Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Crisis Thread was the "Is Israel right" thread

10-07-2006 1:46pm

I would n't say that Israel is right, but then I wouldn't even consider Palestine as being in the right. Both sides have messed with the situation. And neither side have rushed to the peace table with any real sincerity. Simply put the conflict in the past suited their desires, regardless of the casualties to their own peoples.

In the present day, I believe that Hamas are whats holding up the chance for peace. The rejection of suing for peace and the unreaasonable desire for an eternal war, doesn't even try to give their own people a chance for peace. But then again Israel is still land-grabbing.

I doubt it'll end until they actually want peace at the same time, which I don't think has occured yet.

Why are the international community (including Ireland) not recalling their ambassadors from Israel?

Israel is a recognised government which can be negotiated with. It has shown in the past, willingness to give up land, or give concessions with the objective of peace in mind. (Examples, Relationship with Egypt & Sinai)

Whereas Hamas regardless of being voted into power, remain a terrorist faction that resists efforts to bring peace.

Removing Ambassadors from Israel would remove any international voice from the conflict, and might force Israel's hand towards more violent reprisals, since they would feel isolated from the world and its accepted conventions.

Why are they not calling the Israeli reps in each country to give a stern talking to? why is Israel not being ostricised by the international community?

Because they wouldn't listen? And why should they, when we conveniently ignore the US's actions? Its not as if the International Community is without their own offenses.

I would ask you though, why don't you complain about Hamas's refusal to settle for peace? Would you support a complete withdrawal of International support in every form, with the intention of forcing Hamas to settle for peace? Afterall, why should Israel help someone that declares themselves their lifelong enemies...?

Could it be that the actions of the Israelis are supported by most of the 'democrats' of the world as an example of Realpolitik?

Unlikely. Its just that the international community can't really do anything about it, and it doesn't threaten their own interests. Its not as if Israel/Palestine were awash with oil, Uranium or any other precious substance, that would cover the cost of any real intervention.

Simply put there's no reason for them to commit anything beyond rhetoric.

Catsmokinpot · 10-07-2006 3:07pm

kaiser1 wrote:

Hey guys

Iv been listening to reps. on the radio from different world organisations calling for Isreal to show restraint in thier military actions into Gaza.

Now correct me if im wrong but didnt the Palestinian people vote the terrorist group Hamas into goverment,so shouldnt they take some of the responsibility for the actions of thier Goverment??

I think Isreal is dead right in thier choice of dealing with the kidnapping of one of thier soldiers.With fanatical groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad there is no reasoning with them.....there for Isreal needs to show that when you mess with them the consequences are going to be devestating. Its this show of force and a strong will by Isreal thats needed.I have alot of respect for Isreal...they know thier own mind and is a country that will not under any circumstances be intimidated or terrorised into accecpting suituations that will endanger its people and its standard of living.

do you understand that the reason groups like Hamas and islamic Jihad exist is because israel has been suppressing the islamic population in the gaza strip and the west bank since they moved in back at the end of ww2?

in answer israel isnt right in doing what its doing, they bombed the **** out of gaza yet again and this time for what? a soldier... thats a bit of a flimsey excuse. and hamas has already said they haven't taken the soldier, so what is gonna happen?

palestinians arent right in what they are doing, but would you just sit there and do nothing when your family is being killed and your home taken?

10-07-2006 3:24pm

Catsmokinpot wrote:

palestinians arent right in what they are doing, but would you just sit there and do nothing when your family is being killed and your home taken?

Israeli's arent right in what they are doing, but would you just sit there and do nothing when your family is being killed, and surrounded by enemies who desire to drive you out of your homes?

It works both ways. You saying that such & such isn't right, and then giving justification for what they're doing..... It applies to both Palestinians and Israeli's, although you focus on just Palestinians.

I understand though. Its very hard to look at this conflict without having some bias. I have my own leanings towards Israel in this matter.

do you understand that the reason groups like Hamas and islamic Jihad exist is because israel has been suppressing the islamic population in the gaza strip and the west bank since they moved in back at the end of ww2?

I thought Hamas were formed in 1988? And Islamic Jihad has existed since the Arab nations refused to acknowledge the UN creation of Israel (they also refused to peacefully renogiate the decision to create Israel/Palestine, resorting to military intervention instead).

The Saint · 10-07-2006 3:49pm

Deleted User wrote:

Israeli's arent right in what they are doing, but would you just sit there and do nothing when your family is being killed, and surrounded by enemies who desire to drive you out of your homes?

It works both ways. You saying that such & such isn't right, and then giving justification for what they're doing..... It applies to both Palestinians and Israeli's, although you focus on just Palestinians.

I understand though. Its very hard to look at this conflict without having some bias. I have my own leanings towards Israel in this matter.

I thought Hamas were formed in 1988? And Islamic Jihad has existed since the Arab nations refused to acknowledge the UN creation of Israel (they also refused to peacefully renogiate the decision to create Israel/Palestine, resorting to military intervention instead).

You're right in stating that both the Palestinians and the Israelis can use rhetoric to justify actions taken but I think it's disngenuous to ignore facts on the ground. While a minority of Palestinians support killing Israelis and driving them from their homes the fact is that the numbers of Israelis killed is minimal compared with Palestinians killed. There have been no Israelis driven from their homes by Palestinians but there have been many Palestinians driven from their homes by the Israelis. Population transfer has been a policy of the Israeli government since partition and unlike the Palestinians it has the ability to do so and has done so. So while some Palestinians would like to take such actions the Israelis actually do it.

I agree that you have to look at both perspectives but I find a reasonable way to analyse the sitiuation is through the prism of international law which Israel is overwhelmingly in violation of.

