Speaking of Israel...

[Don Corleone]

The remains of the three missing teenagers who were kidnapped 3 weeks ago have been found (http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.602189). :shame:

Praying for the souls of the departed, and comfort for their family. Also praying for cool heads and restraint. Barring that, also praying for the soon-to-be victims of what is likely to follow... a heavy-handed retribution designed to punish, not resolve.

[Hooahguy]

Cooler heads will not prevail, more blood will be spilled, peace will never come.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Prayers well placed, and I will echo them.

Hooahguy:

"Never" is a long time, and I pray not lifetimes away in this instance, but this 50-year-old, despite hoping to double that total, does not expect to see it in his lifetime.

[Hooahguy]

I have lost any hope in a peaceful settlement of this conflict. Just look at the comments people are saying, on both sides. The Israelis are demanding Palestinian blood (preferably of children it seems) and Palestinians are celebrating the murders. Disgusting.

[Fragony]

Hit back and hit hard, how obvious do you want things to be. Palestinians cheer for the death of these poor sods, they cheer for 9/11, they cheer for the death of an abducted Israeli soldier and rub up their face with his organs, crazy frenzy. It is what it is so treat it as what it is. Why care if it only makes them angrier, the hate is already well established.

[Greyblades]

Hit back and hit hard, how obvious do you want things to be. Palestinians cheer for the death of these poor sods, they cheer for 9/11, they cheer for the death of an abducted Israeli soldier and rub up their face with his organs, crazy frenzy. It is what it is so treat it as what it is. Why care if it only makes them angrier, the hate is already well established.

Probably not a good idea to be advocating that a Jewish state, currently accused of recreating the early days of the holocaust against the Palastinians, hit back hard.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I have lost any hope in a peaceful settlement of this conflict. Just look at the comments people are saying, on both sides. The Israelis are demanding Palestinian blood (preferably of children it seems) and Palestinians are celebrating the murders. Disgusting.

I don't know - eventually both sides will get worn out, or more likely the US will lose it's grip and another country will impose peace. In another generation the Holocaust will be merely history, with no living witnesses, and at that point Israel's special standing will drain away and they will be forced to behave like adults.

Then the Palestinians will be forced to behave like adults in turn.

[Fragony]

Probably not a good idea to be advocating that a Jewish state, currently accused of recreating the early days of the holocaust against the Palastinians, hit back hard.

Laughable, in the Hamas own writings it is 100% obvious what they are after for. They don't even pretend they don't want to kill all jews. Kill the vermin whenever you can, whenever you got a reason given it's a gift.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I don't know - eventually both sides will get worn out, or more likely the US will lose it's grip and another country will impose peace. In another generation the Holocaust will be merely history, with no living witnesses, and at that point Israel's special standing will drain away and they will be forced to behave like adults.

Then the Palestinians will be forced to behave like adults in turn.

The sense of guilt will last longer than the deaths of those remaining Holocaust survivors. How much longer I am unsure.

[Sir Moody]

Laughable, in the Hamas own writings it is 100% obvious what they are after for. They don't even pretend they don't want to kill all jews. Kill the vermin whenever you can, whenever you got a reason given it's a gift.

You realise you are talking about Humans yes? I would think about rephrasing your tirade a little - you sound much like the preachers you claim to hate...

On the matter at hand - sadly I don't think it will ever end until one side is gone - Israel insists on slowly strangling the Palestinian people by striping their land away settlement by settlement and in turn the Palestine people refuse to cast out the Terrorist organisations and instead continue to support them with fervour - it would take both sides to step back and so far neither is overly interested...

[Fragony]

You realise you are talking about Humans yes? I would think about rephrasing your tirade a little - you sound much like the preachers you claim to hate...

On the matter at hand - sadly I don't think it will ever end until one side is gone - Israel insists on slowly strangling the Palestinian people by striping their land away settlement by settlement and in turn the Palestine people refuse to cast out the Terrorist organisations and instead continue to support them with fervour - it would take both sides to step back and so far neither is overly interested...

Sure I am talking about humans, but their wellbeing doesn't interest me all that much, live with hate untill you die because of hate. The palestinians are in a pinball-machine because of powers that are bigger than them, sucks. But I don't feel sorry for them, they made their choice, no going back. They cheered when people were jumping out of the WTC because that was a better option than burning alive, they cheer because of these 3 youths were murdered, they cheer for the most horrible things. Not just in Palestina, also in Europe where nobody is taking anyone's land. It's the islam and the islam is nothing more than it is, a sick ideoligy.

[Hax]

While a disturbingly large number of Palestinians have expressed sympathy for the terror attacks, the images from their cheering on 9/11 are pretty ambiguous. they're actually not ambiguous at all, sadly. Additionally, the PNA also condemned the attacks.

I don't know what your point is, Fragony, but I think that your ideas on how to solve the conflict are insane.


On the matter at hand - sadly I don't think it will ever end until one side is gone - Israel insists on slowly strangling the Palestinian people by striping their land away settlement by settlement and in turn the Palestine people refuse to cast out the Terrorist organisations and instead continue to support them with fervour - it would take both sides to step back and so far neither is overly interested...

I think Israel should initiate some kind of program to fully integrate Palestine into Israel and fully integrate Palestinian Arabs into Israel as equal members of society. I'm still a bit lost on the specifics though.

[Beskar]

I think Israel should initiate some kind of program to fully integrate Palestine into Israel and fully integrate Palestinian Arabs into Israel as equal members of society. I'm still a bit lost on the specifics though.

Palestine and the Diaspora outnumber the 'Jews' in Israel, so they do not want to integrate option due to becoming a minority within the state. If the numbers were the other way around, it would have worked better.

Alternative solution would be the integration of the diaspora within Jordan properly opposed to refugee status, considering Jordan is pretty much ethnic palestinian in makeup then work with some solution as to the lands within the bloc as you are suggesting.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The sense of guilt will last longer than the deaths of those remaining Holocaust survivors. How much longer I am unsure.

A Jewish friend of mine talked about visiting the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin, and for Germans under thirty the guilt is already mostly gone. Increasingly, the camp guards etc. who committed the Holocaust are also fading from memory, and in another 25 years they will be the great-grandfathers of the ruling class rather than the grandfathers.

The US tends towards memorialism more than Europe, so perhaps it's more of a thing over there but here's we're returning to "business as usual" to the extent that during the financial crash the term "Anglo-Saxon banker" was declared with a nod and a wink, and a candidate for London Mayor can be openly anti-Semitic without being pilloried.


Palestine and the Diaspora outnumber the 'Jews' in Israel, so they do not want to integrate option due to becoming a minority within the state. If the numbers were the other way around, it would have worked better.

Alternative solution would be the integration of the diaspora within Jordan properly opposed to refugee status, considering Jordan is pretty much ethnic palestinian in makeup then work with some solution as to the lands within the bloc as you are suggesting.

Maybe it's time for the Israelis to lump it? The commitment to a "Jewish Homeland" was never intended to produce a soverign state, and that state has frankly become an embarrassment to the West.

[ICantSpellDawg]

War is war. Both sides attack civilians and should expect nothing less in return.

[Pannonian]

A Jewish friend of mine talked about visiting the Holocaust Memorial in Berlin, and for Germans under thirty the guilt is already mostly gone. Increasingly, the camp guards etc. who committed the Holocaust are also fading from memory, and in another 25 years they will be the great-grandfathers of the ruling class rather than the grandfathers.

The US tends towards memorialism more than Europe, so perhaps it's more of a thing over there but here's we're returning to "business as usual" to the extent that during the financial crash the term "Anglo-Saxon banker" was declared with a nod and a wink, and a candidate for London Mayor can be openly anti-Semitic without being pilloried.



Maybe it's time for the Israelis to lump it? The commitment to a "Jewish Homeland" was never intended to produce a soverign state, and that state has frankly become an embarrassment to the West.

I wish we'd just keep the whole region as isolated from us as possible, instead of keeping "key interests" there and supporting this state or that state. Other than the oil in the oil states, there is nothing of interest there that we don't already have within the EU. If they want to kill each other, rather than wring our hands over how it never ends, we should just leave them to it. If there is any legal way possible, I'd strip anyone who enters that region of UK citizenship. That guy whose son appeared in Syria got it right. His son was a traitor to his country. Similarly with that British-Jewish guy a few years back who harped endlessly on about doing aaliyah and joining the Israeli army. If they identify with an identity other than British, wash our hands of them.

[Hooahguy]

Similarly with that British-Jewish guy a few years back who harped endlessly on about doing aaliyah and joining the Israeli army. If they identify with an identity other than British, wash our hands of them.
Now you know how I feel about all those twats who serve in the IDF then come back to the US and live the rest of their lives. I dont mind if you want to move to Israel and serve, just dont bother coming back and living here if you feel so strongly about defending your "home."

[Fragony]

'I don't know what your point is, Fragony, but I think that your ideas on how to solve the conflict are insane.'

I didn't mention any ideas on how to solve the conflict Haxie, I just said that I don't feel sorry for the Palestinians. They are already treated better than they deserve. They get more aid than any people in the world. If it's about their homeland it's already there, it's called Libanon. The Palestinians are invented they don't exist, it's a refugee camp. Got any landmarks of a civilisation to show me or is it just one big township. Hamas is very clear about what they want. PLO is less loud bu they can't be trusted either.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Dead Palastinian Boy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28124329

[Hooahguy]

To be fair, they aren't sure if it was a revenge killing. Either way, pretty despicable.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

To be fair, they aren't sure if it was a revenge killing. Either way, pretty despicable.

To be fair, they aren't sure those three boys were killed by Hamas.

Wasn't there a case a couple of years ago there Hamas got blamed for a dead boy and it turned out to be just a regular domestic murder?

[Hooahguy]

Fair enough.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

To be fair, they aren't sure those three boys were killed by Hamas.

Wasn't there a case a couple of years ago there Hamas got blamed for a dead boy and it turned out to be just a regular domestic murder?

Well some Hamas leaders did praise the episode, albeit without claiming specific "credit" such as it is.

[Kadagar_AV]

I think Israel should initiate some kind of program to fully integrate Palestine into Israel and fully integrate Palestinian Arabs into Israel as equal members of society. I'm still a bit lost on the specifics though.

And I think everyone should get a unicorn for free...

I respect your solution, but the odds of it happening in this century is extremely bad, to say the least.

[Fragony]

And I think everyone should get a unicorn for free...

Lol you forgot the rainbow, shame on you

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Fair enough.

Which is not to say that it wasn't an ethnically or politically motivated killing - but I don't see any suspects as yet.


Well some Hamas leaders did praise the episode, albeit without claiming specific "credit" such as it is.

I'm sure they did - but Israel has no proof and has already begun blowing up houses just for kicks.

It's not hard to see why these guys think the only good Jew is a dead Jew, given that the vast majority of Jews they meet want to kill them and actively try to do so.

[Greyblades]

Now you know how I feel about all those twats who serve in the IDF then come back to the US and live the rest of their lives. I dont mind if you want to move to Israel and serve, just dont bother coming back and living here if you feel so strongly about defending your "home."

Sounds familiar, same sort of thing that happened with american irish and the IRA.

[HoreTore]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.602767#

[Sarmatian]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.602767#

Sad, really sad.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/.premium-1.602767#

Yeah, it's terrible.

Racism is pretty common, though, and as ugly as Israel can be we need to keep it in context.

[Tellos Athenaios]

and that state has frankly become an embarrassment to the West.

More seriously, it has frankly become an embarrassment to plenty of its own citizens.

To the west it is a liability with a severe case of psychopathy at best, and a little hellhole actively competing for "most insidous caste system based on ethnicity and religious fundamentalism" at worst.

Case in point: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/07/us-teen-appear-israeli-court-201476851982465.html

The sooner we disentangle ourselves from this entirely, the better. Who knows, it might even give us the opportunity to formulate a sane strategy towards the Middle East that gets us something in return.

[Fragony]

Looks like earlier speculations of the Palestinian kid being a victim of a family feud were wrong. He was probably burned alive by extremist jews. How can you do such a thing. Pouring gasoline over someone and actually set someone on fire. How screwed up can you be, that boy probably never hurted anyone. fu

[Beskar]

How can you do such a thing. Pouring gasoline over someone and actually set someone on fire. How screwed up can you be, that boy probably never hurted anyone.

Exactly that. Monsters don't have borders and neither do innocents.

[Hooahguy]

Pretty amusing to hear the stammering from my extremely Zionist friends: "Oh no, the people who did this probably were those Israeli Christians or something, a Jew could never do this" and "Im sure they are just lying or something, Haaretz is clearly Palestinian propaganda!" and even worse, "that kid deserved it for the murders of the three the Palestinians murdered."

The whole "blood for blood" thing makes me sick. Unfriended a few people from facebook over this.

[Greyblades]

An eye for an eye destroys the sunglasses industry... I might be remembering that wrong.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Pretty amusing to hear the stammering from my extremely Zionist friends: "Oh no, the people who did this probably were those Israeli Christians or something, a Jew could never do this" and "Im sure they are just lying or something, Haaretz is clearly Palestinian propaganda!" and even worse, "that kid deserved it for the murders of the three the Palestinians murdered."

The whole "blood for blood" thing makes me sick. Unfriended a few people from facebook over this.

Well, it does say "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life"

If you want to see it in a literally Biblical context, then for every "Jew" the "Palestinians" kill and death should be returned in kind - until all the Palestinians are dead, down to the last man, woman, and child.

Like the Amonites.

[Pannonian]

Well, it does say "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life"

If you want to see it in a literally Biblical context, then for every "Jew" the "Palestinians" kill and death should be returned in kind - until all the Palestinians are dead, down to the last man, woman, and child.

Like the Amonites.

The Amonites were already on a lengthy decline when they were finally finished off by the asteroid that took out the dinosaurs. No need to blame the Israelites for that.

