Palestinians in Gaza blaming ... Hamas?

From Spiegel Online:

Quote:

---

In the Gaza Strip people are returning home -- or to the rubble that was once their home. Many are blaming Hamas for the destruction because the militants hid among civilians and attracted Israeli fire. Yet no one dares to speak out openly.

---

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

'Who Has Won Here?'

By Ulrike Putz in Beit Lahia, Gaza

In the Gaza Strip people are returning home -- or to the rubble that was once their home. Many are blaming Hamas for the destruction because the militants hid among civilians and attracted Israeli fire. Yet no one dares to speak out openly.

What is left over when a person is hit by a tank shell. Blood, tissue, bone splinters, splatters on the wall.

And anger.

Mohammed Sadala's rage is aimed at the man, whose remains he found in his bedroom: a Hamas fighter. He and a comrade broke into the home which had long stood empty after the Sadala family fled. The Hamas men shot at the approaching Israelis from the balcony. The soldiers fired back, killing the militants and destroying the house of the 10-strong family in the process.

When Sadala came back to survey the scene he found his property in ruins: the younger children's bedroom was burnt out, while the living room and hallway were strewn with bullet holes and blackened by soot from the fire. In the bedroom lay the corpses: one had bled to death, the other was hit by a tank shell.

Beside the bodies lay the assault rifle which they had used to try to stop the tanks.

"I used to support Hamas because they fought for our country, for Palestine," says Sadala. Hamas stood for a new start, for an end of corruption, which had spread like cancer under the moderate Fatah. In the 2006 elections Hamas won the majority with their message of change, said Sadala, who earned a living in the building business. Gesticulating wildly, the 52-year-old surveyed the ruins of the bedroom: "That is the change that they brought about. We were blasted back 2,000 years."

Through the hole in the wall of his house, Sadala sees a landscape in gray and brown. This is where a neighbourhood had stood, his neighbourhood. Now there is a snake of sand around the bomb crater. It is impossible to tell where the streets once stood. Family houses have turned into piles of debris. People have built refuges using cloth and rubble. They stand alongside dead donkeys and sheep, whose stomachs swell up. No one here has time to remove rotting corpses.

The people from Beit Lahia are starting from zero again: children load wood from broken trees onto their back. Their mothers bend over fires and bake bread. Young women carry water in petrol canisters. Only the men stand around looking numb, smoking, staring blankly. Many people here, like Sandala, had placed their hopes in Hamas -- now they are gazing into nothing, ideologically as well as materially.

Everything Is Lost Now

And it is not just buildings that lie in rubble in the Gaza strip, it is the livelihoods of many thousands of people. In Arabic societies a home is usually everything a family possesses. Often several brothers build a house for the entire family. Living at close quarters has its advantages: when the costs of building the house are paid off, there is more money left over to feed the dozens of family members.

Everything is lost now.

"When Hamas came to power, they came to our aid with packages of groceries," says Abu Abed. The 60-year-old's sons, all of whom are trained hospital nurses, have been without work for years. That is true of many in the Gaza Strip. Now Abu Abed stands before the rumble of the house where he lived with four generations of his family. All that remains are the ground floor pillars. The Israeli navy had its eye on the building from the very beginning of the war. After all, its clear view of Gaza City and the sea would have provided a good base for Hamas.

"I've changed my mind about Hamas," Abu Abed says. "I can't support any party that wages a war that destroys our lives." He is particularly pained by the fact that Hamas is still selling the cease-fire as a victory.

"Who has won here?" he asks and points to the debris that was once his home.

One of his neighbors weighs in: "Many people are now against Hamas but that won't change anything," he says. "Because anyone who stands up to them is killed." Since they took power Hamas has used brutal force against any dissenters in the Gaza Strip. There were news agency reports that during the war they allegedly executed suspected collaborators with Israel. The reign of terror will go on for some time, says the neighbor who doesn't want to give his name. "There will never be a rebellion against Hamas. It would be suicide."

Others swallow their anger. Hail's house is just a few streets away and only suffered light damage. There are a few bullet holes in the living room walls and all of the window panes are broken. Hail also found out after the cease-fire that the militants had used his house as a base for their operations. The door to his house stood open and there were electric cables lying in the hallway. When Hail followed them they led to his neighbor's house which it seems Hamas had mined.

As Hail, in his mid-30s, sat on his porch and thought about what to do a man came by: He was from Hamas and had left something in Hail's home. He let him in and the man then emerged with a bullet proof vest, a rocket launcher and an ammunitions belt. An hour later a fighter with Islamic Jihad called to the door, then disappeared onto the roof and reappeared with a box of ammunition. "The abused civilians' homes for their own purposes. That is not right," Hail says with disgust while trying to remain polite.

In contrast to many of their neighbors the Sadala family is doing comparatively well. They have all survived and the house could theoretically still be repaired. Mohammed Sadala is of another opinion: "There is no way," he says. What happened in his bedroom cannot be covered up just by cleaning. The worst is that he now knows who died in the room. It was Bilal Haj Ali. Sadala knows this because the young mans brothers came to visit a few days ago. They wanted to see the place where Bilal became a martyr. "I did let them in but I hardly spoke a word with them," he says.

