Two ceasefires ...

[Beren Son Of Barahi]

For this to end; there needs to be around 20 years of sustained peace. Countless, pointless and un-winnable wars does nothing for each side. The countless endless cycles of threats and counter threats; violence and counter-violence is not furthering the people on either side of the conflict. Only time and a sense of progress will temper the extremes on both sides. the middle ground must feel they have something gained for their struggle to be moderate.

Both sides need to give the sticks a rest and try the carrot...


edit: on a side note i thought the title was going to be Two ceasefires ...one cup.

[Incongruous]

And how many people saw their relatives killed for no good reason? How many of these people will become militants?

Ha! Does it matter! The mighty nation of Israel will simply declare war on Gaza again in a few years and kill them all!

On a more serious note, the wave of suicide bombings this aburd conflict will create will help Israel in its demonisation of the Palestinians.

[HoreTore]

Firstly, them being children does not necessarily mean that they were not Hamas fighters. Secondly, Hamas militant deaths have been estimated as between four hundred and six hundred and fifty, plus another hundred and fifty-odd police officers - which is probably a pretty good job by Israel considering the closeness with which Hamas operates around civilians.

Uhm.... 500 dead fighters? That's a good number? Do you know how many will take up arms because of this? It's ridiculous to think that number will be counted in hundreds, it will at least be in the thousands.

And then you have the 70.000 who want to take up arms in Iran alone because of this...

No, there's no denying that this is a resounding long-term defeat by Israel. Thousands of people around the world want to take up arms against them, and they've alienated their allies even more. The only thing Israel has won by this is more enemies.

[Gregoshi]

...and perfect timing: 2 days before the new Yank Boss takes over, "cease fire" is called.

I guess each side wanted to get their licks in before it drew a frown from Washington.

This reminded me of a political cartoon from 1983 back when I collected the funnier of such things:

[Tribesman]

This reminded me of a political cartoon from 1983 back when I collected the funnier of such things:

The good old days of the civil war where they called ceasefires to let the banks open so they could get the money to pay the wages of all the different militias so they could get them back fighting again .

[julius_caesar_the_first]

On a more serious note, the wave of suicide bombings this aburd conflict will create will help Israel in its demonisation of the Palestinians.

And the resulting Israeli offensive will help Hamas in it's demonisation of Israel and justify the next round of suicide bombings. And we're back where we started.

[rasoforos]

Firstly, them being children does not necessarily mean that they were not Hamas fighters.

We are reaching new moral lows here... This is unexplored territory...The justification of killing children because some might have been forced to fight for terrorists.

...I bet some of the Jewish people in Nazi concentration camps were criminals too. Hell, some of the kids there might have stolen things or engaged in criminal activity...

...Dont lose your soul trying to justify things mate.

[Meneldil]

which is probably a pretty good job by Israel considering the closeness with which Hamas operates around civilians.

Is that the famous 'Hamas use civilians as human shields' thingy? Because all I see is people voluntarily running around to see what's going on. Not some Hamas people lining up 8 years old children and hidding behind them while firing at the IDF.

[Hooahguy]

Is that the famous 'Hamas use civilians as human shields' thingy? Because all I see is people voluntarily running around to see what's going on. Not some Hamas people lining up 8 years old children and hidding behind them while firing at the IDF.

i saw a video of hamas doing exaclty that (lining kids up and shooting behind them) somwhere on youtube. ill try to find it if i can....

[Banquo's Ghost]

Recriminations are, no doubt, going to keep these threads full of colourful metaphor for some time, but maybe there is room for some debate on what happens next?

There is a new administration about to take office in the United States. Several posters have previously trumpeted the "interests" of the US as reason for the recent unthinking and uncritical stance on Israeli actions.

Given the intellectual abilities of many of our members, perhaps we can try and explore in a constructive way what might be the subtleties of an Obama approach to this most destructive of adventures by Israel?

This opinion piece from Haaretz gives a thoughtful starting point. What are the US interests in the Levant? Would it actually be useful for a hard-liner like Netanyahu to win the coming elections, on the basis that there is naught worse than a mediocre lame-duck like Olmert to command the trust of Israelis when making peace?

