Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Tigers!]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I'm sorry... but what are the sources for this?

I'd also like to point out that Hamas uses terror on their own population. Including kidnappings and beheadings. Considering the behaviour of Hamas, this sounds more like the work of Hamas rather than IDF. It fits their "methods".

Yes, I know that it's a war a wars are messy and the first casuality of war is the truth. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Everything we've seen so far is that Israeli troops are well disciplined and well behaved. Yes, mistakes happen. Which they take responsibility for. But the claims in this video are on a completely different level.

Also... any video titled "what they don't want you to see" screams clickbait. The content of that video looks like exactly what a title like that would suggest.

I found that video unconvincing. It feels like an emotionally manipulative piece of propaganda.

 

[Arctish]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

The Palestinian Fedayeen Insurgency had died down by the mid 1950s. Israel's response to it, namely the formation of Unit 101 under Ariel Sharon, and the Unit's mission of carrying out reprisal attacks aka revenge killings, raises a shit ton of issues.

If you want to make the case that it was cross 'border' attacks that led to the construction of the fence and walls around Gaza, rather than the decision of the Israeli leadership to secure the results of ethnic cleansing by keeping the non-Jewish Palestinians separate and contained, go ahead and do that. You can start with the timeline of attacks and reprisals.

 

[Harry Bosch]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

The Palestinian Fedayeen Insurgency had died down by the mid 1950s. Israel's response to it, namely the formation of Unit 101 under Ariel Sharon, and the Unit's mission of carrying out reprisal attacks aka revenge killings, raises a shit ton of issues.

If you want to make the case that it was cross 'border' attacks that led to the construction of the fence and walls around Gaza, rather than the decision of the Israeli leadership to secure the results of ethnic cleansing by keeping the non-Jewish Palestinians separate and contained, go ahead and do that. You can start with the timeline of attacks and reprisals.

Oh, I remember very well when the wall was built. It had to be built. Isreal didn't really want to at the time as it greatly impacted Palestinian workers crossing into Israel. There were also some far-right Israeli's who didn't like it because it established firm borders. However, it absolutely had to be built. Israeli's have a love for cafe's and enjoying life. Hamas knew this, and targeted it. Below is the list of attacks on the cafes and other places where Israelis would gather:

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notice the peak of attacks in 2001 to 2003. I remember debating on this forum many times during this time that the wall had to be built. (I was on this forum previous to 2001 with a different name). These suicide attacks were vicious targeting mostly younger people. The wall was built. And yes, it hurt Palestinian areas. But it dramatically reduced the suicide attacks. The suicide vests also killed the one state solution.

 

[ZiprHead]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

The Palestinian Fedayeen Insurgency had died down by the mid 1950s. Israel's response to it, namely the formation of Unit 101 under Ariel Sharon, and the Unit's mission of carrying out reprisal attacks aka revenge killings, raises a shit ton of issues.

If you want to make the case that it was cross 'border' attacks that led to the construction of the fence and walls around Gaza, rather than the decision of the Israeli leadership to secure the results of ethnic cleansing by keeping the non-Jewish Palestinians separate and contained, go ahead and do that. You can start with the timeline of attacks and reprisals.

Oh, I remember very well when the wall was built. It had to be built. Isreal didn't really want to at the time as it greatly impacted Palestinian workers crossing into Israel. There were also some far-right Israeli's who didn't like it because it established firm borders. However, it absolutely had to be built. Israeli's have a love for cafe's and enjoying life. Hamas knew this, and targeted it. Below is the list of attacks on the cafes and other places where Israelis would gather:

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notice the peak of attacks in 2001 to 2003. I remember debating on this forum many times during this time that the wall had to be built. (I was on this forum previous to 2001 with a different name). These suicide attacks were vicious targeting mostly younger people. The wall was built. And yes, it hurt Palestinian areas. But it dramatically reduced the suicide attacks. The suicide vests also killed the one state solution.

The wall was built in the forties. The first suicide attack listed was in 1989. Do you think there may be a slight problem with your thinking the wall was a response to suicide attacks?

