Israelis want peace you say?

Rue · December 28, 2008

BC Chick you know my position on this. I think you are unfairly bias for one side of the conflict.

I think you are quick to point the finger at Israel without pointing the same finger

equally at Hamas and the other terror groups.

If peace is to come about Hamas must be disarmed.

It has shown once again it is using its own people in the Gaza as pawns to be

killed to try gain sympathy.

BC they started this latest round of violence just as they have time and time

again in the past and no Israel can not sit back and watch 300 missiles and more

be launched into its nation.

It is a miracle only 15 civilians died in its initial air strike which is testament to how

skilled the IAF is.

Hamas killed two children with its own missles and will expose its people to death

quite intentionally to gain public sympathy.

More to the point the comments from Hamas as of today are referring to taking back

all of Israel and Jordan as it has from day one.

Interesting how the word fighting against the "occupation" means one thing to Palestinians

and another to you or those who pretend it only means Gaza.

In case you haven't noticed Israel hasn't been in Gaza for some time but the missiles never came to

a stop. Ask Kuzadd how shooting missiles at Isral and referring to Israel as occupied Palestine

land will bring peace to the people of Gaza.

Even as Israel tried to send in humanitarian aid two days ago to the Gaza they were shot at.

Sorry BC I am very sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians particularly in Gaza which is

a large cesspool.

But there is a reason why Israelis committed to giving back land for peace and who tried to make

peace with Palestinians like Ehud Barak, the Defence Minister who was laughed at by Arafat when he tried to enter into a peace agreement with him and Tipi L. the Foreign Minister are now forced to be warriors.

Hamas has laughed in their faces and called them weaklings deliberately. Hamas is fueling a war to

get Benjamin Netanyahu elected in 6 weeks. It is exactly what they want, get the peaceful moderates

voted out of office and have Netanyahu elected in a backlash so as to fuel the war not

bring it to an end.

Hamas has chosen terror over peaceful dialogue. You can blame Israel all you want

but it has the right to defend itself from attack.

The sooner Hamas is disarmed the better.

The peaceful moderate Palestinians must be allowed to take over the dialogue but they

can't as long as Iran fuels Hamas with weapons and money to finance war.

Hamas is deliberately assuring moderate Israeli politicians like Tipi Livner and Ehud Barak can not

win an election. With such moderates gone and Netanyahu back in power they can revert to

the usual terrorism and claim Netanyahu is not interested in peace and that is why Israelis

voted him in.

Its a transparent game. Everytime Israel is faced with an election, Hamas has attacked it and launched

terror attacks to provoke its right wing to win the election and futther polarize the situation.

I hope Tippi kicks ass and wins the election but I doubt that will happen.

Edited December 28, 2008 by Rue

GostHacked · December 28, 2008

Oh there we go on cue. Continued occupation of what. According to Hamas its continued occupation of Israel not just the Gaza and West Bank.
Do me a favour Kuzadd try a new one. The double talk reference which means Israel to some and the West Bank for others no longer works. We all see through it.

Rue

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7795139.stm

What is your take on this..

Israeli settlements on occupied territory are seen as illegal by the rest of the world. But now an Israeli human rights group is saying that even under Israeli law, one of the most significant and well-established settlements is unlawful.

The lady they report on in the article states

She has seen the settlement grow hugely. And she believes that all this land belongs to the Jewish people.

As we talk, I am shown photocopies of documents in Arabic, which purport to show how most of the land on which Ofra has been built is in fact still owned by the Palestinians here.
Ziad and his 60-year-old friend Walid Hussein insist that the only recourse now is for the settlers to go, and the land to be returned.

"There will be no peace," said Walid, "if you don't give me my right, my ownership." Ziad says that money is not the issue.

If it is illegal even Israeli law ... then what is the resolution to this problem? I know Isreali law is different from International Law .. or even UN law, that could put all other disputed settlements under the gun. If that is the case, this is what the Palestinians overall are fighting about. This seemed to have been a bad deal from the start, and decades later, much conflict is still going on.

I guess if this place has been like this for thousands of years, I say arm all equal and let the chips fall where they may. Tired of defending either side. I just don't see the point anymore.

