilian death proportionate to the threat is legal under international law.
840high
(17,196 posts)
KoKo
(84,711 posts):kick:
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)The reality of the situation is that the Palestinians simply can't defend themselves. Not adequately, not enough to really make a difference in this conflict. Compare it to our two invasions, our bombing raids, our sanctions on Iraq. How many thousands, even hundreds of thousands died as a result? What of the children who are born with severe mental or physical deformities? What of the parents losing their children? Should we consider their healthcare? Their education? Perhaps their civil rights, their access to clean water, electricity, services and needs that many of us in more developed Nations take for granted.
Many Americans also died in the conflict, however, when you take a number that is less than 10,000 and compare it with hundreds of thousands... in a Nation that lost most of it's structure, it's services, it's pride... and this was all in our control. We could have given the weapons inspectors more time - we could have actually listened to them. We could have had politicians who actually learned about the reality of the situation before signing on. We could have dedicated ourselves to greater acts of diplomacy, to improved intelligence gathering, propaganda campaigns, we could have done many, many things that we did not do in Iraq. Now that Country is a miserable hell because we didn't just destroy it, we destroyed it, we abandoned it, and now we beat our chests and pull our hair as it destroys itself further.
Move forward a bit - and a similar scenario is at play here. Except that this time, it is Israel which has occupied Palestine, taken their land, their livelihoods, their lives. Blocked their land when they fought back. Painted anyone who fights back, whether lunatic or patriot, as a terrorist.
If someone had taken my land, kicked my family off of it and built a new settlement there... if they had made "civilian casualties" of my friends, my brothers and sisters, if they had done these things and left most of my Country and my people depressed and suffering... I too, would try to fight back.
Thus the cycle perpetuates itself, thus tomorrow's "terrorists" are created each time our weaponry claims innocent lives. I think what we need to recognize is that some times the simplest solution is the best one.
Recognize their rights to their own land, to their own lives. Help them to create their own state, feed their people, pave the roads, build schools and hospitals, provide medicine. Do all of these things - win the Palestinian people with love and generosity. That would make more of a difference in this conflict than any amount of posturing from our politicians and warmongers. Unless the intent is to utterly wipe out the people of Palestine, this is something that must be done. It should be done now. Today. Israel can protect it's own while doing this.
Which force is the more guilty here? Who is the greatest villain? Does it really matter? We can list hundreds, even thousands of terrible incidents which caused great suffering, death and destruction... we can point fingers till our arms fall off.
Hamas would be far less popular, far less idealized by the Palestinian people... if Israel and the international world would take steps to demonstrate our humanity, our compassion, our belief in TRUE liberty. It can start with us, instead of using our money to assist with weapons and military matters, we should be using it to buy food, medicine, to send Doctors and teachers, construction workers. We could send our troops to do something they would be proud to do - to help rebuild and reclaim a Nation devastated by war - to reclaim it for it's people who only want to live out their lives in peace. Then, perhaps we might even begin to ease the tensions in the middle east. Perhaps we might become a friend to the world, as opposed to a threat to be feared.
Fuck the politics. Consider the humanity. We all know the right thing to do.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to say that I no longer believe ANY of this is about 'national security, either our own horrible wars or Israel's war on the Palestinians which explains why neither we nor they have resolved it by now.
These are our POLICIES. Ledeen verbalized them back during the Bush era. The chaos in Iraq and Libya and anywhere we've been, according to him, was the GOAL. To level the entire ME and 'turn it into a parking lot'. Why? And how come these psychopaths got control of this country and Israel.
Your solutions are the logical ones, but our Government and Israel's are not interested, it has become clear, in logical solutions, they are interested in forever war, in the subjugation of entire groups of people.
How to dislodge these warmongers and all their backers now that they have managed to get so much power, is the question. I don't believe any politician can do it, so it has to be the people of the world in massive numbers. I do see signs of that happening, and SO DO THEY which is why they crack down so quickly and brutally on protests like OWS.
It can't go on forever, these periods of brutal oppression eventually end as history demonstrates. I hope it ends soon ...