 

[Harry Bosch]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

The Palestinian Fedayeen Insurgency had died down by the mid 1950s. Israel's response to it, namely the formation of Unit 101 under Ariel Sharon, and the Unit's mission of carrying out reprisal attacks aka revenge killings, raises a shit ton of issues.

If you want to make the case that it was cross 'border' attacks that led to the construction of the fence and walls around Gaza, rather than the decision of the Israeli leadership to secure the results of ethnic cleansing by keeping the non-Jewish Palestinians separate and contained, go ahead and do that. You can start with the timeline of attacks and reprisals.

Oh, I remember very well when the wall was built. It had to be built. Isreal didn't really want to at the time as it greatly impacted Palestinian workers crossing into Israel. There were also some far-right Israeli's who didn't like it because it established firm borders. However, it absolutely had to be built. Israeli's have a love for cafe's and enjoying life. Hamas knew this, and targeted it. Below is the list of attacks on the cafes and other places where Israelis would gather:

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notice the peak of attacks in 2001 to 2003. I remember debating on this forum many times during this time that the wall had to be built. (I was on this forum previous to 2001 with a different name). These suicide attacks were vicious targeting mostly younger people. The wall was built. And yes, it hurt Palestinian areas. But it dramatically reduced the suicide attacks. The suicide vests also killed the one state solution.

The wall was built in the forties. The first suicide attack listed was in 1989. Do you think there may be a slight problem with your thinking the wall was a response to suicide attacks?

Different sections of the wall was built at different times. But the "separation wall" as it was described then was primarily built in the 2000's time period, finished in 2005. And as you can see from the above link, dramatically reduced the suicide bomber attacks on civilians. Here is a history of the separation wall:

West Bank barrier - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[ZiprHead]

I thought we were discussing the Gazan wall.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

You kinda changed the subject mid discussion but I get where you're coming from.

 

[DrZoidberg]

For those who are interested in history and keeping their facts straight:

The Long, Bloody History of the Israel-Gaza "Border"

Israel has been enforcing the 'containment' of Palestinian refugees in Gaza since its founding in the 1940s. It has been building and rebuilding a separation barrier since 1971.

Looking at Wikipedia it says that the barrier was built as a security barrier. Unfortunately the article does not say what security was to be enhanced or whom's.

Saying the barriers were built in response to suicide bombings is just plain ignorant. Those attacks happened more than 20 years after the first 60 km of fencing went up, and more than 40 years after Gazans attempting to return to their former homes or harvest food from their farms were routinely shot.

If the Gazans had built it, we could reasonably conclude it was there to keep the Israeli soldiers and settlers out. Since it was built by Israel, we can reasonably conclude it was built to keep the Palestinians in.

Or perhaps to try to keep the fedayeen (Palestinian militants) from killing Jews. Which itself rasises all sorts of issues.

The Palestinian Fedayeen Insurgency had died down by the mid 1950s. Israel's response to it, namely the formation of Unit 101 under Ariel Sharon, and the Unit's mission of carrying out reprisal attacks aka revenge killings, raises a shit ton of issues.

If you want to make the case that it was cross 'border' attacks that led to the construction of the fence and walls around Gaza, rather than the decision of the Israeli leadership to secure the results of ethnic cleansing by keeping the non-Jewish Palestinians separate and contained, go ahead and do that. You can start with the timeline of attacks and reprisals.

Oh, I remember very well when the wall was built. It had to be built. Isreal didn't really want to at the time as it greatly impacted Palestinian workers crossing into Israel. There were also some far-right Israeli's who didn't like it because it established firm borders. However, it absolutely had to be built. Israeli's have a love for cafe's and enjoying life. Hamas knew this, and targeted it. Below is the list of attacks on the cafes and other places where Israelis would gather:

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Notice the peak of attacks in 2001 to 2003. I remember debating on this forum many times during this time that the wall had to be built. (I was on this forum previous to 2001 with a different name). These suicide attacks were vicious targeting mostly younger people. The wall was built. And yes, it hurt Palestinian areas. But it dramatically reduced the suicide attacks. The suicide vests also killed the one state solution.

