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

Mr.Micro

SeanW wrote: »

It seems your side just cant resist whoring pictures of children to score cheap points ... the bolded statement seems rather bizarre in the case of the Gaza strip.

Remember, Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip, left it to the Palestinians in its entirity, withdrawn from there in accordance with the 1967 borders (which they had no obligation to do as they took that land from agressors in war of exterminaton that they defended themselves in). Then the locals saddled themselves with Hamas. Then Hamas started using the whole place as a base to attack Israel. They have continuously and without relent, fired rockets into Southern Israel.

Then and only then did Israel respond with sanctions, and physical retaliation.

Don't get me wrong, I do not think Israel is perfect and I am not a fan of Zionism (though given how Jews have been treated in Europe etc I'm not surprised so many Jews live in Israel/belive in Zionism).

But its clear to me that Israel - having conceded the Gaza Strip - now finds itself under an unprovoked continuous attack, and IMO is well within its rights to defend its Southern citizens. Whatever it takes to make the Gazans stop trying to kill their people, is fine by me.

As long as Israel leaves the Palestinians in the dire straits that they are in there is always going to provocation.... When is Israel going to sort this mess as it resists anybody else doing it such as the UN?

Denerick

What I find interesting is the western medias none-too-subtle reluctance to mention the fact that over 100 rockets were fired into southern Israel recently. To read the Guardian today you'd think the attack was completely unprovoked (There is a mention - as an aside - that Hamas had launched rockets into Israel)

Not only is firing rockets into Israel profoundly stupid as a military tactic (You say rocket, I say full ground offensive with the most sophisticated military in the region...) it is also suicidal. Of course we should mourn innocent civilians killed by the IDF but the whole 'Palestinian Solidarity' groupthink bubble need to start thinking in terms of realpolitik. No nation state can tolerate living in a state of constant bombardment, the primary duty of a nation is to protect its citizens.

Imagine Northern Ireland was an independent country with a military fifty times smaller than the Irish Republic. Imagine if militants in Northern Ireland started firing rockets into Donegal, Monaghan, and Louth. What the hell do you think would happen in that scenario. People need to live in the real world and get the hell out of this mindless bubble they currently inhabit. Its like a big chunk of people form their opinions from a version of reality that have chosen, regardless of facts and what states do when imperiled.

P.S- And before the fringe get all over this, I'm aware there is an Israeli election coming and that a lot of this has to do with posturing, but please get real.

rizzodun

SeanW wrote: »

But its clear to me that Israel - having conceded the Gaza Strip - now finds itself under an unprovoked continuous attack, and IMO is well within its rights to defend its Southern citizens. Whatever it takes to make the Gazans stop trying to kill their people, is fine by me.

I hardly think a total naval blockade and complete control of all materials and supplies going into Gaza, along with building a fence around the whole region and controlling movements in and out of the region, along with regularly grabbing more land for Isreali settlements is conceding the Gaza Strip

If the brits had said to us "Have Ireland" then built a fence around the country, had a naval blockade, and then responded to an IRA attack by rolling into Dublin and levelling the place how would you feel?

Denerick

Mr.Micro wrote: »

As long as Israel leaves the Palestinians in the dire straits that they are in there is always going to provocation.... When is Israel going to sort this mess as it resists anybody else doing it such as the UN?

And how are Hamas ever going to negotiate their way out of this if their leaders keep on getting killed? They've been doing the same thing for 60 odd years now and it doesn't seem to be working. Israel exists and will exist provided they don't get nuked to oblivion. Palestine will never become a state if it continues to launch almost comically suicidal attacks like this. Its like your pet dog trying to kill a Lion. Its almost pathetic really.

KyussBishop

Denerick wrote: »

What I find interesting is the western medias none-too-subtle reluctance to mention the fact that over 100 rockets were fired into southern Israel recently. To read the Guardian today you'd think the attack was completely unprovoked (There is a mention - as an aside - that Hamas had launched rockets into Israel)

Not only is firing rockets into Israel profoundly stupid as a military tactic (You say rocket, I say full ground offensive with the most sophisticated military in the region...) it is also suicidal. Of course we should mourn innocent civilians killed by the IDF but the whole 'Palestinian Solidarity' groupthink bubble need to start thinking in terms of realpolitik. No nation state can tolerate living in a state of constant bombardment, the primary duty of a nation is to protect its citizens.

