Israel doesn't want a two-state solution??

[untermensche]

How were the Palestinians not serious at Taba?

Because they were unwilling to agree to the non-negotiable points.

They reached a reasonable agreement on the side issues but that's meaningless if the big ones aren't settled.

What specifically are you talking about?

At Taba the Palestinians were in full agreement.

But Israel walked out at the last second and ended the process.

They are not an honest participant.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

50/50 after you correctly categorize all the "civilians" that get martyrdom pages.

Implying that you actually spent any amount of time whatsoever taking a count of exactly how many civilian casualties get martyrdom pages. We both know you haven't.

Hint: those are only for the terrorists.

Implying that you have done any research whatsoever to verify this assumption is even true. We both know you haven't.

And while the ideal ratio is no dead civilians the Israeli record is second to none for urban combat.

Implying that you have any source for this claim other than the IDF itself. We both know you don't.

No. The martyrdom pages. 100% proof of combatant status.

Which, again, implies you know anything about Palestinian practices of declaring martyrdom. It wasn't that long ago that kids getting shot and killed for throwing stones at tanks were declared to be martyrs.

Of course, considering you have said many times you consider stones to be military weapons, that's probably a moot point.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Bottom line.

Israel has never been serious about a real 2 state solution.

I think none of the parties have ever been serious about a real (i.e. mutually acceptable) 2 state solution. Nor do I think any of the parties are likely to get serious about a real 2 state solution for a long time unless there is some earth-shaking event that changes the hearts and minds of most people in that region.

There's a difference between "being serious" and "being taken seriously." The Palestinians have almost always been the former and almost never the latter.

The chart above was drawn up in the Oslo Accords in recognition of the reality of Palestine as it existed at the time. The whole point of the agreement was that SOME of the Israeli-controlled areas would EVENTUALLY be handed over to Palestinian control and it was just a matter of deciding how much and when. The Palestinian position was "All of it, as soon as possible" while the Israeli position was "Whatever we feel like, whenever we feel like, with the option to reverse it if we feel like." The INSTANT the Palestinians started to try work for a compromise between those two extremes, the Israelis accused them of negotiating in bad faith and walked out.

They have been following this exact same pattern ever since.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Because they were unwilling to agree to the non-negotiable points.

They reached a reasonable agreement on the side issues but that's meaningless if the big ones aren't settled.

How does Israel refusing to negotiate on certain points make the lack of agreement the fault of the Palestinians?

Israel wasn't the one saying the conditions were non-negotiable. That was the US.

And what was involved was simple: For Israel to accept the right of return is the destruction of Israel. There's no way they'll ever agree to that, it's suicide.

Thus you are criticizing Israel for not being willing to commit suicide.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Implying that you actually spent any amount of time whatsoever taking a count of exactly how many civilian casualties get martyrdom pages. We both know you haven't.

You don't know 2+2. The very next sentence showed that I am aware of the situation.

Hint: those are only for the terrorists.

Implying that you have done any research whatsoever to verify this assumption is even true. We both know you haven't.

Martyrdom pages are for fallen soldiers, not for civilians. Got a single example of a martyrdom page for someone who is clearly a civilian? (Say, a young kid?)

And while the ideal ratio is no dead civilians the Israeli record is second to none for urban combat.

Implying that you have any source for this claim other than the IDF itself. We both know you don't.

Got an example of anyone doing better? Remember, urban combat--it's easy to get a good ratio when you're fighting far from population centers.

No. The martyrdom pages. 100% proof of combatant status.

Which, again, implies you know anything about Palestinian practices of declaring martyrdom. It wasn't that long ago that kids getting shot and killed for throwing stones at tanks were declared to be martyrs.

Of course, considering you have said many times you consider stones to be military weapons, that's probably a moot point.

Stones can kill.

And you will no doubt argue that stones can't kill a buttoned-up tank that's not true--the point of the stones is to get the tank crew to button up and thus not see the guy with the rocket that can actually kill the tank. They're dupes but they are combatants.