Obama has two choices. First, he can let the Israelis bleed and kill all the way to an ostracized apartheid state, observing from the sidelines as Israel endangers peace in the Middle East and undermines his country's interests, just as George Marshall predicted. The second option is to stand at Israel's side in its struggle to achieve peace and maintain its Jewish and moral character en route to regional acceptance, which has been offered by 22 Arab states. Or in other words, to finish Truman's work

[Hooahguy]

i expected as much from haaretz....

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Is that the famous 'Hamas use civilians as human shields' thingy? Because all I see is people voluntarily running around to see what's going on. Not some Hamas people lining up 8 years old children and hidding behind them while firing at the IDF.

Firstly, some civilians even volunteer to be used this way. Secondly, in the modern age, using a human shield doesn't necessarily mean walking behind them - it can mean hiding weapons or fighters in their basements or schools, or firing from the middle of crowds or from among apartment buildings which are full, videos of which I have shown.

We are reaching new moral lows here... This is unexplored territory...The justification of killing children because some might have been forced to fight for terrorists.

If someone is shooting at you, you shoot back. And since you have already violated Godwin's Law, allow me to use the example of underage children in the Volkssturm. The Soviets, in my opinion, had every right to shoot at them. You obviously disagree.

...I bet some of the Jewish people in Nazi concentration camps were criminals too. Hell, some of the kids there might have stolen things or engaged in criminal activity...

That relates? Care to make a logical explanation as to how?

Uhm.... 500 dead fighters? That's a good number?

That is still five hundred dead Hamas militants, and the fact is that they're dead. They may be replaced, but they're not getting up.

Do you know how many will take up arms because of this? It's ridiculous to think that number will be counted in hundreds, it will at least be in the thousands.

Isn't that what people say after every war Israel is involved in? But really, I think it is quite naive to believe that Israel will just sit there through so many bombardments. Did they go too far? Perhaps. Do I blame them? Not in the slightest.

So you demonstrate a lack of comprehension , congratulations

...you completely missed the point. Then again, a lot of others probably did as well, so perhaps that was my fault.

[Don Corleone]

At the end of the day, it all boils down to who supports a two-state solution and who does not. Hamas does not support a two-state solution, never has and never will. They would rather die themselves then allow the Israelis to live there. Note the use of the term Hamas, not Palestinian. Israel does not do itself any service by continuing to conflate the two, nor does the U.S.

We need to provide viable alternatives to the Palestian people. Be it Fatah or other leadership within the Palestinian community, we have to find a way to get the Palestinians to choose leadership other than Hamas.

Has anybody ever seen any numbers on the number of Palestinians that would accept a two-state solution? Is there a political will to be sought? At the end of the day, if Palestinians would rather die killing Israelis then live alongside them, we're all in a holding pattern.

As for the issues that have always been the last 5%, rather than trying to split hairs, why don't they give one hair to one side and one hair to the other? Why not allow for Right of Return, but Jerusalem stays as part of Israel?

[Tribesman]

saw a video of hamas doing exaclty that

Didn't you look at videos of the IDF doing exactly that too ?

i expected as much from haaretz....

Then read Arutz Sheva instead if you don't like thinking .



Interesting piece BG , it does raise the question of what exactly are Americas (or any other countries) interests in Israel ?
Pretty much bugger all really as it stands , rather like an illegitimate spoilt child who is both a drain and an embarrassment yet who misguided charity and warped sense of responsibility deems worth yet another chance to prove that it can grow up and stop its petulant tantrums .
As another piece in that paper today (and several other Israeli papers) mention it is time for a change , the constant round of military action and refusal to meaningfully talk is achieving nothing and will never achieve anything apart from moreof the same . Add to that the Saudis saying that their renewed offer of peace isn't going to be an offer that remains open indefinately unless it is acted upon by Israel .


Don I notice you are refering to Hamas as a single entity that is opposed to a two state solution , that isn't true anymore than describing Fatah as a single entity that is in favour of a two state solution .

