israel responds to terrorism by killing civilians

[DogOnPorch]

--

Edited March 27, 2011 by DogOnPorch

[Jonsa]

You're making the mistake of describing this century-old struggle as a sequence of tit-for-tats, and not as part of a larger historical context. "Israel generally doesn't shoot first", what exactly does that mean? Does that mean that one week without shooting is some sort of fresh start? How are you defining the beginnings and the ends of these conflict episodes? Let me tell you something that perhaps you and many others don't seem to grasp or don't want to understand - the terrorist don't stop planning and readying themselves. They never stop trying. We don't need to regularly provide fresh spilled Jewish blood in order to renew our rights to self-defense. If Israel strikes terrorists, we don't need to have a fresh Jewish casualty from last week to point to as a justification. Unfortunately, the Israeli government often behaves in this manner, waiting for Jewish victims to be murdered before protecting us. It is insane how the Israeli government seems to regularly wait for a refill of Jewish victims before doing what needs to be done, and this has been the method of Israel for decades.

First, I am not making a mistake. I am rather well versed in the history of this conflict.

I mean precisely "Israel generally doesn't shoot first".

Yes, the terrorists will not stop as long as they consider themselves occupied, because its the only avenue of violence available to them. IIRC Haganah and Irgun didn't give up terrorism until 48 and the end of British occupation.

While I could say that you wouldn't give up either if the arabs occupied israel, but I am fully cognizant that you probably wouldn'tbe alive in that case.

The statement about Israel always responding to all terrorist attacks in a "heavy handed fashion" is just something you made up on the spot. It's not true, and it's funny coming from someone who certainly couldn't name five terrorist incidents in Israel without running to Wikipedia. Stop pretending to know the first thing about the history of terrorism in Israel and Israel's dealings with this ongoing threat. Unfortunately for you, there's someone like me in here who knows much, much, much more than you and will call on your bullshit when you pretend to know things you don't. There have been thousands of terrorist attacks on Israel, and many on the Jewish communities in the pre-Israel decades before 1948.

Firstly, Israel responds with a very heavy hand. I don't know how you can deny this, if you know so much. Why you think this is a bad thing, I'll never know.

I am quite aware of the history of this conflict. I was around when that scumbag Arafat crawled out from under the rock and formed the PLO in 64.

I have not nor will I ever deny that Israel has the right to self defence.

"Disproportionate response" is just politicized filth intended to deny Israel and the Jewish people the right to self-defense, that bullshit has been destroyed repeatedly in this forum. Israel, like all other states, has the right to defend itself and secure its citizens. Body counts aren't measurements of justice, or "proportion". When terrorists in Gaza launch rockets into Israel, Israel has the right to stop these rockets. Israel will do what it reasonably can to reduce the likelihood of civilian causalities in its efforts to defend itself, but given the nature of the terrorist infrastructure being embedded within the civilian infrastructure (and populations), it just isn't possible.

You are just a tad hypersensitive. There is medication for that.

Israel engages in "Disproportionate response" like dropping a 500lb bomb on an apartment building to kill one scumbag terrorist or firing a few missiles at a crowd to kill that other scumbag Yassin. There are countless examples where to get to the target, israel endangered and/or killed civilians. I don't denounce this as I agree Israel has a right to self defence and this doctrine is part of it.

I am also aware of the telebots calling ahead of strikes and all the other things that Israel does to mitigate civilian casualties. I believe there is no better example of that than operation cast lead. A remarkably small number of cilivian casualities for an urban shooting war.

the government doesn't have your aversion to the label "disproportionate response".

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/world/africa/01iht-mideast.3.19845135.html

Unlike you,I don't see this conflict in black and white. I don't paint all arabs with the same brush, nor all israelis. Neither side is innocent in this conflict. This idiocy of not recognizing Israel's right to exist is so much arrogant wishful bullshit, flying in the face of reality. REsolution of the conflict means an end to the occupation and that requires a partner that Israel can trust. Unfortunately, the palstinians haven't yet demonstrated that they can get their own house in order to be that partner. Until that day, terror attacks and retaliation will continue.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Jonsa

[Jonsa]

With respect to the story bud is referring to in the OP, it's just another anecdote reinforcing the fact that Hamas and other terrorist organization are inextricable from the civilian population. Hamas official acknowledged that its own people were killed in some of the Israeli airstrikes, as well as some children (bear in mind that children can and often are instruments of terror). Assuming the children are innocent (which isn't an assumption I make), what does it tell you about the fact that they were killed alongside the terrorists? It tells us what we've all known for decades... that the terrorists embed themselves in the civilian infrastructure. Apartments and hospitals and mosques and schools with all serve as scouting points, weapon storage, and operations centres. The terrorists are indistinguishable from civilians until they pull out their weapons or reveal themselves in some other way. This is the nature of combating modern terrorism with the Arabs/Muslims.