[lars573]

The Amonites were already on a lengthy decline when they were finally finished off by the asteroid that took out the dinosaurs. No need to blame the Israelites for that.
Actually the Ammonites are still going 70 billion strong. Despite a 16 million year civil war.
13543

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The Amonites were already on a lengthy decline when they were finally finished off by the asteroid that took out the dinosaurs. No need to blame the Israelites for that.

There was actually a point to my post.

God told Samuel that the Amonites were all evil, and that was why they all had to die.

I'm sure the Israelis who think it's OK to kill Palestinians think they're all evil - yes - I'm absolutely serious.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Exactly that. Monsters don't have borders and neither do innocents.

"If you gaze for long enough into the abyss....."

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...The whole "blood for blood" thing makes me sick. Unfriended a few people from facebook over this.

I kept looking at this closing line....it could almost stand as an epigram for your generation.

[Hooahguy]

Well, it really is the best way to cut someone you dont see everyday from your life. Besides most of those calling for blood who I know are mostly in Israel now, which means Im not interested in talking to them anyways.

[Beskar]

"If you gaze for long enough into the abyss....."

I am curious as to what you mean with that question in this regard, are you thinking of the framing where one side thinks "palestinians are all the monsters" and the opposite?

[Myth]

Why don't they just move? I'm sure there's plenty of land in the US midwest for example and no one will be killing them etc.

[Greyblades]

Why don't they just move? I'm sure there's plenty of land in the US midwest for example and no one will be killing them etc.

The same reason the mexicans can't.

[Hooahguy]

I am curious as to what you mean with that question in this regard, are you thinking of the framing where one side thinks "palestinians are all the monsters" and the opposite?
Well the full quote is

He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.
so if I had to guess it probably means something along the lines of that people tend to become the thing that they are fighting after a long enough period. A classic example of this occurring would be Animal Farm.

[Hooahguy]

Why don't they just move? I'm sure there's plenty of land in the US midwest for example and no one will be killing them etc.
See, you cannot truly expect a people to just get up and completely move, whether it be the Israelis or the Palestinians. Both sides has too many chips in play for them to relocate.

[Beskar]

See, you cannot truly expect a people to just get up and completely move, whether it be the Israelis or the Palestinians. Both sides has too many chips in play for them to relocate.

UKIP propaganda lied to me. :sad:

[Husar]

Pff, non-europeans are so inflexible...

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

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well the full quote is

so if I had to guess it probably means something along the lines of that people tend to become the thing that they are fighting after a long enough period. A classic example of this occurring would be Animal Farm.

It's supposed to be about not using the enemies foul tactics against them, the so called "4ace to the bottom" where both sides try to outdo each other in nastiness.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am curious as to what you mean with that question in this regard, are you thinking of the framing where one side thinks "palestinians are all the monsters" and the opposite?

Pretty much. Both sides' protracted intransigence has allowed them to fall into this cognitively simple, but ultimately self-defeating rut.

If you stop thinking of the other side as a group of persons with hopes, dreams, aspirations, limited perception etc. -- just as you yourself possess -- it is all too easy to de-humanize them. The only way to win then is via eradication of the opponent -- which history teaches us always exacts a harsh if delayed price on the victor as well.

Rome's eradication of Carthage led, over time, to the destruction of the Roman Republic.

The USSR's eradication of Nazi Germany did damage that modern Russia is still coping with, and ended up creating the context for the USSR's own dissolution.

etc.


Plus, quoting Nietzche always has that "badass" cachet.....

[Hooahguy]

I find it both amusing and frustrating how self-centered my friends on facebook are about the escalation in Israel. So many statuses and pictures on how the world isnt paying attention enough to Israel. "Oh noes there are rockets raining down on Israel and its not the top story of every news agency. Nevermind the fact that there are thousands dying in Syria, theres a civil war going on in Ukraine, bloody cartel wars in Central and South America, and other crises going on around the globe, but noooooo everyone has to fall into your narrow worldview, and gods forbid someone say they simply do not care enough about whats going on in tiny relatively insignificant country. Of course I told some people this in long-winded comments to their cries that nobody is paying attention, but in three cases my comment was deleted with no response by the OP, and in one case, I was even unfriended for my comment which is perfectly OK by me.
Ugh such stupidity and sheer ignorance of how the world works.

/rant

[a completely inoffensive name]

Save your anger on more meaningful things. Block idiots on facebook and don't pay attention to them anymore.

[Ronin]

this will never be resolved....having visited Israel a few years ago it's impressive how even middle-class young IT professionals can turn irrational over a simple discussion of the politics of the area at lunch.
and we all know the proclivities of the hard core element on the other side.

2 groups of people can´t live in peace if they do not want to do so, and both sides have to much blood on their hands to claim to be a straight cut "good guy" in the situation.

it's political incorrect to say it, but possibly the situation could only be resolved by erecting a wall around both sides, providing both with weapons and letting them solve their issues, and let the chips fall were they may.

[Papewaio]

The one good point about supporting Israel is we can say we are meddling in the Middle East and it isn't for oil...

[Fragony]

I am curious as to what you mean with that question in this regard, are you thinking of the framing where one side thinks "palestinians are all the monsters" and the opposite?

It's from Nietschze 'if you gaze long enough in the abysd the abyss gazes into you'

[Ironside]

Relevant video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-evIyrrjTTY

[Seamus Fermanagh]

.... Block idiots on facebook and don't pay attention to them anymore.

I'd be blocking half my friends and most of my relatives....would get sorta quiet.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Well, in the long term Israel MUST annex the West Bank if it is to survive, that means they Palestinians must either be killed or forced out. However, it's foolish to assume the Arabs will, not at some point, produce a new Saladin which means that Israel will ultimately be destroyed after is his killed enough Arabs to convince the remaining Arabs to make a concerted effort to force the Israelis out.

Again.

Rinse and repeat in 500 years.

The only way to break the cycle is for the Israelis to integrate, but they can't because they're Jews and the surrounding people are Muslims.

The punchline, of course, is that some Jews did integrate - at the start of the last century they were living in Jerusalem, in Jaffa etc. They had integrated and converted to Islam - we call these people "Palestinians".

[Hooahguy]

So much idiocy in one article. (http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/mr-president-my-kids-are-in-bomb-shelters/)

Gods forbid that the POTUS call for restraint on both sides. Its almost as if he wants there to be peace and for people not to die!

:wall:

[Pannonian]

So much idiocy in one article. (http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/mr-president-my-kids-are-in-bomb-shelters/)

Gods forbid that the POTUS call for restraint on both sides. Its almost as if he wants there to be peace and for people not to die!

:wall:


Mr. President, my four children, American citizens all, are running to bomb shelters in the Israeli capital while you’re asking terrorists to show restraint.

Mr. President, what is this man's four children, American citizens all, doing in the Israeli capital? If they're going to grow up thinking of Israel as home, do they really count as American citizens?

[Hooahguy]

Mr. President, what is this man's four children, American citizens all, doing in the Israeli capital? If they're going to grow up thinking of Israel as home, do they really count as American citizens?
Oh dont even get me started about people who claim to be upstanding US citizens yet continually declare Israel as the homeland. Ugh.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Oh dont even get me started about people who claim to be upstanding US citizens yet continually declare Israel as the homeland. Ugh.

Well, before we get TOO heavy on them ALL Americans do that. Many Irish-Americans actively supported the republican terrorists during the Troubles, including sitting politicians.

[Hooahguy]

Well, before we get TOO heavy on them ALL Americans do that. Many Irish-Americans actively supported the republican terrorists during the Troubles, including sitting politicians.
But do they actively encourage people to move back to "the homeland"?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

But do they actively encourage people to move back to "the homeland"?

No, they just went and killed British soldiers, or sent money and guns.

Then they'd complain at another time that Britain was not supportive enough of America

[Hooahguy]

Fair enough, did not know that. Either way, still makes me want to hit my head against the wall.

[Husar]

It is stupid regardless of who does it.

When you swear the oath to become an American citizen, you renounce all ties to your previous homeland AFAIK but I guess people just talk the talk as usual and then stop caring about what they just swore.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I can kind of understand why Jews cling onto the idea of a homeland in Israel. The reality is that many Jews in America have anti-Semites for political representatives, of both the left and right-wing variety.

No matter how American you feel hooah, I think there is still a sense that Jews are part of some Hollywood-Communist anti-America conspiracy. It might not be a mainstream idea but it is there and it is tolerated within mainstream parties as the case of Legvold shows.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Whoah, hey. There's more actual anti-semitism in Europe than there is in America, by far.

I don't doubt it, I wasn't meaning what I said as an attack upon America. You would probably be right in saying Jews have more to worry about here in Europe than they do in America. Some even feel the need for a Jewish homeland in Europe (http://medinatweimar.org/).

It all just goes to show that Jews to this day aren't entirely welcome in the Western world. With that in mind I can understand why they would identify with Israel as somewhere where they feel they could belong and be free from persecution.

Americans who complain about the Jewish identification with Israel should stop electing anti-Semites to power if they want Jews to feel part of American society.

[Pannonian]

I don't doubt it, I wasn't meaning what I said as an attack upon America. You would probably be right in saying Jews have more to worry about here in Europe than they do in America. Some even feel the need for a Jewish homeland in Europe (http://medinatweimar.org/).

It all just goes to show that Jews to this day aren't entirely welcome in the Western world. With that in mind I can understand why they would identify with Israel as somewhere where they feel they could belong and be free from persecution.

Americans who complain about the Jewish identification with Israel should stop electing anti-Semites to power if they want Jews to feel part of American society.

It doesn't explain why they think they have a claim on America though, even after moving abroad and declaring themselves for their new country. I think Sean Connery is a tit for getting involved with Scottish nationalism, despite being such a dyed in the wool Scot that he lives anywhere but.

Also, the argument you've put forward for Jews applies several times more to Muslims, in terms of feeling unwelcome. But to me British Muslims, same as British Jews, are British above all else, same as me, unless they declare otherwise.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

.... I think Sean Connery is a tit for getting involved with Scottish nationalism, despite being such a dyed in the wool Scot that he lives anywhere but....

I always thought it ironic that they cast Connery as the Spaniard and Lambert as the Scotsman.....

[HopAlongBunny]

It is interesting how support for Israel is actually higher outside the monolith of Jewish American opinion:

http://happynicetimepeople.com/mad-thing-sweet-sea-parting-moses-dont-tell-jews-jew/

[Hooahguy]

So apparently a cease-fire was called, but Hamas kept sending rockets, so Israel started bombing again.

:wall:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

One of the problems, of course, is that Hamas is not a discrete entity but a coalition. It does not speak with one voice or act according to one set of directions.

[Idaho]

So apparently a cease-fire was called, but Hamas kept sending rockets, so Israel started bombing again.

:wall:
This is a standard Israeli trick. They attack, kill hundreds, offer a "ceasefire" which has some totally unacceptable conditions - then make a big fuss when this ceasefire is rejected.

Hundreds of Palestinians dead after collective punishment attacks from state of the art military. Zero Israeli dead after random crude rocket attacks from fringe group. This is not an even fight.

[Fragony]

Pffffft, having as many civilians as possible killed is what Hamas is after. Cynical but true. Hamas has a better weapon, the media, and they play it like a violin, and everybody falls for it.

[Hooahguy]

This is a standard Israeli trick. They attack, kill hundreds, offer a "ceasefire" which has some totally unacceptable conditions - then make a big fuss when this ceasefire is rejected.

Hundreds of Palestinians dead after collective punishment attacks from state of the art military. Zero Israeli dead after random crude rocket attacks from fringe group. This is not an even fight.
I thought Egypt offered the cease-fire?
And apparently one Israeli was killed by mortar fire yesterday.

[Fragony]

I thought Egypt offered the cease-fire?
And apparently one Israeli was killed by mortar fire yesterday.

Did they, or did they offer a way out of escalation. That was rejected. Hamas needs dead Palestinians more than a junk needs crack. In the meantime normal Palestinians who never harmed anybody get bombed because Hamas is more into pr then anything else. They are sacrificing their own, kinda screwed. Stop firing that shit and you won't be hit back, and continue herding your wives and loving goats, or was it the other way around. Stop firing rockets. You can say 'what's it to me', but antisemitism is what islamist colonists brought here and we just got rid of it, or should I call them immigrants, sounds better.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Did they, or did they offer a way out of escalation. That was rejected. Hamas needs dead Palestinians more than a junk needs crack. In the meantime normal Palestinians who never harmed anybody get bombed because Hamas is more into pr then anything else. They are sacrificing their own, kinda screwed. Stop firing that shit and you won't be hit back, and continue herding your wives and loving goats, or was it the other way around. Stop firing rockets. You can say 'what's it to me', but antisemitism is what islamist colonists brought here and we just got rid of it, or should I call them immigrants, sounds better.

While simple enough on one level, "don't shoot at me and I won't shoot at you," the position you advance fails to consider the living conditions in Gaza. Lots of people crowded together, haphazard infrastructure, huge un and under employment, disproportionate numbers of youths to elders....violence is no less a certainty there than in Chicago's south side. Then you add in Hamas, which provides a focus for that frustration-generated anger.

As to the most recent Israeli attack, Israel is taking the easy way out by lumping all of Hamas into one label. Hamas is a kaleidoscope, and the shifting fragments do NOT always line up on one goal or set of behaviors. Hamas -- the larger leadership elements -- may very well have agreed to and kept this latest cease fire (hard to know). But some fragment repudiated it, acted, and Israel struck back at Hamas.

Is it ethical to punish all of Hamas and Gaza for what may have been the unsanctioned actions of a comparative few? One argument says yes -- that if you claim leadership you must enforce your authority upon your membership and if you cannot you will be held responsible. The other position holds that efforts should only be focused upon the guilty few. The second route is much harder, requiring time and intelligence resources and some degree of cooperation.

Cognitively, it is much simpler to just lob rockets at known targets....much easier than doing the meticulous detective work required for specificity. Besides, the rockets have a shelf life and you eventually have to throw them away if you don't use them.

