1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

Nodin · 03-01-2009 9:34pm

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Hamas was formed to wipe Israel off the map, how is Israel going to accommodate that?

Before they were 'locked out' moderates in Hamas were talking about talks, recognition, de facto recognition. The facts are there always seems to be some excuse for Israel not to deal with the factions.

They wouldnt deal with Arafat, and the building went on. They say they'll talk with Abbas, and the building still goes on. Should hamas dissappear and by replaced by some other more chirpy group, like Islamic Jihad, it'll be the same thing. Should Islamic jihad be replaced by the Mahatma Gandhi party, same thing. Theres no downside to not negotiating for Israel - no sanctions or penalties. Until that changes they have no reason to procede in a different manner.

Ciaran500 · 03-01-2009 9:35pm

Are you getting back to the reasonable force point? If Hamas are firing on Israel they can expect retaliation. Even if they aren't killing people with the rockets.

EDIT: Aimed at paster

Mr.Micro · 03-01-2009 9:40pm

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Are you getting back to the reasonable force point? If Hamas are firing on Israel they can expect retaliation. Even if they aren't killing people with the rockets.

What did Hamas think Israel was going to do, put its hands up and give up?

turgon · 03-01-2009 9:40pm

Darragh29 wrote: »

I find it hard to understand how a Jewish nation can behave like this towards another civilisation, it's only 50 odd years ago that their own people were tormented, have they extremely short memories or something???

Gas comment!! What would you have them do, show the other cheek?

IRISH RAIL · 03-01-2009 9:41pm

[QUOTE=Nodin;5845508

Theres a number of religous forums here for that kind of justification. Outside of them its really 'Argumentum ad Easter Bunny'.[/QUOTE]

you forgot the rest of my post where I said this isnt the thread

A Dub in Glasgo · 03-01-2009 9:42pm

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Are you getting back to the reasonable force point? If Hamas are firing on Israel they can expect retaliation. Even if they aren't killing people with the rockets.

Does that work the other way? If Israel are firing at Hamas, they can expect retaliation. If not, why not?

Sand · 03-01-2009 9:42pm

Is this a game of guess who or a quiz of some type, you must be in the wrong forum.

No, its the game where people shrug and ask "what do you expect?" when Side A commit terrorist atrocities against Side B, but acts outraged and questions the humanity of Side B should they respond and defend themselves.

Its a very, very, very old game. Somebody has to be *more* wrong. Somebody *has* to be.

I find it hard to understand how a Jewish nation can behave like this towards another civilisation, it's only 50 odd years ago that their own people were tormented, have they extremely short memories or something???

No, they probably have extremely long memories and will never again allow themselves to be at the mercy of an organisation like Hamas that dreams of wiping them out. If they are ruthless in defending themselves from groups like Hamas, it isnt a contradicition of their history, it is a product of it.

And again, in terms of scale, its one side that suffer the overwhelming number of deaths in that regard, over the last 4-5 decades.

Is there a grudgekeeping scorecard out there somewhere?

Are the Israelis owed 6 million germans?

Are the British owed an Irish victim for every person killed in an IRA bomb?

Christ almighty. A child is a child is a child.

IRISH RAIL · 03-01-2009 9:43pm

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Does that work the other way? If Israel are firing at Hamas, they can expect retaliation. If not, why not?

Hamas never stopped firing during the lull.

A Dub in Glasgo · 03-01-2009 9:46pm

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

Hamas never stopped firing during the lull.

Is the principle valid though?

Darragh29 · 03-01-2009 9:50pm

turgon wrote: »

Gas comment!! What would you have them do, show the other cheek?

Do what we had to do eventually, sit down and sort it out. The Israelis should be the people taking the lead on this, the Palistinian people are a displaced civilisation. This intranigence makes me sick, they are the cause of this conflict, it should fall to them to resolve it, instead of going on about how they will fight and fight and fight until they have demonstrated their will, they remind of the old Ian Paisley the way they behave.

IRISH RAIL · 03-01-2009 9:55pm

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Is the principle valid though?

Yes the principal is valid.
Although without going too far back there has to be a starting point most would agree this would be the "ceasefire" in june which was never adheared to by Hamas.
If anyone wishes to come up with another starting point (that doesnt include propoganda or just look at 1948) but an educated and well publisied timeframe when there was calm I have no problem in going from there.

Ciaran500 · 03-01-2009 9:57pm

Mr.Micro wrote: »

What did Hamas think Israel was going to do, put its hands up and give up?

I really don't know. I can only assume they have some sort of plan based on starting this war.