If someone is shooting at you, you shoot back.

Really ? So if an armed robber starts shooting at the police from a crowded bank the police should just shoot back .

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Didn't you look at videos of the IDF doing exactly that too ?

In the only cases I can find of the IDF conclusively being proven to use human shields (which the Israeli Supreme Court defined as clearly illegal), the commanders in question were punished.

[Tribesman]

In the only cases I can find of the IDF conclusively being proven to use human shields (which the Israeli Supreme Court defined as clearly illegal), the commanders in question were punished.

You mean that those who were caught on video with incontravertable evidence in the period after many court cases finally led to a supreme court ruling get an official reprimand .
Have you seen this years ones from the West Bank ? them official reprimands are a real deterrent ain't they

[Fragony]

Really ? So if an armed robber starts shooting at the police from a crowded bank the police should just shoot back .

Well yes, can't be of much use when you are dead.

It's so very very predictable Israel is going to pull out and Hamas claims victory, and they will be able to sell it people want to believe, round # comming up.

[julius_caesar_the_first]

If someone is shooting at you, you shoot back. And since you have already violated Godwin's Law, allow me to use the example of underage children in the Volkssturm. The Soviets, in my opinion, had every right to shoot at them. You obviously disagree.

Unfortunately I have to agree with you...to a point.

If an Israeli soldier finds him or herself looking down the barrel of an AK-47 held by a child that has been told all his life that the Israelis are evil monsters that have to be exterminated then it's a situation of kill or be killed. It's not a pretty picture but that's life sometimes.

But as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong) most of the children that died were killed by bombs or artillery shells. How can a pilot see from a cockpit that the child was a Hamas fighter? He can't. It's just wrong to kill children just because some might have been mislead to fire a gun for Hamas in a propaganda video.



As for American policy I think that, from a strictly pragmatical point of view, Israel receives too much support. They are a small state with no resources and that is hated by all the states in the region (or at least the people of those states). They are alienating, much more valuable, potential allies as well giving many governments in the region a way to distract their own people from their lack of freedom and democracy. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying let Israel burn, but the US could easily Israel to accept just about any peace plan by threatening to cut off the aid it gives.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Have you seen this years ones from the West Bank ? them official reprimands are a real deterrent ain't they

The difference is that IDF commanders in the field sometimes use human shields in direct violation of the orders they are given by their commanders. Hamas, on the other hand, constantly uses human shields in complete obedience to the orders they are given by their commanders.

But as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong) most of the children that died were killed by bombs or artillery shells. How can a pilot see from a cockpit that the child was a Hamas fighter? He can't. It's just wrong to kill children just because some might have been mislead to fire a gun for Hamas in a propaganda video.

This is probably true. I wasn't saying that it was right to kill children in this scenario, simply that the fact that children and militants are not mutually exclusive. However, I don't think that most of the dead children, militants or otherwise, were specifically targeted. This leads back to the human shield argument.

[Don Corleone]

Didn't you look at videos of the IDF doing exactly that too ?

Don I notice you are refering to Hamas as a single entity that is opposed to a two state solution , that isn't true anymore than describing Fatah as a single entity that is in favour of a two state solution .

Are there operators within Hamas that would accept a two-state solution, given the chance? Probably. Do they hold sufficient autonomy and power to mold Hamas in a direction that would at large accept a two-state solution? Probably not. I'm not saying 'every Hamas member', I'm speaking of the results of the organization as a whole.

Honestly, I don't know why Israel and the U.S. don't go into the West Bank, talk to some of the political leaders and explain to them "Want to be the Nasser of Palestine? We'll build your nation for you, here are the details... just get your people to quit bombing cafes and lobbing rockets and we'll do it". In fact, when you consider Carter's and Clinton's stances, I imagine we probably have. So I have to assume that nobody with the political will to actually achieve such a goal has the desire to. And I don't know that 'we' can change that. That's a decision the Palestians are making for themselves.