And I note your use of "kids"--when you plot the Palestinian deaths vs age you see the curve shoots up sharply at about age 16. Most of those "kids" killed in combat are combatants that are 16 or 17.

 

[Arctish]

How does Israel refusing to negotiate on certain points make the lack of agreement the fault of the Palestinians?

Israel wasn't the one saying the conditions were non-negotiable. That was the US.

And what was involved was simple: For Israel to accept the right of return is the destruction of Israel. There's no way they'll ever agree to that, it's suicide.

Thus you are criticizing Israel for not being willing to commit suicide.

So you're not going to describe the two state solution your thread title implies Israel wants and you're not going to explain why the party not making non-negotiable demands is being accused of not negotiating. I don't suppose you're going to explain how the Palestinian offer to accept a token Right of Return for approx. 15,000 elderly refugees who were born inside what is now Israel could cause Israel to commit suicide.

That's too bad. I'm particularly interested in hearing your explanation of that last one.

 

[Will Wiley]

If Israel wanted a two state solution we would have it. Israel aren't the victims

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If Israel wanted a two state solution we would have it. Israel aren't the victims

Two state, sure. Solution? Your side simply assumes that 67 borders will bring peace.

There's little reason for this assumption as the Palestinians make it clear they intend to fight until they have all of Israel. And there wasn't peace in 67.

 

[iolo]

As everybody knows, all that Nazi 'Israel' wants in Death Camps.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Wikileaks says otherwise:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/55071

Don't think we need a call. She is for a two-state solution and thinks the status quo is unsustainable. She had dozens of hours of convos with Bibi where he not only supported a two-state solution but actively negotiated to bring it about. We don't need to wade into Israeli politics but we should be clear and unabashed about our own position.

Breaking news, Isreal isn't a person. Israel, as it turns out, is several people who have different opinions.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You don't know 2+2. The very next sentence showed that I am aware of the situation.

"Aware of the situation" ≠ "Actually bothered to count the ratio." 50/50 is a figure you pulled out of your ass based on nothing whatsoever.

Martyrdom pages are for fallen soldiers, not for civilians.

And you know this HOW?

Got a single example of a martyrdom page for someone who is clearly a civilian?

One of the kids who was shot and killed on camera (the brother of a U.S. citizen) was given a matyrdom page. AFAIK, they also routinely give those pages to party members, police officers and government employees who are killed by Israel for just about ANY reason.

Got an example of anyone doing better?

The USMC at the Battle of Fallujah. Both times.

We screwed up A LOT of things during the occupation, but absurdly high civilian-to-combatant ratio wasn't one of them.

Stones can kill.

And you will no doubt argue that stones can't kill a buttoned-up tank that's not true--the point of the stones is to get the tank crew to button up and thus not see the guy with the rocket that can actually kill the tank. They're dupes but they are combatants.

And here we circle back to the original point: you will perform any neccesary mental gymnastics to support your supposition that most if not all of the Palestinians who are killed by Israel are, in fact, terrorists in some way. As long as you can IMAGINE a justification for their killings, anyone who disputes the "terrorist" label will have to research every single case and prove, individually, and beyond all reasonable doubt, that they WEREN'T involved in terrorism at the time they were killed. Otherwise, the label sticks, and sometimes even then.

"Guilty until proven innocent" makes the Palestinian's actions moot; if they don't resist at all, they will STILL be labeled "terrorists" in western press, so long as there are people like you creative enough to imagine all the dastardly schemes they could have been up to at the time.

And I note your use of "kids"--when you plot the Palestinian deaths vs age...

Implying that YOU have actually taken the time to "plot" anything whatsoever. We both know you haven't, that you pulled this factoid DIRECTLY out of your ass, but you quote it with confidence because you ASSUME that if someone actually analyzed the data that is probably what they would find.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Wikileaks says otherwise:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/55071

Breaking news, Isreal isn't a person. Israel, as it turns out, is several people who have different opinions.