DogOnPorch · December 28, 2008

Egypt has been turning a blind eye to the tunnels that are keeping Gaza alive. Ironically, if Israel had not imposed the blockades, Egypt would be in a better position to monitor what goes into region and to make sure arms are not being smuggled in as well.
In any case, my question remains... after 18 months of blockades that resulted in a humanitarian crisis while Israel thumbed its nose at international pressure to stop, why don't Palestinians have a right to defend themselves the way Israelis do? Are their lives worth less?

Shooting Katyushas is an offensive act...not defensive. The Russians used to have trucks that carried 16-32 of them during WW2 for softening up the Germans before launching an attack. The design hasn't changed much since those days. Smaller warheads for greater range being the most obvious modification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyusha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief006-10.htm

Egypt policing for weapons? Please... They barely control what happens in their own cities let alone the desert. The Egyptians keep their border closed because they don't want Gaza's problems becoming theirs. They fired warning shots today when numerous Palestinian Arabs tried to cross. I believe they are letting through a bit of medical traffic, mind you. As well, they may have to play host to other Arab nations intent on shipping supplies to Hamas via their border. Tough position to be in...piss off Israel or piss off your Arab/Muslim allies.

--------------------------------------------------------------

He reminds me of the man who murdered both his parents, and then when sentence was about to be pronounced pleaded for mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan.

---President Abraham Lincoln

Edited December 28, 2008 by DogOnPorch

bush_cheney2004 · December 28, 2008

....Tough position to be in...piss off Israel or piss off your Arab/Muslim allies.

Easy decision if you ask me....the billion$ in foreign aid come from the same place as Israel's.

myata · December 28, 2008

Note how nobody has called this "disproportionate" yet? Called for an immediate stop due to much human suffering and such? Only media reporting the numbers?

Which calls for some interesting scientific question:

Question: what is the value of a Palestinian (and generally, non Western) life compared to that of a Westerner?

Solution: the rebuttal of Georgia's little democracy mission by Russia has cost it (Georgia) some 60 civilian lives and was found by everybody on the right (i.e our) side of moral divide grossly disproportionate; on the other hand, in this latest development, the bodycount on the Palestinian side was over 200, the last time I heard the news, and nobody (of the world's moral leadership, other than Gaddafi) could be bothered for a comment.

As every 5-grader would tell us, the ratio sought would be less than 60/200 = 3/20 = 0.15.

Now Georgia isn't really a full Western country, more like an aspiring ally. Which means that its lives still don't count as much as those from the democratic metropolia proper, maybe only a half of it.

0.15 / 2 = 0.075. I.e. just under 1/10. And counting, because 200 could easily become 3,4,500 and god forbid, 1000 (as in the last major Israeli operation in Lebanon), and nobody would find anything unusual, unbecoming or disproportionate in any such development.

Could I have just broken a virgin fresh ground in some totally new field of science (let's call it, "moral arithmetics")?! Think I'll bequest all credits to our great moral leaders (current and aspiring ones) though.

bush_cheney2004 · December 28, 2008

Note how nobody has called this "disproportionate" yet? Called for an immediate stop due to much human suffering and such? Only media reporting the numbers?
Which calls for some interesting scientific question:

Not really...the math is simple....mess with the bull...get the horns.

myata · December 28, 2008

Aren't we're talking the sanctity of life though? Something we (complete with our great leaders, policy makers and such) value above all else? Vouch to guard, defend and protect at all (figuratevely speaking) cost?

bush_cheney2004 · December 28, 2008

Aren't we're talking the sanctity of life though? Something we (complete with our great leaders, policy makers and such) value above all else? Vouch to guard, defend and protect at all (figuratevely speaking) cost?

Nope...the "sanctity of life" is just a punchline...from abortions to A-bombs.

myata · December 28, 2008

Thought so. The bud with the biggest fist is always the one who's most just, moral and humanistic (if he likes being called that).

moderateamericain · December 28, 2008

Note how nobody has called this "disproportionate" yet? Called for an immediate stop due to much human suffering and such? Only media reporting the numbers?
Which calls for some interesting scientific question:

Question: what is the value of a Palestinian (and generally, non Western) life compared to that of a Westerner?

