Israel and Hamas trade blows yet again; may possibly escalate into a ground war

Im pretty shocked that there isnt a post on this yet.

Hundreds of rockets have been launched at Israel, and 3 Israeli civilians have been killed so far.
Also, 16 Palestinians have been reported killed.

The Iron Dome interceptor system seems to be working pretty well so far- Israel reports that 145 of the around 200 rockets have been intercepted.

Im not surprised at all of this, but Im wondering if peace will ever be possible.

I get why the Palestinians feel the need to send rockets over even though they dont do all that much to convince Israel to change their mind, so I think its more for PR and to get them on the front page of CNN and BBC.

There isn't a post about the hundreds of rockets because people who read quality media actually think they are being informed.

This is merely and attempt to distract Israel and the rest of the world from degrading Iran's freedom of action in Syria/Lebanon.

I think it is more to do with the fact we are all so used to these two bickering like children with explosive hardware - it doesn't have any shock value anymore and the discussion will always be the same

Hopefully there wont be any ground action this time or we may then have something to discuss...

Gaza isn't a functional state. It doesn't have normal political or economic rights. Israel just wants it to dissappear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

IIRC, this happened because Israel took out of the leader of Hamas' military wing. Not at all surprising, and as usual I sympathize with both sides. :shrug:

---

I don't sympathize with either side. I sympathize with normal people on both sides. The clique on both sides should commit mass suicide and just maybe allow people to live normal lives.

+ points if they film it and release it on youtube.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

The Israeli extremists truly believe they have a right to the land, and they've defended it valiantly for decades now. The Palestinian extremists believe the same. It is easy for people to say that they can't sympathize with militarists, jihadists, or whatever--but when pushed far enough you sometimes have to embrace violence to achieve your goals. The people truly in need of sympathy are indeed the normal folks, but I am not so high and mighty as to pretend the motivations of the 'bad guys' on both sides are foreign to me.

---

Nationalists are nationalists.

Anyway, back to the current situation:

I believe the Israelis and Palestinians are adding the situation in Syria into account when deciding what to do. Just how they assess the Syrian factor isn't something I claim to know, but here's a few ideas of what they may be thinking:

- Israel wants to reach their objectives(whatever that may be) before the Syrian situation is resolved. They believe the jihadi focus is currently on Assad, and wants to get things done before they can turn their eyes on Israel again.
- Israel wants to play it cool for the moment, not provocing a major conflict. They believe the Jihadis now engaged in Syria might spill over if they escalate the situation. Worst case scenario here would be a hostile Assad still in power combined with more jihadis in Palestine.
- The palestinian militants wants to do business while the iron is hot. They believe now is the time to strike because they are likely to gain assistance from the militants in Syria.
- the palestinians want a low intensity struggle, to keep things going until the jihadis win Syria, at which time they expect the jihadis to come to their aid full-force.
- With security council eyes on Syria, Israel/Palestine recons they can get away with things easier than previously. Thus, they will try to achieve minor objectives now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Nationalists are nationalists.

Anyway, back to the current situation:

I believe the Israelis and Palestinians are adding the situation in Syria into account when deciding what to do. Just how they assess the Syrian factor isn't something I claim to know, but here's a few ideas of what they may be thinking:

- Israel wants to reach their objectives(whatever that may be) before the Syrian situation is resolved. They believe the jihadi focus is currently on Assad, and wants to get things done before they can turn their eyes on Israel again.
- Israel wants to play it cool for the moment, not provocing a major conflict. They believe the Jihadis now engaged in Syria might spill over if they escalate the situation. Worst case scenario here would be a hostile Assad still in power combined with more jihadis in Palestine.
- The palestinian militants wants to do business while the iron is hot. They believe now is the time to strike because they are likely to gain assistance from the militants in Syria.
- the palestinians want a low intensity struggle, to keep things going until the jihadis win Syria, at which time they expect the jihadis to come to their aid full-force.
- With security council eyes on Syria, Israel/Palestine recons they can get away with things easier than previously. Thus, they will try to achieve minor objectives now.

