Top Hamas Military leader killed - Israel/Hamas on the brink of War??

Manic Moran

AngryHippie wrote: »

Here is a question:

Is it possible for foreign powers to intervene in the Israel-Palestine conflict to stop the bloodshed, or will an intervention result in escalation, sides being taken and lines being drawn and the conflict engulfing the entire region?

Peace enforcing won't work, I don't think, it would have to be a peacekeeping mission which means that it has to be agreed to by both sides. (Even if it's an aggressive peacekeeping mission, which does happen).

Of course, anything is possible. The Israel/Lebanon border has been kindof quiet the last few years. How much of that is the effect of UN forces on the border, and how much is a memory of what happened to Southern Lebanon the last time the Israelis got thoroughly pissed off, I'm not sure, but past experience is that if the Israelis don't think that the external powers are doing a good enough job, they'll bypass them and do the work themselves.

In practice, though, I just don't see an external power being accepted by the Palestinians: Exchanging one jailer for another, as far as they're concerned, I think. And if the Palestinians don't -want- to stop lobbing rockets at Israel, most UN missions won't have the force to make them. So it seems all a bit academic really, short of alien invasion or the zombie apocalypse.

AngryHippie

Manic Moran wrote: »

Peace enforcing won't work, I don't think, it would have to be a peacekeeping mission which means that it has to be agreed to by both sides. (Even if it's an aggressive peacekeeping mission, which does happen).

Of course, anything is possible. The Israel/Lebanon border has been kindof quiet the last few years. How much of that is the effect of UN forces on the border, and how much is a memory of what happened to Southern Lebanon the last time the Israelis got thoroughly pissed off, I'm not sure, but past experience is that if the Israelis don't think that the external powers are doing a good enough job, they'll bypass them and do the work themselves.

In practice, though, I just don't see an external power being accepted by the Palestinians: Exchanging one jailer for another, as far as they're concerned, I think. And if the Palestinians don't -want- to stop lobbing rockets at Israel, most UN missions won't have the force to make them. So it seems all a bit academic really, short of alien invasion or the zombie apocalypse.

Yeah, that is more or less what I had figured, neither side is going to pull its head in enough to defuse the situation long enough to improve the quality of life and give the Palestinians some hope of a future.
Its just another tragedy in our times.
Nice to get an opinion from somebody with more than armchair experience !

JustinDee

Manic Moran wrote: »

Peace enforcing won't work, I don't think, it would have to be a peacekeeping mission which means that it has to be agreed to by both sides. (Even if it's an aggressive peacekeeping mission, which does happen).

Of course, anything is possible. The Israel/Lebanon border has been kindof quiet the last few years. How much of that is the effect of UN forces on the border, and how much is a memory of what happened to Southern Lebanon the last time the Israelis got thoroughly pissed off, I'm not sure, but past experience is that if the Israelis don't think that the external powers are doing a good enough job, they'll bypass them and do the work themselves.

In practice, though, I just don't see an external power being accepted by the Palestinians: Exchanging one jailer for another, as far as they're concerned, I think. And if the Palestinians don't -want- to stop lobbing rockets at Israel, most UN missions won't have the force to make them. So it seems all a bit academic really, short of alien invasion or the zombie apocalypse.

No, there is no outside influence with enough credence or power to intervene. It would only be done in a self-serving manner.
Nothing will change before one centrist party won majority in Knesset and also if Hamas were deposed in Gaza. Only one of these desired outcomes would happen democratically and it isn't in Gaza.

Chuck Stone

AngryHippie wrote: »

This is one case where the Israelis may have diverted an inbound missile, do you think that it happens every time ?

Credit where credit is due imo. I doubt it's an intricately planned propaganda stunt on the part of the pilots. They'd probably have faced little in the way of sanction if they would have carried out the attacks.

Do the IDF do some reprehensible things? Certainly. Is every member of the IDF an amoral automaton kill machine? Certainly not.

Indeed there's a website here where former IDF soldiers speak out about some of the nasty shit that goes on. In many other countries in the region they'd be tortured/executed by their own govt/state for not toeing the line.

Jelle1880

Koda Red Stepson wrote: »

Some food for thought (for you).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX6vyT8RzMo

**edit**

Sorry Ken I replied to you before I'd seen your reply to me.