Anyways, the OP omits the context of Hamas terrorists also being killed in these strikes alongside the children/youth, which tells us all we need to know about how the terrorists operate alongside these children/youth (and use them as instruments of terror).

this is not just a tactic of hamas. It has been used effectively by the PLO, IJ, PFLP and the alphabet of terrorist thug gangs that dominate palestinian neighborhoods. They use kids as lookouts and shields. This is well documented. It a bonus if some children get killed in an attack - propaganda points and further enraging the citizens.

The other aspect of this they call anyone under the age of 17 a child. Seems there's been 30 some odd successful suicide bombings by "children" with another 15 or so thwarted and dozens of shooting incidents. Nobody ever screams about palestinians breaking international law wrt child soldiers tho.

[Bob]

First, I am not making a mistake. I am rather well versed in the history of this conflict.

I mean precisely "Israel generally doesn't shoot first".

Yes, the terrorists will not stop as long as they consider themselves occupied, because its the only avenue of violence available to them. IIRC Haganah and Irgun didn't give up terrorism until 48 and the end of British occupation.

The point I was making is that you're viewing this conflict as a bunch of little flare-ups, each with their own starting points. That's the message we're getting from you when you sat "Israel generally doesn't shoot first". Generally speaking, there aren't any more starting points for this conflict. It's never really stopped. That's all I'm saying. Just because the news doesn't report on these issues for a little while doesn't mean the conflict has stopped, doesn't mean the terrorists have stopped their efforts to murder us, and certainly doesn't mean Israel has stopped efforts towards protecting us from this seemingly eternal threat.

You're also implying that the occupation is, at the very least, a primary motivation of terrorism. If that's true, why were they terrorizing us decades before the occupation began after the Six-Day War? It's just a bullshit argument, and people like you are never gonna stop using it it seems. What were the Arabs protesting when they massacred Jews in Hebron in 1929 (one of many examples of terrorism from the Arabs against us in the decades before Israel's rebirth)? What were they protesting when they all came together to destroy Israel in 1948? How about in 1954 or again in 1967? Again, the "occupation- terrorism" line of argumentation doesn't hold any water.

While I could say that you wouldn't give up either if the arabs occupied israel, but I am fully cognizant that you probably wouldn't be alive in that case.

Arabs do occupy parts of Israel. They compose about 20% of our population, and quite a few of their areas are very "under the radar" of the Israeli government - with such a hostility towards Israel that police never dare go in without a full team and riot gear. Jews are afraid to go into many Arab parts of Israel, with good reason. It's an unofficial occupation, in a way.

Firstly, Israel responds with a very heavy hand. I don't know how you can deny this, if you know so much. Why you think this is a bad thing, I'll never know.

Israel most certainly does not. Israel operates with very restrictive rules of engagement, and the terrorists break all the rules of war. In all seriousness, though, I believe there is much truth to "all if fair in love and war". The problem is, we're the ones playing by the rules and those rules are killing us and protecting them. Israel always defends herself with both hands tied behind her back. The Cast Lead, the 2006 Lebanon War, and the Mavi Marmara are all recent examples of Israel showing massive restraint.

I am quite aware of the history of this conflict. I was around when that scumbag Arafat crawled out from under the rock and formed the PLO in 64.

I have not nor will I ever deny that Israel has the right to self defence.

Assuming you are familiar with the history of this conflict, you don't seem to have a strong understanding of the basic. Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another.

You are just a tad hypersensitive. There is medication for that.

Israel engages in "Disproportionate response" like dropping a 500lb bomb on an apartment building to kill one scumbag terrorist or firing a few missiles at a crowd to kill that other scumbag Yassin. There are countless examples where to get to the target, israel endangered and/or killed civilians. I don't denounce this as I agree Israel has a right to self defence and this doctrine is part of it.

