1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

wes

PeakOutput wrote: »

can you link me to that please?

Its not on there site, but I found an article from Haaretz:

Israeli-trained Gaza doctor loses three daughters and niece to IDF tank shell

---

The press conference at Tel Ha-Shomer became tense at one moment when an Israeli woman and mother of three IDF paratroopers began yelling at Abu al-Aish, demanding that he explain why there was weaponry in the house.

---

Click here for full article

Just came across this article:

British Jews attacked for pro-Gaza solidarity


By Emily Dugan
Sunday, 18 January 2009


British Jews have been attacked for expressing support for Palestinians suffering under Israeli military strikes in Gaza. Police confirmed yesterday that they have provided protection to a number of people believed to be victims of UK-based Zionist extremists angered by expressions of solidarity with Palestinians.

Click here for full article

Really sad to see these type of attacks, as well as the rise of Anti-Semitic attacks due to the atrocities in Gaze. There can be no excuse for such by violence by anyone.

jank

Israel has won the battle but lost the War. It cant win this war unless it wants to kill or expell 5+ million Palistinians from the West Bank and Gaza.

Israel has enforced itself again as top dog in the middle east after the debacle of the 2006 war.

But what has it achieved? Nothing. Expect the re-election of Olmert.

Hamas is still in power, still firing rockets. 600 dead militants? There wont be a shortage to replace those lost anytime soon judging the civilian deaths.
Gaza is occupied yet again. The borders are still closed. World opinion has hardend against them, Obama I doubt will be so aloof as Bush. Moderate potential allies in the middle east wont go near them now.

Tunnels used to smuggle arms into gaza destroyed. Well short term gain at best. Clutching at straws now! Isreal has done itself no favours at all.

So where to now?

I think this has done untold damage to Obama as Israel. He was supposed to be the new face of america yet stood by as Israel went to war. Ordinary muslims in Saudi Arabia, Iran etc will just see him now as just another US politician. OK you cant have more then one president but he was the president as bush is a lame duck. Dont be surprised if there is a good long reference to the Israel/Palistine siutation in the inaugural address. He should give the two sides a kick up the arse and make them sit down.

Threaten Israel to withdraw all miliary aid if it doesnt attempt a proper settlement to the issue. Threaten Hamas and Fatah that if they dont sort themselves out that Israel will be given a free hand to do what they want (Well i dont know, how can it get any worse for the palistinians, they are as low as they can go IMO, while Israel have alot more to lose which explains their fanatic defense of their actions. The more you have the more you have to lose.)

Also Iran has to be brought to the table at some stage. I expect that Obama has this issue number 2 on his list after the economy as what happens in gaza interfers with the whole fabric of the middle east and terrorism.

Manic Moran

A lot of the previous post was said after the 06 conflict, but none of it has come to pass. Indeed, it's gotten a lot quieter after the fact.

I doubt the Israelis did this for the laugh. They presumably feel that they are now in a better position than they were before, the question is why?

NTM

Macha

Manic Moran wrote: »

A lot of the previous post was said after the 06 conflict, but none of it has come to pass. Indeed, it's gotten a lot quieter after the fact.

I doubt the Israelis did this for the laugh. They presumably feel that they are now in a better position than they were before, the question is why?

NTM

I think they did this now to get one last major offensive in before Bush leaves office. Obama may not take a radically different stance than Bush but the details of his policy towards Israel are not known yet so - better do it now.

I think that the Israeli treatment of Palestine was incredibly similar to Bush's "War on Terror". I.e., exaggerate and oversimplify a legitimate, albeit relatively small, national security threat (Hamas) to create acceptance among the general population for neverending idological warfare (and conveniently only bomb the **** out of a country that can't really fight back).