As for Arab states and Palestinians not negotiating the conditions of their disenfranchisement, what the hell would you expect them to do? No one would partake in negotiations that gave 55% of your land to immigrants. Why would people want to legitimise their dispossession by negotiating it?

Catsmokinpot · 10-07-2006 4:01pm

Deleted User wrote:

Israeli's arent right in what they are doing, but would you just sit there and do nothing when your family is being killed, and surrounded by enemies who desire to drive you out of your homes?

It works both ways. You saying that such & such isn't right, and then giving justification for what they're doing..... It applies to both Palestinians and Israeli's, although you focus on just Palestinians.

I understand though. Its very hard to look at this conflict without having some bias. I have my own leanings towards Israel in this matter.

this conflict has been going on since the israelis formed israel, they hadn't called israel home since biblical times. what right did they think they had being there? they were no longer from there, just as americans aren't english, german or irish anymore.

they came and settled then called for a jewish state.

you cant just take someone's land, and tell them they cant live there anymore.. how immoral is that?

if they were going to set up a jewish state they should have done so in germany.

i wouldn't compare hundreds of suicide bombers who see no other way out other than blowing themselves up - to a fully equipped army, armoured bulldozers knocking down houses, knocking down people, bombing powerstations & watersupplies cutting off trade routes (in essence starving the people)

Deleted User wrote:

I thought Hamas were formed in 1988? And Islamic Jihad has existed since the Arab nations refused to acknowledge the UN creation of Israel (they also refused to peacefully renogiate the decision to create Israel/Palestine, resorting to military intervention instead).

and why was hamas formed? and why was islamic jihad formed? i didnt say when were they formed i said why and the why was because israel was given land that didnt belong to them in the first place...... and then they suppressed a whole nation of people trying to get them out of that land.

10-07-2006 4:23pm

The Saint wrote:

You're right in stating that both the Palestinians and the Israelis can use rhetoric to justify actions taken but I think it's disngenuous to ignore facts on the ground.

People choose which "facts" to use. The problem with this conflict is that there's so much propoganda that its next to impossible to find actual facts rather than biased information. In another thread a while back, I tried to find out accurate composition of military forces on all sides for the 6 day war, and couldn't find anything definite. (no arab source websites or Israeli sites agreed, and I couldn't find much "neutral" info)

While a minority of Palestinians support killing Israelis and driving them from their homes the fact is that the numbers of Israelis killed is minimal compared with Palestinians killed. There have been no Israelis driven from their homes by Palestinians but there have been many Palestinians driven from their homes by the Israelis. Population transfer has been a policy of the Israeli government since partition and unlike the Palestinians it has the ability to do so and has done so. So while some Palestinians would like to take such actions the Israelis actually do it.

no. Israel is successful in doing so. If palestinians had the ability they'd do the same. Just as the other Arab nations would do the same if they could. They tried in the past and failed. The only difference is that Israel actually does it, and for the most part gets away with it. Nothing that the Arab leaders in Palestine or the other nations have suggested that they would act any differently should the roles had been reversed.

I agree that you have to look at both perspectives but I find a reasonable way to analyse the sitiuation is through the prism of international law which Israel is overwhelmingly in violation of.

I agree that Israel is in violaion of international law. However I don't think its a reasonable way to analyse the situation since Palestine isn't and can't be held accountable for its own actions. There's no balance. No equality. Palestine gets away scot free, and Israel is accountable for everything. Even now, with Hamas in power, its Israel thats still held accountable with palestine's actions being mostly ignored.

As for Arab states and Palestinians not negotiating the conditions of their disenfranchisement, what the hell would you expect them to do? No one would partake in negotiations that gave 55% of your land to immigrants. Why would people want to legitimise their dispossession by negociating it?

So you think the constant deaths are acceptable? The keeping of a situation which prevents the stabilising of their economy? The prevention of a peaceful environment whereby medicine, adequate food, education, etc could be achieved?

Nah. Doesn't cut it. Compared to the last 50 years, Palestine is currently going through its best opportunity for peace. To get on with their lives. Not once in the last 50 years, have they come close to getting all the land they claim as their. Even the land area of Resolution 242 is beyond their present capabilities through violence. So all they're doing is killing for the sake of it.

Both Egypt & Sinai achieved peace with Israel and regained previously conquered land. At least with peace, Palestinians would possibly gain the boundaries of 242 (through the negotiating table), which is alot better than their current situation.

10-07-2006 5:10pm

Catsmokinpot wrote:

this conflict has been going on since the israelis formed israel, they hadn't called israel home since biblical times. what right did they think they had being there? they were no longer from there, just as americans aren't english, german or irish anymore.

Actually the UN created the "independent" states of both Israel & Palestine. Israel didn't suddenly appear on its own. How come the Arabs don't attack the UN rather than Israeli's for that action? :rolleyes: Regardless, I always find it interesting that people tend to ignore that there was no independent nation called Palestine prior to the UN proposal.... (Palestine was British territory, and before that part of the Ottoman empire. It didn't have indpendence at any time during those periods)

The "conflict" has been going on since Jewish & Arab resistance groups started terrorising each others populations in the 30's, while they were still under British rule.

you cant just take someone's land, and tell them they cant live there anymore.. how immoral is that?

Immoral? Might is right. The world was shaped this way. It's only since WW2 that world opinion (at least, western opinion) has changed to regard conquest of land as being wrong (Prior to this time, there was plenty of territory grabbing). Morals are dependent on the culture and religion you were influenced most by. My own set of morals are vastly different to some of my friends, just as their morals are vastly different to some friends of mine from Japan. Morals are also dependent on how secure you currently are.

if they were going to set up a jewish state they should have done so in germany.