You're fairly naive when it comes to war, and I'm not trying to belittle you when I say that. But if you'll forgive me I won't debate too many of your points made (I've done it in a thousand other threads on the same subject).

I don't think anyone here would advocate war, and sure we'd all rather avoid conflict. But Whats a country to do when its constantly attacked, on a daily basis Israel is attacked from inside Gaza ~ this is beyond dispute, no one can honestly deny that.

As I said earlier, there's a price to pay for attacking any nation and a terrorist leader paid that price (with his life) today ~ unfortunately as it all too often happens innocents were also killed.

I'm off to bed now, hope you have a good night & and if you pray (I don't) when lets pray for peace.. goodnight.

To be fair, the Goldstone report is not exactly a valid source anymore since Richard Goldstone himself said that it was created before additional evidence was available.

He even said that the UN Human Rights Commission was undoubtedly biased against Israel...

karma_

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Hamas knows that the IAF will try and abort an attack if there is a danger to civilians and so will drive towards civilians and put them in danger so as to avoid attack themselves. The following video is from Operation Cast Lead and shows this clearly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUeSE3WWX_M

How would a driver of a car even know a missile has been fired at it?

That whole channel is nauseating, it is flat-out propaganda swallowed whole. Extra-Judicial targeted assassinations are now something to be watched on youtube for entertainments sake. Stinks.

wes

Jelle1880 wrote: »

To be fair, the Goldstone report is not exactly a valid source anymore since Richard Goldstone himself said that it was created before additional evidence was available.

He even said that the UN Human Rights Commission was undoubtedly biased against Israel...

There were several authors on that report, and all the others disagreed with Goldstone:

UN Gaza report co-authors round on Goldstone

My understand is that they were rather annoyed with him. So we have 3 out of the 4 authors who stand by it.

There was also a rather nasty personal campaign against Goldstone, he was at one pointed banned from attending his Grand sons Bar Mitzvah for example. He was eventually allowed, but I think stuff like had a huge influence on his late statements in regards to the report, and this kind of stuff should also be taken into account.

BlaasForRafa

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Are you saying the Hamas guys in the vehicles can detect when there's an Israeli missile bearing down on them?

helicopters and aeroplanes are not invisible or inaudible, unless you know of some tech that they IAF has deployed that the rest of us are unaware of?

karma_

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

helicopters and aeroplanes are not invisible or inaudible, unless you know of some tech that they IAF has deployed that the rest of us are unaware of?

This is pretty much nonsense, I've experienced this many times in the North, when driving you cannot hear helicopters unless they get pretty close to you.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Manic Moran wrote: »

Of course, anything is possible. The Israel/Lebanon border has been kindof quiet the last few years. How much of that is the effect of UN forces on the border, and how much is a memory of what happened to Southern Lebanon the last time the Israelis got thoroughly pissed off, I'm not sure, but past experience is that if the Israelis don't think that the external powers are doing a good enough job, they'll bypass them and do the work themselves.

Well UN Resolutions 425 & 426 were pretty weak and it mean't UNIFIL couldn't properly ensure the safety of The Galilee. Ironically enough it was Israel own fault that 425 & 426 were weak and they didn't want heavy armour on its northern border.

I think the heaviest weapons UNIFIL had at the time were 120mm mortars and the Panhard 90.

Under resolution 1701 UNIFILS strength has almost trebled and although they've little or no airpower they do have naval power and modern MBT's and 155 SP artillery.. Another major difference is that the Lebanese army are allowed operate south of the Litani river.

There are still attacks by Hezbollah across the 'Blue Line' (Israeli/Lebanese) border and recently there was the killing of an IDF officer who was involved in tree felling on the Blue Line but these are few and far between compared to pre-2006.

I'm not entirely sure if UNIFIL went from peacekeeping to peace enforcement under 1701.. But given a strong enough mandate and a willingness (and trust) from all sides peace enforcing can work, and it has been shown to work in the Middle East, Africa and the Far East.

However, its hard to image how to deal with Hamas in the intrim.. Killing its military chiefs will help.

NTMK

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

helicopters and aeroplanes are not invisible or inaudible, unless you know of some tech that they IAF has deployed that the rest of us are unaware of?