---

Syria is an escalation of problems for Israel regardless of outcome. Either Assad will be deposed and another government will form -- almost certainly following the tone set by Egypt of being less tolerant of Israel -- OR -- Assad will crush the rebellion and those fighters will be pushed out into the Bekaa. Either way, Israel "wins" more militants (recently trained) on its border.

I'm pretty sure that Obama can fix this. The muslims really like him since that one speech fixed everything, so if only he would like go over there and talk to them and stuff, maybe get both sides to do a fist bump, we can fix this situation and put it off for another 12 weeks until it flares up again.

I feel really apathetic to the whole situation in Israel/Palestine. Maybe because last time this happened I was the only one of my friends who really took an interest in what was happening. My friends and I were in our 2nd year of high school and foreign issues, even of a massive one that involved Israel, wasnt such a big deal for most of my age group since we had bigger things on our minds. So now that my friends are all grown up and seem to care more about certain issues, they are all freaking out over facebook and all this "I stand with Israel" crap that everybody and his/her 2nd cousin is posting and raising a big commotion about, I just cant care less for the situation. I only posted a topic here about it since there wasnt one already. Im just so jaded and tired from the last string of debates we had on this. The original thread when Cast Lead happened had 922 posts in it, and there were probably a dozen more threads after it was locked. I remember that it went on so long that the mods actually banned Israel/Palestine topics for a few months.

And for some reason, it feels great not to care. Ive got bigger things on my mind. Classes, social life in college, stuff like that. But Israel is not one of them.

Point is, pretty much every Jew I know is freaking out about this and I find myself wonderfully apathetic.

I'm tired of the back and forth, even the Cold War ended, let one side annihilate the other already and lets move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

The Israeli extremists truly believe they have a right to the land, and they've defended it valiantly for decades now. The Palestinian extremists believe the same. It is easy for people to say that they can't sympathize with militarists, jihadists, or whatever--but when pushed far enough you sometimes have to embrace violence to achieve your goals. The people truly in need of sympathy are indeed the normal folks, but I am not so high and mighty as to pretend the motivations of the 'bad guys' on both sides are foreign to me.

---

Which is the whole point - as long as both sides think they have an exclusive right to the land, the conflict is gonna go on. It can end when one side defeats the other or when both sides figure out a way to share the land and live together.

Nationalism and religious fundamentalism brings a whole lot of problems and doesn't really solve anything, and it is the ordinary folks who suffer, not the cliques in power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

IIRC, this happened because Israel took out of the leader of Hamas' military wing. Not at all surprising, and as usual I sympathize with both sides. :shrug:

---

Had some prehistory. Appearently some non-Hamas salafi militia killed Israeli soldiers in some border skirmish. Since it's Hamas' responsibillity to control those (Hamas being the goverment in Gaza) and they haven't done so, Israel got fed up (the situation in Syria probably influenced greatly) and took out that Hamas leader.

And fed up covers the issue pretty much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

Had some prehistory. Appearently some non-Hamas salafi militia killed Israeli soldiers in some border skirmish. Since it's Hamas' responsibillity to control those (Hamas being the goverment in Gaza) and they haven't done so, Israel got fed up (the situation in Syria probably influenced greatly) and took out that Hamas leader.

And fed up covers the issue pretty much.

---

It probably even wasn't Hamas but Islamic Jihad who are much worse, that is also the difficulty Hamas is facing, even if they wanted to form a government more radical elements won't allow it. It ain't going to happen, Hamas will have to control even more radical factions if they try to be reasonable and become a target itself.

No country or province in the world that is subject to blockade and military strkes is going to have a moderate and non-militarised political structure. Can you imagine the kinds of political front runners you would get in texas if Mexico locked down it's borders and sent in the occasional air strike?