But they didn't. Or rather the UN didn't. They should have killed Hitler in WW1. Hindsight is a lovely viewpoint to consider things.

i wouldn't compare hundreds of suicide bombers who see no other way out other than blowing themselves up - to a fully equipped army, armoured bulldozers knocking down houses, knocking down people, bombing powerstations & watersupplies cutting off trade routes (in essence starving the people)

Fine, you wouldn't. I would though. The intention by both groups is the same. The rest are just tools. (Each of the examples you use could be implemented using the weapons available to resistance/terrorist groups)

and why was hamas formed? and why was islamic jihad formed? i didnt say when were they formed i said why and the why was because israel was given land that didnt belong to them in the first place...... and then they suppressed a whole nation of people trying to get them out of that land.

Hamas? To kill Israeli's. To fight an unending war of revenge. And they're doing just that at the expense of their own people.

islamic jihad? Maybe I misunderstood, but islamic jihad is a type of warfare. A religious war. A war between Islam and Jewism. A convenient way to enroll common people into the army to fight better than, had they been conscripted. Bit like the Christian Church did with the Crusades. Kill one Muslim and your place in Heaven is assured. So, kill one Jew, and your place in Heaven is assured.

Sorry, you refered to WW2, and Hamas came about 40 years later. And suppression? Yes. They did. No argument there. Did Palestinians offer Israel any alternative to war? Nope. But then that doesn't really matter.

The Saint · 10-07-2006 5:16pm

Deleted User wrote:

People choose which "facts" to use. The problem with this conflict is that there's so much propoganda that its next to impossible to find actual facts rather than biased information. In another thread a while back, I tried to find out accurate composition of military forces on all sides for the 6 day war, and couldn't find anything definite. (no arab source websites or Israeli sites agreed, and I couldn't find much "neutral" info).

While some facts are controversial I prefer to look at figures that are non-controversial such as statistics of people killed, land appropriated, settlements built, etc.

Deleted User wrote:

no. Israel is successful in doing so. If palestinians had the ability they'd do the same. Just as the other Arab nations would do the same if they could. They tried in the past and failed. The only difference is that Israel actually does it, and for the most part gets away with it. Nothing that the Arab leaders in Palestine or the other nations have suggested that they would act any differently should the roles had been reversed.

Maybe. It pure speculation so we'll never know given the total asymmetry of the means of violence. The Palestinians would never be in a position to carry out such acts on Israels. All neighbouring states have shown their willingness for peace with Israel but Israel doesn't seem terribly interested.

Deleted User wrote:

I agree that Israel is in violaion of international law. However I don't think its a reasonable way to analyse the situation since Palestine isn't and can't be held accountable for its own actions. There's no balance. No equality. Palestine gets away scot free, and Israel is accountable for everything. Even now, with Hamas in power, its Israel thats still held accountable with palestine's actions being mostly ignored.

Palestine is being held responsible for its actions. The EU and the US have stopped aid going to the PA. Israel also makes sure there are repercussions for its actions as we can see now. Israel doesn't take any notice of international law and objections from other governments and is not affected by them. No tangiable actions have been taken againt Israel by anyone while the Palestinians have seen and continue to see repercussions for their actions, especially the civilian population.

Deleted User wrote:

So you think the constant deaths are acceptable? The keeping of a situation which prevents the stabilising of their economy? The prevention of a peaceful environment whereby medicine, adequate food, education, etc could be achieved?

Um, where did you get the idea that if the Palestinians stopped terrorism the things would be rosey? During the peace negociations at Camp David and Tabba Israeli settlement expansion continued at an accellerated rate. Is silent expansionism acceptable? Palestinians still need a passport to travel around the territories. Not very good for economic development. Israel controls entry and exit to the territories and stops aid from entering as we can see them doing now. The fact is that when violence stopped there wasn't very much improvement in the Palestinians situation. And no I don't think deaths are acceptable on either side.

Deleted User wrote:

Nah. Doesn't cut it. Compared to the last 50 years, Palestine is currently going through its best opportunity for peace. To get on with their lives. Not once in the last 50 years, have they come close to getting all the land they claim as their. Even the land area of Resolution 242 is beyond their present capabilities through violence. So all they're doing is killing for the sake of it.

Um, what were they offered in Camp David and Taba? Certainly nowhere near what they are entitled to under international law as well as a South African style bantustan state. I'm not saying that they should use terrorism, however resistance is perfectly legitimate, but they were hardly doing well when there was peace as I have already stated above. It like their damned if they do and damned if they don't. They get punished no matter what they do.

Deleted User wrote:

Both Egypt & Sinai achieved peace with Israel and regained previously conquered land. At least with peace, Palestinians would possibly gain the boundaries of 242 (through the negotiating table), which is alot better than their current situation.

A peace agreement between Israel and Egypt came about as it was realised that Egypt was the most powerful Arab army in the Middle East and it was better to have them on side. Sadat had offered peace to Israel before Yom Kippur in 1973 which was rejected.

Israel will never accept a return to the 242 borders. Even at Taba Barak's most generous offer, which he pulled for domestic political purposes, didn't come near to all land returned. It was accepeted as a basis for negotiations by Arafat.

10-07-2006 5:41pm

While some facts are controversial I prefer to look at figures that are non-controversial such as statistics of people killed, land appropriated, settlements built, etc.

Would you accept statistics from the IDF? the CIA factbook? Arab militant sites? the Media? Or is it the UN releases that you take such info from?