The young men took photos of the remains of their brother with their mobile phones. "But they didn't want to clean it up," Sadala says. "I told them not to show their faces here ever again."

Gee, I seem to remember an awful lot of people claiming that this war would lead to vastly increased recruitment for Hamas. But it seems likely there will be no such recruitment from Gaza, where people actually have to live with the actions of Hamas, and the Palestinians quoted in this article are asking the tough questions of Hamas that some anti-Israel people refuse to ask.

CR

You sum up the text as "Hamas hides behind civilians" and in the text it says that Hamas militants/fighters/whatever occupied an empty house. You remark at the end how this won't increase recruitment for Hamas because Sadala is angry at Hamas not at Israel, at yet in the same paragrapgh it says that two brothers of the dead guy came to honour their brother as martyr :dizzy2:

CR I simply have to point out that you can't handle the truth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

You sum up the text as "Hamas hides behind civilians"

---

No, I did not.

Quote:

---

and in the text it says that Hamas militants/fighters/whatever occupied an empty house.

---

Which got blown apart by Israel trying to kill the fighters within. The house was destroyed, a family's home was destroyed and now they have nothing.

Quote:

---

You remark at the end how this won't increase recruitment for Hamas because Sadala is angry at Hamas not at Israel, at yet in the same paragrapgh it says that two brothers of the dead guy came to honour their brother as martyr :dizzy2:

---

I said any recruitment will not be of the vastly higher type predicted by several people on this site. Kindly cease your repeated misunderstandings.

The fact that two men came to take pictures of the body of their brother and then leave it where it lay does nothing to refute that.

Why, exactly, is this simple concept so confusing?

CR

Beit Lahia ?
That was pretty solid Fatah territory wasn't it (apart from the little Islamic Jihad enclave) the only reason Hamas got a foothold there in the last election was because Fatah split its voters with the arguement between the new and old guard candidates on the list .
So I suppose going there and finding someone who doen't like Hamas would be as hard as going to New York and finding someone that doesn't like Bush .

I don't believe either side completely, we will see the results when the next bloodshed comes around I guess, has been like that for a while now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

From Spiegel Online:

Gee, I seem to remember an awful lot of people claiming that this war would lead to vastly increased recruitment for Hamas. But it seems likely there will be no such recruitment from Gaza, where people actually have to live with the actions of Hamas, and the Palestinians quoted in this article are asking the tough questions of Hamas that some anti-Israel people refuse to ask.

CR

---

In the previous thread i accused the Palestinians of unmitigated stupidity in electing Hamas, that may have been unfair.

While electing Hamas was an act of extreme stupidity, it might appear that the Gazans are emerging from their period of derangement in light of their new appreciation of what glorious benefits Hamas have brought them.

Less than 50% elected Hamas. The other option isn't exactly rosey.

Is all of the UK stupid for voting in Labour and hence causing the current mess?

~:smoking:

the people who voted labour did not vote to elect a terrorist group whose principle aim was the destruction of the superpower next door, and do so by launching attacks on said superpower from the civilian homes and infrastructure of its electorate.

that is rank stupidity.

p.s. while i understand and approve of the conservatives losing power in 97, i do indeed hold the hardcore labour voter to a very stupid creature.

I thought that most often the rockets were fired from the fields.

I agree that professing to hate the superpower next door that is chocking off power, water and food is immflamatory, but I imagine an election manifesto of "Israel is our misunderstood friend" would get few votes. There's a reasonable chance that the populace are upset about being treated the way they are.

In the situation I don't know who I'd think would make a difference. What would you suggest?

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

the people who voted labour did not vote to elect a terrorist group whose principle aim was the destruction of the superpower next door, and do so by launching attacks on said superpower from the civilian homes and infrastructure of its populace.

---

In fairness, I doubt the Hamas voters did that either. I think they rather voted in the guys who actually built some of that infrastructure and civilian homes, and provided food and medical care, and compensation when when injury/death occured - versus the previous lot who kept all the cash (meant to do all that social stuff) to themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I thought that most often the rockets were fired from the fields.

I agree that professing to hate the superpower next door that is chocking off power, water and food is immflamatory, but I imagine an election manifesto of "Israel is our misunderstood friend" would get few votes. There's a reasonable chance that the populace are upset about being treated the way they are.

In the situation I don't know who I'd think would make a difference. What would you suggest?

~:smoking:

---

i would suggest that the previously delusional people of Gaza are finally realising what their vote bought them, along with a clear perception that they will have to live with the fact that israel lives next door and will always be the godzilla of the neighbourhood, so why keep sticking pins in his side.

it is possible that this recent conflict has created conditions more conducive to a future peace, in that it has allowed Kadima the breathing room within israels stifling system of coalition governance to push on with a peace process, and that it may finally have cause palestinians to realise that israel isn't going to go away, whatever they do or wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

In fairness, I doubt the Hamas voters did that either. I think they rather voted in the guys who actually built some of that infrastructure and civilian homes, and provided food and medical care, and compensation when when injury/death occured - versus the previous lot who kept all the cash (meant to do all that social stuff) to themselves.