The results of this policy for both countries has been similar: totally ineffective. They don't seem to be able to accept that the other side has legitmate grievances and the fact that they go about expressing them in a totally unacceptable way does not negate these grievances, nor does it justify their own inexcusable actions. All that is achieved is more injustices that deepen resentments on both sides and create more innocent deaths for future radicals to use in rationalising their extremist operations. Whatever the number of terrorists genuinely killed during this war (no doubt we'll never know the true number as Israel considers every single member of the Hamas and civil service a terrorist), dozens more will now be willing to take their place.

So I cannot accept that Israel genuinely thought that this war would promote future peace, nor do I think that it was a knee-jerk reaction. It was a war that only went ahead because it suited the political leaders: they had to be seen to do something and they made sure that the bombing was done from a distance so that Israeli casualties were kept low, despite knowing that Palestinian civilian casualites would be incredibly high. Shame on Israel and shame on Hamas.

slimjimmc

taconnol wrote: »

I think they did this now to get one last major offensive in before Bush leaves office. Obama may not take a radically different stance than Bush but the details of his policy towards Israel are not known yet so - better do it now.

This very theory was discussed on Sky News or BBC (can't remember which) soon after the invasion. They also predicted that a ceasefire or truce would be announced just before Barrak's inauguration.

jank

So I cannot accept that Israel genuinely thought that this war would promote future peace, nor do I think that it was a knee-jerk reaction. It was a war that only went ahead because it suited the political leaders: they had to be seen to do something and they made sure that the bombing was done from a distance so that Israeli casualties were kept low, despite knowing that Palestinian civilian casualites would be incredibly high. Shame on Israel and shame on Hamas.

I agree, why fight house to house when you have F16's at your disposel to rain down bombs.

As we have seen throughout history it is very easy to kill at a distance or issue orders in an office that may kill innocent people. One thing that remains clear is the life is very cheap in Gaza.

I doubt the Israelis did this for the laugh. They presumably feel that they are now in a better position than they were before, the question is why?

Yea, they might feel better and safer for now knowing much of Gaza is in ruins and Hamas has been severly wounded. Military operations by Hamas will be very difficult of course. But they are not dead. So what next? Endless fingerwaging?

I think bush's departure and the upcoming elections in Israel are the primary factors for this operation. The bonus is too that they may have laid some of the ghosts of 2006 to rest. Pity 1200 people had to die for us to learn that.

Serenity Now!

jank wrote: »

Yea, they might feel better and safer for now knowing much of Gaza is in ruins and Hamas has been severly wounded. Military operations by Hamas will be very difficult of course. But they are not dead. So what next? Endless fingerwaging?

No, more rocket firing into Israel actually. This morning is a clear indication that Hamas either do not know the meaning of the word 'ceasefire' or have no intention to stop firing. Or both come to think of it.

Nodin

concussion wrote: »

I'm not hiding behind anything, I'm merely pointing out the rough amounts of militants killed.

Hamas is a movement with an armed wing. Not everyobe in Hamas runs around with an AK. They targeted anyone involved with Hamas.

And, it appears, did the same kind of operation they used do when they occupied Gaza.

In testimony collected from residents of the village of Khuza'a by the Observer, it is claimed that Israeli soldiers entering the village:
• attempted to bulldoze houses with civilians inside;
• killed civilians trying to escape under the protection of white flags;
• opened fire on an ambulance attempting to reach the wounded;
• used indiscriminate force in a civilian area and fired white phosphorus shells.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/18/israel-war-crimes-gaza-conflict

There used be a series of books - "Sanders of the River" I think, in which Sanders would be there in Africa, ruling the natives. Now and again, "trouble" would start (natives getting the idea it was their country or some such nonsense), and Sanders would have to track down the Chief causing the problem, string him and his accomplices up and thus restore order. Setting an example, as it were.

jank

Serenity Now! wrote: »

No, more rocket firing into Israel actually. This morning is a clear indication that Hamas either do not know the meaning of the word 'ceasefire' or have no intention to stop firing. Or both come to think of it.