The wall was built in the forties. The first suicide attack listed was in 1989. Do you think there may be a slight problem with your thinking the wall was a response to suicide attacks?

What are you smoking?

1996 a simple wire fence was built. Anyone with a wire cutter could easily penetrate it. So wasn't really working. And didn't. Palestinians kept going boom in Israel.

Since it wasn't doing the trick, it kept getting upgraded. In 2005 it was upgraded with sensors, cameras and watchtowers. Which seems to have done the trick. Suide bombings became rare. This is the so called "iron wall". Up until 2016 it kept being upgraded with fence parts being switched out for concrete walls.

Between 2017 - 2021 it was further upgraded with high tech defences.

Considering the 7/10 attack in 2023 these defences weren't good enough.

So I don't understand what you are whinging about? Clearly Israel needed that wall. They needed something way more elaborate... obviously.

You don't seem to understand just how badly the Palestinians of Gaza have behaved... over the years. It's not good.

 

[Arctish]

The fence and walls Israel built that separated Gaza from the rest of Israel and Palestine is not the same barrier that was built on Occupied Territory in the West Bank during the 1990s and 2000s.

The barriers keeping Gazans separate were initially built in order to secure the results of ethnic cleansing. Yes, some of the Palestinians entering Israel from Gaza were there to attack the Israelis, but most of them were refugees trying to reclaim their homes and property. The fence was 'defending' the theft of land and resources and enforcing segregation.

Anyone interested in history and keeping their facts straight can read that article I linked and comment on it directly. They can also provide additional links to the history of the barrier around Gaza, which would be very much appreciated, at least by me.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They don't need to. We know the context. I'm just spelling it out.

The IDF are explicitly at war with Hamas. Not all Palestinians. They consider the death of Palestinian civilians regretable. Which should be obvious when they acknowledge doing it. If they were at war with all Palestinians, they would hardly care who they kill, right?

Yeah. Compare it with Iran who fired missiles at a hospital and pretended they were hitting a military facility nearby (but not identifying said facility because that would reveal there was none) but their press release says "near the hospital", doesn't admit hitting the hospital. Israel does not deny hitting hospitals, they just point out they were being used for military purposes.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think the west has a duty to help Iranians kick the Ayatollah out of Iran. The only reason he's in power at all is because excessive and heavy handed meddling by greedy Brittain and USA. Just so they could get their hands on Iranian oil for cheap. One of the many shameful chapters of Western imperialism.

But of course... it's only tiny little Israel actually doing anything about it. Not a western country. Go go Israel.

Objection. It wasn't to get the oil cheap, it was to avoid the nationalization (without compensation) of the American-owned facilities. It shouldn't have been done, but it wasn't theft. It was preventing theft.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They don't need to. We know the context. I'm just spelling it out.

The IDF are explicitly at war with Hamas. Not all Palestinians. They consider the death of Palestinian civilians regretable. Which should be obvious when they acknowledge doing it. If they were at war with all Palestinians, they would hardly care who they kill, right?

You’re not helping the IDF with this “all Palestinians deserve to die because of Hamas” rhetoric. They're already facing international backlash and accusations from people who genuinely despise them, and voices like yours only make it worse. No matter how strong your convictions are, you’re not offering support, you’re handing extremist groups like Hamas propaganda on a silver platter. They can point to your words and say, “See? This is what they really think of us. Your posts would make perfect propaganda for Hamas.

You're assigning a false position to him.

The only people saying anyone deserves to die is Hamas, in reference to the Jews.

We do not like the fact that the Palestinians are dying, but we recognize that it's exactly what Hamas intended and thus we assign the blame to Hamas. But we can't do anything about Hamas so the keys must be under the Israeli streetlight.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The risk of creating a power vacuum shouldn’t be underestimated. We’ve already seen the consequences of that in Iraq, and Iran’s influence in the region is far broader. If the current regime were toppled without a viable and stable replacement, the resulting chaos could be far worse. One of my many questions is: what would an Iran-sized power vacuum look like, and who’s prepared to deal with it?