I hate my fellow Jews so :daisy: much. Cant stand them. In an effort to show why the Palestinians might just be a bit angry at Israel I posted this image:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/rqOJI.jpg

with the caption: "It is important in this conflict to try to see both sides of the issue."

Oh boy did that open a :daisy:storm.

I got three messages calling me a terrorist sympathizer and a storm of angry comments. Just ended up deleting the picture.

And people wonder why I am anti-Zionist.

A good question: What is Israel's long-term strategy?

Short-term, I understand: No state can agree to have its civilians rocketed. But long-term, do Israeli leaders believe that they possess a military solution to their political problem in Gaza? There is no way out of this militarily. Israel is not Russia, Gaza is not Chechnya and Netanyahu isn't Putin. Even if Israel were morally capable of acting like Russia, the world would not allow it. So: Is the goal to empower Hamas? Some right-wingers in Israel would prefer Hamas's empowerment, because they want to kill the idea of a two-state solution. But to those leaders who are at least verbally committed to the idea of partition, what is the plan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

I hate my fellow Jews so :daisy: much. Cant stand them. In an effort to show why the Palestinians might just be a bit angry at Israel I posted this image:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

https://i.imgur.com/rqOJI.jpg

with the caption: "It is important in this conflict to try to see both sides of the issue."

Oh boy did that open a :daisy:storm.

I got three messages calling me a terrorist sympathizer and a storm of angry comments. Just ended up deleting the picture.

And people wonder why I am anti-Zionist.

---

I long ago separated "Jews" and "Israelis" - Israelis are screwed, long term, unless they give Palestinians equal rights and end Apartheid.

Jews are just people - but some of them think they're the same as Israelis, when really they're not.

The only short-term solution? Any old casus belli will do, I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Point is, pretty much every Jew I know is freaking out about this and I find myself wonderfully apathetic.

---

I join you in apathy. If anything, I'm more pissed off with Israel than anything else. I don't know how it's possible to look at this situation and conclude that Israel isn't the aggressor. They struck first and they're hammering the Palestinians 100 times as hard as they're getting in return. If I was living in Gaza, I'd sure as hell be trying to shoot back. When you're the big boy on the block with all the fancy toys, you don't get to play the victim. Israel has no one but themselves to blame if their relations with Egypt got to pot over this.

As is the assassination of a high-ranker. :shrug:

But proportionality is not a concern when the goal is to obviate negotiations.

Do you believe that we should attack with military force the Mexican state over the actions of the cartels?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Rockets were coming in before the assassination. Don't get me wrong, Israel is largely responsible for the strategic situation as it exists, but i cannot fault them for what they're doing right now.

---

Yes, but then again, rockets have been fired intermittenly throughout the entire year.

To little effect, mostly.

I'm not saying Israel shouldn't respond to them. But all things considered I don't see how their policies at large, with so many Palestinian deaths as collateral damage, can be considered a proportionate response.

Does it? The cartels are doing demonstrable harm to the country, and the Mexican government has failed to curtail them. You don't think this would serve as cause to launch ordnance at Mexican urban centers? Don't forget that it was the jihadists who claimed to have launched the tendentious rockets.

But I do see a missing element - we're not blockading Mexico nor actively attempting to prevent the recognition of Mexico as a state-peer by the world. Though there's something interesting to be said concerning our occupation of the "Western territories". :beam:

Quote:

---

1. Ending the rocket attacks, this means sending in the army.

2. Achieving a lasting piece. This means making political concessions to the Palestinians.

---

What if #2 is the most effective means for achieving #1 available?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

1. Ending the rocket attacks, this means sending in the army.

---

The problem is, sending in the army won't stop the rocket attacks. They did that not too long ago and the rockets came right back. Military action will only reduce the rockets, not stop them; not unless they fully occupy Gaza, and that would be so costly in lives and money that Israel couldn't sustain it.