Imagine Northern Ireland was an independent country with a military fifty times smaller than the Irish Republic. Imagine if militants in Northern Ireland started firing rockets into Donegal, Monaghan, and Louth. What the hell do you think would happen in that scenario. People need to live in the real world and get the hell out of this mindless bubble they currently inhabit. Its like a big chunk of people form their opinions from a version of reality that have chosen, regardless of facts and what states do when imperiled.

P.S- And before the fringe get all over this, I'm aware there is an Israeli election coming and that a lot of this has to do with posturing, but please get real.

Here is a good timeline of the escalation (linked in the article I posted above):
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/how-israel-shattered-gaza-truce-leading-escalating-death-and-tragedy-timeline

Note how a truce was being arranged, and Israel assassinate one of the leaders reviewing the truce, the very same day the truce is to be presented to Israel:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/15/assassinating-the-chance-for-calm.html

Yesterday morning, hours before Israel assassinated Ahmed Jaabari, my counterpart in Hamas presented the draft to Jaabari and to other Hamas leaders. Senior Hamas leaders on the outside had already seen it and had instructed him to check the reactions to it in Gaza. I was supposed to receive the draft yesterday evening to present to Israeli officials who were waiting for me to send it to them.

EDIT: I do agree though that Hamas policies are utterly stupid and counterproductive, it's just there was a very clear chain of provocation from Israel with this, which has completely destroyed the current chance at a long term truce.

Jaafa

Denerick wrote: »

And how are Hamas ever going to negotiate their way out of this if their leaders keep on getting killed? They've been doing the same thing for 60 odd years now and it doesn't seem to be working. Israel exists and will exist provided they don't get nuked to oblivion. Palestine will never become a state if it continues to launch almost comically suicidal attacks like this. Its like your pet dog trying to kill a Lion. Its almost pathetic really.

Well that, if you read my last post above, is the intention.

Mr.Micro

Denerick wrote: »

And how are Hamas ever going to negotiate their way out of this if their leaders keep on getting killed? They've been doing the same thing for 60 odd years now and it doesn't seem to be working. Israel exists and will exist provided they don't get nuked to oblivion. Palestine will never become a state if it continues to launch almost comically suicidal attacks like this. Its like your pet dog trying to kill a Lion. Its almost pathetic really.

Israel must like having the thorn of the Palestinians in its side as it has no intention of ever sorting the problem, It would have to give back the occupied territories, and that is never going to happen. In the meantime the Palestinians do nothing..... get nowhere, provoke Israel again and get nowhere. See the repeating pattern. It needs the UN to help sort it out as neither party involved are capable or willing to the most part to resolve the matter.

Denerick

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Israel must like having the thorn of the Palestinians in its side as it has no intention of ever sorting the problem, It would have to give back the occupied territories, and that is never going to happen. In the meantime the Palestinians do nothing..... get nowhere, provoke Israel again and get nowhere. See the repeating pattern. It needs the UN to help sort it out as neither party involved are capable or willing to the most part to resolve the matter.

I agree, the ongoing situation suits Israel as its future as a state is predicated on a large Jewish majority. A one state solution is clearly off the table as the Muslims would be a majority and Israel would simply become an even more unstable version of Lebanon (Replace Christians with Jews). A two state solution isn't in their interests either as Palestinians will clearly want to develop their own military capabilities and remain committed to some form of military opposition to Israel, posing an existential threat to the nation. My own personal view is that Israel eventually wants Egypt to assume control of Gaza and Jordan of the West Bank. This way they can placate their larger neighbours through their nuclear deterrent and force Egypt and Jordan to deal with the militant issue themselves, for fear of annihilation. This would be the perfect solution for Israel, granting them a modicum of stability. However for this to happen it would require the destruction of the idea of Palestinian nationhood, which has always been Israeli policy. The odd intervention from the international community has forced them into peace deals but the broader strategy is unchanged, I think.