Iran is the one that has stepped into the power vacuums. If they fall it would be great for the Middle East. (Not that I expect them to fall, though.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The genocide expands its scope.

Yup.

The actual genocide:

Driven to starvation, Sudanese people eat weeds and plants to survive as war rages

Amid battles and food insecurity across Sudan, many people are turning to weeds and wild plants to sustain them.

apnews.com

 

[Politesse]

That is also genocide. This isn't a competition.

 

[ZiprHead]

Six Ways Trump's Bombing of Iran Made the Middle East – and the US – Less Safe

1. Iran has more reason than ever to build a nuclear weapon in secret.​

By greenlighting Israel’s attacks in the middle of US-Iran nuclear talks, and then joining the war himself, Trump embarrassed the moderates in Iran’s government and vindicated hardliners who have long argued that negotiating with America was a losing proposition. The war elevated the influence of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and convinced Iran’s parliament to curtail international observers’ access to Iran’s nuclear program. Iran has likely relocated and hidden some of its highly enriched uranium and may still possess intact centrifuges and other key equipment needed to work toward a nuclear weapon. What is certain is that the Iranian government now has every incentive to conceal its nuclear activities.

Go to the link for the other five reasons.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A friend posed a philosophical conundrum. A guy rapes your mom. Holds up four babies and threatens to kill them if you retaliate. Its not your babies. Why wouldn't you retaliate? How are you guilty if the babies get hurt?

Because real strength isn’t shown in how much pain you can dish out, it’s in how much you can endure without becoming the thing you hate. Those babies may not be mine, but if I treat them like they are, even when it costs me justice or vengeance, that’s exactly what sets me apart from the one who raped my wife and hid behind children. I know you won't like that answer, but I live that answer everyday. Besides, I'm persistent, so eventually I'll catch up to that asshole when the children aren't around.

Turning the other cheek won't help you when they kill you. And that's what Hamas wants to do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No. I'm saying they are doing better than anyone else, I feel they are meeting the burden.

You keep saying this and you have been asked before. Who are you making this comparison to to declare "They are doing better"?

Everyone. Including the US.

That sounds like more of a dodge than a real answer. How about being a little more specific?

We've been down this one before. You managed to find a site that basically said combat doesn't have to be deadly to civilians because combat is always deadly either the civilians or the attacking force. Yes, effectively claiming !p because p.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"carrying pilgrims". Big yellow flag right there, I was already expecting deception when I played the video.

"I was already expecting deception when I played the video." Can't much get a stronger admission of prejudice. And the word pilgrim simply means a person who journeys to a sacred place for religious reasons. More prejudice.

Reading. Try it sometime!

I read it and responded directly to what you said. Why would you question my reading ability?

You still aren't addressing "carrying pilgrims". Very unlikely, therefore an indication the events are not as claimed.

As I said, we would have done the same thing in Iraq.

Those people were suspected of being deadly terrorists ready to spring their trap so we'll just damage their vehicle and let them go on their merry way. No investigation. No search for weapons. Do you realize how daft that sounds???

As for Iraq, I declare your statement total bullshit. Here is the United States forces Rules Of Engagement:

Which says absolutely nothing about how they would react in this case.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think the west has a duty to help Iranians kick the Ayatollah out of Iran. The only reason he's in power at all is because excessive and heavy handed meddling by greedy Brittain and USA. Just so they could get their hands on Iranian oil for cheap. One of the many shameful chapters of Western imperialism.

But of course... it's only tiny little Israel actually doing anything about it. Not a western country. Go go Israel.

Objection. It wasn't to get the oil cheap, it was to avoid the nationalization (without compensation) of the American-owned facilities. It shouldn't have been done, but it wasn't theft. It was preventing theft.

Bullshit. Great Britain was greedy beyond belief (because the UK was broke following WW2). And USA was enablilg British theft.

Just another chapter in awful imperial Britain being awful. The British empire didn’t fall apart because the Brits were misunderstood saints