[Fragony]

Of course it's not ethical to punish the whole of Gaza, but is that happening? The Palestinians are the victim of their own government and whoever they are that are really controlling them. I can't blame Israel for being the way they are, I am glad I am not an Israeli who has to have an opinion on it, and I am extra-glad I don't live in Gaza. But who should you really blame. Hamas or Israel? I wouldn't know, but I am absolutily rooting for those that aren't out to destroy everything, guess who I root more for.

[Beskar]

Reason why it is such a mess is because after the initial partition, Egypt and Jordan annexed Gaza and the Westbank and alienated the citizens by not granting citizenship. These then declared war on Israel, and got stomped with Israel taking those areas and Sinai in the peace-deal. Israel since voluntary gave up these lands and Sinai to the respective parties involved.

A solution would be to build settlements in Egypt and Jordan and allow the Palestinians to emigrate to them and be granted respective citizenship. Israel then annexes the Gaza-strip and West-Bank, integrating the remaining citizens. This would be a death-blow to the Palestinian state, but if this is done correctly, it might produce the most ideal solution for everyone involved, even if they are not happy with it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Reason why it is such a mess is because after the initial partition, Egypt and Jordan annexed Gaza and the Westbank and alienated the citizens by not granting citizenship. These then declared war on Israel, and got stomped with Israel taking those areas and Sinai in the peace-deal. Israel since voluntary gave up these lands and Sinai to the respective parties involved.

A solution would be to build settlements in Egypt and Jordan and allow the Palestinians to emigrate to them and be granted respective citizenship. Israel then annexes the Gaza-strip and West-Bank, integrating the remaining citizens. This would be a death-blow to the Palestinian state, but if this is done correctly, it might produce the most ideal solution for everyone involved, even if they are not happy with it.

You dare to advocate a one-state solution? Kudos to you sir, though you will catch flack for doing so.

I have not heard any better answer put forward though....and two-state solutions are either pipe dreams or mild embellishments on exactly the conditions we have now.

[Beskar]

You dare to advocate a one-state solution? Kudos to you sir, though you will catch flack for doing so.

I have not heard any better answer put forward though....and two-state solutions are either pipe dreams or mild embellishments on exactly the conditions we have now.

Unfortunately, that is the pragmatic answer to the two-states upon one piece of land issue which has highest chance of success, it isn't the ideal answer. It is also flawed due to the very same reasons the Oslo accords came about which the 'two-state' solution was meant to be the answer. Perhaps Palestine to be an autonomous region governed under Israel? There are no 'right' answers and it parallels the Balkan situation a lot.

Alternatives such as 'Israel and Palestine' merger are also possible, but the biggest issue is the Palestinian Refugees which will cause Israel to veto that solution instantly. There is a big diaspora outside of Israel/Palestine and these are ill-treated by Egypt and Jordan. Israel isn't the only 'bad guy' which people like to comment on. It isn't perfect but there is more that everyone else can do to make it better, especially Egypt and Jordan. Lebanon and Syria being rather excused at the moment due to their own internal conflicts.

[Idaho]

Israel's plan is clear enough. They won't allow any viable Palestinian state. They disrupt, destroy and starve the economy, abuse the people and confiscate the land. They won't lay out any possible route that any sane Palestinian would accept.

13634

[Idaho]

Three kids playing on the beach blown up by Israeli jets. How can anyone sane, sanction that? (I said sane Fragony).

[Hooahguy]

They were hiding a rocket cache underneath their sandcastles, duh.

[Beskar]

Israel's plan is clear enough. They won't allow any viable Palestinian state. They disrupt, destroy and starve the economy, abuse the people and confiscate the land. They won't lay out any possible route that any sane Palestinian would accept.

13634

Sorry, that picture is inaccurate. Palestine pretty much didn't exist in 1948-1967
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanian_occupation_of_the_West_Bank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Gaza_Strip_by_Egypt
Also, the picture actually misses out the Six-Day war too, where Israel become this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Six_Day_War_Territories.svg
Sinai was returned in 1979 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7381362.stm)
Oslo Accords occured in 1993 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7385301.stm)

The annex of the West Bank doubled Jordan's population, a large majority which isn't accepted by the state and is part of a refugee crisis. Egypt were equally greedy with Gaza. When Israeli's gave up these possessions, it was on the promise of peace, they traded those lands for security.

A lot of solutions being pushed force Israel to lose security and the constant rocket attacks don't do any favours, such as demanding the return of the Palestinian diaspora which are 3-4 generations of Palestinians who have never lived in Palestine (Awkward, considering Israel's concept..)

Israel is not perfect, but the dangerous thing to do is flip to a position where Israel is the only 'bad guy'. The whole area is pretty much responsible for the absolute mess, including old British and French policies dating from the end of the Ottoman Empire and the Balfour Declaration.

Seamus Fermanagh, funnily enough, just reminded myself. Last few years, there has been a 'Three State' solution since Hamas won the election, and it was overthrown in the West-Bank, leading to Palestine split in two, before the recent reunification government which Israel has opposed (due to Hamas)

[Fragony]

Three kids playing on the beach blown up by Israeli jets. How can anyone sane, sanction that? (I said sane Fragony).

Or observant, look at the upper right corner of the pic, at the holes in the sand and the stones. How many times can you count the exact same objects. Pic is photoshopped. That boy is probably laying in the rubbles.

edit:lol on the left, from halfway, odd sand they got there on these beaches, two types.

Reuters Reuters Reuters how could you miss all that.

Bullshit story.

[Idaho]

Sorry, that picture is inaccurate. Palestine pretty much didn't exist in 1948-1967
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanian_occupation_of_the_West_Bank
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Gaza_Strip_by_Egypt
Also, the picture actually misses out the Six-Day war too, where Israel become this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Six_Day_War_Territories.svg
Sinai was returned in 1979 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7381362.stm)
Oslo Accords occured in 1993 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7385301.stm)

The annex of the West Bank doubled Jordan's population, a large majority which isn't accepted by the state and is part of a refugee crisis. Egypt were equally greedy with Gaza. When Israeli's gave up these possessions, it was on the promise of peace, they traded those lands for security.

A lot of solutions being pushed force Israel to lose security and the constant rocket attacks don't do any favours, such as demanding the return of the Palestinian diaspora which are 3-4 generations of Palestinians who have never lived in Palestine (Awkward, considering Israel's concept..)

Israel is not perfect, but the dangerous thing to do is flip to a position where Israel is the only 'bad guy'. The whole area is pretty much responsible for the absolute mess, including old British and French policies dating from the end of the Ottoman Empire and the Balfour Declaration.

Seamus Fermanagh, funnily enough, just reminded myself. Last few years, there has been a 'Three State' solution since Hamas won the election, and it was overthrown in the West-Bank, leading to Palestine split in two, before the recent reunification government which Israel has opposed (due to Hamas)
Yes everyone is responsible. It's all equal.

Israelis and Palestinians both have passports?
Both have functioning economies?
Both have state of the art weapon technology?
Both can freely move around their own nation?
Both have killed over 200 people in the last week?
Both confiscate each others land?
Both have a vote?

The reality is that one apartheid state is doing everything to expel or exterminate a population who they fear, hate and see as inferior.

The acid test is how Israelis treat Israeli Arabs. Badly, is the answer.

[Idaho]

Or observant, look at the upper right corner of the pic, at the holes in the sand and the stones. How many times can you count the exact same objects. Pic is photoshopped. That boy is probably laying in the rubbles.

edit:lol on the left, from halfway, odd sand they got there on these beaches, two types.

Reuters Reuters Reuters how could you miss all that.

Bullshit story.
You really are a ville and delusional man. Welcome to my ignore list.

[Fragony]

You really are a ville and delusional man. Welcome to my ignore list.

Haha, you probably can't read this but you have fallen for Pallywood.

For those who don't ignore me, judge for yourself.

Warning, the image of the dead kid doesn't get any less unsettling because of the photoshop, click at own risk.

https://mobile.twitter.com/sheikhNB/status/489490642394152960/photo/1

That's a nice line of holes in the right-upper corner, nice line of exactly the same holes. The stones, the Japanese couldn't do it any better, perfect really. Nice composition.

Is there any beer on Idaho's ignore list, sounds like a nice place. Sorry mia muca you ain't too bright.

[Idaho]

Alas the ignore button hasn't worked.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5591776
So the photo shopping was also 4d mind photo shopping that included the watching foreign journalists. Still, I suppose, like the Israelis, you don't really see these people as human so you don't care.

[Montmorency]

A lot of outright calls for ethnic cleansing of Arabs from the Israeli citizenry lately.

I think I hinted a year ago that much of the problem stems from the fact that:

Most of the liberal, Westernized Ashkenazi Jews were killed in the Holocaust or were already in America.

Soviet expat Jews, many of whom reactionary right-wing, streamed into America and Israel from the 1970s on and shifted the political climate.

Most of the rest of the Israeli Jews are Sephardi/Mizrahi Jews, heavily steeped in the Middle-Eastern milieu.

To sum up:

5 of the 6-million Israeli Jews are mostly-conservative, either ex-Communist or Middle-Eastern born-and-bred.


Now, because of the geopolitical situation of Israel's region, the only realist political option Israel has is to gradually (some might say insidiously) colonize all the land they can within their putative borders such that the "two-state solution" becomes moot and Israel's internal security improves due to demographic homogeneity (where it matters). This is inevitable as long as Israel and its neighbors are governed and populated by religious conservatives.

TLDR: The hell with all of these savages. Only time will sort them out.

[Fragony]

Alas the ignore button hasn't worked.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5591776
So the photo shopping was also 4d mind photo shopping that included the watching foreign journalists. Still, I suppose, like the Israelis, you don't really see these people as human so you don't care.

That's what you think. Got any Palestinian friends? I know more about how these things work than you ever will, unless you can answer the question: do I know any people who are actually from there? Because I do, I know a whole lot better what things are like you do because I get it from people who are from there. The first victims are those that are less radical. The second ones are the now-so-called radicals called Hamas. The third will be Hamas because they will be replaced by even more radical movements who will be aided in seizing anything that now belongs to Hamas. That is why Hamas doesn't want a state, they are themselve a target if they get it. Ever thought about that. You didn't did you, but feel free to question my sanity.

Edit: lol, so it was a photoshopping, saw it way before you/they did.

[Idaho]

Hamas and the politicians are scum. As are 99% of all politicians. However the people have a right to a normal life. Israel won't allow that. They either provoke a reaction which is used to justify their oppression, or just continue to strangle, steal and starve the occupied territories.

[Sir Moody]

Edit: lol, so it was a photoshopping, saw it way before you/they did.

the fact that particular image was a photoshop isn't really relevant because the event DID happen and everyone agrees that it happened - if all it takes for you to ignore the reckless bloodshed is the Western Media using a photoshopped image then I really don't know what to say...

[Fragony]

Hamas and the politicians are scum. As are 99% of all politicians. However the people have a right to a normal life. Israel won't allow that. They either provoke a reaction which is used to justify their oppression, or just continue to strangle, steal and starve the occupied territories.

That's just a pretty rediculous thing to say considering that they get more aid than any other people in the world. I feel sorry for the non-political Palestinians but not more than that. If I would have to give an honest answer it would indeed be that I don't really care about them, but neither does the Arab world so why should I. I don't mean them any harm but theyare a victim of circumstances, what I want and don't want has nothing to do with it, bigger things at work there. Hamas is basicly Iran having a proxy. I am not a coldblooded person I hate hearing about the misery that's going on right now, but who's to blame really?

[Fragony]

the fact that particular image was a photoshop isn't really relevant because the event DID happen and everyone agrees that it happened - if all it takes for you to ignore the reckless bloodshed is the Western Media using a photoshopped image then I really don't know what to say...

Yeah, maybe they didn't even bother checking the story and cried with the wolves, not spotting the obvious manipulating of images is lazy at best. Gonna wait for the real pic where that poor kid is absolutily not on a beach.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I remain sympathetic to the Israeli state in general, but I have to say their actions here are disgraceful. It is just pure revenge on hundreds of innocent people because of the actions of a few Hamas scumbags.

Israel has to be stepping up at a time like this and showing why they are better than Hamas, not trying to out-do them a hundredfold in pointless tit-for-tat murders.

[Hooahguy]

Agreed. My general view is that Israel has a right to defend itself against the rocket attacks, but clearly the bombings arent helping anyone and are only causing harm. Harm for the Palestinians who are hurt by the bombings, and harm for the Israelis who come in harm's way when the Palestinians fight back. Why Israel keeps thinking that the bombings will work is beyond me.

But at this point its silly to think that there will ever be a diplomatic solution, it will only end with one side wiping out the other side, whichever side that is.

[Fragony]

the fact that particular image was a photoshop isn't really relevant because the event DID happen and everyone agrees that it happened - if all it takes for you to ignore the reckless bloodshed is the Western Media using a photoshopped image then I really don't know what to say...

Put me on the ignore list and you don't have to say anything. It ain't that hard, and you won't see anything I say. You will never have to do anything to do with me. So what does it matter what you have to say. You can call me whatever you want in your anecdotes of your interesting life. But that isn't going to convince me even if you win the Pulitzer Price. It's pretty simple, they are just better at hating than they are at killing, if they would be better at killing all jews living there would be dead. So it's good that they aren't very good at it.

Edit, little addition, if it's all about living standards, than why are sinagogues attacked in Europe? Maybe, just maybe, is the Islam an absolutily vile ideoligy that has more genes in their collective hate of jews than they have collective genes running in their families?

Sick religion, genetically challenged followers. All in all screw the horribly perverse death-cult that is islam. Sideways.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Relevant video:


http://youtu.be/7XMMUNGwm4c (http://youtu.be/7XMMUNGwm4c)

[Sir Moody]

Put me on the ignore list and you don't have to say anything. It ain't that hard, and you won't see anything I say. You will never have to do anything to do with me. So what does it matter what you have to say. You can call me whatever you want in your anecdotes of your interesting life. But that isn't going to convince me even if you win the Pulitzer Price. It's pretty simple, they are just better at hating than they are at killing, if they would be better at killing all jews living there would be dead. So it's good that they aren't very good at it.