Maybe. It pure speculation so we'll never know given the total asymmetry of the means of violence. The Palestinians would never be in a position to carry out such acts on Israels. All neighbouring states have shown their willingness for peace with Israel but Israel doesn't seem terribly interested.

really? How do you figure that? Israel only really has current problems with Palestinians. With both Egypt & Sinai they have peaceful co-existance with.

And the Palestinians would never have had that position to do the same? Why? If the Arab forces had won during the Israeli War of Independence, it would have been the Israelis that would be treated as second class citizens (those that survived the Jihad).

Palestine is being held responsible for its actions. The EU and the US have stopped aid going to the PA. Israel also makes sure there are repercussions for its actions as we can see now. Israel doesn't take any notice of international law and objections from other governments and is not affected by them. No tangiable actions have been taken againt Israel by anyone while the Palestinians have seen and continue to see repercussions for their actions, especially the civilian population.

Its only since Hamas came to power that the EU has started rejecting sympathy towards Palestine. Prior to this, it was rare that they ruled heavily against them.

And Israel has escaped punishment mostly due to US involvement in the UN. What would you consider appropiate punishment and for which actions?

Um, where did you get the idea that if the Palestinians stopped terrorism the things would be rosey?

I never said it would. However, answer me this. What has the last 50 years of resistance actually achieved?

During the peace negociations at Camp David and Tabba Israeli settlement expansion continued at an accellerated rate. Is silent expansionism acceptable? Palestinians still need a passport to travel around the territories. Not very good for economic development. Israel controls entry and exit to the territories and stops aid from entering as we can see them doing now.

And Hamas has not withdrawn its pledge for war. Israel is still being attacked by militant forces. Why would they lower their security measures, when the Palestinians won't stop their war?

I've already said the resettlements are wrong... And its still ongoing. Can't say I see the rationale in continuing the resettlement.

The fact is that when violence stopped there wasn't very much improvement in the Palestinians situation. And no I don't think deaths are acceptable on either side.

really? Apart from the resettlements I thought the daily lives of the civilians increased quite a bit, without having fighting in the streets.

Um, what were they offered in Camp David and Taba? Certainly nowhere near what they are entitled to under international law as well as a South African style bantustan state. I'm not saying that they should use terrorism, however resistance is perfectly legitimate, but they were hardly doing well when there was peace as I have already stated above. It like their damned if they do and damned if they don't. They get punished no matter what they do.

The violence hasn't worked. Do you really think that will change? Does it not make sense that negotiated peace is the only option? Are they not better off when Israeli forces withdrew last year, as opposed to two-three years ago with fighting in the streets? was that not an improvement? What positive change does their violence bring, since it just means more & more reprecussions from the IDF?

A peace agreement between Israel and Egypt came about as it was realised that Egypt was the most powerful Arab army in the Middle East and it was better to have them on side. Sadat had offered peace to Israel before Yom Kippur in 1973 which was rejected.

It doesn't matter. The peace was made. Egypt had already been at war with israel once, and knew that peace was the better option. That peace still holds.

Israel will never accept a return to the 242 borders. Even at Taba Barak's most generous offer, which he pulled for domestic political purposes, didn't come near to all land returned. It was accepeted as a basis for negotiations by Arafat.

heh. I'd like to see how much peace for a year, without any attacks by Palestinian miliants or the IDF, would influence Israel towards a real settlemet, and withdrawal of forces.......... but then it's unlikely to happen, since a rocket attack or such will occur, and Israel will send in the tanks again & again.

The Saint · 10-07-2006 6:26pm

Deleted User wrote:

Would you accept statistics from the IDF? the CIA factbook? Arab militant sites? the Media? Or is it the UN releases that you take such info from?

I find the human rights sites especially BTselem quite good for statistics. Quite uncontraversial and undisputed as far as I can gather but there are plenty of places to get them. The statistics I mentioned are generally quite uniform across sources.

Deleted User wrote:

really? How do you figure that? Israel only really has current problems with Palestinians. With both Egypt & Sinai they have peaceful co-existance with.

Yes Israel has peaceful relations with Egypt as well as Jordan (I'm not sure why you're mentioning the Sinai as it is part of Egypt. However Israel also has territorial disputes with Syria over the Golan Heights and Lebanon over the Sheba farms (which the UN says actually belong to Syria). A resolution was put forward by Saudi Arabia at an Arab summit in 2002 calling for full recognition for full peace. It was ignored.

Deleted User wrote:

And the Palestinians would never have had that position to do the same? Why? If the Arab forces had won during the Israeli War of Independence, it would have been the Israelis that would be treated as second class citizens (those that survived the Jihad).

To quoten you: But they didn't. Hindsight is a lovely viewpoint to consider things.

Deleted User wrote:

Its only since Hamas came to power that the EU has started rejecting sympathy towards Palestine. Prior to this, it was rare that they ruled heavily against them.

The EU and UN have regularly condemned Palestinian terror. What punative measures have ever been taken against Israel?

Deleted User wrote:

And Israel has escaped punishment mostly due to US involvement in the UN. What would you consider appropiate punishment and for which actions?.

Yes, one of the most persistent violator of international law has a get out of jail free card. How sweet is that? Do you consider this a good thing? I'd think increased duties on imports corresponding to damage caused to civilian infrastructure as well as land confiscated and settlements built. The US should cut all aid to Israel (but thats not going to happen) and possible limited santions for continuing violations of international law. Diplomatic sanctions should also be taken. The same goes for Palestine if terror continues.

Deleted User wrote:

I never said it would. However, answer me this. What has the last 50 years of resistance actually achieved?