---

In fairness, I accept what you say, however it is rank stupidity to believe your 'nation' exists in a vacuum from which its actions towards the outside world have no consequence within.

Yet you've not answered what to do.

Sit down contentedly with no infrastructure, awaitinf the next nutritionally deficient meal and hoping that you don't get ill as there's no health service? Then if there's time organise militia patrols to ensure that no one dares to antagonise the Isralis or fires any rockets.

If there was a postal service, one might ask the Israli PM how many years before they might be allowed to have open borders...

~:smoking:

well, as the der-speigel article makes clear the gazans themselves realise they have a problem in that they voted in a bunch of terrorists who they cannot criticise or remove. what indeed will they do? most countries choose revolution in that situation if they have the balls and a fighting chance of winning.

They also have to somehow get off the dole. Those folks receiving subsidies and not paying taxes, tho' often the loudest grousers, are seldom the ones sparking revolutions or reforms.

revenues: $1.149 billion (95% foreign aid)
expenditures: $2.31 billion

Unemployment rate: 41.3%

These people need product. Not to consume; to make, and sell, and export.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

In fairness, I doubt the Hamas voters did that either. I think they rather voted in the guys who actually built some of that infrastructure and civilian homes, and provided food and medical care, and compensation when when injury/death occured - versus the previous lot who kept all the cash (meant to do all that social stuff) to themselves.

---

Something I've been wondering, if there is an unpalatable choice between one party who are palatable foreign policy-wise, but who are abysmal domestically, and the other, who are good domestically, but who are abysmal foreign policy-wise, why doesn't the EU or US just formally take over Palestine? Declare the situation there as unfavourable to all in the region, including the Palestinians themselves, and formally take over the government and the wellbeing of the Palestinian state. Sure, it's colonialism all over again, but is it that much worse than the basket case it currently is?

Quote:

---

These people need product. Not to consume; to make, and sell, and export.

---

Thats kinda hard when the borders are closed nearly all the time so you don't get any imports or exports

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Thats kinda hard when the borders are closed nearly all the time so you don't get any imports or exports

---

And make rockets out of all the fertilizer.

It occurs to me that a bored, frustrated, unemployed Palestinian-Gazan can't be that much different than a bored, frustrated, unemployed American-Californian; that is: trouble waiting to happen.

If I were George Mitchell (ha!), newly-designated US envoy to the M.E., my first trip would be to Nagoya (Toyota HQ) and persuade the CEO to build a plant in Gaza City. Then sell the idea to Gaza leadership, and break ground this spring. Volunteer the US Navy/Coast Guard to provide port and coast security for both Israel and Gaza, relieving Israel of that duty, for 5 years.

Give the Gazans something to fight for, instead of an ancient enemy to fight against.

And that, lads, is Kukri's over-simplified, stupid idea for peace in the mid-east. Jobs. Product. Security. A sense of personal and group self-respect and dignity. Hands busy making Prius's, instead of katyusha's

Unfortunately, now it's only Hamas money that is helping the Gazans who suffered the torments of war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guildenstern

Unfortunately, now it's only Hamas money that is helping the Gazans who suffered the torments of war.

---

So why doesn't the US or EU just take over the direct government of Palestine? Sod this nonsense about an intractable problem and the impossibility of persuading all sides to mutual agreement. Take over domestic policy, so there will no longer be the culture of corruption, nor any shortage in fundng. Take over foreign policy, so attacks on Israel will no longer be tolerated, nor Israeli encroachment on Palestinian territory. Promise any potential investors that stability will now be guaranteed by the new administration. No BS about democracy and whatnot - the administration of the province is geared entirely towards stability and eventual prosperity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

So why doesn't the US or EU just take over the direct government of Palestine? Sod this nonsense about an intractable problem and the impossibility of persuading all sides to mutual agreement. Take over domestic policy, so there will no longer be the culture of corruption, nor any shortage in fundng. Take over foreign policy, so attacks on Israel will no longer be tolerated, nor Israeli encroachment on Palestinian territory. Promise any potential investors that stability will now be guaranteed by the new administration. No BS about democracy and whatnot - the administration of the province is geared entirely towards stability and eventual prosperity.

---

Iraq II -- complete with having to fight incursions by our allies!

There is no political will to do this in the USA, nor are the resources really lined up for it with major committments in Iraq and Afgnanistan ongoing.

Sadly, I think a combo of your idea, Pan, with Kukri's, is the only recipe that might work. Israel will kill comparitively few yanks, and with enough resources and time the FBI would eventually marginalize the more criminal/terroristic elements of Hamas etc. Of course, the whole thing would be a boon to other terrorist recruiting efforts elsewhere as we would be seen as reincarnating the Crusader kingdom. Ah, the joys of the Middle East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Iraq II -- complete with having to fight incursions by our allies!

