Did you know?

[William Ashley]

Ummm... just out of curiosity, just how many times has a country tunneled into an adjacent country with which they were "friends"?

Maybe the Hamas fighters digging those tunnels were doing so in order to bring cake and ice cream to all the good Israeli children.

You know, if any Americans start digging tunnels under the border into Canada, I'd hope that the Canadian government take at least some action.

There are many reasons for tunneling that don't involve hostile relations.

CERN for instance has tunnels through a number of countries.

There are a number of tunnels that have existed between the US and Canada - not all rail

There is a tunnel very large called the chunnel

there are countless other examples

Actually part of it is based on covert activities and protection from attack and detection

or monitoring of supplies which technology can see these days on the surface.

Your comment is inane to even reference the "unusualness" of tunneling.

Actually it ain't all weapons that is being brought in through the tunnels and it seems plausible that cake and icecream could be among the goods smuggled in. What would you bring in a siege tunnel if you were surrounded by a hostile enemy bent on destroying you?

The tunnels wouldn't need to exist if they could regulate their own trade over land and sea routes israel controls that are gaza's natural borders.

Edited February 13, 2010 by William Ashley

[bush_cheney2004]

Give me a break with your babbling. Like Hamas, with the limited resources they have, can find these homemade rocket launchers.

If Hamas can't or won't find them, the IDF will.

You're trying to justify what has already been concluded to be war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.

So what? What other conclusions shall we obsess on for political purposes? Bring on the show trials!

No one is excusing Hamas or other militant factions. They're wrong in many ways. This still does not excuse Israel's actions. Read up on international law some time.

Looking forward to your first OP on the evils of Hamas.

[Guest American Woman]

Looking forward to your first OP on the evils of Hamas.

That's something I'd look forward to, too. But I won't hold my breath. Something tells me naomi's babbling is going to continue to be totally biased, let the facts be damned.

Edited February 13, 2010 by American Woman

[DogOnPorch]

naiomiglover: Stormtrooper not okay? Useful idiot okay?

Either are fine names for yourself. Need help choosing?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I would like folks to consider this question; Why does the middle east make so much difference?

To my mind, I think the entire notion is a fools errand. No solution has been, nor will be found because the opposing sides want to make war not peace. So why should we become involved? There is nothing to gain and everything to lose for all living outside of the area of conflict and therefore we all need to step back from the edge. Sadly it is a problem they have created themselves, and it is a problem only they can solve. For us to become involved merely risks more lives and has the potential to cause even further harm than what is currently experienced there now. This is in my view, a problematic issue with only one viable available option in terms of foreign relations, and that is to declare ourselves neutral and abstain from any international resolution against anyone.

The entire concept of sending our troops out of country to fight, instead of training to and actively defending our own nation is a political boon-doogle of the first order.

[bush_cheney2004]

...The entire concept of sending our troops out of country to fight, instead of training to and actively defending our own nation is a political boon-doogle of the first order.

Do you want to put some historical boundaries and context on this statement or just let it hang out there for pot shots?

[segnosaur]

To my mind, I think the entire notion is a fools errand. No solution has been, nor will be found because the opposing sides want to make war not peace.

You know, I really doubt if the majority of Israelis want to "make war". They'd just rather not be subject to continued rocket/mortar/suicide bomber attacks.

Consider the fact that: Hamas has, right in its charter the goal of destroying Israel. Palestinian TV shows children shows like Sons of the Pioneers which advocate suicide attacks. As others have pointed out, Palestinians danced on 9/11. Israel, on the other hand, has no such "reaction". You may consider their military actions heavy-handed, but for the most part they are reactive rather than proactive.

The entire concept of sending our troops out of country to fight, instead of training to and actively defending our own nation is a political boon-doogle of the first order.

Well, there are at least 2 reasons why I can think of why we would want to "send our troops out of the country"...

- Sometimes it may be necessary to take on an enemy on their own soil, just in case their actions negatively affect us in the future. I doubt that al Qaeda will ever try to mount an invasion of the Canadian homeland, but their actions could end up resulting in Canadian deaths, through terrorist attacks either here or abroad. (There were a couple of dozen Canadians killed on 9/11 for example.)