Edit, little addition, if it's all about living standards, than why are sinagogues attacked in Europe? Maybe, just maybe, is the Islam an absolutily vile ideoligy that has more genes in their collective hate of jews than they have collective genes running in their families?

Sick religion, genetically challenged followers. All in all screw the horribly perverse death-cult that is islam. Sideways.

ignoring ignorance and hate doesn't make it go away so I wont be ignoring you - I will pity you however for your complete lack of empathy...

[Fragony]

ignoring ignorance and hate doesn't make it go away so I wont be ignoring you - I will pity you however for your complete lack of empathy...

Me no empathy, You could see it like that if you want to. Can I also call you total idiots for falling for an obviously manipulated photograph that has no other purpose than manipulating you.

Was kinda right no, how I look at things doesn't change anything, that pic was deviced to make you look at things in a certain way. Doesn't that make you feel kinda used. I would feel used when being lied to with cheap tricks, especially when they are so very very obvious. You are probably not the most stupid person on the planet and surroundings that oh so willingly gobbed it up, so credits for that.

[Sir Moody]

personally the fact that it was witnessed by several western media outlets first hand was more convincing to me - and one fake image really didn't change that fact...

[Papewaio]

Can someone point me to the military target that caused those children to be euphemistically termed Collateral damage?

Because if you can't point to a legitmate target then this was a state sponsored terrorist act. It is meant to intimadate and crush any will of the people.

=][=

Now if its all about living standards why do Ultra Orthodox Jewish men attack non-orthodox Jewish school children?

[Beskar]

But at this point its silly to think that there will ever be a diplomatic solution, it will only end with one side wiping out the other side, whichever side that is.

Part of why my suggested solution would be for settlements to be erected for the Palestinian population in the neighbouring countries and the various areas, and they be granted citizenship in those areas and compensated. It isn't the most ideal situation in the world, but if I was in that situation, being compensated to live with a home and work, would be a better alternative than nothing at all.

This would obviously be a policy carried out over a stretch of years from agreements and practical standpoint. Obviously working better if the compensation is generous, perhaps assistance from foreign aid budgets.

Israel would most likely end up burdened with the greatest cost in the arrangement, as it should be if they want those territories.

[Papewaio]

So you want the rest of the world to pay for a diaspora mark II?

[Kralizec]

Agreed. My general view is that Israel has a right to defend itself against the rocket attacks, but clearly the bombings arent helping anyone and are only causing harm. Harm for the Palestinians who are hurt by the bombings, and harm for the Israelis who come in harm's way when the Palestinians fight back. Why Israel keeps thinking that the bombings will work is beyond me.

But at this point its silly to think that there will ever be a diplomatic solution, it will only end with one side wiping out the other side, whichever side that is.

I respect the sentiments expressed in this post, but for the pessimistic prediction...I hope not, and I frankly expect not. Hamas is not capable of it. Even the situation changed dramaticly and Israel faced an existential threat, there'd be plenty of warning signs long before it - Israel has plenty of foreign goodwill to count on, in the first place the US.
Israel might consider driving out the Palestinians entirely, but I expect not. They would have to embrace the prospect of being a pariah on the world stage, and such a 'final solution' would arouse so much internal disssent that even an extremely right-wing government would hesitate.

Then again...the general sequence of things could continue for at least a decade or two, by which point settler outposts literally saturate the west bank. The rest of the world now maintains that they're all illegal and should be dismantled, but that might be an impossible option in the far future. Leaving the Palestinians even more overcrowded and concentrated than they currently are.

I seriously wonder what the underlying strategy beneath the settlement policy is - it just might be to create a fait accompli for future Israeli politicians, ensuring that there's no way going back.

[Beskar]

So you want the rest of the world to pay for a diaspora mark II?

Nothing perfect, hence this situation in the first place. But I think working on ending a humanitarian crisis would be a good spend and as stated, those involved in causing it are the ones with most of the burden.

[Pannonian]

I respect the sentiments expressed in this post, but for the pessimistic prediction...I hope not, and I frankly expect not. Hamas is not capable of it. Even the situation changed dramaticly and Israel faced an existential threat, there'd be plenty of warning signs long before it - Israel has plenty of foreign goodwill to count on, in the first place the US.
Israel might consider driving out the Palestinians entirely, but I expect not. They would have to embrace the prospect of being a pariah on the world stage, and such a 'final solution' would arouse so much internal disssent that even an extremely right-wing government would hesitate.

Then again...the general sequence of things could continue for at least a decade or two, by which point settler outposts literally saturate the west bank. The rest of the world now maintains that they're all illegal and should be dismantled, but that might be an impossible option in the far future. Leaving the Palestinians even more overcrowded and concentrated than they currently are.

I seriously wonder what the underlying strategy beneath the settlement policy is - it just might be to create a fait accompli for future Israeli politicians, ensuring that there's no way going back.

With the borders defined by previous agreements, continued settlement is basically land-grabbing, which according to just about every legal understanding is casis belli and provides a iusta causa for the Palestinians to retaliate as they see fit. Of course, the onus is on the Palestinians to repel the Israelis themselves, and they're too weak to do so, and quite frankly I don't care enough about them to want us to help them do so. The Melian dialogue applies. The strong (Israelis) do what they will, the weak (Palestinians) suffer what they must. There is no justice involved except practical reality.

For anyone wishing to excuse the settlements, I ask a couple of questions: are the settlers subject to Palestinian law, and do they pay taxes to the Palestinian authorities? If neither is true, but they are supported by the Israeli state, then they are invaders. If both are true, they are immigrants. For people like Frag, I'd ask a further question: would you be happy if Muslim inhabitants in your country refused to pay taxes or obey your country's laws, but pledged allegiance to and were supported by a foreign state? If it happened in Britain, I'd expect my government to do everything legally possible to eliminate the problem, and if we weren't strong enough, call on every favour we have to help us do so.

[Papewaio]

Last time someone tried something like that with the British it caused the Falkland war.

[Pannonian]

Last time someone tried something like that with the British it caused the Falkland war.

Someone may try to nitpick by saying that an invasion is crossing the border in arms. Which is only true where the country being invaded is strong enough to forcibly eject unarmed invaders, thus necessitating any invasion to be done with arms. If you trust your supporting government to back you with arms in the event of any attempt to evict you, you can cross the border and occupy foreign land unarmed, and it is no less an invasion than if you'd done so in full uniform and military regalia. If you enter and live in another country, you are either a guest of that country, a citizen of that country, or an invader.

[Hooahguy]

The ground offensive has begun. (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28359582)

Interesting to see what happens now.

[drone]

I know the best solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the only downside is that it involves cobalt nukes.

[Greyblades]

Well that's awkward because there arent any cobalt nukes.

[Papewaio]

Any dirty bomb or a neutron one would have the same effect as a cobalt bomb:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt_bomb

[Idaho]

We are all war gamers. What would you think of a "battle" that had a casualty ratio of 263-1?

[Papewaio]

Monks, fog and somehow my general the only one dead as he charged through the forest....

[Rhyfelwyr]

We are all war gamers. What would you think of a "battle" that had a casualty ratio of 263-1?

A heroic victory!

EDIT: To clarify, I mean something serious when I say this. Israeli society will hail the military as heroes and while I harbour nothing against the ordinary soldier, at the strategic level these actions are the furthest thing possible from heroic.

[Idaho]

The correct answer is: a massacre.

[Greyblades]

Er... technically if the casulaties are purely millitary then a 263-1 I consider it a successful military action, I have a propensity for artillery and like it when the battles are one sided.

Obviously in this case where the casualties are civillians it's a massacre, but the numbers dont by themselves constitute massacre in the wrongful mass murder sense, to be clear here.

[Idaho]

Lets take a look at the few Hamas fireworks landing in leafy, well-to-do Israeli suburbs. Cat slightly scared:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpqiHchsbE0

And then compare to the effect of battlefield munitions being fired into the crappy ghetto of Gaza:

13668

270 dead versus 1 dead. These are civilians.

[drone]

Lets take a look at the few Hamas fireworks landing in leafy, well-to-do Israeli suburbs. Cat slightly scared:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpqiHchsbE0
Much lulz for the cat, but I launched bigger stuff than that on July 4th. Was that just a remnant from an iron dome intercept? :inquisitive:

[Beskar]

Much lulz for the cat, but I launched bigger stuff than that on July 4th. Was that just a remnant from an iron dome intercept? :inquisitive:

Ding ding ding.

The Jerusalem Post reported that the metal shard that hit the tree was a remnant of an Israel Defense Force Iron Dome missile intercepting a rocket that had been launched from Gaza.

Are you trying to post an advertisement for Israel's Iron-dome system or you simply trying to mislead people by not presenting all the facts?

[Idaho]

Sorry - I got my stats wrong. It's now 290 - 1. Among the latest dead, 3 kids shot by a tank.

1,300 permanently displaced, 40,000 in UN shelters. Although with Israel's past form for not giving a shit about those...

[Hooahguy]

Isn't it 290-2 now?

[drone]

Are you trying to post an advertisement for Israel's Iron-dome system or you simply trying to mislead people by not presenting all the facts?
Maybe I'm just guessing (correctly, it appears) as to why a rocket would make such a lame impact. :inquisitive: Iron Dome gets a lot of press, but it's not as good as the hype makes it out to be.

[HopAlongBunny]

..., but it's not as good as the hype makes it out to be.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/528916/israeli-rocket-defense-system-is-failing-at-crucial-task-expert-analysts-say/

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Part of why my suggested solution would be for settlements to be erected for the Palestinian population in the neighbouring countries and the various areas, and they be granted citizenship in those areas and compensated. It isn't the most ideal situation in the world, but if I was in that situation, being compensated to live with a home and work, would be a better alternative than nothing at all.

This would obviously be a policy carried out over a stretch of years from agreements and practical standpoint. Obviously working better if the compensation is generous, perhaps assistance from foreign aid budgets.

Israel would most likely end up burdened with the greatest cost in the arrangement, as it should be if they want those territories.

So, like the people of Diego Garcia?

Nope - not acceptable - you would be condemning the Palestinians to a worse fate than they face now - and denying them the right to the land they have bled over.

[Beskar]

Nope - not acceptable - you would be condemning the Palestinians to a worse fate than they face now - and denying them the right to the land they have bled over.

Actually, I meant for the ones in Palestine to actually stay there, idea being, Israel would find the conditions too costly to move them, so they will accept them as legitimate people/owners of that area. I was referring for settlements for the refugees and citizenships, which is a big concern.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Extreme nationalists cruelly stomping civilians being used as cover by religious extremists who launch the dumbest of bombs in order to prompt retaliation using the smartest of technology, all for the sake of hopefully getting the favor of Europe who created the entire situation in the first place.

What a joke.

[Husar]

European exceptionalism/ingenuity!

[Idaho]

Extreme nationalists cruelly stomping civilians being used as cover by religious extremists who launch the dumbest of bombs in order to prompt retaliation using the smartest of technology, all for the sake of hopefully getting the favor of Europe who created the entire situation in the first place.

What a joke.

David Lloyd George - created the northern Ireland conflict, the Arab Israeli conflict, the Cyprus disaster.

So with the latest bombing the death toll reaches over 300 with 8 members of the same family dead.

Americans are a strange lot. They seem more prone to narratives that create an "other", an enemy. Once that division is made, all sympathy and action flows from that. This explains why they have always been so poor at wars of occupation. They can't switch from being invading aggressors to defensive peacekeepers.

[Idaho]

If anyone was still in mistaken belief that Israeli is not deliberately trying to destroy the viability of the Palestinian state:From The New York Times:

How the West Chose War in Gaza

By preventing payment of Hamas workers salaries and free passage to Egypt, Israel and the West laid the groundwork for the latest escalation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/opinion/gaza-and-israel-the-road-to-war-paved-by-the-west.html

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

http://youtu.be/Qd2lZosBrig

Sad - because I think Jewish girls are hot.

[Sp4]

Relevant video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-evIyrrjTTY

And this is probably why no one cares ^^

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Everybody can't have the same taste, that would get boring fast. I'm sure some of them are just talking for the camera, though. :laugh4:

Personally interesting because my cousin married a Jew - and as she's not Jewish, their children will not be deemed Jewish. Also interesting because the first thing my father asked on hearing of the engagement was "what do his parents think?"

Which shows the generational gap.

[Hooahguy]

As someone who is Jewish who has no intention of marrying Jewish, I know that I will probably be disowned if I don't marry within the fold.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

As someone who is Jewish who has no intention of marrying Jewish, I know that I will probably be disowned if I don't marry within the fold.

Eh - come to the UK.

Although, if you'd seen Suzie Gold you'd think all Jews here were obsessed with their children "marrying out". Although the main reason to see that film is to appreciate just how hot Summer Phoenix is, and then to curse because it's the last film she made.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0348155/

[Seamus Fermanagh]

David Lloyd George - created the northern Ireland conflict, the Arab Israeli conflict, the Cyprus disaster.

So with the latest bombing the death toll reaches over 300 with 8 members of the same family dead.

Americans are a strange lot. They seem more prone to narratives that create an "other", an enemy. Once that division is made, all sympathy and action flows from that. This explains why they have always been so poor at wars of occupation. They can't switch from being invading aggressors to defensive peacekeepers.

Part of the decision on Archangel in support of White Russia as well, if I recall. Not to mention his willingness to cave in to the Germans in 1940.

[Hooahguy]

Eh - come to the UK.

Although, if you'd seen Suzie Gold you'd think all Jews here were obsessed with their children "marrying out". Although the main reason to see that film is to appreciate just how hot Summer Phoenix is, and then to curse because it's the last film she made.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0348155/
Technically if your child doesnt marry Jewish then Jewish law says you must consider them as if they were dead. Funny lot we Jews are.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Technically if your child doesnt marry Jewish then Jewish law says you must consider them as if they were dead. Funny lot we Jews are.

I remember a pal of mine from my grad school days....his grandfather told him to enjoy himself all he wanted but to remember that "shiksa were just for practice."