Jets can fly extremely High meaning that they are pretty much Invisible and inaudible and the calibre of heli the IAF have can hit from miles away. Not to mention the arsenal of drones they would have at their disposal

periodictable

GRMA wrote: »

Yeah, the 11 month old baby they killed was a right nasty piece of work. Why are rockets being fired? Becuase of the brutal zionist imposed status quo.

Ever visited Israel? Talked with Israeli arabs? Doesn't sound like it.
Don't talk about something you have no experience of. Remember there's a multitude of sides to the story and somewhere in there lies the real story.

blahfckingblah

periodictable wrote: »

Ever visited Israel? Talked with Israeli arabs? Doesn't sound like it.
Don't talk about something you have no experience of. Remember there's a multitude of sides to the story and somewhere in there lies the real story.

so did they or did they not kill an innocent 11 month old baby.. seems clear cut, regardless what your opinion is when children are getting killed so often theres something not right

brimal

I'm in Jerusalem right now, sirens have just gone off across the entire city.

brimal

If Jerusalem gets hit, this changes everything.

Mr.Micro

brimal wrote: »

If Jerusalem gets hit, this changes everything.

Changes what? Your schedule or your travel plans? Be a bit more specific please.

Higher

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

helicopters and aeroplanes are not invisible or inaudible, unless you know of some tech that they IAF has deployed that the rest of us are unaware of?

lol so clueless. Apaches can fire from miles away. Drones are silent. There is no way someone in a car could ever know that a missile was heading straight for them :rolleyes:

brimal

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Changes what? Your schedule or your travel plans? Be a bit more specific please.

The Israeli psyche for a start. Jerusalem was always known as the 'safe' city, untouchable from rockets, etc. There was also the thought that Jerusalem is so important to Islam that Hamas would never touch it, etc. It's been decades since sirens sounded here.

Second, this will guarantee a ground offensive in Gaza now. No questions.

This is massive news over here, with all the rockets being fired these last few days, nobody really expected Jerusalem to get hit.

Also, try not to be such a dick - I actually live here now. "Travel plans.." :rolleyes:

Mr.Micro

brimal wrote: »

The Israeli psyche for a start. Jerusalem was always known as the 'safe' city, untouchable from rockets, etc. There was also the thought that Jerusalem is so important to Islam that Hamas would never touch it, etc. It's been decades since sirens sounded here.

Second, this will guarantee a ground offensive in Gaza now. No questions.

This is massive news over here, with all the rockets being fired these last few days, nobody really expected Jerusalem to get hit.

Also, try not to be such a dick - I actually live here now. "Travel plans.." :rolleyes:

You could have said all that in the first place instead of your attempt at being enigmatic. I presume you do travel in the area, hence my reference to travel. :rolleyes:

hyperborean

brimal wrote: »

The Israeli psyche for a start. Jerusalem was always known as the 'safe' city, untouchable from rockets, etc. There was also the thought that Jerusalem is so important to Islam that Hamas would never touch it, etc. It's been decades since sirens sounded here.

Second, this will guarantee a ground offensive in Gaza now. No questions.

This is massive news over here, with all the rockets being fired these last few days, nobody really expected Jerusalem to get hit.

Also, try not to be such a dick - I actually live here now. "Travel plans.." :rolleyes:

I presume you meant tel aviv?

Jerusalem is not going to be a target until all the legal rights of the Palestinians in it have been eroded, as it stands only illegal evictions and some racist incitement by the isrealis has occured,,,, Jerusalem is very much a middle eastern city, unlike tel aviv which is a israeli city!

brimal

Mr.Micro wrote: »

You could have said all that in the first place instead of your attempt at being enigmatic. I presume you do travel in the area, hence my reference to travel. :rolleyes:

I didn't think it needed explanation. Anyone who has followed this conflict over the years knows the significance of Jerusalem getting hit.

hyperborean wrote: »

I presume you meant tel aviv?

Jerusalem is not going to be a target until all the legal rights of the Palestinians in it have been eroded, as it stands only illegal evictions and some racist incitement by the isrealis has occured,,,, Jerusalem is very much a middle eastern city, unlike tel aviv which is a israeli city!

No, I meant Jerusalem.

hyperborean

brimal wrote: »

I didn't think it needed explanation. Anyone who has followed this conflict over the years knows the significance of Jerusalem getting hit.



No, I meant Jerusalem.