All of which underlines the fact that Palestine is playing exactly into Israeli strategic objectives by giving them a carte blanche to launch these kinds of assaults with a certain kind of political, if not exactly ethical legitimacy.

With regards to the Hamas ceasefire proposal, that does sound interesting but I don't particularly see how it changes the overarching dynamics of the situation. Israel as a nation state will protect itself through military means after facing an attack, regardless of any peace feelers that may have been in play. Obviously the more ethical path would have involved restraint and acceptance of a cease fire, but in the real world a state will retaliate after facing 100 rocket attacks.

SeanW

rizzodun wrote: »

I hardly think a total naval blockade and complete control of all materials and supplies going into Gaza, along with building a fence around the whole region and controlling movements in and out of the region

Which they only started doing AFTER Hamas took over the Gaza Strip.

along with regularly grabbing more land for Isreali settlements is

not something I agree with, but that's the West Bank. The border with the Gaza Strip is undisputed. The entire landbank has been the territory of the Palestinians since Israel left it.

If the brits had said to us "Have Ireland" then built a fence around the country, had a naval blockade, and then responded to an IRA attack by rolling into Dublin and levelling the place how would you feel?

That IIRC was not how it happened.

But if we allowed the IRA to take over Ireland and let them use the whole country as a base to launch missiles against England, they would be within their rights to try to stop them.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

It seems your side just cant resist whoring pictures of children to score cheap points ... the bolded statement seems rather bizarre in the case of the Gaza strip.

Remember, Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip, left it to the Palestinians in its entirity, withdrawn from there in accordance with the 1967 borders (which they had no obligation to do as they took that land from agressors in war of exterminaton that they defended themselves in). .

You seem to be mistaken . They were indeed obligated to give it up. However they only did so in order to concentrate on annexing more of the the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem, while wrong footing arafat.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3720176.stm

SeanW wrote: »

Then the locals saddled themselves with Hamas. .

So 1967, withdrawal, Hamas? You're missing a few important details there.

SeanW

Nodin wrote: »

So 1967, withdrawal, Hamas? You're missing a few important details there.

After the Israeli withdrawl, Hamas took over the Gaza Strip.

Nodin

Denerick wrote: »

I agree, the ongoing situation suits Israel as its future as a state is predicated on a large Jewish majority. A one state solution is clearly off the table as the Muslims would be a majority and Israel would simply become an even more unstable version of Lebanon (Replace Christians with Jews). A two state solution isn't in their interests either as Palestinians will clearly want to develop their own military capabilities and remain committed to some form of military opposition to Israel, posing an existential threat to the nation. My own personal view is that Israel eventually wants Egypt to assume control of Gaza and Jordan of the West Bank. ...........

You mean Egypt re-assume control of Gaza and Jordan re-assume control of whats left of the West Bank. Whatever about Egypt, the Jordanians are already a minority in their own state due to Palestinian refugees. Having ceded all negotiation rights to the PLO for the territory, its unlikely they're going to take them and two or so million palestinians back.

wes

Denerick wrote: »

And how are Hamas ever going to negotiate their way out of this if their leaders keep on getting killed? They've been doing the same thing for 60 odd years now and it doesn't seem to be working.

Hamas hasn't existed for 60 years.....

Denerick wrote: »

Israel exists and will exist provided they don't get nuked to oblivion. Palestine will never become a state if it continues to launch almost comically suicidal attacks like this. Its like your pet dog trying to kill a Lion. Its almost pathetic really.

The Palestinians receive violence regardless of whether there peaceful or not. Look at the expanding settlements in the West Bank, where the PA are working with Israel to prevent attacks on them. Just the other day Lieberman threatened to remove the PA, for going to the UN, which is a simple act of peaceful resistance.

Israel always responds with violence, and it doesn't matter what Palestinians do.

Nodin

SeanW wrote: »

After the Israeli withdrawl, Hamas took over the Gaza Strip.

Nope. There's a lot more detail to it than that.

rizzodun

SeanW wrote: »

But if we allowed the IRA to take over Ireland and let them use the whole country as a base to launch missiles against England, they would be within their rights to try to stop them.