Sometimes I think that is equally true of Netanyahu.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One of the kids who was shot and killed on camera (the brother of a U.S. citizen) was given a matyrdom page. AFAIK, they also routinely give those pages to party members, police officers and government employees who are killed by Israel for just about ANY reason.

Party members? More like senior combatants.

Police officers? Most of the Gaza "police" force is Hamas.

Got an example of anyone doing better?

The USMC at the Battle of Fallujah. Both times.

It's much easier to cut down on civilian casualties when they leave the area before the battle. Despite that the ratio was about 1:2. Had the civilians not fled first you would have fared worse than Israel.

We screwed up A LOT of things during the occupation, but absurdly high civilian-to-combatant ratio wasn't one of them.

Stones can kill.

And you will no doubt argue that stones can't kill a buttoned-up tank that's not true--the point of the stones is to get the tank crew to button up and thus not see the guy with the rocket that can actually kill the tank. They're dupes but they are combatants.

And here we circle back to the original point: you will perform any neccesary mental gymnastics to support your supposition that most if not all of the Palestinians who are killed by Israel are, in fact, terrorists in some way. As long as you can IMAGINE a justification for their killings, anyone who disputes the "terrorist" label will have to research every single case and prove, individually, and beyond all reasonable doubt, that they WEREN'T involved in terrorism at the time they were killed. Otherwise, the label sticks, and sometimes even then.

You will perform any necessary mental gymnastics to pretend combatants are not combatants.

Implying that YOU have actually taken the time to "plot" anything whatsoever. We both know you haven't, that you pulled this factoid DIRECTLY out of your ass, but you quote it with confidence because you ASSUME that if someone actually analyzed the data that is probably what they would find.

Why should I take the time when others have done so already? Of course you don't care because the only ones that actually prepare the data is Israel. Groups like B'Tselem make their data as hard as possible to analyze.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Party members? More like senior combatants.

Or politicians. Same thing to you, though.

Police officers? Most of the Gaza "police" force is Hamas.

Hamas is the ruling government of Gaza. Who the fuck ELSE would they be working for?

"Guilt by association" is just another form of "guilty until proven otherwise."

Had the civilians not fled first you would have fared worse than Israel.

But they didn't, and so Israel's claim of being "Second to none" in urban combat is factually incorrect and is hypothetical AT BEST.

Why should I take the time when others have done so already?

Because if you DID, you would probably find that either the scenario -- or even your recollection of the scenario -- is a figment of your imagination.

Groups like B'Tselem make their data as hard as possible to analyze.

Yes, because real data about real situations that happen in combat zones under the most chaotic circumstances you can imagine should be really easy to analyze.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Or politicians. Same thing to you, though.

Police officers? Most of the Gaza "police" force is Hamas.

Hamas is the ruling government of Gaza. Who the fuck ELSE would they be working for?

"Guilt by association" is just another form of "guilty until proven otherwise."

I mean they are Hamas fighters.

Had the civilians not fled first you would have fared worse than Israel.

But they didn't, and so Israel's claim of being "Second to none" in urban combat is factually incorrect and is hypothetical AT BEST.

It's hard to kill civilians that aren't there. Taking even the low value of 70% evacuated--add them back into Fallujah and the civilian/combatant ratio would be worse than Israel. (Note that there's never an evacuation when Israel stomps on Hamas. If anything, the exact reverse--people kept from fleeing at gunpoint.)

Why should I take the time when others have done so already?

Because if you DID, you would probably find that either the scenario -- or even your recollection of the scenario -- is a figment of your imagination.

You simply assume any data you don't like is false. That's arguing like a creationist.

Groups like B'Tselem make their data as hard as possible to analyze.

Yes, because real data about real situations that happen in combat zones under the most chaotic circumstances you can imagine should be really easy to analyze.