Were does the Jerusalem angle come from? Even with my tin foil cap on I cannot see how bull about Palestinians targeting Jerusalem would work in your favor?

The elections wont be won in Jerusalem!

brimal

hyperborean wrote: »

Were does the Jerusalem angle come from? Even with my tin foil cap on I cannot see how bull about Palestinians targeting Jerusalem would work in your favor?

The elections wont be won in Jerusalem!

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

wes

Gaza conflict: Militant rocket targets Jerusalem

Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip say they have launched a rocket on Jerusalem - the first time the holy city has been targeted.

Ambulance services said the missile landed just outside the city - and there are no reported casualties. An earlier missile targeted Tel Aviv.

It comes amid mounting violence, following the killing of Hamas's military chief on Wednesday.

Egypt's leader has vowed to back Gaza in the face of "blatant aggression".

Surprised that they would do this. Looks like the assassination may have caused a far larger escalation here.

hyperborean

brimal wrote: »

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

I get it now, unbelievable that jerusalem would be targeted. sheer unbeleivable

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE:

There seems to be a bit of confusion about where people are posting, so please let me remind everyone: smart-ass one-liners and :roll eyes: do not count as rational debate in this forum.

Chuck Stone

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

helicopters and aeroplanes are not invisible or inaudible, unless you know of some tech that they IAF has deployed that the rest of us are unaware of?

You're answering a question with a question. I asked you if Hamas have the capability to detect a bomb bearing down on their militants.

If they did then wouldn't the most recent high profile Hamas guy taken out have gotten out of the car and ran into a shopping centre?

I'm calling shenanigans on this until you can offer some sort of evidence.

Mr.Micro

wes wrote: »

Surprised that they would do this. Looks like the assassination may have caused a far larger escalation here.

It could be a deliberate ploy by Hamas to attempt to widen the conflict, and targeting Jerusalem may do that, emboldened, as Egypt appears to be backing Gaza.

wes

Mr.Micro wrote: »

It could be a deliberate ploy by Hamas to attempt to widen the conflict, and targeting Jerusalem may do that, emboldened, as Egypt appears to be backing Gaza.

Could be, but I think it may be a tit for tat escalation. Where one sides ups the ante, so the other side does the same. Both sides need to stop, before more people on both sides are hurt.

junder

Chuck Stone wrote: »

You're answering a question with a question. I asked you if Hamas have the capability to detect a bomb bearing down on their militants.

If they did then wouldn't the most recent high profile Hamas guy taken out have gotten out of the car and ran into a shopping centre?

I'm calling shenanigans on this until you can offer some sort of evidence.

They may not have the technology to detect incoming missiles but previous experince should tell them that after firing missiles at isreal it's a good chance the Israelis who have the technology to detect incoming missiles might just be targeting them and it might be worth going to ground in a non civilian populated area until they get the all clear

joseph brand

Max Blumenthal interviewed on RT.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ayD_rm1Vls

Eggy Baby!

Ah yes. RT. We meet again.

Interesting interview though.

southsiderosie

MOD NOTE:

Per the charter, please don't post videos without a clear explanation of what is on the video - not everyone can watch them from where they are reading the thread.

Memnoch

My own feeling on this is that this is a deliberate ploy by the Israeli government in order to derail Palestine's UN application for observer status. Much easier to make a case when there has been a reasonably held peace but without any negotiations. They may yet have more moves to make in this scheme.

WakeUp

Hamas are claiming they have captured an Israeli pilot in the last few mins. Dont know if the plane was shot down or malfunctioned but the pilot has been captured according to them.

Mr.Micro

WakeUp wrote: »

Hamas are claiming they have captured an Israeli pilot in the last few mins. Dont know if the plane was shot down or malfunctioned but the pilot has been captured according to them.

If I recall correctly that last time Israeli military personnel were captured Lebanon was invaded, so if true, Gaza is next?

Suff

Mr.Micro wrote: »

If I recall correctly that last time Israeli military personnel were captured Lebanon was invaded, so if true, Gaza is next?

They're going to invade regardless, since their operation hadn't achieve the results they had hoped for, and for them (Israeli government) to safe face they're going to further escalate the situation, but it's too late, the myth of the mighty Israeli army has been abolished by Hizballah in 2006, that's why we see the Palestinians shelling Tel Aviv, and went even as far as to shell Jerusalem.

