West Bank - whose is it?

[Jayjay]

You don't know that 3 and 4 would make the problem worse. Unless the "problem" is the conflict starts to cool down and somebody who makes bombs loses business and profits. At least somebody is suggesting a solution that does not involve continued hatred. You ought to try it yourself. See what you could come up with that would hurt a minimum number of people. Just try it. I dare you! Remember Palestinians are to be counted as people...even if they are Hamas.

You're still falling for the cover story that they'll settle for 67 borders.

They've made it clear that they intend to continue the conflict after getting a "peace" deal. 3 and 4 will give them more military ability, thus more deaths.

Palestinians may not settle for 67 borders in some hypothetical future scenario. But Israel is not settling to 1967 borders now, and is continuing the conflict as we speak so that's a moot point. The current conflict is already taking thousands of lives each year. The Palestinians would have to be several orders of magnitude better at killing Israelis if they wanted to beat that, which you could argue they want to do, but they would need a thousand times more rockets, a thousand times more funding, and a thousand times more people. It's simply not a realistic scenario.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're still falling for the cover story that they'll settle for 67 borders.

They've made it clear that they intend to continue the conflict after getting a "peace" deal. 3 and 4 will give them more military ability, thus more deaths.

Palestinians may not settle for 67 borders in some hypothetical future scenario. But Israel is not settling to 1967 borders now, and is continuing the conflict as we speak so that's a moot point. The current conflict is already taking thousands of lives each year. The Palestinians would have to be several orders of magnitude better at killing Israelis if they wanted to beat that, which you could argue they want to do, but they would need a thousand times more rockets, a thousand times more funding, and a thousand times more people. It's simply not a realistic scenario.

Most years it doesn't take anything like that many. Hamas decided to provoke a war, we had more deaths this year.

And I'm not saying that more military capability in Palestinian hands would cause more Israeli deaths than we currently see Palestinian deaths, but rather that the greater the threat the harder Israel would stomp on it. They would quit bending over backwards trying to avoid civilian deaths.

 

[Arctish]

Palestinians may not settle for 67 borders in some hypothetical future scenario. But Israel is not settling to 1967 borders now, and is continuing the conflict as we speak so that's a moot point. The current conflict is already taking thousands of lives each year. The Palestinians would have to be several orders of magnitude better at killing Israelis if they wanted to beat that, which you could argue they want to do, but they would need a thousand times more rockets, a thousand times more funding, and a thousand times more people. It's simply not a realistic scenario.

Most years it doesn't take anything like that many. Hamas decided to provoke a war, we had more deaths this year.

And I'm not saying that more military capability in Palestinian hands would cause more Israeli deaths than we currently see Palestinian deaths, but rather that the greater the threat the harder Israel would stomp on it. They would quit bending over backwards trying to avoid civilian deaths.

Israelis are quite thoroughly evil, you see. The only reason the death toll in Gaza was limited to thousands, most of them children, was because the Israelis didn't feel threatened. The moment Israelis think someone might actually hurt them, or at least thwart their ambitions in the West Bank, the rivers will run red with blood and vultures will feast like kings.

 

[Jayjay]

Palestinians may not settle for 67 borders in some hypothetical future scenario. But Israel is not settling to 1967 borders now, and is continuing the conflict as we speak so that's a moot point. The current conflict is already taking thousands of lives each year. The Palestinians would have to be several orders of magnitude better at killing Israelis if they wanted to beat that, which you could argue they want to do, but they would need a thousand times more rockets, a thousand times more funding, and a thousand times more people. It's simply not a realistic scenario.

Most years it doesn't take anything like that many. Hamas decided to provoke a war, we had more deaths this year.

And I'm not saying that more military capability in Palestinian hands would cause more Israeli deaths than we currently see Palestinian deaths, but rather that the greater the threat the harder Israel would stomp on it. They would quit bending over backwards trying to avoid civilian deaths.

So your argument against peace is that for Israel peace would mean stomping on Palestinians even harder?

But that doesn't hold either. In 2006 Israel wages a war against a better-equipped enemy, Hezbollah. They had at least an order of magnitude more rockets than Gaza and during the war Israel could hardly put a dent in it. Yet the casualties to Lebanon in that war were less than the Gaza war this year.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most years it doesn't take anything like that many. Hamas decided to provoke a war, we had more deaths this year.

And I'm not saying that more military capability in Palestinian hands would cause more Israeli deaths than we currently see Palestinian deaths, but rather that the greater the threat the harder Israel would stomp on it. They would quit bending over backwards trying to avoid civilian deaths.

Israelis are quite thoroughly evil, you see. The only reason the death toll in Gaza was limited to thousands, most of them children, was because the Israelis didn't feel threatened. The moment Israelis think someone might actually hurt them, or at least thwart their ambitions in the West Bank, the rivers will run red with blood and vultures will feast like kings.

Repeating Hamas lies about who died proves nothing. It was not mostly children.

I'm not finding any stats counting the whole fight but looking at the midpoint is damning enough:

http://honestreporting.com/analysis-of-gazans-killed-so-far-in-operation-protective-edge/

Furthermore, now that the eyes of the world aren't looking so hard we find several cases of "children" that were actually terrorists. I posted one on here a while back, more have been found since.

- - - Updated - - -

Most years it doesn't take anything like that many. Hamas decided to provoke a war, we had more deaths this year.

And I'm not saying that more military capability in Palestinian hands would cause more Israeli deaths than we currently see Palestinian deaths, but rather that the greater the threat the harder Israel would stomp on it. They would quit bending over backwards trying to avoid civilian deaths.

So your argument against peace is that for Israel peace would mean stomping on Palestinians even harder?

But that doesn't hold either. In 2006 Israel wages a war against a better-equipped enemy, Hezbollah. They had at least an order of magnitude more rockets than Gaza and during the war Israel could hardly put a dent in it. Yet the casualties to Lebanon in that war were less than the Gaza war this year.

True peace would not mean stomping harder. The Palestinian version of "peace" would. They have made it very clear that they just regard a peace treaty as a stepping stone towards the conquest of Israel.