[Hooahguy]

I remember a pal of mine from my grad school days....his grandfather told him to enjoy himself all he wanted but to remember that "shiksa were just for practice."
Haha yes that is a saying. There really isnt anything that I know of in Jewish law that prohibits sex with non-Jews, its the procreating part which is the problem.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I remember a pal of mine from my grad school days....his grandfather told him to enjoy himself all he wanted but to remember that "shiksa were just for practice."

That's sickening.

[Husar]

http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/good-bye-jonathan-stuart-leibowitz-and-kisses-to-the-little-goyim/2013/10/02/

That is actually somewhat crazy, just imagine someone today wrote that article about aryans instead of jews.
Or about muslims marrying non-muslims or blacks marrying non-blacks...

[Montmorency]

http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/good-bye-jonathan-stuart-leibowitz-and-kisses-to-the-little-goyim/2013/10/02/


Parochialism makes me :rolleyes:

[Fragony]

That's sickening.

Yeah, and exactly why orthodox jews and conservative muslims don't belong here in the west.

Go away. Desert->

[Hooahguy]

That's sickening.
Out of curiosity, why? I do agree that the concept is kinda funny for me in an uneasy manner since Ive had a better time with "shiksas" than any Jewish gal so far, but Ive always seen that phrase as more of a joke than something to be taken seriously.


http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/good-bye-jonathan-stuart-leibowitz-and-kisses-to-the-little-goyim/2013/10/02/

That is actually somewhat crazy, just imagine someone today wrote that article about aryans instead of jews.
Or about muslims marrying non-muslims or blacks marrying non-blacks...
Yeah, nobody with half a brain at least in the Jewish world takes the Jewish Press seriously. It's a rag, kinda like the Daily Mail.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Out of curiosity, why? I do agree that the concept is kinda funny for me in an uneasy manner since Ive had a better time with "shiksas" than any Jewish gal so far, but Ive always seen that phrase as more of a joke than something to be taken seriously.

Because he's saying that girls outside of his own race/religion can be treated like sex objects for nothing more than his own gratification. Even if it is only said in jest it is still an unhealthy mindset to have.

To treat girls like sex objects is always wrong, but adding a racial aspect to it makes it particularly disgusting.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Out of curiosity, why? I do agree that the concept is kinda funny for me in an uneasy manner since Ive had a better time with "shiksas" than any Jewish gal so far, but Ive always seen that phrase as more of a joke than something to be taken seriously.

In fairness - this is common to most communities - you can use the "other" for sex, but they're not fit to marry.

What do you call a girl you have sex with without a meaningful emotional relationship? - If you know going in it's not going to be for the long haul, it's not meaningful.

The word you are looking for is "whore".

Of course, I hear that White Americans think Jewish girls are easy - probably because the Jewish boys don't want them until they're ready to marry.

The article on John Stewart there makes the point very clearly. Stewart is a Jew - but his wife and children are not - he should be ashamed - he's practising "ethnic cleansing" against his own people - UNLESS his wife converted.

Obviously, if his wife converted and became a proper Jew - a proper woman - it's OK for them to be married.

[Beskar]

Reminds me of those Jack Straw comments about Arab Individuals preying on the 'easy meat' White Girls.
Article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Reminds me of those Jack Straw comments about Arab Individuals preying on the 'easy meat' White Girls.
Article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12141603)

That comment was somewhat miss-reported, as Jack Straw was making the point (quite accurately, I think) that a section of the Muslim community see white, non Muslim, girls as "fair game" for things they would never allow to be done to Muslim girls.

This is not news, nor is it a specifically Muslim problem - you only have to look at the shameful way the American G.I.'s behaved with women from Allied Countries to see the problem is endemic to all male cultural groups everywhere - although not all men.

[Hooahguy]

I see your point. In my circles at least its not quite as derogatory as the word "whore" its just the word used to describe non-Jewish women, but still certainly not a "good" term to use.

Anyways more on topic, the death toll is now ~425 - 20.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I see your point. In my circles at least its not quite as derogatory as the word "whore" its just the word used to describe non-Jewish women, but still certainly not a "good" term to use.

Anyways more on topic, the death toll is now ~425 - 20.

Well, if you want to marry out, I invite you to consider why the Jewish community has a specific word for non-Jewish women.

Death toll is absurd - this is like Lebanon all over again. As soon as one of Israel's neighbours shows any signs of progress they flatten them.

Israel is not only the focus for all Islamists in the region, it actively suppresses any positive development.

[Hooahguy]

Well, if you want to marry out, I invite you to consider why the Jewish community has a specific word for non-Jewish women.
Also a word for non-Jewish men. Basically all non-Jews. Were pretty xenophobic Id say.


Death toll is absurd - this is like Lebanon all over again. As soon as one of Israel's neighbours shows any signs of progress they flatten them.

Israel is not only the focus for all Islamists in the region, it actively suppresses any positive development.
What do you mean by "progress"?

[Idaho]

Meanwhile the Palestinian death toll reaches 348 with 2700 injured. Many women and children. So do you think it's unreasonable for the families of those dead to cheer the news of 13 dead Israeli soldiers?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/gaza-thousands-flee-israeli-bombardment

[Hooahguy]

I thought it was past 425 now?

Either way, the Palestinians will cheer the deaths of the Israelis and the Israelis will cheer the deaths of the Palestinians. And the cycle continues.

[x-dANGEr]

This thread is so lovely. Too many people on their high pedestals. I guess it sounds too cool to be all wise and smart about people dying else where.. they're just animals killing each other, at the end of the day. Never mind you could very well be in these people's shoes, if it weren't for your "lucky" place or time of birth.

I particularly enjoy the "only possible solution" suggested by one of the members.

In short, get real. 10 is not the same as 1, no matter how you spin it. You can't just take things from people, that's called stealing, and if you do, you better expect they won't be happy about it, and never will be. Kill them? Well if this was a few hundred years ago that would probably slip just fine [think Amerika?], but no, your civility denies that doesn't it? Unless stealing things is fine, or killing people is fine if they're not fine with you stealing their possessions.

Keep going though, I'm feeling enlightened and intellectually bettered, by the post.

[Greyblades]

Interesting that you decry people for thier high pedestels while building your own even higher.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This thread is so lovely. Too many people on their high pedestals. I guess it sounds too cool to be all wise and smart about people dying else where.. they're just animals killing each other, at the end of the day. Never mind you could very well be in these people's shoes, if it weren't for your "lucky" place or time of birth.

I particularly enjoy the "only possible solution" suggested by one of the members.

In short, get real. 10 is not the same as 1, no matter how you spin it. You can't just take things from people, that's called stealing, and if you do, you better expect they won't be happy about it, and never will be. Kill them? Well if this was a few hundred years ago that would probably slip just fine [think Amerika?], but no, your civility denies that doesn't it? Unless stealing things is fine, or killing people is fine if they're not fine with you stealing their possessions.

Keep going though, I'm feeling enlightened and intellectually bettered, by the post.

War is stupid - I don't think anyone here is defending the utter foolishness that led to this situation - and I don't think even frags is defending the wholesale slaughter going on right now.

Maybe you should, you know, read​ some of these posts?

[Papewaio]

So we are approaching/past the point where more civilians have died then in the Malaysian Airliner.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

[HOPPING ON PEDASTAL] Could we please stop reporting deaths as though they were ball-scores? I grew up with that in the '60s. It was silly at best and vile at worst then...and hasn't improved. [/PEDASTAL]

[Papewaio]

Collatoral damage implies:
(1) The target was military ie emplacement, communications, bunker etc
(2) That care was taken to minimize civilian casualties.
(3) That there is a miltary advantage to doing so in proportion to the act.

As a posed to a political advantage through civilian deaths which would be an act of terrorism.

[Montmorency]

The problem is with political conduct, not military conduct.

Sure, but, uh, if anyone had problems with the American interventions in the region, it's difficult to imagine them not being at least as displeased with the Levantine situation.

So speaking of proportion misses the point.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

How's that related?

Israel deliberately destroyed the infrastructure in Lebanon "we will bomb them back to the Stone Age". Lebanon was a functioning pluralistic democracy, Sunni, Shia, Christian, Druze...

sure, they made accommodations with Hamas, but it was still the Hamas military wing - not Lebanon's army - that was attacking Israel. By destroying the Lebanese military and political structure Israel made Hamas stronger in the long term for what was, frankly, a very limited short term advantage.

[Pannonian]

Israel deliberately destroyed the infrastructure in Lebanon "we will bomb them back to the Stone Age". Lebanon was a functioning pluralistic democracy, Sunni, Shia, Christian, Druze...

sure, they made accommodations with Hamas, but it was still the Hamas military wing - not Lebanon's army - that was attacking Israel. By destroying the Lebanese military and political structure Israel made Hamas stronger in the long term for what was, frankly, a very limited short term advantage.

AFAICS this is just another good old punitive campaign to demonstrate Israel's overwhelming military power and willingness to use it, in order to cow the other side into submission or at least a quiet period. Nothing wrong with it if that's the way you roll. Us western powers moved away from that by mid-20th century at the latest, but Israel isn't a western power. They're more westernised than most middle eastern countries, but they're a middle eastern country and they operate by those rules.

[Idaho]

Israeli snipers shoot people looking for dead/injured relatives. Then repeatedly shoot a down and injured man:


http://youtu.be/sBakqLUBWP0

Grim, brutal and evil.

[Fragony]

Don't know about you but I bleed when I get wounded, not at war of course we don't have any here, but I certainly bleed more after losing a kickboxing match and riding pony's

Palywood, cynical, false, not be be considered considering earlier pallywood exploits. He wasn't even shot there are no wounds.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

AFAICS this is just another good old punitive campaign to demonstrate Israel's overwhelming military power and willingness to use it, in order to cow the other side into submission or at least a quiet period. Nothing wrong with it if that's the way you roll. Us western powers moved away from that by mid-20th century at the latest, but Israel isn't a western power. They're more westernised than most middle eastern countries, but they're a middle eastern country and they operate by those rules.

I am glad we of the effete West care about such things -- I think it represents an improvement in human governance and the use of power. I am happy that my country could no longer countenance the tactics employed without hesitation and with full official support in World War 2 or the intervention in Korea. I am happy that analogous actions taken during the Vietnam intervention, Gulf 1, Gulf 2 and the War on Terror [not what I would have called it] rarely have official sanction and have been in a number of cases successfully prosecuted as crimes. But nothing can make warfare humane.

Warfare probably started as a ritual clash between bands of hunter-gatherers which were more symbolic than violent. We still have vestiges of such rituals like the Inuit song duels to teach us of this.

When resources expanded following agriculture and metallurgy, war assumed its basic form. To wit: Defeat your opponents, kill the warriors who oppose you, kill the old or the young who will be a burden, take all of their valuta, acquire the younger women and breed them from your own men so that their maternalism binds them to your group thereafter. The defeated are thereby destroyed and cannot pose a renewed threat. Civilians v military; public v private property -- all such distinctions are irrelevant to war in its basic form. There are variations, but that is the essential character of war -- Clausewitz notwithstanding.

If warfare is less brutal than this model, then somebody is attempting to restrain or "limit" war -- usually for moral purposes. But there are always those for whom any such restraints are themselves wrong.

[drone]

I particularly enjoy the "only possible solution" suggested by one of the members.

Yeah, someone reads my posts!

The only way to stop the incessant fighting over this particular patch of desert (as seen in the excellent "This Land Is Mine" vid) is to make the land uninhabitable. Neither side wants peace, so to replace the constant war/low level terrorism endless cycle, there are two options:
Complete genocide
Denial of territory
I'm open to others if you have them.

[x-dANGEr]

I don't understand how you treat the two parties as equal. There are two aspects where I find this flawed.

First, at root, to me, this is a problem of legitimacy. Some people legitimately own all those lands, and have owned it for a very long time. Suddenly, others took over it, colonized it, and have been there de facto for the last what 90 years? Do you truly believe they both have equal right to the lands in dispute?

This isn't even a matter of politics to me. Say an old man owned half of Haifa, and was forcefully expelled from Haifa, but still has all the legal documents which prove he owns half of Haifa. Isn't it his right then to want his land back? What say does anyone in the world have to "rightfully" take over his land?

Second, does proportion even matter at all? For example, is it sound to paint all people who kill with the same color without looking into the details? I think doing that is a very superficial way of weighing things, it reflects absence of reality and too much book-reading. The devil is in the detail.

What's also truly disturbing is the hypocrisy the civilized modern world shows when dealing with this crisis in comparison to others. What happened, I don't get it.. How did I miss the world-wide convention on founding a country in some innocent people's land, expelling the original people, and then basing that country on a strictly racist hierarchy, and turning a blind eye to whatever evil shit that country does from then on?

Also, let's stop kidding ourselves. The country in question probably has the most allies in the region, contrary to the popular stigma, which goes "oh they're backed against the wall etc., poor them."

Excuse my deficiency of expression. My last post was unfair to most of the posters here, but then I really didn't address most of them with it. Sorry about that misunderstanding.

[Pannonian]

I don't understand how you treat the two parties as equal. There are two aspects where I find this flawed.

First, at root, to me, this is a problem of legitimacy. Some people legitimately own all those lands, and have owned it for a very long time. Suddenly, others took over it, colonized it, and have been there de facto for the last what 90 years? Do you truly believe they both have equal right to the lands in dispute?

This isn't even a matter of politics to me. Say an old man owned half of Haifa, and was forcefully expelled from Haifa, but still has all the legal documents which prove he owns half of Haifa. Isn't it his right then to want his land back? What say does anyone in the world have to "rightfully" take over his land?

Second, does proportion even matter at all? For example, is it sound to paint all people who kill with the same color without looking into the details? I think doing that is a very superficial way of weighing things, it reflects absence of reality and too much book-reading. The devil is in the detail.

What's also truly disturbing is the hypocrisy the civilized modern world shows when dealing with this crisis in comparison to others. What happened, I don't get it.. How did I miss the world-wide convention on founding a country in some innocent people's land, expelling the original people, and then basing that country on a strictly racist hierarchy, and turning a blind eye to whatever evil shit that country does from then on?