While I may be generalising to put forward a point, Israel's response to rocket attacks is wholly disproportionate. 300 attacks by Hamas, 3 people dead, Israel can land a missile with pinpoint accuracy and do not care about innocent civilians as collateral damage, they have a larger army than the UK, and fully functioning air force, funded, in part, by the US government. They have a right to defend their territory, even if they took it by force, but their retaliation should be in line with provocation.

Israel do not care for peace with Palestine, and conveniently use religion as motivation for their cause. Much like the Republican and Unionists during the troubles.

Denerick

wes wrote: »

Hamas hasn't existed for 60 years.....

Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't realise this was an exercise in pedantry. You know what I mean, 'Militant Palestinian Nationalists/Militant Palestinian Islamists'. Perhaps we can all use a nice acronym going forward in order to stop this kind of pointlessness, such as MPN/MPI

Israel always responds with violence, and it doesn't matter what Palestinians do.

Except when Israel isn't attacked by anyone, they can't retaliate for something that didn't happen. Its a pretty basic pattern. Attack -> Retaliation -> Attack -> Bigger retaliation. If an individual presented these kinds of traits to a psychiatrist, they would have been committed to an institution long ago. In terms of military strategy, the logic resembles that of a severely mentally ill person.

BlaasForRafa

rizzodun wrote: »

I hardly think a total naval blockade and complete control of all materials and supplies going into Gaza, along with building a fence around the whole region and controlling movements in and out of the region, along with regularly grabbing more land for Isreali settlements is conceding the Gaza Strip

If the brits had said to us "Have Ireland" then built a fence around the country, had a naval blockade, and then responded to an IRA attack by rolling into Dublin and levelling the place how would you feel?

The Irish state never attacked Britain thus a blockade was never in question. If the Irish State did attack Britain then they would be within their rights to retaliate.

If the Palestinians in the Gaza strip could be trusted not to fire rockets at Israel then there wouldn't be a need to blockade them. If the blockade was relinquished then Hamas, on the evidence of the last 6 years or so would use that opportunity to import bigger missiles in order to kill more Israelis.

Denerick

Nodin wrote: »

You mean Egypt re-assume control of Gaza and Jordan re-assume control of whats left of the West Bank. Whatever about Egypt, the Jordanians are already a minority in their own state due to Palestinian refugees. Having ceded all negotiation rights to the PLO for the territory, its unlikely they're going to take them and two or so million palestinians back.

A lot of things could look a lot differently in 10 or 20 years time. If Jordans King meets his demise and a democratic state took root in Jordan, it wouldn't be an implausible idea for Jordan to annex the West Bank.

Nodin

Denerick wrote: »

Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't realise this was an exercise in pedantry. You know what I mean, 'Militant Palestinian Nationalists/Militant Palestinian Islamists'. Perhaps we can all use a nice acronym going forward in order to stop this kind of pointlessness, such as MPN/MPI

....

The fact is that the largest segment of the palestinian movement has essentially been at peace for many years now, and the only thing they seem to receive for it is more settlements.

rizzodun

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The Irish state never attacked Britain thus a blockade was never in question. If the Irish State did attack Britain then they would be within their rights to retaliate.

If the Palestinians in the Gaza strip could be trusted not to fire rockets at Israel then there wouldn't be a need to blockade them. If the blockade was relinquished then Hamas, on the evidence of the last 6 years or so would use that opportunity to import bigger missiles in order to kill more Israelis.

Retaliate with appropriate force, I don't think roughly 1400 dead the last time they invaded would be deemed appropriate.

I should go on record to say I don't agree with the actions of Hamas, but nor do I think Israel would care too much if there were no rocket attacks, they would still do their best to make sure the Gaza strip was left out in the cold.

Also, the blockade may only be 6 years old, but they have restricted movement of Palestinians since 1989, but I'm sure some members here have no problems with a state restricting movement of another state's citizens either?

Denerick

Nodin wrote: »

The fact is that the largest segment of the palestinian movement has essentially been at peace for many years now, and the only thing they seem to receive for it is more settlements.

Hmm... Am I supposed to respond to this? I'd like to know where I defended Israeli settlement building and/or their effective colonisation of the west bank? Morally I disagree with Israeli policy on Palestine and think it totally unethical. But the realities of power politics in the region is another matter entirely, which many seem to overlook in their 'analysis'. Without any effective international pressure, particularly from the US, Israel will continue down the path it is going.