It's impossible to know. Perhaps nothing, perhaps stopping the complete annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the ethnic cleansing of the terrirories. As I said, it's impossible to know and specualtion would be futile.

Deleted User wrote:

And Hamas has not withdrawn its pledge for war. Israel is still being attacked by militant forces. Why would they lower their security measures, when the Palestinians won't stop their war?

And Isreal has not withdrawn it's statement of rights to the West Bank and Golan Heights in violation of international law. Hamas should reject violence but it is perfectly entitled to not recognise Israel as it does not know what to recognise given that it seems Israels borders are not static. Israel also doesn't recognise Palestine. They should maybe recognise Israel within the 1967 borders, which it seemed it was implicitly going to do in a statement a few weeks ago before this debacle started.

Deleted User wrote:

I've already said the resettlements are wrong... And its still ongoing. Can't say I see the rationale in continuing the resettlement.

Expansion and settlement has always been an explicit and domonstrable policy of successive Israeli governments since even before independence.

Deleted User wrote:

really? Apart from the resettlements I thought the daily lives of the civilians increased quite a bit, without having fighting in the streets.

So you think South African style bantustans and continuing disenfranchisement and settlement is a good quality of life?

Deleted User wrote:

The violence hasn't worked. Do you really think that will change? Does it not make sense that negotiated peace is the only option? Are they not better off when Israeli forces withdrew last year, as opposed to two-three years ago with fighting in the streets? was that not an improvement? What positive change does their violence bring, since it just means more & more reprecussions from the IDF?

I've said before that terrorism against civilians is wrong but resistance is legitimate. While the violence hasn't worked neither has non-violence. Negotiations have not worked.

Deleted User wrote:

[heh. I'd like to see how much peace for a year, without any attacks by Palestinian miliants or the IDF, would influence Israel towards a real settlemet, and withdrawal of forces.......... but then it's unlikely to happen, since a rocket attack or such will occur, and Israel will send in the tanks again & again.

There was peace for quite a while during the Camp David and Taba negociations and they still got bugger all out of it. During that time settlement expasion increased. I'd also advise you to look at the statistics for people killed by the Qassam rockets over the last five years. It somewhere around eight. Then take a look at the statistics of civilians killed by Israeli air strikes in the same period.This whole nonsense about Israel under threat from this new menace coming in from the sky is just a load of rubbish. It's just another excuse. Also, Hamas were on ceasefire while Israel was still carrying out political assasinations with high levels of 'collatoral damage'.

Sand · 10-07-2006 6:47pm

Sending a missile into a crowded city/area/house is just as disgusting as smashing a face in with a rock, yet you seem to think it is not!

Like I said before Glasgo, either I dont have to, or its a waste of my time.

And it probably is anyway given your endorsement and support of the men who carry out "military" operations like kidnapping mens families to force them to drive suicide bombs to checkpoints. Real patriots, right Glasgo?

New_Departure06 · 10-07-2006 7:13pm

Now correct me if im wrong but didnt the Palestinian people vote the terrorist group Hamas into goverment,so shouldnt they take some of the responsibility for the actions of thier Goverment??

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. They do with suicide bombings what Israel does with Abrams tanks and F16s. Not so different really.

I think Isreal is dead right in thier choice of dealing with the kidnapping of one of thier soldiers.With fanatical groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad there is no reasoning with them.....there for Isreal needs to show that when you mess with them the consequences are going to be devestating. Its this show of force and a strong will by Isreal thats needed.I have alot of respect for Isreal...they know thier own mind and is a country that will not under any circumstances be intimidated or terrorised into accecpting suituations that will endanger its people and its standard of living.

Has Israel even tried this option? A movement with 44% support is better within the tent of a peace-deal that outside if the deal (when it happens) is to survive. Since 2000 there has been NO negotiations. In the absence of negotiation you have conflict. So talk and stop this self-righteous claptrap.

I don't accept the neocon argument that you "cannot negotiate with terrorists". That was done in NI successfully and the Spanish govt is about to talk to ETA. I think separatist terrorism is different from other forms in motivation especially as the former has negotiable aims and is therefore ultimately more amenable to compromise.

Sesshoumaru · 11-07-2006 12:56am

Israel is absolutely right to hit these Islamic terrorists hard. They should be using more military force to bring these Islamic terrorists to their knees. If these bearded fanatics had the upper hand militarily they wouldn't hesitate to send every Jew in Israel to the gas chamber. These people are motivated by their holy book to wage war against the Jews. How can you negotiate with them?

sceptre · 11-07-2006 1:12am

Sesshoumaru wrote:

If these bearded fanatics had the upper hand militarily they wouldn't hesitate to send every Jew in Israel to the gas chamber.

Until you show us all that that isn't something you just made up, that's something you just made up.

New_Departure06 · 11-07-2006 1:19am

Sesshoumaru wrote:

Israel is absolutely right to hit these Islamic terrorists hard. They should be using more military force to bring these Islamic terrorists to their knees. If these bearded fanatics had the upper hand militarily they wouldn't hesitate to send every Jew in Israel to the gas chamber. These people are motivated by their holy book to wage war against the Jews. How can you negotiate with them?

I recall that Israel's claim to this land also derives from a "Holy Book" so maybe they are not so different from Hamas after all. This has less to do with Islam that an illegal an brutal colonial occupation by the most loathed nation on earth, supported by the Christian and Jewish Zionists in the US. The IDF has carried out terrorist acts like the Jenin massacre and destroying civilian lives and infrastructure.

Manic Moran · 11-07-2006 1:34am

I do wish people would stop saying that Israel has Abrams tanks...