No, you're not thinking. There's no reason the data has to be arranged to be as hard as possible (if possible at all) to figure out. They don't connect the dots, the dead are all listed individually without any connection to why they died. Furthermore, they are only listed as whether they were taking part in combat operations. From the B'Tselem data it's impossible to tell if the dead guy was a passerby or a bodyguard of someone Israel assassinated. It's not like the information isn't available--if they were in the same vehicle they're almost certainly bodyguards. (Figuring these cases out becomes even more problematic if the target manages to bail out of the car and get clear while the missile is inbound. At that point you only see dead "noncombatants".)

I will not blame B'Tselem for not having data that isn't known. I will blame them for failing to include data that is available.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I mean they are Hamas fighters.

Police officers and politicians are not "fighters."

It's hard to kill civilians that aren't there.

... is the reason why Israel is "second to none" in theory only.

You simply assume any data you don't like is false...

I assume that an accusation of guilt is not, in and of itself, EVIDENCE of guilt. Once you start providing actual data to back up these scenarios you keep inventing, we can start examining them to the extent they apply to Palestinian casualties in general.

No, you're not thinking. There's no reason the data has to be arranged to be as hard as possible (if possible at all) to figure out.

Which it isn't. It's presented in precisely the way it was collected, in the context of the circumstances of their deaths. This is because B'Tselem provides DATA, not assumptions, not conclusions. "They were in the same vehicle and therefore were probably bodyguards" is an assumption based on nothing at all; "Their names were Khaled Hafeez and Ismail Tariq, known to be bodyguards of the deceased" certainly would be data, IF they actually had access to it.

You would prefer that they explicitly list more dead Palestinians as being "claimed to be civilian but actually militant?" If you actually had information to back up that preference, you would have presented it to THEM, not here on this message board surrounded by people who already know you're full of shit. You need EVIDENCE to make accusations, and for most of the world "being Palestinian" isn't sufficient.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Police officers and politicians are not "fighters."

When you take a Hamas soldier and slap a police officer badge on him you still have a fighter.

And anyone giving orders to soldiers is a valid target.

It's hard to kill civilians that aren't there.

... is the reason why Israel is "second to none" in theory only.

The point is the example given involved a situation where most people had left, very far from what Israel is fighting.

No, you're not thinking. There's no reason the data has to be arranged to be as hard as possible (if possible at all) to figure out.

Which it isn't. It's presented in precisely the way it was collected, in the context of the circumstances of their deaths. This is because B'Tselem provides DATA, not assumptions, not conclusions. "They were in the same vehicle and therefore were probably bodyguards" is an assumption based on nothing at all; "Their names were Khaled Hafeez and Ismail Tariq, known to be bodyguards of the deceased" certainly would be data, IF they actually had access to it.

I would accept "Khaled Hafeez, riding in the same vehicle as the target of an assassination."
But what we get is "Khaled Hafeez, not taking part in any combat operation."

The data would be a lot more informative if they simply grouped all casualties of any given incident.

You would prefer that they explicitly list more dead Palestinians as being "claimed to be civilian but actually militant?" If you actually had information to back up that preference, you would have presented it to THEM, not here on this message board surrounded by people who already know you're full of shit. You need EVIDENCE to make accusations, and for most of the world "being Palestinian" isn't sufficient.

I'm not the one suffering from constipation.

http://time.com/3035937/gaza-israel-hamas-palestinian-casualties/

Cast Lead. Palestinian combat casualties: PCHR: 236. Israel: 709. Hamas, after it was no longer news: ~700.

 

[LordKiran]

Why should I take the time when others have done so already? Of course you don't care because the only ones that actually prepare the data is Israel. Groups like B'Tselem make their data as hard as possible to analyze.

Because it's your job when making a claim to back it up with tangible facts and data?

Are you honestly arguing that you shouldn't be held accountable for backing your own claims? All to avoid having to admit your numbers amount to little more than shooting from the hip?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

When you take a Hamas soldier and slap a police officer badge on him you still have a fighter.

And anyone giving orders to soldiers is a valid target.

So you concede that your definition of "fighter" has now expanded to "police officers and politicians." Please fail to surprise me by also expanding that definition to include any individuals working for the police department -- janitors, clerks, delivery drivers -- as well as the support staff of said politicians, notably drivers, secretaries, administrative assistants, etc.