Also, let's stop kidding ourselves. The country in question probably has the most allies in the region, contrary to the popular stigma, which goes "oh they're backed against the wall etc., poor them."

Excuse my deficiency of expression. My last post was unfair to most of the posters here, but then I really didn't address most of them with it. Sorry about that misunderstanding.

Some of us have an even less hypocritical and less high pedestalled position than yourself. You complain about taking stuff from people and you call it stealing. Fair enough, but then what's your position on taking stuff back from the Israelis in order to restore it to the Palestinians? At what stage does taking and giving become righteous and principled in your eyes? Who decides what to give and what to take, and who enforces it to your satisfaction? If you're not just riding a high horse, but have a practical position, please answer these questions.

As for me, I care not who has what nor who kills whom. They're not me and mine, what they do doesn't affect me. I only wish there was an even lesser chance of what they do affecting me. I put forward a position earlier considering international law, but only as an academic point since, as I said, I care not enough to enforce it. If you want us to take a position of principle, explain why we should care enough to do so.

Just so you can have a point of reference and something to accuse me of, I'm a Brit, so you can drag up all the stuff about us illegally giving the Jews what wasn't ours to give. And you know what? I don't care that we did. I didn't do it, nor anyone in my generation. It's long past the stage where it's in our power to do anything about it, and since we can't do anything about it, why should we be bothered? The question is, what's in it for us now that we should back one side or the other? I don't think Israel offers anything that we don't already have, and Palestine offers even less. And if anyone tries the guilt argument on us, that's just an argument for us to care even less. We've done worse elsewhere, and if we can't be bothered to feel guilty about them, there's even less chance that we can be bothered to feel guilty about a patch of sand where everyone hates us anyway.

[lars573]

I don't understand how you treat the two parties as equal. There are two aspects where I find this flawed.

First, at root, to me, this is a problem of legitimacy. Some people legitimately own all those lands, and have owned it for a very long time. Suddenly, others took over it, colonized it, and have been there de facto for the last what 90 years? Do you truly believe they both have equal right to the lands in dispute?

This isn't even a matter of politics to me. Say an old man owned half of Haifa, and was forcefully expelled from Haifa, but still has all the legal documents which prove he owns half of Haifa. Isn't it his right then to want his land back? What say does anyone in the world have to "rightfully" take over his land?
The Arabs who owned (or more properly perpetually leased from the sublime porte) the land only really did so since 1858 or 1873 (when the Ottoman empire enacted a series of land reforms). Before that land was held collectively by a village in a very medieval sense of by custom rather than legality. Also don't forget that old chestnut, possession in 9/10th's of the law. So whom ever has it now has more right.

Who has the right? The legitimate government that controls Haifa, namely Israel. And Israel has passed 4 laws (The Absentees’ Property Law, 5710- 1950, Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law, 5713-1953, The Absentees’ Property (Amendment No.3) (Release and Use of Endowment Property) Law, 5725-1965, The Absentees’ Property (Compensation) Law, 5733-1973 ) saying that any Arab who abandoned his land (whether by their own choice or a gun to their heads), left any claims behind with it. Save for some sort of financial compensation, once a final peace deal is reached. So realistically his papers would be better used wiping his ass.

And let's be real here. For every Arab who fled Mandatory Palestine in 1948, a Jew left his home in North Africa or the Arab country. Guess where they ended up? Israel

[Don Corleone]

First, at root, to me, this is a problem of legitimacy. Some people legitimately own all those lands, and have owned it for a very long time. Suddenly, others took over it, colonized it, and have been there de facto for the last what 90 years? Do you truly believe they both have equal right to the lands in dispute?

I'm very sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians, more so than I ever used to be. However, while I agree with you that the root issue here is legitimacy (as it applies to land ownership by a political body, sovereignty), I disagree with your supposition that one side has it and the other doesn't. We can trace who took what from whom all the way back to our pre-historic days.

I suppose before we can discuss who has legitimate claim to ownership, we have to define legitimacy and sovereignty. From whence do the rights come? How are they established? Are they transferrable? If I buy a property in good faith, and then I sell my property to a buyer, yet down the road it is revealed that my deed to the property had another claimant and my deed was in dispute... what then? ~:confused:

The more I think about this, the more I'm coming to believe that Chief Seattle may have been correct... You cannot "own" land, the Earth does not belong to man, man belongs to the Earth. (http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/seattle.htm)

[Idaho]

This forum always depresses the shit out of me. I remember the Iraq war threads and the Afghan war threads. All the dehumanising of the enemy. The callousness and casual uninterest in civilian death. The blithe faith that the established media truth and the actions and decisions of our leaders were the natural and best course of action.

When we read through history we come across injustices and crimes that at the time went largely unchallenged. There is no reason our era should be different.

[Pannonian]

This forum airways depresses the shit out of me. I remember the Iraq war threads and the Afghan war threads. All the dehumanising of the enemy. The callousness and casual uninterest in civilian death. The blithe faith that the established media truth and the actions and decisions of our leaders were the natural and best course of action.

When we read through history we come across injustices and crimes that at the time went largely unchallenged. There is no reason our era should be different.

Israel possesses nukes. They're willing to spread their joy a bit if it comes to the crunch. So all the sermonising about injustices will amount to nothing. It's terrorism in its pure form, but by heck it's effective. If you disapprove of Israel, then the most we can do is the course I favour, which is to isolate ourselves from them as far as is possible. Not that I approve of what the Palestinians do either, except to acknowledge the legal injustice of the West Bank settlements. I think they're within their rights to do whatever they see fit to expel the Israelis from those areas of the West Bank which the Israelis have agreed to be Palestinian as per the last agreement. But it's up to them to use this right to expel the Israelis. If they can't do it themselves, c'est la vie.

[x-dANGEr]

If this sort of thing had happened say 500 years ago, I guess the problem wouldn't be as complicated. One side would exterminate the other, and the notion of owning a land would become irrelevant. That's not the case here though. So long the "true owner" lives, they will have a right to what they own. I realize the words between quotations are disputed and may sound controversial to some of you, especially if you start going all Plato, but to make things more simple:

Try imagining what would happen if the scenario would be repeated now, say with part of Britain (or anywhere, really). Say Obama promised Armenians a home in England.. As far as I'm concerned those people living in England now will be the rightful owners of their lands, even if for 100 years they're still fighting back for it, so long they still exist.

Again touching on the notion of legitimacy, I guess it's most similar to the right of the crown. Sure, you can "steal" that right, but ironically history has shown that you have to exterminate the rightful heir to become so yourself. This time around, the rightful crown prince is still alive, and you only killed the king. I guess history repeats itself for a reason.

Sadly I'm painting the same tragic picture most of you do.. One side has to exterminate the other, it is an existential conflict, but as far as what I think, I will side with the Palestinians on this, because well, I do think they are "rightful" until they do not exist. Of course this is not the only way to go. The other way to go about this is to try and altar the existential nature of the conflict, which requires integration efforts the involved parties are clearly not spending. This also, IMO, falls on the stronger party. The strong integrates the weak.

Dear brit friend, I welcome the notion of you not caring about anything. Indeed your country has done the world enough favors.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This forum always depresses the shit out of me. I remember the Iraq war threads and the Afghan war threads. All the dehumanising of the enemy. The callousness and casual uninterest in civilian death. The blithe faith that the established media truth and the actions and decisions of our leaders were the natural and best course of action.

When we read through history we come across injustices and crimes that at the time went largely unchallenged. There is no reason our era should be different.

You refuse to vote - so you're pretty depressing too.

And anyway, maybe you should look at the posts where we're at least trying to be civil and even handed?

[Pannonian]

If this sort of thing had happened say 500 years ago, I guess the problem wouldn't be as complicated. One side would exterminate the other, and the notion of owning a land would become irrelevant. That's not the case here though. So long the "true owner" lives, they will have a right to what they own. I realize the words between quotations are disputed and may sound controversial to some of you, especially if you start going all Plato, but to make things more simple:

Try imagining what would happen if the scenario would be repeated now, say with part of Britain (or anywhere, really). Say Obama promised Armenians a home in England.. As far as I'm concerned those people living in England now will be the rightful owners of their lands, even if for 100 years they're still fighting back for it, so long they still exist.

Again touching on the notion of legitimacy, I guess it's most similar to the right of the crown. Sure, you can "steal" that right, but ironically history has shown that you have to exterminate the rightful heir to become so yourself. This time around, the rightful crown prince is still alive, and you only killed the king. I guess history repeats itself for a reason.

Sadly I'm painting the same tragic picture most of you do.. One side has to exterminate the other, it is an existential conflict, but as far as what I think, I will side with the Palestinians on this, because well, I do think they are "rightful" until they do not exist. Of course this is not the only way to go. The other way to go about this is to try and altar the existential nature of the conflict, which requires integration efforts the involved parties are clearly not spending. This also, IMO, falls on the stronger party. The strong integrates the weak.

Dear brit friend, I welcome the notion of you not caring about anything. Indeed your country has done the world enough favors.

Would we complain if another country claimed a right to the land we lived in? Have a look at the English language. It's one of the more irregular European languages, with several sets of rules each governing its own vocabulary. It's the result of this land having been conquered and occupied by different peoples through its history. The original Brits got pushed back into the mountains in the west, where they preserve their Welsh language. The Anglo-Saxons who took over endured numerous incursions from the Norse, who've left their mark especially in the north. However, it was the Norse's French-speaking cousins who left a more lasting mark. They were never expelled, but eventually identified themselves along with the general population as a unified English people. This reminder of how many times the area we call England has been invaded and conquered is now the most widely spoken language in the world. Do we complain about the injustices inflicted on us? No, we're grown ups and we call this process history.

BTW, if you want to talk about injustices and atrocities, the north of England, probably an area equivalent to Palestine as defined by the UN circa 1950, suffered a systematic depopulation that's far worse than anything the Palestinians have suffered. Not as bad as the Jews in WWII, but still pretty bad, with most of the population in the area killed or starving to death in the wake of a campaign by the Norman conquerors.

[a completely inoffensive name]

This forum always depresses the shit out of me. I remember the Iraq war threads and the Afghan war threads. All the dehumanising of the enemy. The callousness and casual uninterest in civilian death. The blithe faith that the established media truth and the actions and decisions of our leaders were the natural and best course of action.

Iraq you have a point because the Iraqi's were innocent bystanders caught up in US foreign policy. This conflict between the Palestinians and Israeli's is perpetuated wholeheartedly by both sides. Decades of peace talks have only resulted in bribing Egypt and Israel with millions of foreign aid. If anyone really had such a bleeding heart over deaths in the Gaza, they would advocate for total withdraw of foreign aid and presence in the region and let either the Arab states or Israel fight until total hegemony is established by one side or the other.

[Papewaio]

Any serious military scholar would tell you that Israel is doing all of these things. Hamas hides rockets in schools, so... :shrug: As Brenus so often likes to bring up, NATO bombed a hospital in Kosovo and that was considered acceptable, if tragic. And that wasn't even a military target, it was just error. We've seen both kinds of collateral damage from Israel so far in this one, and its not anything beyond the pale honestly. Your objections, while both valid and agreeable, are 100% political. That might seem nitpicky, but I don't see it that way. The problem is with political conduct, not military conduct.

So far... ya never know, ugh :wall:

My three points are essentially a summary of the Rome Statue which goes on to say what crimalises an act of war:
" Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;"

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Warfare in that part of the world is very old, as are attacks upon civilians. Massacres in Palestine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Palestine); massacres in Palestinian territories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Palestinian_Territories); massacres in Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Israel). Perhaps the acknowledged beauty of the area is due to its overly rich fertilization. ~:mecry:

I study conflict. I have a degree in it. I have watched young Palestinians and Jews argue/attempt to resolve this conflict as part of a laboratory in Second Track (Burtonian) conflict resolution. The continuance of this conflict is such a cultural idee fixe for both parties that it beggars description. It makes Ireland during the Troubles look like a community with a few "issues."

For too many, on both sides, this conflict and their opposition to the "other" has ceased to be a part of what it means to be an Israeli or a Palestinian...it has become integral to their identity -- it is central to who they are. And none of us gives up readily on who we conceive ourselves to be.

Perhaps there will come an event some day in the future...like the two moms from different factions in Ireland who said "enough" and who were the catalyst for change...but I fear this will come only after a far longer series of horrors than any of us hope to see. For most in Israel/Palestine, I fear that only Plato's definition of peace will prove to be true.

[Papewaio]

You take a far more merciful interpretation of that and the laws of war in general than the Israeli or even Australian Army does, if you think civilians who happen to be near rockets that are actively being used for strategic warfare are totally off limits. The israelies have taken meaures to limit collateral damage, and are in accordance with international law so far.

Thats really important. Its cool to emotionally disagree with what Israel has historically done to the palestinians, but that is quite separate from what the Israeli military is doing now. So far.

It's not my opinion it is in quotes from the article:
"Article 8(2)(b)(iv) criminalizes:
Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;
Article 8(2)(b)(iv) draws on the principles in Article 51(5)(b) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, but restricts the criminal prohibition to cases that are "clearly" excessive. The application of Article 8(2)(b)(iv) requires, inter alia, an assessment of:
(a) the anticipated civilian damage or injury;
(b) the anticipated military advantage;
(c) and whether (a) was "clearly excessive" in relation to (b)."

[Montmorency]

So you must be pro-Iraq War? Yet you're not...

What gives?

[Papewaio]

Its a vague article, and that is your opinion. Is it excessive to go after the missile sites, even if civilians are around? The Israel Army says no. Most western Armies say no. Either the Israelis haven't signed on to that article, in which case who cares? Or they take a radically different interpretation, which should not be surprising given how vague the writing is. Under the laws of war, when an enemy is raining rockets on your cities, what constitutes excessive retaliation, proportionality, and anticipated military advantage (that's a big one!) are very subjective. There's a reason most nations who actually use their Armies don't even sign on to half of these stupid declarations. :shrug:

The Rome Statue has an interesting background. One of the interesting outcomes is that the ICC prosecuter cannot determine if Palestine is a State and therefore cannot sign it.