Darragh29 · 03-01-2009 9:59pm

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

or just look at 1948

Once we don't want to talk about the little inconvenience that is the source of the whole conflict. Look, you're talking to Irish people here, not gullible Americans who don't understand a thing other than what you tell them...

Manic Moran · 03-01-2009 10:13pm

And of course because the IDF says so, tis true.

The videos are on youtube, if you're interested. Here's one of a mosque/arms depot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCVr7MBhgj0

I'll believe it when I see it. They couldn't cope with the casualties

Well, they've started. Do you believe it now?

I refer people back to the post I made a few days ago. This is going to be very bloody, the Israelis are not going to make the same errors they made in Lebanon. There will be liberal use of artillery and tank fire.

it seems to me everyone is demanding that the israeli army play by the rules but Hamas and the PLO can do what they like

Despite the fact that a lot of the rules in war are daft and shouldn't be there to begin with, given the overmatch I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the Israelis to "play by the rules" just for the sake of perception. The problem is that I'm not sure most people truly understand what "the rules" really allow. Some people have weird notions of what they think the rules should be, without checking to see if they match with reality.

NTM

Mr.Micro · 03-01-2009 10:18pm

Well, they've started. Do you believe it now?

I refer people back to the post I made a few days ago. This is going to be very bloody, the Israelis are not going to make the same errors they made in Lebanon. There will be liberal use of artillery and tank fire.

It will be like a fox in a chicken coop, as Hamas have nowhere to run with the poor Palestinians in the middle.

marco murphy · 03-01-2009 10:21pm

Mr.Micro wrote: »

It will be like a fox in a chicken coop, as Hamas have nowhere to run with the poor Palestinians in the middle.

They have nowhere to run, and never had anywhere to run. That goes for all Palestinian people in Gaza. It's either fight, or die.

patser grey · 03-01-2009 10:30pm

QUOTE:.........In practice, Zionists did not accept the UN Partition Plan. Zionists seized areas beyond the proposed Jewish State and did not recognize the International Zone. Using force and terrorism months before May 1948, Jews seized land beyond the UN proposed borders. The UN Plan was used as a pretense for taking over most of Palestine.

NOTE: This is a critical fact often omitted when the history is presented and this leads to a very distorted view of what happened in 1948. The misleading story often told is that "Jews declared Israel and then they were attacked." The fact is from November 1947 to May 1948 the Zionists were already on the offensive and had already attacked Arabs. In the months before Israel was declared, the Zionists had driven 300,000 non-Jews off their land. In the months before Israel was declared, the Zionists had seized land beyond the proposed Jewish State. SEE Sources or this blog entry: Sources for the Israeli/Palestinian situation 1947-1948

Darragh29 · 03-01-2009 10:33pm

An incursion and an occupation by the way are two different things entirely. You won't see the IDF hanging around, if they are that hung up on casualites that they have to avenge one death with 150, they won't be able to stomach a land occupation.

And would you believe it, there is or course a little religious dimension to this whole episode!

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

patser grey · 03-01-2009 10:40pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

The videos are on youtube, if you're interested. Here's one of a mosque/arms depot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCVr7MBhgj0

NTM

Theres other video's also manic moron that dont come from IDF

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ISRAELI+ATROCITIES

this 1 in particular

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHA2NLzrcYE

Manic Moran · 03-01-2009 10:44pm

Why do people keep insisting on mis-spelling my name?

Those videos do not particularly seem to be on point when it comes to discussing the individual acts of the current military campaign. I've no problem accepting that the IDF occasionally carried out some pretty reprehensible acts. I've not seen them in the last week, though.

NTM

Mr.Micro · 03-01-2009 10:47pm

I for one do'nt buy into this video bombing where secondary explosions indicate arms,weapons or explosives. Its too much like a computer game and done with the same amount of feeling and detachment.

Nodin · 03-01-2009 11:04pm

Sand wrote: »

Its a very, very, very old game. Somebody has to be *more* wrong. Somebody *has* to be..

Usually the colonist, not the colonised.

Sand wrote: »

Christ almighty. A child is a child is a child.

PR wise they seem to have little value when brown, Arab, muslim etc.

Manic Moran wrote:

The videos are on youtube, if you're interested. Here's one of a mosque/arms depot.

Heres an interesting story about another video that was on you tube.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7809371.stm

As a general point, it should be noted that because of the lack of a reliable electricity supply, many places store fuel for generators and propane for cooking. Which isn't to say that every video of a secondary explosion isn't due to weapons, but the truth is that unless theres independent verification, all such claims should in fairness be treated as "suspect". That goes for the other lot too.