Well in fairness they have not signed up to the ceasefire that Israel claim to have signed up to. The IDF are still in Gaza.
Just because one stops shooting does not mean that a ceasefire is agreed upon by all parties but its a clever ploy by Israel.
Hamas stops firing rockets, Israel claim victory. Hamas continues to fire rockets, Israel can say to the world "We told you so!" Its very clever!
This doesnt mean that hamas is right to send rockets into Israel either by the way. Hamas is very good at playing this game too.

Anyway the fact that rockets are still being fired says alot about what the end game for Israel was for this attack? What was the objective and what has been achieved. Feck all as I mentioned a few posts up.

Macha

Serenity Now! wrote: »

No, more rocket firing into Israel actually. This morning is a clear indication that Hamas either do not know the meaning of the word 'ceasefire' or have no intention to stop firing. Or both come to think of it.

It is a disgrace and they must stop firing rockets immediately. However, the ceasefire is unilateral, meaning that Hamas have not signed up to it.

Israel are playing a blinder: start the war because they have "no choice" despite the fact that there is no military solution (only political gain to be had). Then declare a unilateral ceasefire that meets no terms of the other party and then strut self-righteously around the international arena condemning the other side.

Serenity Now!

taconnol wrote: »

It is a disgrace and they must stop firing rockets immediately. However, the ceasefire is unilateral, meaning that Hamas have not signed up to it.

Israel are playing a blinder: start the war because they have "no choice" despite the fact that there is no military solution (only political gain to be had). Then declare a unilateral ceasefire that meets no terms of the other party and then strut self-righteously around the international arena condemning the other side.

Whereas Hamas will stupidly continue firing into Israel from built-up areas of Gaza as they have done since the last ceasefire in 2008.
Not signed up to Geneva Conventions and allegedly not signed up to this ceasefire yet sanctimonious hypocrites in the name of 'peace' support them for doing so.

Ironic, eh Alanis? :rolleyes:

Macha

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Whereas Hamas will stupidly continue firing into Israel from built-up areas of Gaza as they have done since the last ceasefire in 2008.

*sigh* it has already been proven on here that rocket attacks went practically down to zero during the last ceasefire, even while Israel continued the blockade, which is effectively an act of war.

Serenity Now! wrote: »

Not signed up to Geneva Conventions and allegedly not signed up to this ceasefire yet sanctimonious hypocrites in the name of 'peace' support them for doing so.

So Hamas should just sign up to whatever scrap of a deal that Israel throws at them? An unconditional ceasefire? What nonsense.

I think as a supporter of Israel, you'd be best advised to leave all talk of the Geneva Convention out as Israel don't have a leg to stand on.

slimjimmc

Sounds a bit like a footballer (israel) using dirty tactics (ask UN) to score a goal, then when he does he unilaterally decides the game is over and grabs the trophy before the ref (international community) investigates his 'great skill' and declares a foul.

concussion

Nodin wrote: »

Hamas is a movement with an armed wing. Not everyobe in Hamas runs around with an AK. They targeted anyone involved with Hamas.

That's why I took Palestinian and UN sources and not IDF sources For reasons I've already stated the IDF sources are going to have a higher percentage of militants than Palestinan/UN ones.

slimjimmc

Hamas announce terms for ceasefire : withdraw within 1 week and end seige. On Sky News now

Serenity Now!

taconnol wrote: »

*sigh* it has already been proven on here that rocket attacks went practically down to zero during the last ceasefire, even while Israel continued the blockade, which is effectively an act of war

It most certainly has not been.
Even the spokesperson for the Irish branch of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign admitted that rocket fire had continued throughout and then said incredibly that Israel broke the ceasefire in november even though rockets were fired into Sderot in June after the final salvo from Gaza the day before the ceasefire went into effect!
A ceasefire means just as it sounds: To stop firing. Hamas didn't.

taconnol wrote: »

So Hamas should just sign up to whatever scrap of a deal that Israel throws at them? An unconditional ceasefire? What nonsense

The first priority of both sides should be to accomodate a ceasefire. Saying one side only wants war when the other keeps on bloody firing is nothing more than hypocrisy, something you lump with Israel.

taconnol wrote: »

I think as a supporter of Israel, you'd be best advised to leave all talk of the Geneva Convention out as Israel don't have a leg to stand on.