There is no political will to do this in the USA, nor are the resources really lined up for it with major committments in Iraq and Afgnanistan ongoing.

Sadly, I think a combo of your idea, Pan, with Kukri's, is the only recipe that might work. Israel will kill comparitively few yanks, and with enough resources and time the FBI would eventually marginalize the more criminal/terroristic elements of Hamas etc. Of course, the whole thing would be a boon to other terrorist recruiting efforts elsewhere as we would be seen as reincarnating the Crusader kingdom. Ah, the joys of the Middle East.

---

The main problem with Iraq is the democratic BS I talked about. Everyone knows that the US will eventually leave, so they fight to get into position to control Iraq once they eventually do. So start by establishing that this isn't an effort to create a democracy in Palestine, which will be handed over to the Palestinians ASAP. The west, whichever body decides to take control, is there to stay. It is there because they don't trust the Palestinians to govern their country to their satisfaction. Would it boost terrorist recruiting efforts? Probably, but is the difference between that and existing recruiting efforts really worth the continuing instability?

So, just like our other two Mid-East ventures, then?

I don't think Hamas would go quietly, either.

Im sure there were some israeli's who blamed the israeli goverment for the rocket attacks of Hamas as well, unfortunately such people are minoritys in israel as well as palestine and they will blame the foriegn enemy over thier own bad goverments...

I'm sorry, but I see any possible US led invasion of Gaza as a huge debacle. Think of the press that would get - and the fact that we'd be getting ourselves into a very thorny situation.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

Im sure there were some israeli's who blamed the israeli goverment for the rocket attacks of Hamas as well, unfortunately such people are minoritys in israel as well as palestine and they will blame the foriegn enemy over thier own bad goverments...

---

let me get this straight:

not enough palestinians stood up to denounce hamas for launching rockets from their homes.
and
not enough israelies stood up to denounce Kadima for letting Hamas lauch rockets at their homes.

have i got that right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

So, just like our other two Mid-East ventures, then?

I don't think Hamas would go quietly, either.

---

Too bad, but nothing that a police lockdown wouldn't be able to solve. Hold out the carrot of eventual integration into the EU, if this is an EU undertaking, or the US, if this is a US undertaking. This isn't a democratic adventure, to liberate the Palestinians from their tyrannical rulers. This is actual integration into the western world. Given what they've experienced so far, wouldn't this be a substantial enough carrot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Too bad, but nothing that a police lockdown wouldn't be able to solve. Hold out the carrot of eventual integration into the EU, if this is an EU undertaking, or the US, if this is a US undertaking. This isn't a democratic adventure, to liberate the Palestinians from their tyrannical rulers. This is actual integration into the western world. Given what they've experienced so far, wouldn't this be a substantial enough carrot?

---

What the hell? This is about integrating Hamas in the western world????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

What the hell? This is about integrating Hamas in the western world????

---

Palestine. The people of Hamas can go along with it, or they can be purged. If they care about the Palestinian people and the Palestinian land that much, this is a chance to ensure the integrity of Palestinian land, the functionality of Palestinian institutions, and the prosperity of the Palestinian people. If the EU takes over direct control, the interests of the Palestinian people will be guaranteed by the EU. So any more Israeli incursions will be met by EU militaries, and EU measures.

People moan about how the Palestinians never make a decision that satisfies them. So take direct control, so you make their decisions for them. In exchange, you also take responsibility for their wellbeing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Palestine. The people of Hamas can go along with it, or they can be purged. If they care about the Palestinian people and the Palestinian land that much, this is a chance to ensure the integrity of Palestinian land, the functionality of Palestinian institutions, and the prosperity of the Palestinian people. If the EU takes over direct control, the interests of the Palestinian people will be guaranteed by the EU. So any more Israeli incursions will be met by EU militaries, and EU measures.

People moan about how the Palestinians never make a decision that satisfies them. So take direct control, so you make their decisions for them. In exchange, you also take responsibility for their wellbeing.

---

So that all europeans on top of the Israeli's are to blame, no thanks. They already could have had everything.

edit, bit much

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

So that all europeans on top of the Israeli's are to blame, no thanks. They already could have had everything.

edit, bit much

---

If we don't want to involve ourselves fully, and we're not satisfied with what we're getting for what we're investing, then why not pull out fully, and leave them to their own devices, and stop moaning about what they do? If they decide to blow up Israelis, that's none of our business, and we should leave them to it. If the Israelis decide to blow up Palestinians, that's also none of our business, and we should leave them to it. If we're not going to do anything about it, stop the moral outrage, and just let them sort things out for themselves. As I've said before, I'd be quite happy with locking in everything and everyone to do with that region, save for those whom we actually need (ie. the oil countries), and letting them live with the consequences of their actions, away from us.

What legal or moral authority do EU and US have to do that? It would be seen as occupation and rightfully so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

What legal or moral authority do EU and US have to do that? It would be seen as occupation and rightfully so.