I think the Israelis are panicking now... which means things are going to get worst.

junder

Suff wrote: »

They're going to invade regardless, since their operation hadn't achieve the results they had hoped for, and for them (Israeli government) to safe face they're going to further escalate the situation, but it's too late, the myth of the mighty Israeli army has been abolished by Hizballah in 2006, that's why we see the Palestinians shelling Tel Aviv, and went even as far as to shell Jerusalem.

I think the Israelis are panicking now... which means things are going to get worst.

Don't let your hatred of isreal blind you To the facts or anything

Sierra Oscar

junder wrote: »

Don't let your hatred of isreal blind you To the facts or anything

Is Suff not correct though? The surgical strikes have not eradicated the capabilities of Hamas to target Israeli centres of population. Indeed we have seen Tel Aviv targeted alongside Jerusalem, which was unimaginable prior to the outbreak of this current conflict.

The IDF will have to move in to save face.

BlaasForRafa

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Is Suff not correct though? The surgical strikes have not eradicated the capabilities of Hamas to target Israeli centres of population. Indeed we have seen Tel Aviv targeted alongside Jerusalem, which was unimaginable prior to the outbreak of this current conflict.

The IDF will have to move in to save face.

Targeted? missing the target by several miles is hardly targeted.

Hamas are lobbing missiles out there in the hope they'll kill as many civilians as possible but they couldn't be called targeted in any meaningful sense.

BlaasForRafa

Suff wrote: »

They're going to invade regardless, since their operation hadn't achieve the results they had hoped for, and for them (Israeli government) to safe face they're going to further escalate the situation, but it's too late, the myth of the mighty Israeli army has been abolished by Hizballah in 2006, that's why we see the Palestinians shelling Tel Aviv, and went even as far as to shell Jerusalem.

They'd need to have artillery in order to shell anything. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to Hamas's artillery capability or are you are just talking out of your hole?

KyussBishop

Good article on media coverage of the conflict; it's primarily about the BBC, where the servility isn't exactly surprising, but it's interesting to have criticism spelled out so well:
http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=706:gaza-blitz-turmoil-and-tragicomedy-at-the-bbc&catid=25:alerts-2012&Itemid=69

SamHarris

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Is Suff not correct though? The surgical strikes have not eradicated the capabilities of Hamas to target Israeli centres of population. Indeed we have seen Tel Aviv targeted alongside Jerusalem, which was unimaginable prior to the outbreak of this current conflict.

The IDF will have to move in to save face.

Actually the amount of missiles being fired from Gaza drops off significantly after sustained attacks from Israel. It has happened time and again.

i'm of the opinion that assassination and surgical strikes does little to stop actual attacks, particularly in the medium to long term, however I can't see how any country is going to react any differently to dozens of missiles being lobbed into their territory for a week.

If Hamas is the legitimate representative of the Gazan people, then it is their responsibility to ensure their territory is not used as a base to attack Israel. If it is their military wing that is/was attacking then what are they but legitimate targets for the Israeli military?

Their are far too many people who feel comfortable ignoring Hamas' attacks and declared aims, merely because they are often to weak and inept to make any headlines of their own.

I hope to god most people declaring their support for an organisation that wants to fight and kill their enemy, 'the Jew' (note, not Israel in their manifesto, a racial group), is just the childish ignorance and reductionism so common in this country. Otherwise people here have very serious racial issues.

But on the other hand, there is so much suffering and poverty in the Gaza strip in particular its hard to sympathise with Israel - given much of it is caused by their blocade.

Untill the Palestinians have a Gandhi or Martin Luther King they will remain where they are - and given the attitude polls show the people their have towards violence directed at Israel (even childern) it is incredibly difficult to see how any mass peace movement would take hold there.

Suff

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They'd need to have artillery in order to shell anything. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to Hamas's artillery capability or are you are just talking out of your hole?

Basically, you have ignored the point put forward in my post and concentrated on my choice of words 'Shell' to a point it compelled you to post a comment, and seeing that you have the nature of a good debater, I see no point in discussing it further.