No. Israel certainly does not launch missiles into crowds of people or level apartment buildings because of "one terrorist". You're just making shit up, and certainly could not cite one real example of either of these events taking place. The exact opposite is true, where Israel calls of actions when it is determined that there is too high a risk to civilians. That's the code of conduct of the IDF.

Unlike you,I don't see this conflict in black and white. I don't paint all arabs with the same brush, nor all israelis. Neither side is innocent in this conflict. This idiocy of not recognizing Israel's right to exist is so much arrogant wishful bullshit, flying in the face of reality. REsolution of the conflict means an end to the occupation and that requires a partner that Israel can trust. Unfortunately, the palstinians haven't yet demonstrated that they can get their own house in order to be that partner. Until that day, terror attacks and retaliation will continue.

The occupation is an unfortunate necessity given the track record of the residents who live there. It sucks for Israel to have to endure it, but it is what's necessary.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Bob

[Jonsa]

The point I was making is that you're viewing this conflict as a bunch of little flare-ups, each with their own starting points. That's the message we're getting from you when you sat "Israel generally doesn't shoot first". Generally speaking, there aren't any more starting points for this conflict. It's never really stopped. That's all I'm saying. Just because the news doesn't report on these issues for a little while doesn't mean the conflict has stopped, doesn't mean the terrorists have stopped their efforts to murder us, and certainly doesn't mean Israel has stopped efforts towards protecting us from this seemingly eternal threat.

I am well aware of the continum of this conflict from its very beginings at the start of the 20th century.

You're also implying that the occupation is, at the very least, a primary motivation of terrorism. If that's true, why were they terrorizing us decades before the occupation began after the Six-Day War? It's just a bullshit argument, and people like you are never gonna stop using it it seems. What were the Arabs protesting when they massacred Jews in Hebron in 1929 (one of many examples of terrorism from the Arabs against us in the decades before Israel's rebirth)? What were they protesting when they all came together to destroy Israel in 1948? How about in 1954 or again in 1967? Again, the "occupation- terrorism" line of argumentation doesn't hold any water.

Well, prior to 1948 the arabs attacked jews because they viewed the jews as a threat to take over their land. The jews were rather vocal in expressing their zionist aims and the arabs that lived there were kinda pissed. After al nakba the reason for arab terrorism is kind obvious. Since 67, and direct occupation the focus is on the fact that the palestinians are an occupied people.

In 1929 it was a dispute over access to the wailing wall as you well know.

In 1948 they were protesting the creation of Israel.

In 1954 they weren't protesting anything, Israel acted as proxy to France and Britain.

In 1967 they were protesting the fact that Israel existed.

The terrorists of today are concerned with what is immediately in front of them. After 72 it became clear Egypt wasn't going to start up with Israel again. By 94 when Jordan threw in the towel, it was pretty clear to all palestinians that a united arab army of liberation for all of historic palestine was nothing more than a wet dream. OTOH I won't deny that many of terrorists and all palestinian Islamists seek the destruction of Israel.

Arabs do occupy parts of Israel. They compose about 20% of our population, and quite a few of their areas are very "under the radar" of the Israeli government - with such a hostility towards Israel that police never dare go in without a full team and riot gear. Jews are afraid to go into many Arab parts of Israel, with good reason. It's an unofficial occupation, in a way.

Say what?

You're telling me that Israeli citizens are occupying Israel?

Got news for ya, many americans are afraid to go into the ghettos and the police only go in with riot gear. Try visiting detroit some time.

Israel most certainly does not. Israel operates with very restrictive rules of engagement, and the terrorists break all the rules of war. In all seriousness, though, I believe there is much truth to "all if fair in love and war". The problem is, we're the ones playing by the rules and those rules are killing us and protecting them. Israel always defends herself with both hands tied behind her back. The Cast Lead, the 2006 Lebanon War, and the Mavi Marmara are all recent examples of Israel showing massive restraint.

Yes, I am aware of the lengths to which Israel attempts to minimize civilian casualities. Its a moral philosophy first articulated by Ben Gurion. in the late 30's.

However, imho when they do retaliate it is always with a heavy hand. I don't understand why you seem to feel this a bad thing.