---

The ability to do so. It wouldn't be seen as an occupation, as it will be a formal occupation, and eventual incorporation. Annexation in other words. It wouldn't be morally right, but it would at least be more honest than the tut-tutting and constant undermining of all sides that is currently happening.

Alternatively, as I've also suggested, we could fully pull out of all involvement in the region, and leave them to their games. Either would be better than what we have now.

well if a nation cannot create of itself a functioning nation state, and if the result is to export instability to its neighbours, then yes maybe the answer is annexation, but quite frankly who would be stupid enough to want the palestinians? (speaking from a geo-politics point of view).

Quote:

---

well if a nation cannot create of itself a functioning nation state, and if the result is to export instability to its neighbours, then yes maybe the answer is annexation

---

So you are saying to annex Israel .

Quote:

---

They already could have had everything.

---

Yeah apart from the 67 borders , the 48 borders , the right of return , water rights , control of their borders and control of their money, control of the sea and air... but yeah apart from those little things they could have had everything:dizzy2:

have i got that right?

I was saying most people don't blame thier own goverments for actions leading to the attacks but rather blame the attacker (of them) which is true for almost all countries...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

If we don't want to involve ourselves fully, and we're not satisfied with what we're getting for what we're investing, then why not pull out fully, and leave them to their own devices, and stop moaning about what they do?

---

I am not moaning they are being dealt with properly, it's the only way. It's the only way for the Taliban, it's the only way for Al Quaida, and it's the only way with Hamas. Some people just want to see the world burn. So burn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So you are saying to annex Israel .

---

no.

One article from the very pro-Zionist Ulrike Putz doesn't necessarily give a true and accurate picture of events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I am not moaning they are being dealt with properly, it's the only way. It's the only way for the Taliban, it's the only way for Al Quaida, and it's the only way with Hamas. Some people just want to see the world burn. So burn.

---

I'm talking about Palestine, not Hamas. If we're not satisfied that we're getting good returns from our investment, take it over completely so the returns will be in our hands, rather than filtering through via some middlemen. Or else just stop investing, and cut off all contacts. At the moment, we're telling the Palestinians what to do, but we don't want to go the whole hog and admit we're telling them what to do, and instead pretend that it's all in their own hands. It was in their own hands, and they made a decision, but we're now telling them off for making said decision, and that they should make a different one instead. If we're going to do that, why not just take over the decisionmaking completely? As I said, at least it would be more honest than what we're currently doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

One article from the very pro-Zionist Ulrike Putz doesn't necessarily give a true and accurate picture of events.

---

makes a refreshing change from palestinian victim-complex cheerleaders like the BBC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

makes a refreshing change from palestinian victim-complex cheerleaders like the BBC.

---

I'd say when you are a small, isolated and empoverished ghetto like Gaza being attacked by one of the strongest and best equipped militaries in the world - leading to over 1000 civillian casualties - you have some justification in the term 'victim'.

Also this 'secret whispering campaign' is starting to look more like Israeli propaganda tricks. Lots of talk from key supporters in the media, very few actual cases.

Meanwhile - news sources who do cite actually people in Gaza...

UN Envoy Says Attacks Have Strengthened Hamas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

Meanwhile - news sources who do cite actually people in Gaza...

---

The article cites one only. And he is Irish. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

One article from the very pro-Zionist Ulrike Putz doesn't necessarily give a true and accurate picture of events.

---

Very pro-Zionist? Have you ever read any of her articles? For instance, would you call this one very pro-Zionist?

Gerroffit, Idaho..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

I'd say when you are a small, isolated and empoverished ghetto like Gaza being attacked by one of the strongest and best equipped militaries in the world - leading to over 1000 civillian casualties - you have some justification in the term 'victim'.

Also this 'secret whispering campaign' is starting to look more like Israeli propaganda tricks. Lots of talk from key supporters in the media, very few actual cases.

Meanwhile - news sources who do cite actually people in Gaza...

UN Envoy Says Attacks Have Strengthened Hamas

---

The BBC has always been biased towards palestine in the way it presents news coverage.

And a Der-Spiegal news article is now automatically branded an israeli whsipering campaign...........

The UN envoy can say what he likes, i do not hold him/her to be an authority on Hamas military capability.

Probably the best 3 step solution ever:

1. USA has nukes. USA hasn't tested nukes on a real life, densely populated region in a lot of years. THEY WANT TO DO THAT.
2. Send the entire American air force over Gaza+Israel, dropping leaflets that they are going to nuke the entire region in one week. The leaflets exhort anyone who wishes to live, to run like rats and leave everything behind. Phone to every home in Israel and Gaza saying that they are going to nuke the region.
3. Nuke the entire region. No more Israel, no more Gaza, thus no more problems.

Done. :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

Probably the best 3 step solution ever:

1. USA has nukes. USA hasn't tested nukes on a real life, densely populated region in a lot of years. THEY WANT TO DO THAT.
2. Send the entire American air force over Gaza+Israel, dropping leaflets that they are going to nuke the entire region in one week. The leaflets exhort anyone who wishes to live, to run like rats and leave everything behind. Phone to every home in Israel and Gaza saying that they are going to nuke the region.
3. Nuke the entire region. No more Israel, no more Gaza, thus no more problems.