Great post, thank you.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Common sense - and simple humanity. There is so much we can accomplish, so much that can be done that people think is impossible, simply because it hasn't been done before. I am so very tired of politicians posturing and using their little mouth pieces to posture for them.
As we debate over right and wrong... the right things to do are not being done, they are outside of the picture that is typically painted for us, the question of whether Israel is right or wrong. Who cares? Does them being wrong revive any innocent dead? Does them being right? If we focus, if we unite and combine our efforts and resources, we could turn this disaster into something very different. We could feed a people, heal a land, show the world that we are not only the Nation with the most powerful and "feared" military, but that we have great compassion and humanity as a people. Which we do.
It should go beyond politics or the shady picture of morality our media paints. The right things to do? We can do them. We could have done them many years ago. We can do them now. The government of Israel could stop this cycle, could put an end to most of this hate and fanaticism. People who are content, who are happy, who are well treated... far less likely to wage war and kill soldiers or innocent civilians.
The solutions are simple, when it comes right down to it.
swilton
(5,069 posts)and deemed unacceptable. Palestinian deaths which occur more frequently at the hands of the IDF or Israeli settlers is buried in the back pages and is considered normal.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)the Israeli death was the result of an act intended to kill a civilian.
The Palestinian death (the civilian ones) is the result of an act intended to kill a militant.
Murder gets more press than natural disasters.
politicman
(710 posts)an entire neighbourhood in the U.S if the police received intelligence that an escaped prisoner was hiding in a certain neighbourhood?
I am stunned that Israeli apologists can attempt to make the absurd argument that Hamas forced Israel to kill untold numbers of children and civilians.
Does Hamas have some sort of secret weapon where they can divert an Israeli missile and reroute it onto the head of a child?
These Israeli apologists want to absolve Israel of all blame for the deaths of innocent civilians and children by arguing that Hamas uses them as human shields, YET it is Israel that is making the conscious decision to fire a missile at a house or building that they know contains children and civilians.
Here's a thought experiment for you Israeli apologists:
Remember that time that a man shot his boss in New York and the NYPD responding by having an indiscriminate shoot out with this man in the middle of times square and many innocent bystanders got injured, well did you support the actions of the NYPD is that scenario?
Would you support any police force in the U.S indiscriminately shooting into a building full of innocent people to take out one bad guy that the cops were after?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)logical of the talking points they are obviously given to try to defend their actions.
It has been taken apart so often now, one wonders why we are still seeing it.
Good post, thank you.
politicman
(710 posts)We still see that ridiculous argument by Israel and its supporters because they know that if they keep repeating their stupid propaganda argument, eventually anyone with a brain capable of refuting their lies will tire of constantly pointing out their lies, THUS they end up being the ones that get an unchallenged platform with which to influence people who don't know much about the mid-east conflict.
We see it on here everyday, how many times do I go through a thread and see the same Israeli apologists keep repeating the same propaganda points without answering any questions put to them.
Constantly I see the same Israeli apologists on here dodge any and all questions and respond with only the same discredited arguments time and time again.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)they are delusional. It has the opposite effect imo. I hate talking points and assume when I see them that we are being propagandized so automatically reject them. If someone sincerely believes in something, they don't need talking points, they are able to articulate their opinions in their own words.
Talking points destroy good forums, which may be their intent but they do not win anyone over.
And looking around the internet all over the world at the comment sections attached to news articles re this conflict, people ARE rejecting them. They are everywhere, the same old illogical talking points and they are getting the same negative reaction everywhere.
Maybe it's just me, but if I wanted to sell something and my ad campaign was only turning people off, I would stop wasting my money on such a failed venture.
Ahmed Aftab
(55 posts)a terrorist grabs a kid and uses him as a human shield while he shoots up a crowded market place. Let's say the police can either let the terrorist shoot 100 people, or shoot the terrorist through the kid shield, killing the kid in the process.
What is the police to do, let 100 people be killed, or kill the one kid shield themselves?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Their first order of defense should be voting out Hamas.