SamHarris

KyussBishop wrote: »

Good article on media coverage of the conflict; it's primarily about the BBC, where the servility isn't exactly surprising, but it's interesting to have criticism spelled out so well:
http://www.medialens.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=706:gaza-blitz-turmoil-and-tragicomedy-at-the-bbc&catid=25:alerts-2012&Itemid=69

If only the BBC could be as even handed and criticaly fair as the author of this article! :rolleyes:

The ability of people to see bias only where they want to will never fail to amaze me.

It's interesting how so many people in this conflict see any reporting or recognition of wrongs done by one side as some sort of massive betrayal and confirmation that the autor/publication is behind the other faction all the way. Sad how terrifyed people are of recognising any complexity to a situation.

SamHarris

Suff wrote: »

Basically, you have ignored the point put forward in my post and concentrated on my choice of words 'Shell' to a point it compelled you to post a comment, and seeing that you have the nature of a good debater, I see no point in discussing it further.

Maybe if you just use the right terms everything will work out better for us all?

As to your point, if you believe Hezzbollah proved anything comprehensive its pretty clear you are saying what you want to believe rather than what is fact.

Given Arab public and poltical opinion in surrounding states fear of the Israeli military is certainly one of the main factors stopping (yet another) mass attack. You only have to look at opinion polls to see the truth of this, with intense racial hatred being endemic throughout the region.

Black Swan

MOD REMINDER:
Please focus on the thread topic, and not each other.

Suff

SamHarris wrote: »

Untill the Palestinians have a Gandhi or Martin Luther King they will remain where they are - and given the attitude polls show the people their have towards violence directed at Israel (even childern) it is incredibly difficult to see how any mass peace movement would take hold there.

Could you please elaborate further on the required character of this leader that resembles Ganhi or MLK, and what sort of decisions he or she would have to make to satisfy Israel? - sorry, I meant Peace, and shouldn't we ask for one of those on the other side?

I understand and respect your pro-Israel position, but could you tolerate the idea of perhaps looking from the other side of the equation, for the reasons behind the Palestinians resentment/ hatred towards Israel? But please, before you use the Anti-semetic, racial tags; know that Palestinians are semitic.

KyussBishop

SamHarris wrote: »

If only the BBC could be as even handed and criticaly fair as the author of this article! :rolleyes:

The ability of people to see bias only where they want to will never fail to amaze me.

It's interesting how so many people in this conflict see any reporting or recognition of wrongs done by one side as some sort of massive betrayal and confirmation that the autor/publication is behind the other faction all the way. Sad how terrifyed people are of recognising any complexity to a situation.

You haven't put out a single solid criticism of the article there, this is just a patronizing sneer, where you try to attribute a whole bunch of unstated views to me, as straw-men, based on the content of that article.

Pick out the parts of the article you disagree with; there are dozens of criticisms of the BBC's coverage in that, point out the ones you actually disagree with, and back them up with an argument.

There's every reason to be critical of their coverage, and it's wholly ignorant to suggest that's anything about picking a 'side', as you don't need to pick a side or have a motive to criticize any media outlet, if there is a problem or bias in their reporting.

SamHarris

Suff wrote: »

Could you please elaborate further on the required character of this leader that resembles Ganhi or MLK, and what sort of decisions he or she would have to make to satisfy Israel? - sorry, I meant Peace, and shouldn't we ask for one of those on the other side?

I understand and respect your pro-Israel position, but could you tolerate the idea of perhaps looking from the other side of the equation, for the reasons behind the Palestinians resentment/ hatred towards Israel? But please, before you use the Anti-semetic, racial tags; know that Palestinians are semitic.

Yes yes, you don't recogonise anti-semetic as a label to describe a legitmate historical phenomenon of hatred of the Jews, what a surprise.

As in a leader determined to meet violence with peace, to secure the moral high ground for those to weak to win in any other fashion than garnering support.

You may feel that Palestinians have excellent reasons for their 'hatred' and dedication to violence (again shown in poll after poll and the support for Hamas) I, and anyone in a position to make descisions with regard to the situation, really don't care. The fact of it remains, and the fact of it is what Israeli's and people in power have to deal with.

At least you are honest in that you recognise it. So your position is that Israel should just take it? Are they allowed to hate and resent the Arabs for their positions and attacks?

How easy it is for people to absolve the 'right side' of any responsibility.

If Israeli's had the same intent, however, we would not be seeing a dozen deaths a week but tens of thousands a day. One of the lessons of history.