Assuming you are familiar with the history of this conflict, you don't seem to have a strong understanding of the basic. Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another.

No. Israel certainly does not launch missiles into crowds of people or level apartment buildings because of "one terrorist". You're just making shit up, and certainly could not cite one real example of either of these events taking place. The exact opposite is true, where Israel calls of actions when it is determined that there is too high a risk to civilians. That's the code of conduct of the IDF.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2148548.stm

Israel's Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, has described Monday night's attack on Gaza City which killed 15 people - including nine children - as a mistake.

The attack targeted a leading member of the militant group Hamas, Sheikh Salah Shahada, who was among those killed when an F-16 jet dropped a one-tonne guided bomb on the apartment block where he was staying.

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

Yassin, a quadriplegic who was nearly blind, had used a wheelchair since a sporting accident at the age of 12.[15] He was assassinated when an Israeli helicopter gunship fired a missile at him as he was being wheeled to early morning prayers.[16] His killing, in an attack that claimed the lives of both his bodyguards and nine bystanders, precipitated much criticism of Israel, and many observers suggested that the act would negatively impact the peace process.[16] 200,000 Palestinians attended his funeral procession.[17]

I suggest you examine the record a little more closely these are just two high profile incidents. there are many many more.

Yes, knowledge is one thing and understanding is another.

The occupation is an unfortunate necessity given the track record of the residents who live there. It sucks for Israel to have to endure it, but it is what's necessary.

I don't disagree with that.

[Bob]

The 1929 massacre in Hebron was related to access to the Western Wall? What in the world are you talking about? It was anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism all wrapped into a pogrom. It had nothing to do with the Western Wall.As far as access to holy sites goes, only under Israeli control have all religions had full access. The only restrictions that currently exist come from the Muslims, where they are delegated some administrative authority. There is absolutely no question that with respect to religious tolerance, the Jewish people have been a light where the Muslims have been darkness.

Anyways, the motivation behind terrorism is and has always been the same - rejection if Jewish independence in Israel. This will never change.

As far as your reference to American ghettos, there is no comparable situation anywhere in America. There are no areas in America where full teams of riot police are required to do any form of police action. There are no areas in America with widespread illegal and undeclared constructions where property taxes aren't collected. I could go on, but it's too ridiculous to continue...

[Bob]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2148548.stm

Israel's Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, has described Monday night's attack on Gaza City which killed 15 people - including nine children - as a mistake.

The attack targeted a leading member of the militant group Hamas, Sheikh Salah Shahada, who was among those killed when an F-16 jet dropped a one-tonne guided bomb on the apartment block where he was staying.

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

Yassin, a quadriplegic who was nearly blind, had used a wheelchair since a sporting accident at the age of 12.[15] He was assassinated when an Israeli helicopter gunship fired a missile at him as he was being wheeled to early morning prayers.[16] His killing, in an attack that claimed the lives of both his bodyguards and nine bystanders, precipitated much criticism of Israel, and many observers suggested that the act would negatively impact the peace process.[16] 200,000 Palestinians attended his funeral procession.[17]

I suggest you examine the record a little more closely these are just two high profile incidents. there are many many more.

Your original implication was that Israel destroyed apartment buildings in order kill one person. Killing fifteen people alongside a high-profile terrorist? It's a decision I would make, if I was in charge. I also would not presume the innocence of people near him at any time. I am aware of both of those incidents. Do you seriously think there are important things regarding this conflict that I can learn from you?

[Jonsa]

The 1929 massacre in Hebron was related to access to the Western Wall? What in the world are you talking about? It was anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism all wrapped into a pogrom. It had nothing to do with the Western Wall.

What was the spark? Yes of course it was rooted in anti-zionism and extended to anti-semitism. I have repeatedly noted the anti-zionist attitude of the arabs. I just tried to avoid using that term. Perhaps you should re=read some of my posts - what do you think when I say the arabs were pissed that the jews were moving into and claiming their land?

As far as access to holy sites goes, only under Israeli control have all religions had full access. The only restrictions that currently exist come from the Muslims, where they are delegated some administrative authority. There is absolutely no question that with respect to religious tolerance, the Jewish people have been a light where the Muslims have been darkness.

Irrelevant to the discussion, although I agree.