NTM

11-07-2006 8:36am

The Saint wrote:

Yes Israel has peaceful relations with Egypt as well as Jordan (I'm not sure why you're mentioning the Sinai as it is part of Egypt. However Israel also has territorial disputes with Syria over the Golan Heights and Lebanon over the Sheba farms (which the UN says actually belong to Syria). A resolution was put forward by Saudi Arabia at an Arab summit in 2002 calling for full recognition for full peace. It was ignored.

Terrirorial disputes? Just about every nation has some form of territorial dispute with their neighbours. But I would expect that there would be unfinished business from the previous war between their countries, however, there IS peace. They're not sending suicide bombers or punitive strikes.

The EU and UN have regularly condemned Palestinian terror. What punative measures have ever been taken against Israel?

Condemned. Yes. Just like they've done with israeli terror. Condemnation doesn't do all that much unless its backed up. No punative measures have been taken against either Palestine or Israel....

Yes, one of the most persistent violator of international law has a get out of jail free card. How sweet is that? Do you consider this a good thing? I'd think increased duties on imports corresponding to damage caused to civilian infrastructure as well as land confiscated and settlements built. The US should cut all aid to Israel (but thats not going to happen) and possible limited santions for continuing violations of international law. Diplomatic sanctions should also be taken. The same goes for Palestine if terror continues.

Totally agree.

It's impossible to know. Perhaps nothing, perhaps stopping the complete annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the ethnic cleansing of the terrirories. As I said, it's impossible to know and specualtion would be futile.

No. It is possible to judge. The goal was their independence, and the withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian borders (although it was more than that, but we conveniently forget that they have their own desires of cleansing the M.East.) From the last 50 years of aggression, they haven't forced Israel to withdraw, but have increased the level of retalitation that the IDF sends. Yup. thats progress.

And Isreal has not withdrawn it's statement of rights to the West Bank and Golan Heights in violation of international law. Hamas should reject violence but it is perfectly entitled to not recognise Israel as it does not know what to recognise given that it seems Israels borders are not static. Israel also doesn't recognise Palestine. They should maybe recognise Israel within the 1967 borders, which it seemed it was implicitly going to do in a statement a few weeks ago before this debacle started.

I'd be happy with a rejection of their war footing. I don't mind them not recognising Israel or vice Versa. Other than that I agree with you.

Expansion and settlement has always been an explicit and domonstrable policy of successive Israeli governments since even before independence.

There was no Israeli Government before independence. :rolleyes:

So you think South African style bantustans and continuing disenfranchisement and settlement is a good quality of life?

Nope, but then the Palestinians must enjoy it if they wish to provide the Israeli's the very reason to keep them that way. There are many Israeli's that would be willing to allow Palestinians free control of their country, if they stopped the violence. All that prevents many Israeli's from opposing their government is the continous attacks by Hamas and other factions. The carror is better than the stick sometimes.

I've said before that terrorism against civilians is wrong but resistance is legitimate. While the violence hasn't worked neither has non-violence. Negotiations have not worked.

Really? When have they really been persisted? I agree both sides have interrupted such talks on each occasion, but the simple fact is that Palestine will not gain independence and a better life through the very violence they seem to worship. Same stands for Israel. Israel will never have peace as long as they resort to the military for every response.

There was peace for quite a while during the Camp David and Taba negociations and they still got bugger all out of it. During that time settlement expasion increased. I'd also advise you to look at the statistics for people killed by the Qassam rockets over the last five years. It somewhere around eight. Then take a look at the statistics of civilians killed by Israeli air strikes in the same period.This whole nonsense about Israel under threat from this new menace coming in from the sky is just a load of rubbish. It's just another excuse. Also, Hamas were on ceasefire while Israel was still carrying out political assasinations with high levels of 'collatoral damage'.

However how many unsuccessful rocket attacks were made during that period? Hopw many were fired that didn't hit anything? This isn't solely about the casualties actually caused but the casulaties that were intended to be caused. Hamas and the other groups launch unsuccessful attacks, which seem to be ignored simply because nobody died. they're still attacks.

And I agree about the resettlements. And this menacing "threat" from the sky.

Sesshoumaru · 11-07-2006 11:04am

New_Departure06 wrote:

I recall that Israel's claim to this land also derives from a "Holy Book" so maybe they are not so different from Hamas after all. This has less to do with Islam that an illegal an brutal colonial occupation by the most loathed nation on earth, supported by the Christian and Jewish Zionists in the US. The IDF has carried out terrorist acts like the Jenin massacre and destroying civilian lives and infrastructure.

They are only loathed by the Muslims. Opinion polls in Europe show growing support for Israel

Link 1
Link 2

TBH I don't care how the state of Israel came into existance. Lots of countries have come about through military conquest in the not so distant past. But right now Israel is recognised by the United Nations as a sovereign state and they have the right to defend themselves against these Islamic terrorists who make no distinction between targeting Israeli civilians or soldiers. The only thing these Islamic terrorists understand is force. If they blow up a bus full of women and children then they need to know that 10, 20 or 30 times that number of Islamic terrorists will die in retaliation.

oscarBravo · 11-07-2006 11:09am

Sesshoumaru wrote:

The only thing these... terrorists understand is force.

I just had a vivid flashback to 1980's London.

The Saint · 11-07-2006 11:12am

Deleted User wrote:

Terrirorial disputes? Just about every nation has some form of territorial dispute with their neighbours. But I would expect that there would be unfinished business from the previous war between their countries, however, there IS peace. They're not sending suicide bombers or punitive strikes.