I just fail to see what the Israeli end-game is here. It looks like they're going to lose far more than they're going to gain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Define proportionate? Israel has two responsibilities:

1. Ending the rocket attacks, this means sending in the army.

2. Achieving a lasting piece. This means making political concessions to the Palestinians.

In that order, if they're smart.

---

*Cough* IRA *Cough* Good Friday.

Ending the Rocket Attacks means giving the Palestinians rights.

Quote:

---

Plus, your vague 'demonstrable damage' is a far cry from missiles landing in a major city.

---

Not in monetary terms.

Quote:

---

The Cartel is a group of powerful outlaws even in their own country.

---

The cartels are Law in wide swathes of Northern Mexico, and beyond. They extend political patronage and benefaction all over the place, for sure.

Quote:

---

Can't happen unless one or both sides agree to stop fighting. Israel is in a better to position to destroy the power structure of Hamas than vice versa. But in an ideal world, yes--the Israelies would stop treating the Palestinians like crap, and Hamas would stop trying to kill Israeli civilians.

---

The onus is entirely on Israel. Hamas has done its bit to reform. The only way to silence radical elements who would like Israel to become an Islamic state is to permit a legitimate, unfettered Palestinian state to develop.

Quote:

---

It would be bloody and costly, but they could certainly blitzkrieg the region and put a proper end to Hamas. Following that, they could be magnanimous in victory and make real political concessions to the palestinians.

---

A new Hamas would arise, with a vengeance. Israel would become even less popular, thus reinforcing the sort of security concerns you're willing to use to justify further crackdowns... This may just be the cycle that the Israeli hawks have in mind.

Quote:

---

But Hamas has to be dealt with first.

---

Hamas is not a real barrier to peace.

Quote:

---

Well, I disagree with you. Now we're just down to throwing opinion at eachother.

---

Israel has occupied Gaza before. The situation did not improve.

Israel can not fight its way out of this.

It is a very complex dynamic.

Politically (internal), the Israeli gov't has little to gain from settling the dispute. As it is they have a marginalized segment of population that is easily exploited; less of a factor with the influx of labour from E. Europe; and an essentially "open frontier" for expansion or settlement. Any solution removes both resources. The beauty of the present situation is Israel keeps options and advantage "open", essentially forever. The slow incremental extermination of the Palestinians allows then to appear both moderate and even generous, while expansion is merely the necessary outcome of a real need for security. This is only one view of course, perhaps a little cynical; it seems to fit the facts.

Quote:

---

Politically (internal), the Israeli gov't has little to gain from settling the dispute. As it is they have a marginalized segment of population that is easily exploited; less of a factor with the influx of labour from E. Europe; and an essentially "open frontier" for expansion or settlement. Any solution removes both resources. The beauty of the present situation is Israel keeps options and advantage "open", essentially forever. The slow incremental extermination of the Palestinians allows then to appear both moderate and even generous, while expansion is merely the necessary outcome of a real need for security. This is only one view of course, perhaps a little cynical; it seems to fit the facts.

---

Perhaps it is even the prevailing view among the government, but it is short-sighted. How can engendering civil/ethnic strife and aggravating international relations be, in the long-term, conducive to security?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I'm not saying they should strictly fight their way out of the situation. I'm saying they should go into Gaza, kill every last militant in sight, and then reach out with a real olive branch and real political concessions to the palestinian people. Militants dead. Political solution achieved. Unfortunately it would require the Israelis to be both militarily surgical and politically flexible at the same time. If you think Hamas is not an obstacle to peace, then I just flat-out disagree with you.

---

Do you really conceive of Hamas as entirely a militant organization, each and every member ready to reach out for an assault rifle to strike at Israel at a moment's notice? Destroying Hamas is only possible with massive collateral damage, but even if an arrow were to pierce every member's heart simultaneously it would not be enough to bring about the conditions necessary. Why can Israel not reach out with an olive branch right now? The solution rests with Israel, and Israel alone.