Solution: the rebuttal of Georgia's little democracy mission by Russia has cost it (Georgia) some 60 civilian lives and was found by everybody on the right (i.e our) side of moral divide grossly disproportionate; on the other hand, in this latest development, the bodycount on the Palestinian side was over 200, the last time I heard the news, and nobody (of the world's moral leadership, other than Gaddafi) could be bothered for a comment.

As every 5-grader would tell us, the ratio sought would be less than 60/200 = 3/20 = 0.15.

Now Georgia isn't really a full Western country, more like an aspiring ally. Which means that its lives still don't count as much as those from the democratic metropolia proper, maybe only a half of it.

0.15 / 2 = 0.075. I.e. just under 1/10. And counting, because 200 could easily become 3,4,500 and god forbid, 1000 (as in the last major Israeli operation in Lebanon), and nobody would find anything unusual, unbecoming or disproportionate in any such development.

Could I have just broken a virgin fresh ground in some totally new field of science (let's call it, "moral arithmetics")?! Think I'll bequest all credits to our great moral leaders (current and aspiring ones) though.

Myata, As someone who took the intial reaction that you proposed and then switched to your stance on the issue the more information I got. I think your missing the point here. South Ossetia was not lobbing 100 rockets a day into Georgia. I think its a bit unfair to make the same comparison. Even you have to admit, that so far. The Israeli are doing a pretty good job at hitting only military targets. Also of that 200 dead I read that most were Military/security forces or Hamas organization members. Were also not talking about random bombarding of a city either.

bush_cheney2004 · December 28, 2008

Thought so. The bud with the biggest fist is always the one who's most just, moral and humanistic (if he likes being called that).

Even that isn't always the case....sometimes a smaller fist wins the day...but always a fist of some sort. Playing the morality game is an afterthought.

myata · December 28, 2008

Point taken. The 200 number comes right off the airwaves, and I haven't yet done detailed analysis of the matter. It is common knowledge though that previous Israeli military responses have resulted in hugely slanted stats of civilian casualties, without any reaction from the West. Which is the only point I'm making. How we, here in the West, value "our" lives, comparted to "theirs".

P.S. here's some info though: BBC: Israel attacks. Note the reference to 100 missiles were launched "since Saturday" i.e after Israel attacked.

bush_cheney2004 · December 28, 2008

Point taken. The 200 number comes right off the airwaves, and I haven't yet done detailed analysis of the matter. It is common knowledge though that previous Israeli military responses have resulted in hugely slanted stats of civilian casualties, without any reaction from the West. Which is the only point I'm making. How we, here in the West, value "our" lives, comparted to "theirs".

I'm not sure why that should even matter.....this is not a zero sum gain affair...never has been. There is no prize for fairness in reporting numbers. I do recall that ferrying corpses and the wounded for photo ops was popular in 2006.

moderateamericain · December 28, 2008

Point taken. The 200 number comes right off the airwaves, and I haven't yet done detailed analysis of the matter. It is common knowledge though that previous Israeli military responses have resulted in hugely slanted stats of civilian casualties, without any reaction from the West. Which is the only point I'm making. How we, here in the West, value "our" lives, comparted to "theirs".
P.S. here's some info though: BBC: Israel attacks. Note the reference to 100 missiles were launched "since Saturday" i.e after Israel attacked.

Well I was actually talking about the 300 or so fired that led up to Israel Saying. "Enough is Enough" I apologize if I did not make that clear. Also I think its hard to tell the difference between civilians and Militia or Hamas or security force if you prefer. They clearly don't have a standing army. And they do use civilian facilities to fire the rockets from. So we are at the mercy of the media. Was that guy who helped load the missle a civilian because he was not armed? Or is that kid in training for suicide bombing in the building when the planes destroyed the rocket launcher on top of the building a civilian. I think you get the picture.

Edited December 28, 2008 by moderateamericain

Keepitsimple · December 29, 2008

If the poll question had specifically stated that there would be no "Right of Return", I think you'd find the Israeli results would have been much different. That's always been the big sticking point......that all Palestinians or their descendents would be allowed to return to whatever land they had in 1948. In a democracy like Israel, the Palestrinians and Arabs would outnumber the Israelis.