So Palestine which was once a functioning province of an Empire was take. Partially/fully over when the Zionists took it over to remake Israel.

Problem is most invaders by becomming the ruling class have an obligation to the ruled.

The Palestinians like the Lebonese are not a single ethnic/religious group. Their are Muslims and Christians of many different sects amongst them. Hamas doesn't have the backing of every single Palestinian.

Collective punishment is an extreme form of prejudice to say the least. Proportionality is settling/stealing people's lands in another country and then killing over a hundred to one when they fight back. This isn't 1950's stylised Cowboys vs Indians is Boer War/apartheid SA.

[Papewaio]

The latest invasion is in response to several escalations on both sides.

The most news worthy was the three youths who were murdered and the revenge murder of another.

Now Israel has launched a campaign to get back at the perpartrors of the first and have arrested the perpartrors of the second.

So given that this is essentially an attempt to right the wrongs of three murders is it proportional to kill a hundred civilians for each?

Are the homes of the second set of murderers bulldozed and their families evicted from their lands? The suspected ones of the first were. Surely the same punishment should be metered out to both?

Should policeman be counted as military for the purposes of death tolls?

Was Timothy McVeighs bombing therefore 100% military casualties and collateral damage as it was a Federal building? If not why not?

[Hooahguy]

This might be of interest to some: How Politics and Lies Triggered an Unintended War in Gaza. (http://forward.com/articles/201764/how-politics-and-lies-triggered-an-unintended-war/)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Israeli operations constitute war crimes.

[Montmorency]

The position is simply that both, though distinct in the manner, are unacceptable. Nothing is being conflated except in your position.

You can't honestly think that people who consider the Iraq War to have been a crime against humanity due to its conduct would not recognize the current invasion as such...

Anyway, it's not even a moral position, necessarily. There's nothing ambiguous about these human rights, and if "not being signatory" is the best you can put up, well...

[Montmorency]

The Israeli invasion is strictly to control the rockets, both presently and in the future. They have that right, under international law, no matter how much you don't like it.

But, again, that's not the point...


based on the laws of war as practiced and understood by the nations that actual go to war.

The fact that international laws and norms of war are outdated and apply best to national wars between national states is another topic entirely. The point is that according to the letter and spirit of these aforementioned, the Israelis are mucking things up.

[Papewaio]

That's far from the best I've come up with. I'm out, done with this one. My position is non-partisan, and based on the laws of war as practiced and understood by the nations that actually go to war. Invading Iraq could be a war crime, given that it was based on false evidence knowingly given--but even so, the president gets a pardon and the UN has absolutely no authority to enforce such a thing. If Bush is a war criminal, he will be convicted in an American court. Since that will never happen, its a moot point. The Israeli invasion is strictly to control the rockets, both presently and in the future. They have that right, under international law, no matter how much you don't like it.

I think you are confalting a (hypothetical) war crime and its ability to be prosecuted. Just because a criminal could get away with a war crime does not extinguish the war crime. All it means is that justice/law cannot be served.

[Papewaio]

Also not true. The laws of war have been updated internally by the nations that still go to war. Under the US Laws of Land Warfare, (so far) the Israelis are doing nothing wrong strictly regarding the conduct of this invasion to control Hamas' ability to launch rockets. If you're trying to say that Israel is breaking international law as a few very stuffy European signatories understand it, then that's a very disingenuous and political argument. Your problem is with international law, and the ability of nations to opt in and opt out. So make that argument. :shrug:

You realize the US, Israel and Sudan are still signatories to this set of laws even though they have said they are stepping away from them to join the likes of Russia and China.

Yeah might makes right.

[Papewaio]

The Israeli invasion is strictly to control the rockets, both presently and in the future. They have that right, under international law, no matter how much you don't like it.

Sure targeting missile platforms. But not everyone thinks these are the only things being targeted and some of them are not the norm for a military target.

Do police count as civilian or military casualties?

[Papewaio]

I could say literally anything and you'd find a way to make it political. Whatever.

Well stop making political rhetoric :p

Surely the Palestinians if they are a state can evict invaders too?

[Montmorency]

It's astounding that you would claim there is nothing political to the international adjudication of military laws, and that it is purely a military matter. Of course such disingenuous compartmentalization of literally the most political aspect of a military's existence makes our statements unacceptable to each other.

But you know, as they say, the truth of the crime lies not with the victim but with the witness...

[Montmorency]

I'm making the least controversial claims in this entire thread

Empirically the opposite.


and I have no idea what you're going on about.

I gathered. :no:

[Montmorency]

The US State Department basically takes the exact same line I've been pushing for the last few pages.

Kim Jong Un could claim that his people are well-fed and happy. So? Perhaps might makes right, but does incest make right?


Israel has a right to defend itself. What part of that are you arguing with, and why?

As laid down by international bodies, the manner in which Israel is defending itself is criminal. Very simple.

Think of Martin and Zimmerman: let's say Martin sought Zimmerman out (even as Zimmerman was doing the same) and threw a punch. Florida law being much less "merciful" than international law tends to be, Martin's subsequent shooting death would be considered lawful. But if Martin had run off to his own house to throw rocks at Zimmerman from the windows, and Zimmerman had responded by setting Martin's house on fire, he would rightfully face a very long prison sentence, even in Florida.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The US State Department basically takes the exact same line I've been pushing for the last few pages. Its a humanitarian shame, but Israel has a right to defend itself. What part of that are you arguing with, and why?




:juggle2:

Nobody believes they're just targeting missile sites.

The extent of the ground bombardment - against an enemy lacking serious AA capability - and the number of Palestinian dead make it look like a punitive campaign.

Aside from that - Hamas is part of the Palestinian Government, if Israel is going to invade it should have formally declared war - attacking another state without a formal declaration of war is a war crime.

Having said that, the US conducts illegal operations in Pakistan, so Israel's key ally has set the bar very low.

[Montmorency]

Can you give an example? Preferably one that doesn't just mention that the Israelis are indeed conducting military operations in Gaza?

Eyewitness reporting from the scene, or a source with a source in the IDF or Knesset?

Again, does incest make right?

[Montmorency]

You just did what I asked you not to do.

'They say they're trying to limit collateral damage'

'Civilian casualties are inevitable'

'Tunnels pose a threat'

Did you honestly think this added anything to the discussion? :inquisitive:

[Montmorency]

The fact that you still have no idea what I'm even talking about makes me sad.

[Montmorency]

:strawman1:

:shrug:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So, the problem is that people believe rumors instead of what's reported by reliable sources? Like I said, I'm not speculating. I'm giving a simple analysis of what's been reported by reliable news sources so far, which is actually quite a lot. For example, the tunnels are apparently more extensive than previously thought, and much of the fighting is taking place in densely populated urban areas that house these tunnels, used by Hamas (allegedly). If true, that's legit for the IDF to attack, and you can expect a lot more civilian casualties, sadly. Hopefully 'ol Kerry can get them to agree to a humanitarian cease-fire or something. :sweatdrop:

The death toll of Civilians has passed 500 in a few days - that looks punitive against the number of Israeli dead - compare to the (relatively) low civilian casualties in Ukraine and the much higher casualties among the Ukrainian army.

Lets just reflect on how sad it is for a moment that we have those two to compare.

Now, even assuming that the fact the tunnels are in Urban areas is the reason for higher casualties it still begs the question of why this is so. Given the low Israeli casualties we know they aren't fighting in them, which suggests they might (for example) be using Ground Penetrating RADAR to map the tunnels and then using bombs to flatten them.

That's not OK, nor is any variation of that strategy.

If this was genuinely a Police Action targeting Hamas then the IDF would sweep through the area, stopping up tunnel entrances as they go and hope to flush the Hamas fighters out, then pour concrete into all the tunnels.

I realise America uses it's fire-power to suppress local resistance in a big way but in Europe and the West that's not usually considered a legitimate use of resources. One of the biggest criticisms of British Forces in Iraq was that they had started adopting these "American tactics" due to a lack of manpower.

[Hooahguy]

Where are you getting the 600 civilian deaths number from?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Its an important distinction to make, between Israeli policy towards Gaza, and Israeli conduct during this invasion. I've said it as thoroughly and in as many ways as I can, so whatever. Go on confusing the two if you want, I'm just trying to steer the discussion in a direction that's less painful to read.

Gelcube:

You are operating with a different frame of reference in mind regarding legitimacy in military targeting.

They view the use of any weapons that could harm non-combatants as a war crime. Artillery, rockets, crew-served weaponry of any kind...all of these have margins of error during normal use that virtually guarantee civilian casualties in densely populated areas such as Gaza (which is, of course, exacerbated by the positioning of equipment near or within civilian concentrations). As such, your "opposition" would view ANY such weapons use as wrong and would argue that the Israelis should refrain from counterfire.

They would probably -- in terms of the morality of the specific act, NOT the implied policy -- accept the deployment of military personnel to effect a direct response using small arms after specific identification of the militancy of the target has been confirmed using mark one eyeballs. Even then, I suspect they would expect these soldiers to show the same restraint a police force would for the potential of collateral casualties during such a "shoot."

Please note, even if they accept that such a military response would be moral in its limitation of civilian casualties, they view the policies and behavior of Israel within Gaza as inherently criminal and tyrannical.

I hope I am summarizing this clearly -- that is my read of things based on the above.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...was American policy in Iraq for the last two years, despite the fact that far more (up to what the Israelis are currently doing) would have been legal under our own laws of warfare. The cost and manpower required to do it that way is prohibitive, and nobody should be expecting Israel to do it that way from a practical and realistic military (or even legal) point of view. Would I like to see them try? Absolutely. But I don't expect it, and neither should you. :shrug:

I do not.

Earlier I noted that war in its most basic form -- at least past symbolic/ritual conflict -- was ghastly and makes no distinction between civilian and military.

While saddened, I am not surprised when I read of incidents involving brutality/civilian targeting -- I am surprised that it does not happen more than it now does.

[Pannonian]

was American policy in Iraq for the last two years, despite the fact that far more (up to what the Israelis are currently doing) would have been legal under our own laws of warfare. The cost and manpower required to do it that way is prohibitive, and nobody should be expecting Israel to do it that way from a practical and realistic military (or even legal) point of view. Would I like to see them try? Absolutely. But I don't expect it, and neither should you. :shrug:

Militarily, the cleanest way for Israel to sort out Gaza and Hamas would be to remove all settlements from the West Bank so as to bolster Fatah's position, do whatever else to strengthen Fatah's position, eg. giving it economic aid to be spent on the West Bank (Europe and the US would probably be glad to contribute to this), give them some form of military aid that would never put them within a million miles of threatening Israel's existence, but would be enough to sustain them through a small scale civil war, then let them loose on Hamas in Gaza. All the losses and atrocities would be the business of other Palestinians, not the Israeli state, whose only contribution in this is the benign support of the legitimate Palestinian government.

No chance of that happening though. Rabin demonstrated that Israeli leaders who make peace with Palestinians are killed.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Gelcube:

You are operating with a different frame of reference in mind regarding legitimacy in military targeting.

They view the use of any weapons that could harm non-combatants as a war crime. Artillery, rockets, crew-served weaponry of any kind...all of these have margins of error during normal use that virtually guarantee civilian casualties in densely populated areas such as Gaza (which is, of course, exacerbated by the positioning of equipment near or within civilian concentrations). As such, your "opposition" would view ANY such weapons use as wrong and would argue that the Israelis should refrain from counterfire.

They would probably -- in terms of the morality of the specific act, NOT the implied policy -- accept the deployment of military personnel to effect a direct response using small arms after specific identification of the militancy of the target has been confirmed using mark one eyeballs. Even then, I suspect they would expect these soldiers to show the same restraint a police force would for the potential of collateral casualties during such a "shoot."

Please note, even if they accept that such a military response would be moral in its limitation of civilian casualties, they view the policies and behavior of Israel within Gaza as inherently criminal and tyrannical.

I hope I am summarizing this clearly -- that is my read of things based on the above.

I won't speak for the others, but my problem is the huge number of casualties.

What is the end goal here?

If it was to neutralise the rocket launchers, surely that could have been done with counter-battery fire - there would have been collateral damage but it would have been localised. What we have seen, though, are punitive strikes against the homes of Hamas "commanders", intel we mostly have to rely on Israel for, and strikes on populated areas.

The 2006 War in Lebanon and previous strikes into gaza have been primarily punitive - the local populace are ground into the dust to drive home the fact that opposing Israel is worse than opposing the militants.

[Hooahguy]

Quick question for you all, so I was having a debate with an acquaintance on Facebook about this conflict, and she kept bringing up how the rest of the world isnt paying nearly enough attention to "(insert crisis here)" and saying how it was antisemitism how much everyone was concentrating on Israel. I said she was practicing a classic case of Whataboutism, to which she denies the claim, saying that can only be leveled at the USSR (ignoring how she was appealing to hypocrisy). Is that a valid claim or not? I think that its perfectly valid to say its Whataboutism.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I won't speak for the others, but my problem is the huge number of casualties.

What is the end goal here?

If it was to neutralise the rocket launchers, surely that could have been done with counter-battery fire - there would have been collateral damage but it would have been localised. What we have seen, though, are punitive strikes against the homes of Hamas "commanders", intel we mostly have to rely on Israel for, and strikes on populated areas.

The 2006 War in Lebanon and previous strikes into gaza have been primarily punitive - the local populace are ground into the dust to drive home the fact that opposing Israel is worse than opposing the militants.

There is no endgame. These are punitive strikes with limited tactical objectives as the frontpieces.

[Beskar]

Quick question for you all, so I was having a debate with an acquaintance on Facebook about this conflict, and she kept bringing up how the rest of the world isnt paying nearly enough attention to "(insert crisis here)" and saying how it was antisemitism how much everyone was concentrating on Israel. I said she was practicing a classic case of Whataboutism, to which she denies the claim, saying that can only be leveled at the USSR (ignoring how she was appealing to hypocrisy). Is that a valid claim or not? I think that its perfectly valid to say its Whataboutism.