Done. :thumbsup:

---

While I appreciate the humor, hydrogen weaponry is pretty ghastly. Let us all hope that no such weapons are used on this planet ever again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I'm talking about Palestine, not Hamas. If we're not satisfied that we're getting good returns from our investment, take it over completely so the returns will be in our hands, rather than filtering through via some middlemen. Or else just stop investing, and cut off all contacts. At the moment, we're telling the Palestinians what to do, but we don't want to go the whole hog and admit we're telling them what to do, and instead pretend that it's all in their own hands. It was in their own hands, and they made a decision, but we're now telling them off for making said decision, and that they should make a different one instead. If we're going to do that, why not just take over the decisionmaking completely? As I said, at least it would be more honest than what we're currently doing.

---

It doesn't matter what we say or do the forces behind Hamas will never allow it, they need the Palestinians to channel the anger of their own population. There is no solution, we can't fix this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

One article from the very pro-Zionist Ulrike Putz doesn't necessarily give a true and accurate picture of events.

---

Ha! You've got nothing - just logical fallacies that don't stand up, as Adrian pointed out, so you bring up talk of 'propaganda conspiracies'.

What's the matter? Do you not want Hamas to lose support? Surely any reasonable person can see that they are an obstacle for peace.

As for victims - they are victims of their own stupidity. They've fired - what, like 5000 rockets into Israel over the past four years - into the land of a nation with a vastly superior military and the willingness to use it. How has that made life better for them? Why is it people such as yourself refuse to ask any tough questions about Hamas? Instead you assuming they'll go on doing the moronic things they do, as though they actions are above review or criticism?

Israel invaded because of what Hamas has done recently. I've heard the talk about how Hamas is the 'resistance' against mean old Israel. But they are some of the stupidest people on this planet to go about resisting the way they do.

CR

Quote:

---

The BBC has always been biased towards palestine in the way it presents news coverage.

---

How ?
BTW could you explain yor "no" earlier since Israel fits your bill for annexation , perhaps thats just your bias though which is why you claim the BBC is biased .

Quote:

---

Surely any reasonable person can see that they are an obstacle for peace.

---

Surely any reasonable person can see that most of the Israeli and Palestinian parties are an obstacle to peace .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

Probably the best 3 step solution ever:

1. USA has nukes. USA hasn't tested nukes on a real life, densely populated region in a lot of years. THEY WANT TO DO THAT.
2. Send the entire American air force over Gaza+Israel, dropping leaflets that they are going to nuke the entire region in one week. The leaflets exhort anyone who wishes to live, to run like rats and leave everything behind. Phone to every home in Israel and Gaza saying that they are going to nuke the region.
3. Nuke the entire region. No more Israel, no more Gaza, thus no more problems.

Done. :thumbsup:

---

1) so does israel- they actually have a lot of nukes.
2) have you heard of the Sampson Theory (if i have the name correct)? its the theory that if everyone attacked israel and israel was about to be destroyed, all the israeli nukes would be launched to pre-set coordinates around the globe, like teharan, damascus, cairo, and god knows what other cities. but its just a theory, so....
3) sarcasm is in green, remember?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

3) sarcasm is in green, remember?

---

:inquisitive:

Apparently, I have a sarcastic username...

~:confused:

:laugh4:

well, maybe your name is sarcastic, but im referring to green in forum posts, but you may want to talk to Tosa about green names for moderators....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

you heard of the Sampson Theory (if i have the name correct)? its the theory that if everyone attacked israel and israel was about to be destroyed, all the israeli nukes would be launched to pre-set coordinates around the globe, like teharan, damascus, cairo, and god knows what other cities. but its just a theory, so....

---

I wish that people who oppose the occupation wouldn't play into the Israeli's hands in this regard. They have an, entirely reasonable historically speaking, ideology that someone will try and wipe them out. If somehow we could remove the belief in that - we'd go far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

I wish that people who oppose the occupation wouldn't play into the Israeli's hands in this regard. They have an, entirely reasonable historically speaking, ideology that someone will try and wipe them out. If somehow we could remove the belief in that - we'd go far.

---

are you saying that there arent people who want to wipe jews and israel out? :inquisitive:
jews need to be a bit paranoid. it was the lack of being paranoid that led us to so many jews dieing in the Holocaust. if more jews got scared when Hiter (may his name be erased) rose to power, more could have been saved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

How ?

BTW could you explain yor "no" earlier since Israel fits your bill for annexation , perhaps thats just your bias though which is why you claim the BBC is biased .

---

That is my perception having watched BBC reporting on israel/palestine for many years, a typical example of which is described here:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_...k_what_happens

you asked if my comment might equally apply to israel, and i responded;no, indicating that i was talking specifically about palestine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

I wish that people who oppose the occupation wouldn't play into the Israeli's hands in this regard. They have an, entirely reasonable historically speaking, ideology that someone will try and wipe them out. If somehow we could remove the belief in that - we'd go far.