WIP · December 29, 2008

Right. Gazans are kept in a ghetto, not allowed to leave even for medical purposes, food supplies are cut, people are malnourished and dying, and when Hamas ends the cease fire and starts to fire rockets into civilian areas, they are terrorists.

And who's fault is it? The reason the borders had to be sealed is because many Palestinians working in Israel started bringing bombs and guns with them to carry out terrorist attacks. After the borders were sealed, then the rocket attacks started. If Canada had a border with a country that was launching continued, indiscriminate rocket attacks on our territory, how long do you think we should have to put up with it before retaliating?

Israel responds by bombing civilian areas without warning, 200 people are killed (so far) and they are merely defending themselves.
No double-standard there.

It's already been pointed out that Hamas locates their bases inside civilian zones, including hospitals, so how can you attack Hamas without killing any civilians who either allow themselves to be used as human shields, or don't have enough sense to stay away from areas where rockets are being launched?

Wild Bill · December 29, 2008

Wild Bill, I remember even starting a thread on it way back when...
http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....showtopic=11192

I had forgotten that thread and also that Hamas offer about the '67 borders. Thanks for reminding me.

However, the reason I had forgotten them was that I never thought the Hamas offer was anything more than a red herring! Israel would be a total fool to go back to those borders. It would merely give Hamas fabulous new locations for rocket launchers! There would be absolutely no security for Israel in such a deal. In fact, it would be doubtful if it would be able then to withstand a first strike by its enemies.

This has been perhaps the main permanent problem with any solution in this part of the world. Israel needs real security from rockets landing in their peoples' houses. They'd have to be dumber than Dion to simply accept Hamas' word on the matter. Meanwhile, the measures she is forced to take to provide that security cause collateral hardship on the mainstream Palestinians, feeding and reinforcing their resentment.

I have no easy solutions to offer but I know one thing. It would be crazy to expect that Israeli citizens would keep voting for a government that allowed Hamas to keep firing rockets into their cities. The only explanation that makes sense is that Hamas must WANT retaliation!

It's a crying shame.

Black Dog · December 29, 2008

Exactly !! I see little condemnation anywhere for Palestinian attacks which happen daily, the only time people speak up is when Israel retaliates. They seem to think it is so sad when Palestinian civilians are victims, but not a single comment when Israeli civilians are the victims- pretty duplicitous.
Where were you all last week when hundreds of rockets were fired on Israeli civilian towns and at kindergartens? Where have you been the last 8 years over 10,000 have been fired from Gaza?

The Palestinians think that they are smart supporting and voting for Hamas but do nothing to stop the rocket attacks on Israel. Then they whine and bitch when Israel fights back. They are a terrorist state, they have made their bed, they can lie in or work towards peace.

Seven years of rocket attacks by the hundreds have caused fewer than 20 fatalities. In less than a week of bombing, Israel has managed to kill around 300 Palestinians, including more than 50 civilians. The imbalance between those figures should give you a clue as to why the reactions are different. No one cares about a crude rocket thudding into empty desert versus a guided missile hitting a target in a civilian area.

BTW, Israel does not deliberately target civilians, Palestinians do.

Israel does not deliberately target civilians. They just don't particularly care if any get in the way.

Edited December 29, 2008 by Black Dog

Riverwind · December 29, 2008

No one cares about a crude rocket thudding into empty desert versus a guided missile hitting a target in a civilian area.

Right. How would you feel if you neighbors were lobbing "crude rockets" into your neighborhood. Is suspect you would be demanding action even if the majority of them missed their mark or did not cause many deaths.

Gunter puts things in perspective for Canadians: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/column...97-814c5a880820

Or maybe you had a home in south Vancouver and militants living in Richmond were lobbing rockets every day across the Fraser River. Already they'd destroyed the homes of a couple of your neighbours, taken out the food court at the Oakridge Centre, levelled a nearby elementary school, damaged hundreds of tombstones at the Mountain View Cemetery and flattened the VanDusen Botanical Garden.

No one died in Gunter's examples either.

Black Dog · December 29, 2008

Right. How would you feel if you neighbors were lobbing "crude rockets" into your neighborhood. Is suspect you would be demanding action even if the majority of them missed their mark or did not cause many deaths.