I have never once supported this latest stunt by the Israeli govt. I have said that Hamas stupidly keep giving them excuses however. This is NOT the same. People here bandy the Geneva Convention about but never apply or even express a desire for Hamas to sign up to it.
Read into that what you will.

Macha

Serenity Now! wrote: »

It most certainly has not been.
Even the spokesperson for the Irish branch of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign admitted that rocket fire had continued throughout and then said incredibly that Israel broke the ceasefire in november even though rockets were fired into Sderot in June after the final salvo from Gaza the day before the ceasefire went into effect!
A ceasefire means just as it sounds: To stop firing. Hamas didn't.

Israel's own data:

http://www.israelpolitik.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/gaza_fact_sheet.pdf

Yet again you ignore the fact that the siege of Gaza is an act of war.

Serenity Now! wrote: »

The first priority of both sides should be to accomodate a ceasefire. Saying one side only wants war when the other keeps on bloody firing is nothing more than hypocrisy, something you lump with Israel.

What is the point of a ceasefire if both sides do not agree to it? Israel did not offer an unconditional ceasefire so why should Hamas be accepted to unconditionally accept a ceasefire?

As it stands, Hamas have announced a one-week ceasefire.

Serenity Now! wrote: »

I have never once supported this latest stunt by the Israeli govt. I have said that Hamas stupidly keep giving them excuses however. This is NOT the same. People here bandy the Geneva Convention about but never apply or even express a desire for Hamas to sign up to it.
Read into that what you will.

My point was that the Geneva Convetion is contravened by both parties so using it against just one side is completely pointless.

Serenity Now!

taconnol wrote: »

Israel's own data:

http://www.israelpolitik.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/gaza_fact_sheet.pdf

Yet again you ignore the fact that the siege of Gaza is an act of war.

What are you on about? I have never once ignored that.
You have also just proven that rocket or mortar attacks took place after the ceasefire, by the way. Or is the new definition of ceasefire now "not that many"?

taconnol wrote: »

What is the point of a ceasefire if both sides do not agree to it? Israel did not offer an unconditional ceasefire so why should Hamas be accepted to unconditionally accept a ceasefire?

taconnol wrote: »

My point was that the Geneva Convetion is contravened by both parties so using it against just one side is completely pointless.

I wasn't. I was pointing out to those who keep blurting about the bloody Geneva Convention that they do just that ffs.

concussion

taconnol wrote: »

Yet again you ignore the fact that the siege of Gaza is an act of war.

Those figures show that the 6 months after the ceasefire show an increase in humanitarian aid of almost 90% - 17,000 truckloads during the 6 month ceasefire from 9,000 in the 6 months preceeding it. The rockets and mortars during the 4 months prior to the Israeli raid on the tunnel have been explained as much as the facts available to use can show, but these figures seem to go against the claims that Israel only tightened the embargo on Gaza.

TOMASJ

Originally Posted by TOMASJ
So are you saying Palestinian children should be grateful that only 340 or so have been murdered by the Israelis

PeakOutput wrote: »

were did i say that, quote it if you can find it

I think you need to read the post a bit better above in bold is what I said.

ah of course someone tried to exterminate them in the past so they shouldnt react to someone else trying to exterminate now. the perfect argument

Are you comparing Hamas to the Nazis, I think anyone with sence can see whos living it the concentrating camp in Gaza

[;ease show me the definition of murder jsut so i know you know what it is. then show me facts and proof that this is what the israelis are doing. you havnt told me an alternative reason as to why they are not bombing the west bank?

please show me the definition of murder? 400 dead children at the hands of the IDF

funny then how on cnn europe after 3 days of israel land assault the head palestinian negotiator who is based in the west bank said they completely dissaprove of hamas actions and while they do not agree with israel sending in its troops they are in no way in support of hamas

I seem to remember Abbas saying to the world on dozens of occasions that what Israel was doing was "brutal aggression."
Have you not seen any news since that cnn Europe report?

jank

Whereas Hamas will stupidly continue firing into Israel from built-up areas of Gaza as they have done since the last ceasefire in 2008.
Not signed up to Geneva Conventions and allegedly not signed up to this ceasefire yet sanctimonious hypocrites in the name of 'peace' support them for doing so.