---

We would be very very far off because that's the reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Surely any reasonable person can see that most of the Israeli and Palestinian parties are an obstacle to peace .

---

Aye. :bow:

And they have constituencies, vested interests and bureaucratic power to help them stay in the saddle. And if those aren't enough, the 'enemy' can always be counted on to do something profoundly stupid to stoke up the fire and underpin the most radical and useless factions on both sides.

There is even a computer game about these aspects of the conflict: Peacemaker. Among other things, the game demonstrates that positive developments and deals in the Middle East are often blocked by internal divisions of the parties concerned, whereby the radical wings destroy whatever sensible initiative the moderate wings come up with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

............demonstrates that positive developments and deals in the Middle East are often blocked by internal divisions of the parties concerned, whereby the radical wings destroy whatever sensible initiative the moderate wings come up with.

---

OT - one of the reasons i do not like coalition politics, and voting methods that encourage coalition governments unlike first-past-the-post.

Quote:

---

you asked if my comment might equally apply to israel, and i responded;no, indicating that i was talking specifically about palestine.

---

So it is just bias then , if the criteria fits both places but you only want to apply it to one .

Quote:

---

a typical example of which is described here:

---

Yes Thompson writes without any bias in the torygraph .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So it is just bias then , if the criteria fits both places but you only want to apply it to one .

Yes Thompson writes without any bias in the torygraph .

---

In my experience I have witnessed the beeb obfuscate palestinian attacks in a way they almost never do for israeli attacks, if pointing this out is bias then yes i am biased.

Regardless of whatever else Damian Thompson might do, the example he quotes is relevant and accurate to the experience i describe above, which is why i linked it.

Quote:

---

A typical little trick: if a suicide murderer blew up an innocent Israeli mother and child, the headline would read "Three killed in West Bank attack".

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

are you saying that there arent people who want to wipe jews and israel out? :inquisitive:
jews need to be a bit paranoid. it was the lack of being paranoid that led us to so many jews dieing in the Holocaust. if more jews got scared when Hiter (may his name be erased) rose to power, more could have been saved.

---

That's the problem. "Death to Israel" etc is used in the ME as a standard rallying call in some circles. But it's as tired a mantra as the "Axis of Evil" tbh. The paranoia may well have saved a lot more. It may not. Who knows. Right now it's causing as many problems as it is solving.

The US has tried to wipe a few places off the map over the years - but those countries have managed to forget about it and move on. It's killed millions of Vietnamese, millions more Cambodians. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. And had a pivotal role in countless brutal proxy wars and suppressions in Africa and Central/South America. But none of those countries have become paranoid or devoted their existences to defending themselves against the next wave of US attacks.

Quote:

---

Regardless of whatever else Damian Thompson might do, the example he quotes is relevant and accurate to the experience i describe above, which is why i linked it.

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
So for a measure of why he describes a headline as biased could you perhaps show the telegraph headline over the London bombings and tell me how that reads any different to the BBC headline about the West Bank bombing ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

The US has tried to wipe a few places off the map over the years - but those countries have managed to forget about it and move on. It's killed millions of Vietnamese, millions more Cambodians. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. And had a pivotal role in countless brutal proxy wars and suppressions in Africa and Central/South America. But none of those countries have become paranoid or devoted their existences to defending themselves against the next wave of US attacks.

---

The US is hardly top of the christmas card list though....

"Regardless of whatever else Damian Thompson might do, the example he quotes is relevant and accurate to the experience i describe above, which is why i linked it."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
So for a measure of why he describes a headline as biased could you perhaps show the telegraph headline over the London bombings and tell me how that reads any different to the BBC headline about the West Bank bombing ?

---

It always a little bit pointless conversing with you Tribesman, but its great for developing patience.

I described my experience of unbalanced beeb reporting on israel/palestine from years of watching the TV, and provide an example which i liken as typical to that which i have experienced.

Everything else in your statement is blather, you could choose to disagree with me and argue your point, but instead you use circumlocution to completely bypass the intent with a barge-load of negative waffle.

What is your purpose in making this statement, because it certainly does nothing to refute or invalidate mine.............?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

That's the problem. "Death to Israel" etc is used in the ME as a standard rallying call in some circles. But it's as tired a mantra as the "Axis of Evil" tbh. The paranoia may well have saved a lot more. It may not. Who knows. Right now it's causing as many problems as it is solving.

The US has tried to wipe a few places off the map over the years - but those countries have managed to forget about it and move on. It's killed millions of Vietnamese, millions more Cambodians. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. And had a pivotal role in countless brutal proxy wars and suppressions in Africa and Central/South America. But none of those countries have become paranoid or devoted their existences to defending themselves against the next wave of US attacks.