MH17 is dominating the headlines far more than Gaza, which is what some people have accused the West of being 'biased' of. "Oh look, another plane, lets ignore what Israel is doing again". I am sure I even read a post somewhere which a person pointed at the casualty list complaining about Gaza not receiving the same coverage.

You get these incidents on both sides of the fence. Some people 'want more' others 'want less'. Depending on the proximity of the incident has a massive bearing. I have a feeling Chinese news has Gaza on a footnote somewhere in comparison.

I bet the Glasgow Commonwealth games wished people gave them more attention.

[Husar]

Quick question for you all, so I was having a debate with an acquaintance on Facebook about this conflict, and she kept bringing up how the rest of the world isnt paying nearly enough attention to "(insert crisis here)" and saying how it was antisemitism how much everyone was concentrating on Israel. I said she was practicing a classic case of Whataboutism, to which she denies the claim, saying that can only be leveled at the USSR (ignoring how she was appealing to hypocrisy). Is that a valid claim or not? I think that its perfectly valid to say its Whataboutism.

You're probably right, but you should take her up on how she does apparently not deny Israel's wrongdoing and only complains about the amount of attention it gets. There is probably some antisemitism involved but using that to distract from the actual issues is not a solution.


I think we need a new thread about not voting. It's an interesting topic, where I am right and you are all wrong.

You can start a new topic if you look forward to being proven wrong, but with your attitude it seems either pointless or it will hurt even more when you finally have to admit your mistakes.

[HopAlongBunny]

The UN apparently sees some basis for possible war crimes. The article focuses on Israel, but does mention Hamas.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2014/07/un-israel-assault-gaza-may-be-war-crime-201472394058635836.html

It is unclear whether the focus on Israel is a product of the UN or the reporting.

BBC provides the same information; apparently the focus on Israel is part of the UN report:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28437626

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think we need a new thread about not voting. It's an interesting topic, where I am right and you are all wrong.

That's just stupid.

You live in a democracy but do not even bother to vote - then you say you love democracy.

Back to Israel - supposedly lots of Israelis disagree with the settlements - but they keep voting in settlement-orientated governments.

why's that?

Well, mostly I think it's because most Israelis aren't actually that bothered - in theory they don't like the settlements but in practice they're more interested in keeping the militants down, and they don't know any way to do that other than beating the Palestinians like mangy dogs.

Basically - the whole area is brutalised and nothing short of a 100-year UN mandate has any hope of ever fixing it.

[Hooahguy]

I dont think a UN mandate would fix anything nowadays. I mean where in the world has a UN mandate actually had a positive change?

[Husar]

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/success.shtml


Since 1948, the UN has helped end conflicts and foster reconciliation by conducting successful peacekeeping operations in dozens of countries, including Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mozambique, Namibia and Tajikistan.

UN peacekeeping has also made a real difference in other places with recently completed or on-going operations such as Sierra Leone, Burundi, Côte d’Ivoire, Timor-Leste, Liberia, Haiti and Kosovo. By providing basic security guarantees and responding to crises, these UN operations have supported political transitions and helped buttress fragile new state institutions. They have helped countries to close the chapter of conflict and open a path to normal development, even if major peacebuilding challenges remain.

[Idaho]

You can start a new topic if you look forward to being proven wrong, but with your attitude it seems either pointless or it will hurt even more when you finally have to admit your mistakes.

Joke dude! There would be no point in debating otherwise.

I must have been wasted when I wrote that last bit. I don't remember it.

[Idaho]

I dont think a UN mandate would fix anything nowadays. I mean where in the world has a UN mandate actually had a positive change?

When it was what the US was going to do anyway.

[Papewaio]

When it was what the US was going to do anyway.

Which in the case of Israel/Palestine is very apt as the US will veto anything not in Israel's short term interests.

US is an enabler both in voting and money for what Israel does.

[Hooahguy]

Fair enough.

Anyways, there was a pro-Israel rally held today in my town, and when I refused to go (since its a waste of my time) I got reamed by a bunch of people for basically being morally reprehensible for not going to a rally. Yes, I am a terrible evil human being for not wanting to go to a rally.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

[Rhyfelwyr]

Fair enough.

Anyways, there was a pro-Israel rally held today in my town, and when I refused to go (since its a waste of my time) I got reamed by a bunch of people for basically being morally reprehensible for not going to a rally. Yes, I am a terrible evil human being for not wanting to go to a rally.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Well if the reason you gave was that is was "a waste of my time", then I can see why they might have got a bit upset! You should have just said you were morally opposed to it.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Fair enough.

Anyways, there was a pro-Israel rally held today in my town, and when I refused to go (since its a waste of my time) I got reamed by a bunch of people for basically being morally reprehensible for not going to a rally. Yes, I am a terrible evil human being for not wanting to go to a rally.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

I had always read that most guys went to rallies more because the gals would be there than for the putative cause of the rally.

[HoreTore]

I had always read that most guys went to rallies more because the gals would be there than for the putative cause of the rally.

Every good leftie demonstration always ends up at the bar.

Drop a few Simone de Beauvoir quotes, and you're set.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Every good leftie demonstration always ends up at the bar.

Drop a few Simone de Beauvoir quotes, and you're set.

On this side of the pond I think Gandhi or Guevara quotes would probably get you further -- less philosophy interest -- but you CLEARLY have the general assessment of things entirely on target.

[HoreTore]

On this side of the pond I think Gandhi or Guevara quotes would probably get you further -- less philosophy interest -- but you CLEARLY have the general assessment of things entirely on target.

"Man is defined as a human being and woman as a female – whenever she behaves as a human being she is said to imitate the male." - Simone de Beauvoir

The point is not to quote leftist icons; everyone will be doing that. No, the point is that you - as a man - quote a feminist icon. Nothing will get those radical feminist knickers off faster. It doesn't really matter if the feminist in question is familiar with de Beauvoir. Her work is so influential that basically every feminist piece can trace its arguments back to her(in particular the second sex, of course), and so such quotes will resonate with her ideology no matter what. The main obstacle will be to seperate the full-blown lesbians from the bi-curios, but in that case the following quote might help:

"In itself, homosexuality is as limiting as heterosexuality: the ideal should be to be capable of loving a woman or a man; either, a human being, without feeling fear, restraint, or obligation." - de Beauvoir, again


What, you think I joined political youth groups because of politics....?

[Hooahguy]

Well if the reason you gave was that is was "a waste of my time", then I can see why they might have got a bit upset! You should have just said you were morally opposed to it.
Saying I was morally opposed is even worse! Saying you dont fall in line with the strictly pro-Israel crowd is basically political suicide. Not that I have political aspirations, but better not to close that door so early.


I had always read that most guys went to rallies more because the gals would be there than for the putative cause of the rally.
Yeah, in these kind of rallys the average age for female participation is 50 and they usually have kids.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

"Man is defined as a human being and woman as a female – whenever she behaves as a human being she is said to imitate the male." - Simone de Beauvoir

The point is not to quote leftist icons; everyone will be doing that. No, the point is that you - as a man - quote a feminist icon. Nothing will get those radical feminist knickers off faster. It doesn't really matter if the feminist in question is familiar with de Beauvoir. Her work is so influential that basically every feminist piece can trace its arguments back to her(in particular the second sex, of course), and so such quotes will resonate with her ideology no matter what. The main obstacle will be to seperate the full-blown lesbians from the bi-curios, but in that case the following quote might help:

"In itself, homosexuality is as limiting as heterosexuality: the ideal should be to be capable of loving a woman or a man; either, a human being, without feeling fear, restraint, or obligation." - de Beauvoir, again


What, you think I joined political youth groups because of politics....?

OH I understood your point about de Beauvoir and "le feminism," but most yank gals wouldn't....hence the more typical leftist/pacifist authors. Your approach reveals a level of sophistication that wouldn't be so well matched on this side of things. Despite being smart, so many of my countrypersons choose ignorance.

[HoreTore]

OH I understood your point about de Beauvoir and "le feminism," but most yank gals wouldn't....hence the more typical leftist/pacifist authors. Your approach reveals a level of sophistication that wouldn't be so well matched on this side of things. Despite being smart, so many of my countrypersons choose ignorance.

I absolutely refuse to believe that your college women are ignorant of basic feminism.

I should go over and verify....

[HopAlongBunny]

Of course its the civilians who suffer.
If one is "anti-Hamas" they get gunned down as traitors to the cause; if "anti-Israel" they are fair game for "collateral damage"; decide you have no dog in this game? see-"collateral damage"
Actually I am surprised there are not more "suicide bombers".

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I absolutely refuse to believe that your college women are ignorant of basic feminism.

I should go over and verify....

Do come, do.

[HopAlongBunny]

Perhaps this conflict is more about "jobs, jobs, jobs!"
Instead of "wasteful spending" on decaying infrastructure at home, America subsidizes continuous creation and destruction of capital in the Middle-East.
Its like a perpetual motion machine of investment.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/israel-gaza-united-states-assistance-unrwa

[HoreTore]

Do come, do.

I still have a masters to do. If you can guarantee a program cleansed of post-modern BS, I'll book my tickets tomorrow ~;)

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I still have a masters to do. If you can guarantee a program cleansed of post-modern BS, I'll book my tickets tomorrow ~;)

You make me sad....I didn't think the pun that hard to decipher.


As to a program of study, it is impossible to skip PM entirely....though when I teach it I am careful to remind students that the power of its critique is only matched by the limitations on any real improvements generated to meet said criticisms. Are all of your profs still reveling in deconstruction without actually getting to the part about rebuilding?

[HoreTore]

You make me sad....I didn't think the pun that hard to decipher.

Gah! I am ashamed of myself. My only excuse is the excessive heat we have here...


As to a program of study, it is impossible to skip PM entirely....though when I teach it I am careful to remind students that the power of its critique is only matched by the limitations on any real improvements generated to meet said criticisms. Are all of your profs still reveling in deconstruction without actually getting to the part about rebuilding?

Sounds good, sign me up! Quit those lame business classes and get over to something of real value, ie. education. Something like 'verbal communication in the classroom' or 'history didactic' should do brilliantly.

I don't have any profs any more; I got fed up, quit my program entirely and got back to working full time.

[Idaho]

Death toll approaching a thousand civilians. Israel bombs a UN "safe zone" compound and kills 15 despite continuous pleas from the UN over the radio. Thousands injured and homeless. Families huddled frightened with nowhere safe to turn... While in Israel:

http://www.haaretz.com/life/nature-environment/1.607076

[Sir Moody]

Death toll approaching a thousand civilians. Israel bombs a UN "safe zone" compound and kills 15 despite continuous pleas from the UN over the radio. Thousands injured and homeless. Families huddled frightened with nowhere safe to turn... While in Israel:

http://www.haaretz.com/life/nature-environment/1.607076

It hasn't been confirmed as Israeli shelling yet - apparently the UN also reported Hamas rockets hitting the area shortly before so it honestly could be either of them at this point... as always the civilians are caught between both factions

[Idaho]

Israel usually deny and obfuscate these events until the news agenda moves on, then the truth is accepted by someone junior during a busy news week a month later.

[Hooahguy]

This article (http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/shalom-motherfr/) has been circulating my social media lately, comes across as very... oh whats the word, pissy?

[Husar]

He doesn't mention the settlements, they never do, it's as though they just sit in their country and noone is building settlements outside their country on other peoples' land. And they left Gaza, that's like saying they left the chicken's cage, but they don't get why the chicken has gone crazy.

[Hooahguy]

It seems to be a common problem among most mainstream pro-Israel supporters (the ones whose only knowledge of the conflict comes from what they are told at Israel advocacy seminars), they tend to just block out opposing viewpoints to maintain their world view.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It seems to be a common problem among most mainstream pro-Israel supporters (the ones whose only knowledge of the conflict comes from what they are told at Israel advocacy seminars), they tend to just block out opposing viewpoints to maintain their world view.

Which is the most common way for a good majority of people to reduce their cognitive dissonance.

Many of my fellow conservatives listen to Limbaugh regularly....few listen to Maddow. Don't know how you actually learn anything that way, but an endless chorus of "of course you are correct" must be soothing to the ego.

[Hooahguy]

And then you have this gem (http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/report-faa-backed-down-after-israeli-threat-to-ramp-up/2014/07/24/), reported from the Jewish Press. Besides the fact that I think its kind of disgusting, if its true in the first place, that people are happy the threatened more violence to get what they want, the whole damn site is a joke. Just check out the disclaimer before the comment section:


Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

:rolleyes:

[Beskar]

- Simone de Beauvoir

She does do some nice observations. Though my run-ins with 'radical feminists' tend not to go well for the wrong reasons.

[Beskar]

Here are two interesting blog posts:
How to Criticize Israel Without Being Anti-Semitic (http://this-is-not-jewish.tumblr.com/post/34344324495/how-to-criticize-israel-without-being-anti-semitic)
How to Support Israel Without Being Racist (http://this-is-not-jewish.tumblr.com/post/35969286556/how-to-support-israel-without-being-racist)

[Hooahguy]

From the same blog, also very interesting:

What have we learned? (http://this-is-not-jewish.tumblr.com/post/58580511446/what-have-we-learned)

[Idaho]

Humanise Palestine project:

http://humanizepalestine.com/2014/07/18/in-memory-emad-qassem-elwan/

[a completely inoffensive name]

From the same blog, also very interesting:

What have we learned? (http://this-is-not-jewish.tumblr.com/post/58580511446/what-have-we-learned)


You taught us to pick up guns, you taught us to slaughter and persecute and ethnically cleanse, you taught us that the only way to protect ourselves was to stop preaching peace and patience because that leads to our graves. We learned your lessons well
[...]
So take some responsibility.
​Hilarious.

[lars573]

Problem is he has point.

[Husar]

Yeah, it's all my fault because I'm born a Nazi.