Anyways, the motivation behind terrorism is and has always been the same - rejection if Jewish independence in Israel. This will never change.

Of course this is a motivation. As time goes by it no longer is the sole motivation.

As far as your reference to American ghettos, there is no comparable situation anywhere in America. There are no areas in America where full teams of riot police are required to do any form of police action. There are no areas in America with widespread illegal and undeclared constructions where property taxes aren't collected. I could go on, but it's too ridiculous to continue...

So what you are saying is that despite the fact that these arabs are Israeli citizens, Israel doesn't treat them as such. That they don't collect taxes, where they don't issue building permits, where they provide limited law and order, where the schools are substandard. These are citizens of your country you are talking about. Seems the victims of millenial prejudice don't mind returning the sentiment when they are in control.

[Jonsa]

Your original implication was that Israel destroyed apartment buildings in order kill one person. Killing fifteen people alongside a high-profile terrorist? It's a decision I would make, if I was in charge. I also would not presume the innocence of people near him at any time. I am aware of both of those incidents. Do you seriously think there are important things regarding this conflict that I can learn from you?

Guess what, I didn't imply it I stated a fact. They dropped a 1 ton bomb on an apartment building to kill one guy, and along the way they managed to kill 14 other people of which 9 WERE CHILDREN!!!! And sure they weren't innocent.

You said:

No. Israel certainly does not launch missiles into crowds of people or level apartment buildings because of "one terrorist". You're just making shit up, and certainly could not cite one real example of either of these events taking place. The exact opposite is true, where Israel calls of actions when it is determined that there is too high a risk to civilians. That's the code of conduct of the IDF.

And I provided the examples. You implied I was lying. I shall await your apology.

Do you seriously think there are important things regarding this conflict that I can learn from you?

Yes there is some important things regarding this conflict that you can learn from me. Shall we start with the arrogant ultra sensitive attitude and progress from there?

Edited March 30, 2011 by Jonsa

[bloodyminded]

Your original implication was that Israel destroyed apartment buildings in order kill one person. Killing fifteen people alongside a high-profile terrorist? It's a decision I would make, if I was in charge. I also would not presume the innocence of people near him at any time.

Are you serious? Are the children guilty through a "sins of the father" hypothetical?

Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Rue]

no different and they'll use it as an excuse to start another settlement west bank...

bad people. ka ka people. bad. poo. poo. bad.

You 2 done?

[Rue]

Are you serious? Are the children guilty through a "sins of the father" hypothetical?

As serious as you are shrilling on cue for Hamas. What's the difference? You explout the deaths for a partisan platform now he responds with his own platform and so?

[Rue]

Say now what a surprise. Bud exploiting the latest round of the conflict to incite Israel is poo comments. Gosh. Never saw that coming.

Now let's see:

Israel is poo. For no reason it just decided to kill civilians. Just ignore this part of the article Bud quoted like he did:

"Hamas has stepped up rocket fire aimed at Israel after a hiatus since the two sides fought a war two years ago, and said its fighters had fired more than two dozen mortar shells and rockets at the weekend.."

While you are at it skip this part of the article as well"

"Israel has retaliated with air and ground assaults, saying it was targeting militants firing rockets and mortar shells at its towns and cities. In Tuesday's raids, Israel killed five militants of the Islamic Jihad group in two air strikes, one of which took place east of Gaza City, Hamas officials and medical staff said.

Israel said one group of militants had been preparing to fire a rocket and the same men had shot a rocket that struck a house in the Israeli city of Beersheba last month."

Also ignore this statement from Netanyahu:

"Netanyahu issued a statement expressing regret for the "mistaken strike on innocent civilians".

and this one:

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized for the civilian casualties and said Israel had no intention of seeking a further escalation of the conflict, but would defend itself against rocket fire aimed at its citizens."

So let's summarize. Israel is poo poo ka ka. For no reason it just wakes up in the morning and says-let's kill innocent Palestinians. why? Because Israel is poo poo and ka ka.

That's spelled P O O and K A. Then you say both words twice.

[bloodyminded]

As serious as you are shrilling on cue for Hamas. What's the difference? You explout the deaths for a partisan platform now he responds with his own platform and so?

...the fuck are you talking about, Rue?

Show me where I've been "shrilling" (shilling?) for Hamas..."on cue" or otherwise.

