-
Features
What should Israel do?
- Thread starter steve_bnk
- Start date
Unsupported by any facts.....
Arctish
Centimillionaire
Source?
For a time the Egyptian government had administrative control of Gaza but Egypt never made any moves to annex it. Egypt always expected Gaza to become part of a Palestinian State.
Meanwhile, Gaza's status as part of Eretz Yisrael inspired Israeli Zionists to seize the territory when the chance presented itself, place it under strict military rule, and get busy colonizing it with Jewish settlers. Withdrawing those settlers was hugely controversial. So I'm having trouble believing Israel ever sincerely offered to hand over Gaza once it was under Israeli control.
You don't appear to be disagreeing with my statements so much as adding additional reasons why the wall was built. I agree attacks from Gaza were a problem. But I disagree with the characterization of the Gazans as the only ones responsible for the violence and unrest. They were under military rule by a hostile neighbor. Their Israeli rulers forcibly relocated Gazans, deposed elected officials, seized valuable assets from Gazans and gave them to Israeli businesses and settlements, etc.
The Israelis took the best Gaza had to offer and gave it to themselves, just as they did in the West Bank. And the end result was the same: a large number of pissed-off, impoverished Palestinians who knew beyond any possible doubt that they were being screwed over by a racist, bigoted, land-stealing European invasion force. And then, right when it looked like the Palestinians might finally have their own State, things got worse.
Whose border fortifications? It was a prison wall the Israelis built on Gazan territory along it's border with Egypt, and the Gazans (you know, the people whose border it was) didn't want it there. So Hamas blew a hole in it, and Gazans went grocery shopping.
If Israel wants to build border fortifications it should stick to it's own borders - the original 1948 border or the 1967 boundary widely accepted by the international community and the PLO.
The Gazans were imprisoned before Hamas came to power, and the people who put all that time, effort, and money into imprisoning them were Israeli.
So why would the Gazans blame Hamas for their imprisonment? Because the Israelis want them to?
Last edited:
angelo
Deleted
Are you fucking serious??? How the fuck can you justify the terrorist attacks from hamas and Hezbolah and in the same breath say their terrorism is justified? If I continuously attacked your home and family would you not seek an end to my terrorism of your property and family? What would it take for you to react, the complete slaughter of all your family members and torching of your home?
Arctish
Centimillionaire
Let's assume for a moment we're talking about a Palestinian in the West Bank or Gaza.
If Zionists attacked his home and family would he not seek an end to their terrorism of his property and family? If they threw stones at his children, cut off the water supply to his fields, uprooted his orchard trees, and destroyed his livelihood, would he not be justified in resisting any further loss? What would it take to justify fighting back, the complete slaughter of all his family members and torching of his home?
I think a lot of the problems in the Middle East, and a lot of the arguing here, stems from the double standards people employ to justify actions taken by their preferred religious/ethnic group while vilifying the exact same action when taken by others. I think any action that relies on special pleading to make it justifiable isn't really justifiable.
Last edited:
angelo
Deleted
angelo
Deleted
What a load of poppycock! I suppose hamas can justify using Palestinians as human shields. The UN itself has uncovered rockets hidden in schools and other civilian buildings. And what did the UN do with the rockets? Why, they handed them back to the terrorists.
No, I'm afraid not. I went through the whole article.
The specific grievances mentioned were three:
i) That Hamas put military personnel and buildings in neighbourhoods that contain civilians, thus encouraging a blurring of the line between military and civilian targets. Unfortunately, the IDF also do this. There simply isn't the space to put large empty spaces between military buildings and civilian houses.
ii) That Hamas don't abide by the rules of war, separating military and civilian targets, and avoiding reprisals on civilian targets for military actions. Again, the IDF, as a matter of public policy, target civilian buildings for bombing on a regular basis, and are particularly fond of punitive attacks - destroying local businesses, power stations, and other buildings outside of active combat.
iii) That Hamas violate articles of the Geneva convention. The Geneva specifically prohibits the actions taken under the settlement program
Derec
Contributor
To get back to what Israel should do, how about assassinate Hamas leaders, first and foremost Khaled Mashaal. But properly this time! No, slow acting poisons, a 9mm brain hemorrhage is much more reliable.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Whose baby is it? His or mine?
How many babies are ok to shoot through to get him? Is there a specific number? If he holes up in a daycare center, is it ok to bomb the center?
Just curious to know if you think there's a line at all.
How would that help?
Derec
Contributor
In the long term: there will be no peace while Hamas is in charge so attacking Hamas leadership is definitely going to help by weakening them.