- We, as a member of the global community, should also take a role in defending the innocent. Granted, we cannot police the entire world; however, lets face it: groups like the Taliban, Saddam, etc. are not nice people.... their actions range anywhere from cutting freedoms to outright murder/genocide. It is seen by some people that we have a humanitarian duty to try to protect those people.

[bloodyminded]

- We, as a member of the global community, should also take a role in defending the innocent. Granted, we cannot police the entire world; however, lets face it: groups like the Taliban, Saddam, etc. are not nice people.... their actions range anywhere from cutting freedoms to outright murder/genocide. It is seen by some people that we have a humanitarian duty to try to protect those people.

But this presupposes a world, plagiarized from epic poems and children's tales, in which the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were undertaken for humanitarian concerns.

Hell, even the leaders themselves threw this chimera in at the last minute, so I don't think it can be taken seriously.

Edited February 16, 2010 by bloodyminded

[segnosaur]

Ummm... just out of curiosity, just how many times has a country tunneled into an adjacent country with which they were "friends"?

Maybe the Hamas fighters digging those tunnels were doing so in order to bring cake and ice cream to all the good Israeli children.

There are many reasons for tunneling that don't involve hostile relations.

CERN for instance has tunnels through a number of countries.

There is a tunnel very large called the chunnel

Sweet zombie Jesus...

Never would I have thought that someone would actually try to justify tunnels dug by terrorists into Israel by equating them with things like the chunnel or the CERN Large Hadron Collider. You do realize that in those examples, the country under which the tunnel was dug actually knew what was going on, and even assisted in the work.

But, since you seem to need a bit of clarification, let me reword things: just how many times has a country tunneled into an adjacent country secretly, and used that tunnel to engage in illegal or terrorist activities?

Actually part of it is based on covert activities and protection from attack and detection

or monitoring of supplies which technology can see these days on the surface.

Your comment is inane to even reference the "unusualness" of tunneling.

Actually it ain't all weapons that is being brought in through the tunnels...

Nope, you're right... sometimes there are kidnapped Israeli soldiers who are brought through the tunnels.

What would you bring in a siege tunnel if you were surrounded by a hostile enemy bent on destroying you?

Irrelevant question... the Gaza strip is not 'surrounded by a hostile enemy bent on destroying them[/i]. If they really wanted to destroy the palestinians, I'm pretty sure they could do a much better job at it than they have.

The tunnels wouldn't need to exist if they could regulate their own trade over land and sea routes israel controls that are gaza's natural borders.

Yeah and Israel wouldn't have to worry about regulating the flow of goods in and out of Palestinian territories if they didn't have to worry about such goods including materials useful in terrorist attacks.

Oh, and by the way, Israel isn't the only country that is trying to stop the use of illegal underground tunnels. Egypt regularly bombs or gasses tunnels it finds between the Gaza strip and Egypt.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLJ94474

[segnosaur]

It's not just me that disagrees with what you're saying, but also international law, which Israel is a signatory to disagrees with the point you're trying to make.

You know, you keep repeating that Israel has "broken international law" over and over, and for the most part I've been letting it slide.

However, the fact is, the idea that they've "broken international law" is not something that has unanimous agreement, nor is it something that's actually been decided in an actual court of law. The fact that you (and the people you worship) think they have is not definitive proof... Israel has its own lawyers (not to mention others throughout the world) who do not think international law has been broken.

Let me put this into proper context... that 'video' spent time pointing out the farm animals killed in Gaza. It made no mention of the fact that rocket attacks from the Gaza strip often damaged Israeli schools. So, the people that made that video felt Palestinian chickens were more important than Israeli children.

Or maybe they were pointing out that Israel was interested in collective punishment...

Except that's a rather idiotic claim.

According to the Palestinians, total Gaza poultry counts are roughly 12 million. (See: http://www.pcbs.gov.ps/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?tabID=0〈=en&ItemID=750&mid=10945) According to the video, the number of chickens killed in the conflict was only a small fraction of that. If Israel actually wanted to engage in 'collective punishment', killing a small fraction of their livestock doesn't seem like the most efficient way to go about it.

A more likely scenario is that terrorist groups were using farms as a base of operations when they were attacked. But then, I guess the Palestinians get more sympathy when they claim "Israel targeted our chickens" rather than "Terrorists were hiding in the barn where we keep our chickens when Israel bombed them.".