But there is no official peace and Israel is not recognised by Syria. The territorial disputes are over land taken by Israel 1967 and therefore illegal. Israel however has attacked southern Lebanon on a number of occasions and just last week buzzed Assads holiday home with figher jets. Doesn't sound like normalised relations to me.

Deleted User wrote:

Condemned. Yes. Just like they've done with israeli terror. Condemnation doesn't do all that much unless its backed up. No punative measures have been taken against either Palestine or Israel....

But punative measures have now been taken against the Palestinians while none have ever been taken against Israel.

Deleted User wrote:

No. It is possible to judge. The goal was their independence, and the withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian borders (although it was more than that, but we conveniently forget that they have their own desires of cleansing the M.East.) From the last 50 years of aggression, they haven't forced Israel to withdraw, but have increased the level of retalitation that the IDF sends. Yup. thats progress.

You might like to judge but that doesn't really count for much. It's pure speculation unless you have a retrospective crystal ball. It is quite possible that many of the Jews would be deported to where they came from. We still can't know.

Deleted User wrote:

I'd be happy with a rejection of their war footing. I don't mind them not recognising Israel or vice Versa. Other than that I agree with you.

I think we're closer to agreement than we think. The only way to deal with this dispute is through the legal aspect. Both parties should stop the violence. Israel should stop building settlements and withdraw from existing settlements as required under international law. Israel should withdraw from all lands captured in 1967 as required under international lawand should gain full recognition and normalisation from it's neighbours.

Deleted User wrote:

There was no Israeli Government before independence. :rolleyes:

It was know since the Balfour declaration that a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine. The World Zionist Organisation, which was comprised of essentially a government in waiting, was pushing for this and was headed by David Ben Gurion the first prime minister of Israel. I can get you quotes from him and others stating the need to clear the land of Palestinians and expend its borders that were said before partition. Expansion and ethnic cleansing was policy long before partition.

Deleted User wrote:

Nope, but then the Palestinians must enjoy it if they wish to provide the Israeli's the very reason to keep them that way. There are many Israeli's that would be willing to allow Palestinians free control of their country, if they stopped the violence. All that prevents many Israeli's from opposing their government is the continous attacks by Hamas and other factions. The carror is better than the stick sometimes.:

There is no reason to suggest that Israels stance on movement and withdrawl would change even if there was peace as precedent shows. In Oslo aggreements there was bantustans with the West Bank carved up into non-contiguous segments by roads and Israeli checkpoints. Arafat rightfully rejected this. The Taba proposals were better but were pulled by Barak. Here's a pretty little animated piece of what was proposed.
http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

Deleted User wrote:

Really? When have they really been persisted? I agree both sides have interrupted such talks on each occasion, but the simple fact is that Palestine will not gain independence and a better life through the very violence they seem to worship. Same stands for Israel. Israel will never have peace as long as they resort to the military for every response.:

I agree but as I have shown the Palestinians have got nothing remotely what they are entitled to when they've negotiated and had ceasefires. You saying that they'll get what they want if they just stop fighting is just not true. Israel has stated that it will not give up any part of Jerusalem and will annex the largest West Bank settlements to Israel. Thats hardly the talk of peace. When there is peace settlement expansion continues and Palestinians still can't move freely around their territory.

Deleted User wrote:

However how many unsuccessful rocket attacks were made during that period? Hopw many were fired that didn't hit anything? This isn't solely about the casualties actually caused but the casulaties that were intended to be caused. Hamas and the other groups launch unsuccessful attacks, which seem to be ignored simply because nobody died. they're still attacks.

As I stated in a previous post:

Since the Israeli withdrawl from Gaza last year the IDF have fired 7000-9000 rockets into the Gaza strip. In the last 6 months alone more than 80 Palestinians have been killed by such attacks. On the other hand Palestinian militants have fired 1000 qassam rockets into Israel from the Gaza strip in the same timeframe. In the last five years 8 Israelis have been killed by qassam rockets.

Hamas weren't firing rockets. They were on ceasefire but they've restarted since Israels reinvasion of Gaza. I agree there is intent in the rockets but the fact is casualties are minimal and there is no control over the rockets while casualties from Israeli rockets are much higher. What do they think will happen in they drop one ton bombs or fire missiles into civilian population areas? It doesn't take a genius to work out that many civilians die. Even though this is well known it is still willfully done therefore making the IDF directly and intentionally responsible for many civilain deaths. I know you don't take much notice of the balance of casualties but I really find them quite interesting and telling. Gives an idea of the balance of violence used.

Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces: Occupied territories: 3453 Israel:60
Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians: Occupied territories: 41
Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians Occupied territories: 234 Israel: 463
Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians: Occupied Territories: 225Israel: 86

of these numbers:
Palestinian minors killed by Israeli security forces: Occupied territories: 699 Israel: 2
Israeli minors killed by Palestinians: Occupied territories: 39 Israel: 80
Palestinians killed during the course of a targeted killing: Occupied territories: 331
Palestinians who were the object of a targeted killing: Occupied territories: 204

fly_agaric · 11-07-2006 11:19am

Sesshoumaru wrote:

They are only loathed by the Muslims. Opinion polls in Europe show growing support for Israel

Link 1
Link 2

Why does Israel care what the treacherous and anti-semitic Europeans think?

I though so long as the US is going to bat or them (and this admin. is the most blatently partial to Israel yet) anyone else can go hang?

The Saint · 11-07-2006 11:26am

Sesshoumaru wrote:

They are only loathed by the Muslims. Opinion polls in Europe show growing support for Israel

Link 1
Link 2.

These polls depend on the situation at any given time and has more to do with lessening support for Hamas than growing support for Israel. I'd imagine if you took a poll now since the reinvasion of Gaza you'd get very different results. Shame for Israel that it has wasted some good PR.