Go ahead, Rue; it's my challenge to you.

One single example will suffice.

Or are you going to admit you're just making things up?

And maybe you agree with Bob's degenerate little knuckledragging remark; and so you got oversensitive; and so decided to say things about me that aren't true.

Oh...and that you get the impression Bob was responding to my remarks (you know, the ones I never said) suggests you aren't even following the basic logic of post-and-response.

Edited March 30, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Guest American Woman]

I think it's a case of mistaken identity.

Edited March 30, 2011 by American Woman

[Bob]

Are you serious? Are the children guilty through a "sins of the father" hypothetical?

That's not what I said and certainly not what I meant. There are two points people need to understand, that being below the age of majority certainly does no imply innocence in the context of terrorism in Gaza (I think 50% of Gaza's population is under the age of 18). Moreover, close proximity to terrorism/terrorists (living among them) doesn't imply innocence. I have a much different reaction to the deaths of seventeen-year-olds in Gaza in IDF military operations than I do the deaths of seventeen-year-olds in car accidents in Manitoba. Lastly, children are regularly utilized in the infrastructure of terror. It's horrifying and sick, but it's reality. Even young children are used to shuttle weapons and report on IDF locations (as examples), putting IDF soldiers in a situation more difficult than you can fathom. That's what I was getting at. This is the type of sick social phenomenon we deal with, and the reality that CNN won't tell you on the six o'clock news.

[Bob]

Guess what, I didn't imply it I stated a fact. They dropped a 1 ton bomb on an apartment building to kill one guy, and along the way they managed to kill 14 other people of which 9 WERE CHILDREN!!!! And sure they weren't innocent.

You said:

And I provided the examples. You implied I was lying. I shall await your apology.

Yes there is some important things regarding this conflict that you can learn from me. Shall we start with the arrogant ultra sensitive attitude and progress from there?

I think the image most people have of apartment buildings are structures that house more than fifteen people, and would kill more than fifteen is destroyed in the cold-blood of the IDF.

[Jonsa]

I think the image most people have of apartment buildings are structures that house more than fifteen people, and would kill more than fifteen is destroyed in the cold-blood of the IDF.

An apartment building is an apartment building. Nine Children is Nine Children. Dead is Dead.

When confronted with truth you try to weasel.

When you demand proof and get it, you ignore it or lamely attempt to justify, never acknowledging you were wrong in the first place..

When challenged you respond with arrogant dismisal or personal accusations.

If you can't answer a criticism of Israel you respond with "yeah but the palestinians.."

You claim extensive "knowledge and understanding", but it all appears to be pushed thru a filter of extreme zionist bias.

Your self righteousness is as unwarranted as it is unattractive.

[M.Dancer]

Your self righteousness is as unwarranted as it is unattractive.

Are you looking for a romantic liason?

[bloodyminded]

I think it's a case of mistaken identity.

Perhaps so. Not a good excuse.

If it was a mistake, that's the predictable consequence of being too promiscuous with the "terrorist supporter" theme, so beloved by Bob and DogonPorch (neither of whom are particularly deep thinkers) and, now it would appear, Rue as well.

[Bob]

An apartment building is an apartment building. Nine Children is Nine Children. Dead is Dead.

When confronted with truth you try to weasel.

When you demand proof and get it, you ignore it or lamely attempt to justify, never acknowledging you were wrong in the first place..

When challenged you respond with arrogant dismisal or personal accusations.

If you can't answer a criticism of Israel you respond with "yeah but the palestinians.."

You claim extensive "knowledge and understanding", but it all appears to be pushed thru a filter of extreme zionist bias.

Your self righteousness is as unwarranted as it is unattractive.

The point I was making is that the image that I have of apartment buildings, in the Canadian context, implies a structure that houses many more than just a couple of families. When you talk about Israel destroying apartment buildings in Gaza to kill a terrorist, the impression most people on a Canadian forum will have is of Israel completely destroying a structure that houses, at a minimum, hundreds of people.

Define "child". After you do that, who's responsibility is it that these children were killed? If I shoot at IDF soldiers from an apartment building in which a family with young children is living, who's fault is it when the IDF strokes the apartment in self-defense?