I'm reminded of Gulf 1 where masses of footage emerged showing guided weapons, when in fact 95% of what was dropped was unguided.

patser grey · 03-01-2009 11:17pm

A few pics, they say a photo says a thousand words.....
photo.aspx.jpg

Mr.Micro · 03-01-2009 11:18pm

I'm reminded of Gulf 1 where masses of footage emerged showing guided weapons, when in fact 95% of what was dropped was unguided.

That's the sum of it, the attacking force show a video when it suits its purpose. Take any of those with a pinch of salt. Its all done for the US public and the utube generation, who believe most of what they are told, and hell there's a video to prove it.

Nodin · 03-01-2009 11:28pm

Mr.Micro wrote: »

That's the sum of it, the attacking force show a video when it suits its purpose. Take any of those with a pinch of salt. Its all done for the US public and the utube generation, who believe most of what they are told, and hell there's a video to prove it.

Indeedy. Accepting such things from either side at the moment is rather naive.

bnt · 04-01-2009 12:02am

Since I'm here, not there, and we can't trust what we see on TV, I'm left with a distant view of events, and take a long-term view. None of the media seems to be making any connection to the events of summer 2007 - less than 18 months ago - never mind previous years.

Hamas appears incredibly short-sighted to me. They are Gaza's government, charged with protecting the people of Gaza from harm, so what do they do? Bang on about the destruction of Israel, fire rockets at civilian targets, and hide the rockets behind their own civillians. Israel retaliates, there are more civilian casualties - obviously, since Gaza is far more densely populated than neighbouring areas, and the Hamas leadership clearly know how to use that "human shield" effectively.

Plenty of outcry from the London Lefty Luvvies, but what is Hamas doing to limit civilian casualties? Or Egypt, or any other Arab state? Nothing, because civilian casualties are useful in the "hearts and minds" media battle, a lesson they learned in 2007 and previous years. If they cared about civilian casualties half as much as we do, they would not be provoking Israel at all. Instead, expect to see more pictures like those above, courtesy of Hamas' media operations.

Manic Moran · 04-01-2009 12:19am

Heres an interesting story about another video that was on you tube.

Yes, I saw that. I'd have made the same error. Now, just how much propane would have been required for such a massive explosion in the mosque?

I'm reminded of Gulf 1 where masses of footage emerged showing guided weapons, when in fact 95% of what was dropped was unguided.

Not to point out the bloody obvious, but that was almost two decades ago.

For the record, the GW 1 figure was 93.5% unguided. OIF saw that figure drop to 32%. It does not stretch the imagination to believe that the majority of munitions used in Gaza, being a somewhat urban area with few area targets, are guided.

NTM

Time Magazine · 04-01-2009 12:24am

turgon wrote: »

I like the way you turn up to this discussion and just disregard all that has been said about the nature of the conflict.

I'm sorry, would you rather I preface my primary input with a tangential 3,000 word essay outlining my views on the authority of United Nations resolutions versus the right of any individual to claim "ownership" of land? I think that's highly unnecessary to make my point.

It isnt a black and white war, anyone rational who thinks more than about three seconds about it can come to that conclusion.

I don't disagree; however any rational individual who thought about my post for more than three seconds should come to the conclusion that it was clearly not supporting either side, but rather questioning the method of argument proposed by many on the pro-Palestine side.

patser grey · 04-01-2009 12:30am

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, I saw that. I'd have made the same error. Now, just how much propane would have been required for such a massive explosion in the mosque?

Not to point out the bloody obvious, but that was almost two decades ago.

For the record, the GW 1 figure was 93.5% unguided. OIF saw that figure drop to 32%. It does not stretch the imagination to believe that the majority of munitions used in Gaza, being a somewhat urban area with few area targets, are guided.

NTM

Now, just how much propane would have been required for such a massive explosion in the mosque? = 1 cannister

Your 2nd point: I was watching sky news earlier, although heavily censored, showed cluster bombs being fired and dropped on a village, not much guidance there.....

Darragh29 · 04-01-2009 12:37am

patser grey wrote: »

Now, just how much propane would have been required for such a massive explosion in the mosque? = 1 cannister

Your 2nd point: I was watching sky news earlier, although heavily censored, showed cluster bombs being fired and dropped on a village, not much guidance there.....

Yeah saw that cluster bomb going off. I hope Iran get involved in this dispute, then we'll see the whole thing levelled up a bit and we'll see a REAL war!

1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

Comments