[Tribesman]

It's so very very predictable Israel is going to pull out and Hamas claims victory, and they will be able to sell it people want to believe, round # comming up.

What were Israels stated aims at the start of the operation Frag ?
Before Israel announced the ceasefire (or indeed after it) which of those aims had been achieved ? Was it none , none , none or none ?

[Fragony]

But as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong) most of the children that died were killed by bombs or artillery shells. How can a pilot see from a cockpit that the child was a Hamas fighter? He can't. It's just wrong to kill children just because some might have been mislead to fire a gun for Hamas in a propaganda video..

Who is killing who then? If you can convince a retard that jumping into the river mid-winter is a great idea then you are guilty when he freezes to death. Israel just can not do nothing, everybody should be able to at least understand that.

[Watchman]

I daresay the issue is rather that they do rather too much of all the wrong things and little if none of the good things...

"A man who sleeps in rain cannot fault the gods for catching a cold" is a chestnut that applies to Tel Aviv as well.

[Kralizec]

Are there operators within Hamas that would accept a two-state solution, given the chance? Probably. Do they hold sufficient autonomy and power to mold Hamas in a direction that would at large accept a two-state solution? Probably not. I'm not saying 'every Hamas member', I'm speaking of the results of the organization as a whole.

Honestly, I don't know why Israel and the U.S. don't go into the West Bank, talk to some of the political leaders and explain to them "Want to be the Nasser of Palestine? We'll build your nation for you, here are the details... just get your people to quit bombing cafes and lobbing rockets and we'll do it". In fact, when you consider Carter's and Clinton's stances, I imagine we probably have. So I have to assume that nobody with the political will to actually achieve such a goal has the desire to. And I don't know that 'we' can change that. That's a decision the Palestians are making for themselves.

The Likud party (not in power right now, I know) explicitly opposes Palestinian statehood and approves the colonisation of the west bank and rejected the withdrawal from Gaza by Sharon. I don't know the other parties' official positions of these, but probably are more ambiguous or simply not outspoken about it.

Till Israel dismantles their settlements, ie return to the 1967 borders with the Palestinians, I can't "support Israel" or believe their lip service statements to long term peace, no matter how much I loathe Hamas. How can you honestly expect a stable state to emerge on a territory dotted with hostile settlements?

[Don Corleone]

The Likud party (not in power right now, I know) explicitly opposes Palestinian statehood and approves the colonisation of the west bank and rejected the withdrawal from Gaza by Sharon. I don't know the other parties' official positions of these, but probably are more ambiguous or simply not outspoken about it.

Till Israel dismantles their settlements, ie return to the 1967 borders with the Palestinians, I can't "support Israel" or believe their lip service statements to long term peace, no matter how much I loathe Hamas. How can you honestly expect a stable state to emerge on a territory dotted with hostile settlements?

You'll never catch me saying that Israel has been blameless in all of this. You're absolutely right, the settlements are an unavoidable obstruction to a path forward. That being said, Israel has proven repeatedly that given the right motivational prompting, they'll have them down in months if not weeks.

Yes, you're right, there are hard-liners in Israel. But the last time I checked, there was something like 80+% support in Israel for a sovereign, autonomous Palestinian state. There is the political will to make the two-state solution work, even if it means dismantling settlements. Some of the harder issues might start dragging that number down, things like right of return, water rights, arms agreements, the status of Jerusalem, etc.

I have no doubt that if President Obama went to Israel (assuming Likkud wasn't in power at the time) and said

okay, here's the deal... we're going back to 1967, Palestinians that can provide proof of ownership will be recognized but there will not be a blanket 'right of return', Jerusalem will be jointly mandated city, with access available to all, in all sites. In exchange, Palestine will recognize Israel's right to exist, will agree to a peace treaty and will work with the IDF to end cross-border raids and terrorism.

then the Israelis would move heaven and earth (and a load of settlements) to make that happen.