Oh, and by the way, its certainly not without precedent that terrorists would use farms to hide their activities. Here's an article (from prior to the invasion) which shows terrorists doing just that:

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/dec/07/world/fg-gaza7

I've repeatedly condemned Hamas' actions...

Yet you don't seem to acknowledge that Hamas instigates these things.

I've asked you this before, and you've run away from the issue. So, I'm going to challenge you once again...

Just how many Rockets/Mortars/Suicide bombings must Israel contend with before you feel it is justified in engaging in military action..

(Not that I actually expect you to answer it... after all, I'm sure its much easier for you to ignore those types of questions than actually address them.)

And, as I mentioned before, Hamas was elected by the people in the Gaza strip. If the majority of Palestinians did not want to be associated with a group which regularly fires rockets into civilian areas in Israel, why did they vote for such a party?

Who said they didn't want to be associated with them?

Well, if Palestinians want to be associated with a militant group who does things like launch rockets and mortars into Israel, then should anyone really have any sympathy for them?

Never thought it was simple. But it was incredibly biased.

Most importantly, little to no input was taken from the Israelis. Granted, it was a decision by the Israeli government not to co-operate

First you complain that no input was taken from the Israelis, then you acknowledge that it was Israel who did not want to give any input?

First of all, I can't blame the Israelis for not participating. Given the fact that the U.N. supported things like the Durban conferences, which was widely seen as having an anti-Israeli bias. (In fact, many countries, including european ones, boycotted the 2009 conference.) Why participate in an organization that is likely going to engage in one-sided criticism?

Secondly, even if Israeli officials did not participate directly in the report, they had already given their defense/justification for many of their actions in other forums.

Lastly, if you can't get participation from one party, and the other (i.e. Hamas) refuses to cooperate fully, then that should have been the end of the process right there.

Oh, and by the way, Goldstone himself admits that he didn't get full cooperation from the Palestinains:

You mean it wasn't perfect? What kind of cooperation did Goldstone receive from Israel?

In this situation, its better to get no cooperation rather than partial cooperation.

Do you really think Hamas did its best to give an unbiased account? Or do you think its more likely that they whitewashed their participation, ignoring all the things they did wrong? How many actual terrorist soldiers do you think Goldstone talked to?

Oh, and you seem to have ignored the fact that other members that were doing the investigation had questionable motives. For example, one of the investigating members, Chinkin, had signed a letter condemning Israel before any investigation began. Really says a lot if one of your lead investigators has already come out and condemned one side.

Chinkin also condemned Hamas in the same letter.

First of all, while she did 'condemn' Hamas, the majority of the letter condemned Israel.

Secondly, even if she did criticize Hamas, the fact is, she still labeled Israeli actions as "agressive" before even a single word of testimony was made, before a single visit to post-war Gaza was made.

Lastly, I'm not the only one who has an issue with Chinkin. There was also a letter signed by around 50 lawyers in different countries (you know, lawyers, the type of people who actually deal with the law) who had recommended that she be removed. Even Goldstone admitted: If it had been a judicial inquiry, that letter she’d signed would have been a ground for disqualification. (See: http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=77618).

Sorry if it contradicts your warped view of reality. But as I said, PBS is a fairly well respected news organization.

Oh, and if you want more cases, consider the video released by Israeli defense forces showing rockets were being launched from civilian areas (including schools)....

Okay. Moot point #3? Israel has not used deserted schools or mosques to launch attacks?

Not to my knowledge, no.

They have used Palestinian civilians as human shields...

I'm sure they sometimes have. Heck, I'm also sure that there have been some Israelis who have deliberately killed civilians.

The difference is, Hamas (as an organization) uses (and targets) civilians as a matter of policy. Israel, while individual solders may break the rules, does not have such policies.

And then there was the Arab reporter who acknowledged that at least one rocket was launched from areas near where Foreign reporters were stationed:

And just in case you don't like the previous examples because they come from Israeli sources, how about this one:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/180691

The incessant sorties of Israeli jet bombers stopped almost immediately, but then suddenly there was a terrific whoosh, louder even than a bomb explosion. It was another of Hamas's homemade Qassam rockets being launched into Israel—and the mobile launchpad was smack in the middle of the four buildings, where every apartment was full...

You really think launching rockets from areas adjacent to apartment buildings is a wise thing to do? (Oh, and by the way, the article also points out how Hamas stationed fighters near schools.)