---

israel was founded upon survivors of the Holocaust. if israel did let down their defenses, there wouldnt be an israel.
also, the countries which the US supposedly tried to destroy arent now threatened seriously by others and there arent millions who are chanting for its destruction, at least, AFAIK.
i dont see thousands chanting for the destruction of 'nam or cambodia in the US. but i do see thousands chanting for the destruction of israel in multiple arab countries.

why do you find a problem with us jews being hell bent on survival? :inquisitive:

:israel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

why do you find a problem with us jews being hell bent on survival? :inquisitive:

---

Off the top of my head it would be the thousands of deaths of others, by intentional neglect and military action.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

What is your purpose in making this statement, because it certainly does nothing to refute or invalidate mine.............?

---

It does , unless you can show that the media didn't run with 56 killed in london attack since you seem to support Thompsons line that a headline of 3 killed in west bank attack is a sign of bias .

Quote:

---

I described my experience of unbalanced beeb reporting on israel/palestine from years of watching the TV, and provide an example which i liken as typical to that which i have experienced.

---

Actually you are just showing your own bias , in the same way as the people that complained that the BBC were biased on the Iraq war ...complaints from both the people who supported the warand those who oppose it each claiming the BBC was biased against them , actually its just like the people who launch complaints that the BBC is too pro-Israeli .

Quote:

---

israel was founded upon survivors of the Holocaust.

---

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Is that todays daily myth from hooah ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It does , unless you can show that the media didn't run with 56 killed in london attack since you seem to support Thompsons line that a headline of 3 killed in west bank attack is a sign of bias .

Actually you are just showing your own bias , in the same way as the people that complained that the BBC were biased on the Iraq war ...complaints from both the people who supported the warand those who oppose it each claiming the BBC was biased against them , actually its just like the people who launch complaints that the BBC is too pro-Israeli .

---

that has nothing to do with the question of how israeli vs palestinian attacks are presented on beeb news.

the comment was by way of explanation to another poster as to why i was pleased to see the der-spiegel article, and was not a provable or disprovable due to the fact it was based on my perception of tv news, so what is the point of this great circumlocution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It does , unless you can show that the media didn't run with 56 killed in london attack since you seem to support Thompsons line that a headline of 3 killed in west bank attack is a sign of bias .

---

Kidding me? Where is the media when rockets hit Israel? Where is the media about the butchering in Darfur? Where was the media when muslim hordes were attacking serbs? The media is the leftist ministery of truth and they have made their choice they are just another stain on the wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Kidding me? Where is the media when rockets hit Israel? Where is the media about the butchering in Darfur? Where was the media when muslim hordes were attacking serbs? The media is the leftist ministery of truth and they have made their choice they are just another stain on the wall.

---

Cost to get British reporters to the Capital: None.
Difficulty: None
Interest in the UK: massive

Cost to get reporters to Darfur: Considerable
Difficulty: Very - unsafe to boot
Interest in the UK - minimal

Yes, there are loads of conflicts. The safety of reporters in Israel is quite good (as long as you stay a long way from the borders as media crew vans are difficult to see with a modern tank's scope).

Getting the media in to the area is an issue you appear to be wilfully ignoring - as well as them not dying.

~:smoking:

Not talking about real journalists, they have zero chance to make it they are condemned to freelance, I am talking about whorenalists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not talking about real journalists, they have zero chance to make it they are condemned to freelance, I am talking about whorenalists.

---

Oh, the unclean business of earning a wage.

What exactly is it that you do which allows you to sneer at everyone who has to compromise between what they'd like to do and what they have to do to earn a living?

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:
Is that todays daily myth from hooah ?

---

nope. no myth. do you really want to argue this? you know you are wrong. where do you think most of the survivors went? america pretty much closed its doors, and Europe is in shambles.
where else to go? israel. duh.

im not talking about the actual founders. im talking about the people who made up most of the immigrants to israel.

ok tribesman, where do YOU think they went, if you think that comment was a myth?
:study:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It does , unless you can show that the media didn't run with 56 killed in london attack since you seem to support Thompsons line that a headline of 3 killed in west bank attack is a sign of bias .

---

Are you saying those are the same situations, with the same public perception of the context behind each event?

CR

Quote:

---

nope. no myth. do you really want to argue this? you know you are wrong. where do you think most of the survivors went? america pretty much closed its doors, and Europe is in shambles.
where else to go? israel. duh.

---

Once again you show how clueless you are , most of the survivors returned to their countries though a fairly large proportion ended up in america .
Perhaps your "research" is letting you down again , have you tried any of the places that study the shoah by any chance ?
Have you considered trying the Jewish documentation center for a start :dizzy2:

Looks like you're both right to an extent.

Quote:

---

Are you saying those are the same situations, with the same public perception of the context behind each event?

---

What I am saying is that if there are two similar headlines over two similar events how can one be biased and the other not .
If both follow the headline with a story saying terrorist and two people killed and 4 terrorists and 52 people killed then all it demonstrates is not bias but the simple everyday practice of using short headlines .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

..but i do see thousands chanting for the destruction of israel in multiple arab countries.

why do you find a problem with us jews being hell bent on survival? :inquisitive:

:israel:

---

I don't have any problem with us jews being hell bent on survival. I just have a problem if us jews decide that we need to kill 200 children as collective punishment for 10 Israelis dying.