Ironic, eh Alanis?

Is Gaza a state then? We might be closer to peace then we think.

Anyway Hamas declares its own ceasefire if Israel withdraw. This is also conditional to the border being reopened in due corse. This will be a better situation for Gaza then at the start of the current conflict. So Hamas will declare victory.
So this means there is no way in hell that Israel will allow this to happen.

Back to square one then.:pac:

Macha

concussion wrote: »

Those figures show that the 6 months after the ceasefire show an increase in humanitarian aid of almost 90% - 17,000 truckloads during the 6 month ceasefire from 9,000 in the 6 months preceeding it. The rockets and mortars during the 4 months prior to the Israeli raid on the tunnel have been explained as much as the facts available to use can show, but these figures seem to go against the claims that Israel only tightened the embargo on Gaza.

We must make the distinction between a blockade and an embargo. Here we're talking about a blockade.

I think it's easy to look at 17,000 trucks and think that's good but to put it in perspective: Approximately 9,000 trucks go through Dublin Port every day. Divide by two to get estimated incoming trucks per day at 4,500. Multiply by 30 to get monthly average = 135,000 incoming trucks every month.

Considering that our population is 3 times the size of Gaza's, that's puts the number of trucks entering at 1/3 the rate as entering Dublin Port. This doesn't even take into account our own internal economy that can produce food, goods services, that don't go through the ports. Gaza doesn't have anything resembling a modern economy as a direct result of the blockade.

concussion

taconnol wrote: »

We must make the distinction between a blockade and an embargo. Here we're talking about a blockade.

I think it's easy to look at 17,000 trucks and think that's good but to put it in perspective: Approximately 9,000 trucks go through Dublin Port every day. Divide by two to get estimated incoming trucks per day at 4,500. Multiply by 30 to get monthly average = 135,000 incoming trucks every month.

Considering that our population is 3 times the size of Gaza's, that's puts the number of trucks entering at 1/3 the rate as entering Dublin Port. This doesn't even take into account our own internal economy that can produce food, goods services, that don't go through the ports. Gaza doesn't have anything resembling a modern economy as a direct result of the blockade.

I see your point, however, trucks going through Dublin port are not carrying 100% humanitarian aid,they carry everything imaginable. Trucks going into Gaza only carry food, building supplies, fuel etc. How can you support the arguement that Israel didn't hold up it's side of the ceasefire when there was almost a doubling of supply? I'm not argueing that there are huge restrictions on the area but I don't see how things got worse, based on these figures, and therefore forced Hamas into attacking Israel, as some have argued.

BlaasForRafa

Overall this is a stunning victory for the IDF. Hamas is severly weakened and the IDF lost very few casualties.

Haaretz gives an interesting analysis of the Hamas position

"Meanwhile it seems that at least the Hamas leadership in Gaza has began to fathom the seriousness of its position. Two Hamas leaders in the Strip, Razi Hamad and Ahmed Yusuf, accused the group's leadership in Damascus of "bringing a terrible disaster on Gaza."

The two are considered members of the pragmatic wing of the party, and charged the Damascus-based leadership with making a terrible mistake in ordering Hamas to foil the extension of the cease-fire agreement with Israel in December. "

Macha

concussion wrote: »

I see your point, however, trucks going through Dublin port are not carrying 100% humanitarian aid,they carry everything imaginable. Trucks going into Gaza only carry food, building supplies, fuel etc.

I don't see why the people of Gaza should be reduced to a level of subsistence that we ourselves, or the Israelis, would not be willing to accept.

