Gaza

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Deckard

Not to mention the Israeli assassinations which didn't stop during the ceasefire. Also when it comes to selective rewinding, I've yet to see Israel's response as to why the crossing points never fully opened to allow essential supplies freely in and out of Gaza, despite the fact that Hamas kept its side of the bargain in suspending the rocket attacks. But I don't doubt there is an answer somewhere that only begs another question - and following that chain is not the route to peace.


Just to be clear: killing an innocent Israeli is just as bad as killing an innocent Palestinian. The point is that, by my reckoning, Israel only wields more responsibility by virtue of its astronomically more powerful position - with those advantages should come greater responsibility. It shouldn't bear "practicallly full responsibility" but certainly it should bear more responsibility than the UK or US are ever willing to attribute to it. I think that's where a sizeable chunk of the overseas anger originates.


Completely understandable. I don't think anyone here doubts that, and I think we all take it as read that firing rockets into civilian areas is a crime against humanity. The key point though is in your phrase "action taken". Not only is this not the action that will stop it, this is action that will greatly exascerbate it - I think you accept this anyway, but here's the crux - the reason Israel comes in for more criticism in my eyes is because:

(a) I have a hard time believing that Israel is DUMB enough not to see that this is completely counterproductive as far as "action taken" goes, or to recognize the threat posed by 3 quarters of a million young people growing up in Gaza with an inexorable hatred of those who have starved and bombed them. For me, the "self defence" reason goes straight out the window. It's not even credible.

(b) I'm starting to question how realistic (/naive) it is to believe that military action of this order is ever executed by a state as advanced as Israel purely for an emotional reason like vengeance (bearing in mind the absence of "self defence") so I don't think it's unreasonable to start asking what might really lie behind this, even if there are no immediate satisfactory answers - just as the notion of Afghanistan and Iraq as "vengeance" for 9/11 never really sat well with me. It is possible that we don't know the full story behind the actions and timing here.

I think what angers me most is that, with 500 Palestinians killed and another 2,000 wounded (at the time of writing), the news ticker tonight is still reading "Gordon Brown: Gaza has reached its darkest hour..... Obama: Gaza and Israel is a source of deep concern for me..." - like some passive commentary on a fictional soap opera. You can bet they wouldn't be so goddamned "Oh dear what a dreadful shame it all is"-passive if this was happening the other way round. We all know Hamas terrorists get condemned, and rightly so. But I feel like this murderous response by Israel is getting the greenlight from MY country - as it always does - and honestly that makes me livid.

Just what the hell is it with our three nations, the US, UK and Israel? What if we really are the world bullies?

lol our concurrent responses are almost identical, except you said it better.

[Deckard]

Hey Strangelet, you weren't there a moment ago!

(Now I feel guilty like it's gang-up-on-Sean time. )

In all honesty I don't greatly disagree with you Sean; my anger is only directed at the green light Israel always seems to get from our politicians.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Deckard

In all honesty I don't greatly disagree with you Sean; my anger is only directed at the green light Israel always seems to get from our politicians.

Same here, man

[myrrh]

Yeah, I agree as well. I don't deny that anyone has the right to defend themselves. However, this has crossed the line of 'defending oneself.'

Like I said in an earlier post, if you punch me in the face, and I in turn take out my shotgun and blow a hole in your stomach- would a judge take my side in saying it was self-defense? Somehow, I don't think so...

Also, we are talking about Israel here. I watched a program about their military technology and they have the ability to see through walls in three dimensions. They had all of the city mapped out and from a room could direct people on the streets. This was about two years ago, and I gotta say it was one of the most coolest/frightening things I have ever seen. So, to say that they can't just go into Gaza and take out Hamas leaders without killing civilians is, in my eyes, a flat out lie.

[BeautifulBurnout]

Originally Posted by myrrh

Also, we are talking about Israel here. I watched a program about their military technology and they have the ability to see through walls in three dimensions. They had all of the city mapped out and from a room could direct people on the streets. This was about two years ago, and I gotta say it was one of the most coolest/frightening things I have ever seen. So, to say that they can't just go into Gaza and take out Hamas leaders without killing civilians is, in my eyes, a flat out lie.

I think, frankly, what they are trying to do is to terrify the Gazan Palestinians into renouncing Hamas by "showing" them that Hamas only brings them hellfire and destruction. Thing is, it will work no better to sap the morale of the people than the Blitzkrieg did on Londoners. All they will do is galvanise hatred against themselves.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Deckard

Hey Strangelet, you weren't there a moment ago!

(Now I feel guilty like it's gang-up-on-Sean time. )

In all honesty I don't greatly disagree with you Sean; my anger is only directed at the green light Israel always seems to get from our politicians.

Ah, it's been a little while, but this is a pretty mild instance of "gang-up-on-Sean time" comparitively speaking. Doesn't bother me at all.

I do essentially agree with you on Israel's greater responsibility due to it's position of power. I'm basically just saying - as I've said here in previous conversations about the conflicts in the Middle East - I don't believe for a second that if Israel were to withdraw troops or even completely disarm, then there'd be peace in the region. I'm raising the point mainly in response to this comment from Myrrh and the subsequent agreement with it:

Originally Posted by myrrh

Maybe, just maybe, if the US had actually recognized that Hamas was the legit government and not labelled them as a terrorist group, then they would have been able to spend money on building more schools, instead of having to worry about buying rockets.

I guess that for me, it's one thing to acknowledge that Israel's response is inappropriate and over the top, but completely another to look at the root causes of the overall regional problems and how they should be handled. Wish I knew what the answers are, but I feel pretty confident that Hamas wouldn't be a peaceful, happy group of school builders had we just been nicer to them.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

I think, frankly, what they are trying to do is to terrify the Gazan Palestinians into renouncing Hamas by "showing" them that Hamas only brings them hellfire and destruction. Thing is, it will work no better to sap the morale of the people than the Blitzkrieg did on Londoners. All they will do is galvanise hatred against themselves.

I fully agree.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Sean

I fully agree.

as do i, but are we willing to take it to the next step? To terrorize a population into changing their political/cultural ends defines terrorism. Which means Israel's policy is the policy of a terrorist state, which obliterates all this hoohaa about sidelining hamas as a singularly evil, nonconventional, rogue organization, not just the other side of the coin?

Or are their other differences? Again, just wondering what you think. not trying to pick an argument.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

as do i, but are we willing to take it to the next step? To terrorize a population into changing their political/cultural ends defines terrorism. Which means Israel's policy is the policy of a terrorist state, which obliterates all this hoohaa about sidelining hamas as a singularly evil, nonconventional, rogue organization, not just the other side of the coin?

Or are their other differences? Again, just wondering what you think. not trying to pick an argument.

No, I understand. Frankly, I've been wrestling with this question personally, and I can't give you a completely straight answer yet. What I can say is that it certainly does seem as if lines are being blurred at best....

[Deckard]

Anyone seen this yet?

Gaza attack timeline

Figures will be challenged I imagine. And I hope the fact that it starts (for me at least) on Day 9 - the day before the number of injured Israelis jumps from 9 to 62 - isn't a deliberate attempt to shape the presentation. It shouldn't ever need shaping.

Still, thought I'd post it nonetheless.