No. Even if it is true, it's not okay for Hamas to do this.

Stormtrooper not okay? Useful idiot okay?

First of all, keep in mind that you were the first one to engage in insults. Heck, that was basically the lead in of your very first post (one that was pretty much devoid of any useful content.)

Secondly... you may have noticed that when I used the phrase "useful idiot" I put it in quotes. There's a special reason for that... the term "useful idiot" has a special meaning. Initially it was applied to pro-communist people living in western democracies. (It has been accredited to Lenin, although he probably didn't actually use the phrase himself.) Since the fall of communism, The term is now used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by a political movement, terrorist group, hostile government, or business.... (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot).

Oh, and do you not recognize the hypocracy of complaining about others "turning a blind eye", when you started this topic with a video that showed more concern over Palestinian chickens than it did over Israeli children?

Israeli children were not killed.

I never claimed they were. What I pointed out that Palestinian rockets and mortar attacks landed in civilian areas (including schools).

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054247.html

How do you know what the report is about when you haven't even read it. Pretty much every comment you've made about the report has been wrong. The reason is because you haven't even looked at it.

Actually I have looked at it. Trouble is, I've also looked at other sources that seem to have information not contained in the report. Which means I'm able to see through the B.S. that is contained therein.

According to the Red Cross you're wrong. Red Cross' credibility is a little stronger than IDF.

And why is that? After all, Israel got the numbers right during the "massacre" at Jenin.

Oh, and is this the same Red Cross that once employed Cornelio Sommaruga, who became famous for equating the star of David with a swastika?

Many of casualties, as demonstrated by the report and by several human rights organizations were not accidents. Many were found to have been indiscriminate and some killings of civilians were found to have been done purposely.

Again, many of those human rights groups had made, ahem, questionable statements regarding Israel in the past.

And as I have pointed out before, even the founder of Human Rights Watch has admitted the organation has an anti-Israel bias.

Iraq attacked Iran and started the war. I'm not sure why you're bothering with this.

Once again, you are ignoring the fact that I admitted that Iraq initiated the invation. What you are ignoring is the fact that I pointed out that Iran had been involved in multiple border skirmishes long before the invasion began..

Please, read that above sentence.

So? It's in Likud's charter to never allow a Palestinian state to be created.

Yet its leader has said he is not unoposed to the idea of a Palestinian state. And more importantly, it is not the policy of that party to "wipe out" the Palestinians.

If Israel was interested in a just peace, they'd negotiate.

Strange, I could have swore they HAD engaged in negotations, with Fatah... you know the group that has actually recognized the right of Israel to exist, and which isn't launching rocket attacks.

Even if you count the mortar attacks, the point still stands. Israel was the provocateur by killing the Hamas members in a tense time.

Once again, how many peaceful nations deliberatly and secretly tunnel under the border to neighboring states?

The ceasefire was still in effect when Israel killed the Hamas members.

Yes they did. And Hamas dug the tunnels at a time when the ceasefire was in effect.

Ummm... so? Hamas was elected by the Gaza residents to run the place. That means they are responsible for the conduct of its citizens/civilians. As such, it is responsible for stopping all such attacks, and the individuals involved should be prosecuted.

Give me a break with your babbling. Like Hamas, with the limited resources they have, can find these homemade rocket launchers.

Ok, here are all the problems with that little argument:

- The government of the west bank has similar resources to those of Israel. Yet rocket attacks originating from there have been a lot more rare over the past few years. If Fatah can minimize rocket attacks, why can't Hamas?

- If Hamas doesn't have the resources to find rocket launchers, then where exactly do they get the resources to kill their political rivals? To build tunnels? Those activities would have employed hundreds of people. Seems to me that they could have diverted those resources to finding those militants responsible for firing rockets.

[William Ashley]

Sweet zombie Jesus...

Never would I have thought that someone would actually try to justify tunnels dug by terrorists into Israel by equating them with things like the chunnel or the CERN Large Hadron Collider. You do realize that in those examples, the country under which the tunnel was dug actually knew what was going on, and even assisted in the work.

Hmm, I think the issue is that both Egypt and Israel very much know what is going on inside the tunnels. If it were a secret why are they being bombed by israel with strike fighter jets?