Should the people of Gaza be grateful for the humanitarian aid and not aspire to anything more?

concussion wrote: »

How can you support the arguement that Israel didn't hold up it's side of the ceasefire when there was almost a doubling of supply? I'm not argueing that there are huge restrictions on the area but I don't see how things got worse, based on these figures, and therefore forced Hamas into attacking Israel, as some have argued.

I support the argument because the blockade was not removed. Simple as. The people of Gaza are practically 100% dependent on food aid and outside help. To not allow these trucks in would have resulted in Israel being responsible for mass genocide through starvation. So it was the bare minimum that could have been expected of Israel.

I support the argument because even at their hightest level, the amount of supplies getting through were woefully inadequate for 1.4 million people. Not only that, but the movement of the Palestinian people in and out of Gaza was severely restricted.

I really don't see much difference between Gaza and an open-air concentration camp. Just because the prisoners are being kept alive with a trickle of aid, doesn't mean that it isn't a concentration camp and that the whole thing is totally unjust.

paulaa

Serenity Now! wrote: »

It most certainly has not been.
Even the spokesperson for the Irish branch of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign admitted that rocket fire had continued throughout and then said incredibly that Israel broke the ceasefire in november even though rockets were fired into Sderot in June after the final salvo from Gaza the day before the ceasefire went into effect!
A ceasefire means just as it sounds: To stop firing. Hamas didn't.

The first priority of both sides should be to accomodate a ceasefire. Saying one side only wants war when the other keeps on bloody firing is nothing more than hypocrisy, something you lump with Israel.

I have never once supported this latest stunt by the Israeli govt. I have said that Hamas stupidly keep giving them excuses however. This is NOT the same. People here bandy the Geneva Convention about but never apply or even express a desire for Hamas to sign up to it.
Read into that what you will.

Here are the statistics

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=ixrYv5pUzps

paulaa

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Overall this is a stunning victory for the IDF. Hamas is severly weakened and the IDF lost very few casualties.

Haaretz gives an interesting analysis of the Hamas position

"Meanwhile it seems that at least the Hamas leadership in Gaza has began to fathom the seriousness of its position. Two Hamas leaders in the Strip, Razi Hamad and Ahmed Yusuf, accused the group's leadership in Damascus of "bringing a terrible disaster on Gaza."

The two are considered members of the pragmatic wing of the party, and charged the Damascus-based leadership with making a terrible mistake in ordering Hamas to foil the extension of the cease-fire agreement with Israel in December. "

You call genocide a victory ? Israels name is muck throughout most of the world atm.

Also your signature is in extremely bad taste considering that only this morning rescue workers were were dragging 95 bodies from the rubble of an apartment block, where they had been shelled and the remains of the building bulldozed on top of them. Sorry, but it's no wonder you support the immoral Israeli regime.

Nodin

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Overall this is a stunning victory for the IDF.

They're fighting a group of semi-trained fighters with no AA capability, no anti-tank capability, at distance.....Its like a few young fellahs taking to some granny in a wheel chair with hurleys and bars. Nothing "stunning" there at all.

TOMASJ

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Overall this is a stunning victory for the IDF. Hamas is severly weakened and the IDF lost very few casualties.

In this great victory you claim the IDF had over a 6th rate group of ragtag fighters,
what do you regard as being the Highlight of this turkey shoot. The school killings the Hospitals that were bombed or was it the house where Samuni family's were herded into and shelled with more than 40 deaths, body's are still being pulled from that house today,

"Mark Regev an Israeli government spokesman"
has now claimed it was Hamas and not the IDF who murdered the children in Gaza, the Israelis and getting more and more desperate and despicable by the day.

freyners

Sorry if this sounds cyinical but not a hope of this ceasefire working

Hamas will wait some time the start again

Israel will retaliate

Whole Cycle starts again

And neither side is willing to sit down and talk to a meaningful solution because hamas aim is to rid the world of Israel and as long as israel has the backing of america they won't feel the need to sit down