As far as shorter term consideration of the ceasefire, it is Mashaal who is rejecting the ceasefire. Easy for him when he is safe in Qatar. But eliminate a fe of the top dogs and their successors will not feel themselves very safe which would make them more receptive to a ceasefire agreement.
???
First off, assassinating a leader doesn't make the leadership of the political party weaker, it makes it stronger. Whoever takes over will have much more support. If Sharon got shot, you think his successor would have the same problems rallying a broad base of support?
Second of all, do you have some evidence that Hamas is somehow blocking peace? What is it about their own peace proposals that you feel is promoting conflict?
Third of all, didn't you say that the ceasefire should be rejected, until Hamas could be blown up some more? Why assassinate someone who agrees with you?
Fourthly, previous Palestinian leaders have not agreed to ceasefires on the grounds of personal safety, so why would they suddenly start now?
And why would you want to weaken Hamas anyway? Hamas rose to power partly as a result of Fatah's struggling to maintain support. If you somehow weaken Hamas, then you'll just get someone worse taking over.
What you really seem to be after is getting the Palestinian population suitably cowed that they won't oppose their overlords any more. I'd suggest that assassination of individuals is a poor way to achieve this. A better approach would be to have a look at some successful repressive societies - such as pre-civil war Deep South in the US, Apartheid South Africa, or some of the present Gulf states that have large ethnic underclasses, and see how they do it.
Because they're already doing basically all they can.
About all I can think of would be to make some sort of delayed-action bomb they can drop even if Hamas resorts to human shield tactics.
I'm not opposed to realistic suggestions, it's just every suggestion your side puts up is basically a matter of Israel should capitulate and things will magically be better. Since it's the Palestinians that want the fight that's not going to work.
And, yes, it's the man in the street, not just the government:
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-kerry-netanyahu-gaza-20140723-story.html#page=1
article said:
- - - Updated - - -
So you want to see Israel destroyed?
Jews quite rightly fear that this would lead to their persecution and death. Europe is growing increasingly hostile towards Jews, they're already trickling away. The US is currently safe but it has not always been.
- - - Updated - - -
I'm talking about what Hamas is actually doing, you're trying to muddy the waters with hypotheticals.
IDF soldiers in Gaza are facing attacks from baby-carrying Hamas troops.
Shadowy Man
Contributor
Hamas soldiers are attacking IDF soldiers with babies strapped to their chests? Ok. I hadn't read that yet. Sorry for assuming you were presenting a hypothetical.
arkirk
Veteran Member
It is a foregone conclusion that Israel has been trying your suggestion since Hamas was formed. You are suggesting the very thing that keeps this slaughter going. They have already been there and done that. You surely must know that. Why suggest the solution that has been tried for decades and has NEVER WORKED?
They haven't tried letting Palestinians form their own state on their own land.
arkirk
Veteran Member
You have that right! When millions of people are denied genuine citizenship in their own homeland, you get what we see in Palestine. The way that Israel has carved up the Palestinian lands with settlements, walls, Israeli only highways, checkpoints and blockades, they have gradually come to a point where a Palestinian state does not seem even remotely possible.
A point made by Derek and Loren that is absolutely not true is the notion that the IDF allows Palestinians to leave Gaza. They are NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE. How quickly we forget when the IDF stopped an unarmed international humanitarian flotilla on its way to Gaza killing people on one of the ships. Gaza is under siege and has been for many years. Merely killing some Palestinians every once in a while will not resolve the humanitarian crisis which must be resolved for there to be any chance of peace or reconciliation. The way to defeat the Hamas fanaticism is to stop feeding it with atrocities.
Gaza is a witches brew of human hatred constructed by Israel and the IDF. We never hear from the war mongers here how to fix the sewage system or the water supply or the other ruined infrastructure in Gaza. If Israel cannot turn away from this violence against unarmed people, it is headed for the same general condemnation the world had for the Nazis at the end of WWII.
The greatest liability in the world today is the human capacity for retribution. The U.N. should have been the leader in attenuating this, but the U.N is so constructed as to maintain several hegemonies that are totally inappropriate for a world attempting to make peace. That is what the sick Security Council has done for the world with its extension of veto power for peace proposals by the major hegemons.
Loren is right. I do not participate in his alleged "strategic thinking" because I have patiently watched for over sixty years as it has torn up whole nations, polluted the environment, and now is running us all off the cliff with environmental consequences of this thinking and action...not to mention the decivilizing effect it has had on the world's population.