I do not have anywhere near the same confidence level with the Palestinians. I met a very intelligent, kind, reflective Palestinian in Stockholm last fall. He made some excellent arguments about the Palestinians right to exist, about the need for a stable state to check Islamic fundamentalism, which is apparently growing rampantly among the camps, which he bemoaned since traditionally, the Palestinians were viewed as being level-headed and moderate in the Arab world (so said he, not me). But when I posed the question to him of a two-state solution, his style changed. He was still polite, but his statements seemed an attempt to obfuscate. On the right of Israel to exist, he said "all people have a right to live". I myself could drive a truck through that statement, so I continued to press. At the end of the day, the guy, who was intelligent, rational and understood the ramifications of what he was saying, could not bring himself to say he believed in a right of existence for an Israeli state. I laud him on his honesty, but I ask myself... if this is where their most moderate, most tolerant viewpoints BEGIN.... can there ever be peace?

I do not believe the Palestinians, as a people, believe in a two state solution. I've posted articles before that Tribesman will disavow, but they come from the founding charters of Hizbollah and Hamas. They don't just deny the right of Israel as a nation to exist, they deny the right of non-muslims as individual people to exist, and these are the people the Palestinians chose to lead them. I know the majority of the Islamic world don't share that view, at least I hope they don't, but I don't see any sort of resistance to such viewpoints when espoused, and in that, I see a tolerance of intolerance that is very telling about future prospects for peace.

[Watchman]

I remain unconvinced by arguments based on willingness to take dramatic "wartime" declarations at a face value, doubly so given the Middle Eastern tradition of poetic exaggeration in public rhetoric.

[HoreTore]

Isn't that what people say after every war Israel is involved in? But really, I think it is quite naive to believe that Israel will just sit there through so many bombardments. Did they go too far? Perhaps. Do I blame them? Not in the slightest.

They have one response when the terrorists are palestinians, and they have another one when the terrorists are jews. If they used the same method they use against the jewish terrorists against Hamas, they might actually accomplish something.

[Tribesman]

I've posted articles before that Tribesman will disavow, but they come from the founding charters of Hizbollah and Hamas. They don't just deny the right of Israel as a nation to exist, they deny the right of non-muslims as individual people to exist

Of course I shall disavow that , unless you also mention that it is taken from Islamic scripture and both Jewish and Christian scripture also say the same about people who follow the wrong faith at the end of times (or mormons and scientologists for that matter) .

That being said, Israel has proven repeatedly that given the right motivational prompting, they'll have them down in months if not weeks.

Actually they havn't Don ,they have shown that they will pull out of settlements if they are too expensive to maintain .
Now there might be some motivational prompting that can be applied , like taking away all grants dollar for dollar your government gives Israel for every dollar Israel spends on the illegal settlements . Also you could put a blanket ban on the "charity" drives you have over in the US where people can make Aliyah by proxy by funding the illegal settlemants (or in the case of the nuttier christians give money to recreate Israel so they can become Christians at the end of the world).

[Goofball]

We are reaching new moral lows here... This is unexplored territory...The justification of killing children because some might have been forced to fight for terrorists.

...I bet some of the Jewish people in Nazi concentration camps were criminals too. Hell, some of the kids there might have stolen things or engaged in criminal activity...

...Dont lose your soul trying to justify things mate.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. If you have children trying to kill you by firing bullets at you/strapping bombs to themselves and getting on busses/launching missiles at you, as much as it is distasteful, you can't simply turn cheek because they may or may not be being forced to fight or you yourself will die. You have to kill them first. It's your only sane option. Are you really saying that on a field of battle soldiers should have to aim away from enemy soldiers who appear to be underage?

As for all of those who are saying this Israeli offensive is only justification for more Palestinians to turn to terrorism, I have another suggestion: perhaps it's justification for Palestinians to turn on their own corrupt leadership and oust them from power because of this destruction that they regularly invite upon their own people. You all make it sound like the only option that Palestinians have is to become murderers. That's not true.

[Fragony]

the wrong faith at the end of times (or mormons and scientologists for that matter) .

Not that much in a hurry these christians and jews. Classical islamphilist response by the way, do not forget to mention that christians once burned witches.