I would accept "Khaled Hafeez, riding in the same vehicle as the target of an assassination."
But what we get is "Khaled Hafeez, not taking part in any combat operation."

Which, when you actually READ the incident reports, is exactly what happens 99% of the time. They go out of their way to differentiate between actual combatants and civilians, even if you don't.

The thing that's interesting is that you are challenging ON BLANKET TERMS the claim "did not participate in hostilities" and effectively arguing with the people who collected that data, while providing no data of your own, and making no attempt to find out where THEY got that data. It's almost as if you don't actually CARE what really happened as long as the Palestinians aren't avoiding blame...

Cast Lead. Palestinian combat casualties: PCHR: 236. Israel: 709. Hamas, after it was no longer news: ~700.

Bullshit. The source for the Palestinian "admission is":

Hamas interior minister Fathi Hammad told the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat that between 200 and 300 Hamas fighters were killed during the 22-day onslaught in addition to hundreds of civilians.

“They say the people suffered from this war, but is Hamas not part of the people? On the first day of the war Israel targeted police stations and 250 martyrs were killed, from Hamas and other factions,” he told the paper.

“In addition to them, between 200 and 300 fighters from the Al-Qassam Brigades (Hamas’s armed wing) and another 150 security forces were martyred.”

Hamas, like everyone else in the world, distinguishes between armed combatants and law enforcement personnel or security guards. Israel (and you) is claiming the cops and guards it killed were "terrorists" by virtue of their being part of Hamas. Hamas, B'tselem and the rest of the civilized world does not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So you concede that your definition of "fighter" has now expanded to "police officers and politicians." Please fail to surprise me by also expanding that definition to include any individuals working for the police department -- janitors, clerks, delivery drivers -- as well as the support staff of said politicians, notably drivers, secretaries, administrative assistants, etc.

I did not expand the definition. I simply said that slapping a badge on a soldier doesn't make him not a soldier.

I would accept "Khaled Hafeez, riding in the same vehicle as the target of an assassination."
But what we get is "Khaled Hafeez, not taking part in any combat operation."

Which, when you actually READ the incident reports, is exactly what happens 99% of the time. They go out of their way to differentiate between actual combatants and civilians, even if you don't.

No. They go out of their way to pretend combatants are civilians. If we knew the guy was in a vehicle hit by an assassination rocket we would correctly identify him as almost certain combatant. If it simply says he wasn't taking part in combat operations he looks like a civilian.

The thing that's interesting is that you are challenging ON BLANKET TERMS the claim "did not participate in hostilities" and effectively arguing with the people who collected that data, while providing no data of your own, and making no attempt to find out where THEY got that data. It's almost as if you don't actually CARE what really happened as long as the Palestinians aren't avoiding blame...

There certainly are civilians that die. Many human shields, some simply too close to a target.

Cast Lead. Palestinian combat casualties: PCHR: 236. Israel: 709. Hamas, after it was no longer news: ~700.

Bullshit. The source for the Palestinian "admission is":

Hamas interior minister Fathi Hammad told the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat that between 200 and 300 Hamas fighters were killed during the 22-day onslaught in addition to hundreds of civilians.

“They say the people suffered from this war, but is Hamas not part of the people? On the first day of the war Israel targeted police stations and 250 martyrs were killed, from Hamas and other factions,” he told the paper.

“In addition to them, between 200 and 300 fighters from the Al-Qassam Brigades (Hamas’s armed wing) and another 150 security forces were martyred.”

Hamas, like everyone else in the world, distinguishes between armed combatants and law enforcement personnel or security guards. Israel (and you) is claiming the cops and guards it killed were "terrorists" by virtue of their being part of Hamas. Hamas, B'tselem and the rest of the civilized world does not.

I suggest actually reading.

Over a year later, after the news media had moved on, Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hammad enumerated Hamas fatalities at 600 to 700