As an isolated issue, I think Israel had a casus belli to attack Gaza. I don't think it has a right to colonise anywhere. Its a more nuanced problem than you give it credit for.

wes

Denerick wrote: »

Oh, I'm sorry. Didn't realise this was an exercise in pedantry. You know what I mean, 'Militant Palestinian Nationalists/Militant Palestinian Islamists'. Perhaps we can all use a nice acronym going forward in order to stop this kind of pointlessness, such as MPN/MPI

There are people who think Hamas have been around far longer than they have been. No way I could have known you didn't mean them.

Denerick wrote: »

Except when Israel isn't attacked by anyone, they can't retaliate for something that didn't happen. Its a pretty basic pattern. Attack -> Retaliation -> Attack -> Bigger retaliation. If an individual presented these kinds of traits to a psychiatrist, they would have been committed to an institution long ago. In terms of military strategy, the logic resembles that of a severely mentally ill person.

Really, then explain the violent settlement expansion in the West Bank? What they in retaliation to exactly? Is it retaliation to the PA, working with Israel to stop attacks on them? You seem intent on ignoring Israel attacks the Palestinian no matter what.

Israel will always react violently to the Palestinians. They are living on land Israel wants and that is reason enough for there constant violent aggression. If Hamas were to disappear tomorrow, Israel would still steal more and more land, and refuse to stop.

BlaasForRafa

rizzodun wrote: »

While I may be generalising to put forward a point, Israel's response to rocket attacks is wholly disproportionate. 300 attacks by Hamas, 3 people dead, Israel can land a missile with pinpoint accuracy and do not care about innocent civilians as collateral damage.

If Israel didn't care about civilians then the WOULDN'T use expensive guided bombs and missiles, if they really didn't give a toss they'd just plaster targets with cheap old-fashioned freefall bombs.

Chuck Stone

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

If the Palestinians in the Gaza strip could be trusted not to fire rockets at Israel then there wouldn't be a need to blockade them.

They're able to smuggle cars through tunnels into Gaza. Are you really that duped by the Israeli PR machine that you think the blockade is about stopping rockets being fired?

That's a rhetorical question btw.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

If Israel didn't care about civilians then the WOULDN'T use expensive guided bombs and missiles, if they really didn't give a toss they'd just plaster targets with cheap old-fashioned freefall bombs.

Israel knows it risks losing the support of the west if it were ever to do such a thing - it judges very accurately the amount of aggression it can use against its neighbours and 'guests' without completely alienating itself from the rest of the world.

rizzodun

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

If Israel didn't care about civilians then the WOULDN'T use expensive guided bombs and missiles, if they really didn't give a toss they'd just plaster targets with cheap old-fashioned freefall bombs.

Blowing up a car driving down a public street shows disregard for innocent lives, guided missile or not.

BlaasForRafa

rizzodun wrote: »

Blowing up a car driving down a public street shows disregard for innocent lives, guided missile or not.

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

Chuck Stone

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.

[YOUTUBE.Vid]

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

AngryHippie

Of course, they use their Hi-tech incoming missile alert system !
Also known as a rear view mirror:rolleyes:

This is one case where the Israelis may have diverted an inbound missile, do you think that it happens every time ? or that all Israeli pilots would be so discerning.
Rules of engagement eh?

GRMA

This is the IDF who use human shields you're calling protectors of civilians yeah?


Root of the thing is that Israel shouldn't be attacking. Or occupying the native peoples land. As Vincent Brown said, they are the cancer in the region.

AngryHippie

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?

Personally I think the Palestinians end up being the punch bag of everyone in the region. The Arab nations support the Palestinians, but have an anti-Israeli agenda, The US and its associates support the Israeli's but clearly have a zionist agenda and a desire for power, influence and control in the Middle East.

Is there a 3rd party who has the means and the power to make everyone stop in their tracks and have a long hard think about how to move forward? China? the Messiah?

Meantime the Palestinians live as refugees in their own country, at the mercy of their neighbors surviving on the goodwill of their allies, in abject poverty. No future, No Hope, Just Anger, Hate and Fear.