Sesshoumaru wrote:

TBH I don't care how the state of Israel came into existance. Lots of countries have come about through military conquest in the not so distant past. But right now Israel is recognised by the United Nations as a sovereign state and they have the right to defend themselves against these Islamic terrorists who make no distinction between targeting Israeli civilians or soldiers. The only thing these Islamic terrorists understand is force. If they blow up a bus full of women and children then they need to know that 10, 20 or 30 times that number of Islamic terrorists will die in retaliation.

But it is relevant how Israel was created. You just can't ignore history and the context of the current situation. Yes Israel is recognised by the UN but so is there illegal occupation of Palestinian and Syrian land (the latter I'm less concerned about). I have no sympathy for terrorists who target women and children. I also have no sympathy for Israeli soldiers that kill civilians which is much higher proportion than Israeli civilians killed. Israel has a right to defend itself against terrorist attacks but Palestinians also have a right to resist occupation and Israeli attack.

Manic Moran · 11-07-2006 2:15pm

Oh, hell, deleted. Not worth arguing over.

NTM

[ETA: What was the Palestinian position on Egyptian/Jordanian control prior to 1967, out of interest? What was the Egyptian/Jordanian position on Palestinians?]

The Saint · 11-07-2006 4:17pm

Should be necessary bachground info. Couldn't be arsed looking for any more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Gaza_Strip_by_Egypt
As a note to this Egypt had offered peace to Israel before yom Kippur in 1973 but it was rejected by Israel. This deal offered nothing to the Palestinians. It was only in the Camp David accords Egypt put conditions on the agreement that Palestinians were to have a state on Gaza and the West Bank.

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

Sand · 11-07-2006 6:32pm

Until you show us all that that isn't something you just made up, that's something you just made up.

From the Hamas Covenant

The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharqad tree (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).

Sure, multiple interpretations might be taken but given the sort of rapid response to genocide that the UN and the international community has demonstrated in Rwanda, the Balkans and Darfur, let alone the Holocaust itself, the Israelis probably feel they cant take the chance Hamas are just joking around. The sort of hate that motivates Palestinian attacks on Israeli civillians doesnt reassure me as to their intentions if they ever reached a dominant position over Israel.

But it is relevant how Israel was created.

No its not. Seriously. Lets say you "prove" Israel shouldnt legally exist. So what? You think theyll go "My God, hes right - technically we shouldnt be here, oh this is so embarrassing!"

Manic Moran · 12-07-2006 2:12pm

To lose one soldier can look like an accident. To lose three looks like careleesness.

This isn't going to be over any time soon. I just hope these two turn out better than the American two captured last month: I saw the video on them yesterday. Disturbing.

Of interest was a news article I read yesterday saying that since Israel pulled out of Gaza in its entirity last year, there were about a hundred incidents. That's a lot of provocatio.

NTM

fly_agaric · 12-07-2006 10:17pm

Manic Moran wrote:

Of interest was a news article I read yesterday saying that since Israel pulled out of Gaza in its entirity last year, there were about a hundred incidents. That's a lot of provocatio.
NTM

It's hardly as though this is Israel's first response to provocation since the pull out.

They've being regularly targetting militants and Hamas leaders (and accidentally killing civilians too - but never mind, plenty more where they came from!) aswell as shutting the borders on and off.

From Sept. Last:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/24/AR2005092401390.html

Since Hamas got in, they are also pocketing Palestinian tax monies they are supposed to pay to the PA.

New_Departure06 · 13-07-2006 1:08am

Israel seems to think that the Holocaust gives them the right to do what they like. Anyone who criticises them can be villified as "anti-semitic" in order to given them a blank-cheque to do as they please. They effectively have a blank-cheque from the US. Unless this changes Israel will drag the world into WW3 in the name of creating a "Greater Israel/Israeli Reich".

HelterSkelter · 13-07-2006 1:33am

I think Israel are totally over the top with their reaction to the kidnapping of their soldiers. Here are a few news snippets showing the repercussions for ordinary Palestinians...

CBS News wrote:

A bomb dropped by an Israeli warplane destroyed the Palestinian Foreign Ministry building in Gaza City early Thursday ...Thirteen Palestinians, including six children, were wounded in neighboring buildings, mostly from flying glass, medics at the scene said. It was not known if anyone was in the ministry at the time

CBS News wrote:

On Wednesday,an Israeli aircraft dropped a quarter-ton bomb on a house in Gaza City where Hamas commanders were meeting. The killed a Palestinian family of nine — including seven children, reports CBS News chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan. "As bodies were pulled from the rubble here, you could feel the crowd, the anger of the crowd," Logan said in an exclusive report from the scene.

BBC News wrote:

At least 23 Palestinians died on Wednesday as Israeli troops occupied positions in central Gaza

RTE News wrote:

42 Palestinians and one Israeli soldier have been killed since Israel stepped up its incursion into the Gaza Strip last week

not exactly an eye for an eye is it?

New_Departure06 · 13-07-2006 2:05am

They are only loathed by the Muslims. Opinion polls in Europe show growing support for Israel

No they don't. That link you gave says:

There has not necessarily been "a rush to Israel" but there has been a "crash" in backing for the Palestinians, he noted.

This was on June 5th. Over a month ago. I think if a poll were taken now it would show strong hatred for Israel's sledgehammer-to-crack-nut approach. Israel is to blame for the growth of Islamic terrorism since 1948. It has sought colonies and treated Arab civilians in a Cromwellian way.

Israel/Lebanon/Hezbollah Crisis Thread was the "Is Israel right" thread

Comments