You're missing the point. Buddy was wondering why no one outside of Israel cared about the largely ineffective rocket attacks versus Israel's retaliation. I was simply putting forward the explanation why. I don't really care one way or the other, certainly not enough to sully my brain with Lorne freaking Gunter.

DogOnPorch · December 29, 2008

Soon...unless I'm totally off base...Israel will send troops and tanks into Gaza to finish the job. Israel at the moment has an opportunity to strike while the latest events include the following:

1. The transition of US presidents.

2. The 'World economic crisis'...falling oil prices included.

3. Holidays.

4. Trouble elsewhere: Pakistan...Afghanistan in particular.

5. Hamas dishing up a perfect chance to take the fight to their home bases.

6. World opinion not really giving a rat's ass about HAMAS and the fools who voted for them.

If I was an Israeli general, I'd think the time was indeed ripe to finish the Gaza front once and for all. They're using the tactics the Americans should have used in their wars...attack hard...attack fast...finish the job before anyone has a chance to form a committee. You only have to 'apologize' once instead of every frickin' day.

-------------------------------------------------

Looks like sombody sure cut through that fence, alright...

---Bang Gunly, US Marshal Fields; Stan Freberg

GostHacked · December 29, 2008

And who's fault is it? The reason the borders had to be sealed is because many Palestinians working in Israel started bringing bombs and guns with them to carry out terrorist attacks. After the borders were sealed, then the rocket attacks started. If Canada had a border with a country that was launching continued, indiscriminate rocket attacks on our territory, how long do you think we should have to put up with it before retaliating?

If rockets are being fired at us, I'd like to know why. Then you can ask, how long you would put up with it.

HD0000001643785 12/29/2008 11:49 WorkInProgress DC16 // LCLNTOT69 // ONE OF TEH POWER SUPPLIES IS ABOUT TO DIE Dc16 // LCLNTOT69 // one of teh power supplies is about to die

How big is Gaza again? And can you tell me where they would be located that would be out of the way of civilians? Gaza is small, and they are packed in there pretty tight. Not to mention there are several Isreali settlements in Gaza that the status of them are in dispute. If Isreal is considering that their own territory and are trying to defend these disputed settlements, then I can understand why they are being attacked (if they are being attacked, it seems most are on the Isreali side of the yet to be finalized border between Palestine and Isreal.

UNtill that is settled, this war is gonna go on and on and on and on.

DogOnPorch · December 29, 2008

Not to mention there are several Isreali settlements in Gaza that the status of them are in dispute.

What settlements would those be?

------------------------------

Eh?

DogOnPorch · December 29, 2008

Figures you can't answer that one...apparently you'd be surprised to learn there are no settlements in Gaza. The last one there was left to the Arabs and they simply destroyed it even though it was packed with valuable farm equipment that the Israelis couldn't take with them...the greenhouses in particular.

Google maps has an excellent image of the former Israeli oasis.

-----------------------------------------------------

It's a Daisy.

BC_chick · December 29, 2008

And who's fault is it? The reason the borders had to be sealed is because many Palestinians working in Israel started bringing bombs and guns with them to carry out terrorist attacks. After the borders were sealed, then the rocket attacks started. If Canada had a border with a country that was launching continued, indiscriminate rocket attacks on our territory, how long do you think we should have to put up with it before retaliating?

Interesting. Especially since the blockade continued on even during the the truce.

Israel would be a total fool to go back to those borders. It would merely give Hamas fabulous new locations for rocket launchers! There would be absolutely no security for Israel in such a deal. In fact, it would be doubtful if it would be able then to withstand a first strike by its enemies.

Actually, except for a few settlements in what are considered Biblical parts of Israel proper, Israel does want to give back the land. Mostly, it's East Jerusalem that's the problem, many Israelis believe all of Jerusalem to be the 'eternal' capital of the country and as you know, Palis wants East Jerusalem for their own capital.

There is way more to this conflict than 'security' or Hamas recognising Israel... it's a dumb @#% religious war over what two sets of backward idiots think is their biblical right.

As Gost said, establish the borders (to add to that - keep Jerusalem an international city belonging to neither side) and let's see if the rockets continue.

Edited December 29, 2008 by BC_chick