I also don't know what a "extreme Zionist" is. Don't people like you view Zionism as inherently "extreme"? I mean, it's extreme of the Jewish people to build and preserve our own homeland through which we actualize our self-determination and independence. How extreme of me. I should give and and submit myself to living under Arab/Muslim rule, then I'd be a "moderate".

[Jonsa]

Are you looking for a romantic liason?

Are you looking for some wit?

[Jonsa]

The point I was making is that the image that I have of apartment buildings, in the Canadian context, implies a structure that houses many more than just a couple of families. When you talk about Israel destroying apartment buildings in Gaza to kill a terrorist, the impression most people on a Canadian forum will have is of Israel completely destroying a structure that houses, at a minimum, hundreds of people.

I see, so it all comes down to a matter of size, not intent. As if you can mitigate the "impression" of blowing up an "apartment building" because it smaller than typical canadian high rise apartment buildings. Nice try.

Define "child". After you do that, who's responsibility is it that these children were killed? If I shoot at IDF soldiers from an apartment building in which a family with young children is living, who's fault is it when the IDF strokes the apartment in self-defense?

Here's the kids that were killed. You tell me which one isn't a "child".

Subhi Mahmoud al-Huti (5),

Dunia Rami Matar (5),

Muhammad Ra'id Matar (4),

Aiman Ra'id Matar (2),

Alaa Muhammad Matar (11),

Dina Ra'id Matar (<1),

Muhammad Mahmoud al-Huti (3)

And a 14 year old, but we won't argue about him being a child even if his voice hadn't changed yet.

I also don't know what a "extreme Zionist" is. Don't people like you view Zionism as inherently "extreme"? I mean, it's extreme of the Jewish people to build and preserve our own homeland through which we actualize our self-determination and independence. How extreme of me. I should give and and submit myself to living under Arab/Muslim rule, then I'd be a "moderate".

No, people like me don't view zionism as inherently extreme.

What I mean by extreme zionist, is someone with your views. That there is no occupation, that arabs should leave, that arab israelis are occupiers, that all arabs are out to kill jews, that arab children aren't innocent, that have a teflon attitude where no shit sticks to Israeli actions. I'll bet you even think Baruch Goldstien was a hero.

Moderate zionists are the 60% of Israelis (general public and Israeli settlers) who support "dismantling most of the settlements in the territories as part of a peace agreement with the Palestinians."

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/659.php

And spare us all your idiotic melodramatic vision of a 'moderate' is.

[bloodyminded]

Good Christ.

There are a few matters under discussion here, but let's recap one of them, in an ongoing back and forth throughout several posts:

Jonsa (quoting): "Israel's Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, has described Monday night's attack on Gaza City which killed 15 people - including nine children - as a mistake."

Bob: Killing fifteen people alongside a high-profile terrorist? It's a decision I would make, if I was in charge. I also would not presume the innocence of people near him at any time.

Bloodyminded: Are you serious? Are the children guilty through a "sins of the father" hypothetical?

Bob: That's not what I said and certainly not what I meant. There are two points people need to understand, that being below the age of majority certainly does no imply innocence in the context of terrorism in Gaza. Moreover, close proximity to terrorism/terrorists (living among them) doesn't imply innocence.

Bob: Define "child".

Jonsa: Subhi Mahmoud al-Huti (5),

Dunia Rami Matar (5),

Muhammad Ra'id Matar (4),

Aiman Ra'id Matar (2),

Alaa Muhammad Matar (11),

Dina Ra'id Matar (<1),

Muhammad Mahmoud al-Huti (3)

So, OK, points to Jonsa, obviously. That's not even a debate.

Bob, I cannot for the life of me understand posters who are so determined to discredit themselves that they plunge into this sort of darkness.

For the sake of argument, let's say that you have made a lot of really good points. It's not inconceivable. But this sort of thing ruins any possibility of your being taken seriously.

It's fucking grotesque, to put it bluntly.

Edited March 31, 2011 by bloodyminded

[M.Dancer]

I see, so it all comes down to a matter of size, not intent.

Intent is the only thing that matters. They intended to get the terrorist leader. They did not intend to kill civilians.

Israel's Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, has described Monday night's attack on Gaza City which killed 15 people - including nine children - as a mistake.

There is no equivalancy between terrorists who intend to kill civilians and those who kill civilians by accident.