But, since you seem to need a bit of clarification, let me reword things: just how many times has a country tunneled into an adjacent country secretly, and used that tunnel to engage in illegal or terrorist activities?

First one that comes to mind is Berlin. Britain, the US, Germanies and Russia all engaged in that type of behavior.

This whole terrorist thing is what gets me. Israel itself was founded as a terrorist state by breaching immigration laws, and conducting terrorist activities against people living in Palestine. The future leadership of Israel was engaged in terrorsit activities, even frowned on at the time. You like to label something terrorist but the fact is that not all of hamas is terrorsits, these are people who have a history of being victimized by israel. Israel is a state of apartheid, and while there is plenty of good in Israel such as global oneness in the jewish faith, it is also an extremely biased nation.

Israel launched many assassination attempts, and they were the ones who "Returned" note the return -there were people there before them, meaning much like abraham, they invaded the place they now live. While you can justify this by saying their faith says they can - the Islamic faith at one point said, kill the jews they will betray you. While this isn't me just saying they are both twisted, this is me saying that instead of attacking one side or another why not try to work on a solution - turning gaza into the warsaw ghetto ain't gonna fix problems it is only going to have people get upset. How would you feel if your city was sealed off and put under siege? When a terrorists or criminal act (they are the same to me as I think there is something called jurisdiction, if it breaks the law in your country it is a crime, there is no need for a special class of criminals - it is an excuse to allow the military to perform police functions or breach civil justice laws). The point isgeuss what Canada's allies have built secret tunnels to conduct terrorist activities, but hold on.. you would say hamas isn't a government-- reality check - it is. You might say but the brits and americans were allowed to conduct terrorist operations because they are fighting a good cause like limiting the Russians. Or the Israeli's can abduct and murder people such as what just happened again in January because the people they kill by assassination are bad people. OK, but the fact is.. you are justifying acts that would otherwise be criminal acts because you don't like the people they target. In that case - who cares you would justify anything for your ally and lable anything your enemy did as wrong - fact is you are the mindless zombie not me.

I have universal standards - you have an objective - so what each to their own.

Just a reminder of groups like Gush Emunim.

Nope, you're right... sometimes there are kidnapped Israeli soldiers who are brought through the tunnels.

Oh and how many kidnapped israeli soilders are there as opposed to inprisoned palestinians - I bet the number is a lot older as Israeli soilders have shoot to kill orders instead of custody orders.

Irrelevant question... the Gaza strip is not 'surrounded by a hostile enemy bent on destroying them[/i].

I disagree. I equate making peoples lives a living hell as a hostile enemy. Maybe you don't.

If they really wanted to destroy the palestinians, I'm pretty sure they could do a much better job at it than they have.

I bet you they couldn't. This is like me saying I bet the other middle east countries could whipe isreael off the face of the planet if they wanted too.. reality check.. what is stoping them.. now ask yourself that same question about israel.

Yeah and Israel wouldn't have to worry about regulating the flow of goods in and out of Palestinian territories if they didn't have to worry about such goods including materials useful in terrorist attacks.

Why not leave that to the Palestinians to do, it is their country.

Oh, and by the way, Israel isn't the only country that is trying to stop the use of illegal underground tunnels. Egypt regularly bombs or gasses tunnels it finds between the Gaza strip and Egypt.

And your point? Hold on, I bet you thought I was anti israeli - fact is I comment on acts not on notions.

I call it for what it is, and there is a reason if Israel gets more criticism than other countries.

Edited February 17, 2010 by William Ashley

[M.Dancer]

I bet you they couldn't. This is like me saying I bet the other middle east countries could whipe isreael off the face of the planet if they wanted too.. reality check.. what is stoping them.. now ask yourself that same question about israel.

Nothing except the desire and will to do it.

[DogOnPorch]

Arabs = some of the worst soldiers/pilots on the planet. Poorly led, trained, motivated, supported.

Israelis = some of the best soldiers/pilots on the planet. Elite in many areas. Excellent NCOs.

Here's a classic example...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mole_Cricket_19

[M.Dancer]

Arabs = some of the worst soldiers/pilots on the planet. Poorly led, trained, motivated, supported.

Israelis = some of the best soldiers/pilots on the planet. Elite in many areas. Excellent NCOs.

Here's a classic example...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mole_Cricket_19

If you believe the article's summary, American technology in Israeli hands freed the russian proletariat from bondage....