Speaking of Israel...

[Fragony]

What are the other 20% for in case it's 80. Going to be a hard equation to make if you want to accuse me of backing ethnic cleaning like was done in Warshaw against the jews and compare that to what Israel does to the Palestinians. Bit of a difference between collateral and intentional damage. One of the parties has absolutily no problem with the latter. Looks so nice on tv, journalists gob it up faster than my two new kittens a can of tuna.

[HoreTore]

What are the other 20% for in case it's 80. Going to be a hard equation to make if you want to accuse me of backing ethnic cleaning like was done in Warshaw against the jews and compare that to what Israel does to the Palestinians. Bit of a difference between collateral and intentional damage. One of the parties has absolutily no difference with the latter.

That would be Moshe Feiglin, then. As Husar said, it would help a lot if you actually read the stuff you're replying to.

Feiglin is advocating clearing the Gaza strip of Arabs and repopulating the area with Jews. He defines all inhabitants on Gaza as enemy soldiers, and sees no reason not to kill them all. His logic is that since they voted in Hamas, everyone is a target. Hilariously, by that token there is no need at all to distinguish between Israeli citizens and Israeli soldiers.

There is no doubt that Hamas is a loony bunch of genocidal maniacs. There is no doubt that the Israeli right is a loony bunch of genocidal maniacs.

Why you choose to focus on one of those and ignore the other, is curious.


Finally, Hamas launches their missiles knowing they will not kill anyone. IDF launches their missiles knowing they will kill someone.

[Beskar]

I have no idea what you mean with the ISIS comparison, where was Gutmensch proven wrong when he said the American invasion would fail?

Conformational Bias using a strawman.

[Fragony]

That would be Moshe Feiglin, then. As Husar said, it would help a lot if you actually read the stuff you're replying to.

Feiglin is advocating clearing the Gaza strip of Arabs and repopulating the area with Jews. He defines all inhabitants on Gaza as enemy soldiers, and sees no reason not to kill them all. His logic is that since they voted in Hamas, everyone is a target. Hilariously, by that token there is no need at all to distinguish between Israeli citizens and Israeli soldiers.

There is no doubt that Hamas is a loony bunch of genocidal maniacs. There is no doubt that the Israeli right is a loony bunch of genocidal maniacs.

Why you choose to focus on one of those and ignore the other, is curious.


Finally, Hamas launches their missiles knowing they will not kill anyone. IDF launches their missiles knowing they will kill someone.

Yeah, and Hamas makes sure people get killed, that's why they launch them from area's where people are going to get killed, the more the better. Their greatest allies are sure to be there with a camara for juicy shots. In the meantime ISIS murdered more people in a few days than got killed since Israel's founding. But that isn't all that interesting, because not Israel. How people explain that for themselves I don't understand but I am not good at leftist logic, just don't see it.

And sure there are Israeli idiots. They aren't all that liked but that is changing really fast, the violence bred a bit of a new generation.

[Pannonian]

Yeah, and Hamas makes sure people get killed, that's why they launch them from area's where people are going to get killed, the more the better. Their greatest allies are sure to be there with a camara for juicy shots. In the meantime ISIS murdered more people in a few days than got killed since Israel's founding. But that isn't all that interesting, because not Israel. How people explain that for themselves I don't understand but I am not good at leftist logic, just don't see it.

And sure there are Israeli idiots. They aren't all that liked but that is changing really fast, the violence bred a bit of a new generation.

"They aren't all that liked"? Are you aware that Feiglin is essentially #2 in the ruling party there?

[Fragony]

"They aren't all that liked"? Are you aware that Feiglin is essentially #2 in the ruling party there?

Yeah there are nutjobs yeah. Wonder what drove them nuts. No I don't really. They alreadry were, but becomming an increasingly good proposel for those that really don't want to have to do anything with them. Who's fault is that really.

i know knothing of Feiglin by the way, never heard of them

[Pannonian]

Yeah there are nutjobs yeah. Wonder what drove them nuts. No I don't really. They alreadry were, but becomming an increasingly good proposel for those that really don't want to have to do anything with them. Who's fault is that really.

i know knothing of Feiglin by the way, never heard of them

If you know nothing of Feiglin, why didn't you read up on him before responding to those who were commenting on him? Is it your habit to assume that anyone who hates Palestinians must therefore be a good person?

[HoreTore]

Yeah there are nutjobs yeah. Wonder what drove them nuts. No I don't really. They alreadry were, but becomming an increasingly good proposel for those that really don't want to have to do anything with them. Who's fault is that really.

i know knothing of Feiglin by the way, never heard of them

Funny how you do not extend the same kind of goodwill towards the Palestinians that you do towards the Israeli's. You excuse Israeli nutjobs, while you denounce all palestinians because of their nutjobs.

As for the suggestion that "the left" only cares about Israel; when was the last time you went to a free west-Sahara rally? I've been to several, and I see plenty of my fellow lefties there. I see basically noone from the right there. Ditto for Sri Lanka, the Congo, Sudan, Kurdistan, etc. Tibet is an exception, maybe because of evil commies.

It really is one of the worst "arguments" of all. It fails on every level.

[HoreTore]

If you know nothing of Feiglin, why didn't you read up on him before responding to those who were commenting on him? Is it your habit to assume that anyone who hates Palestinians must therefore be a good person?

It's a lot easier to have strong opinions if you don't have any knowledge.

[Pannonian]

It's a lot easier to have strong opinions if you don't have any knowledge.

For Frag's information, Feiglin thinks Christians are even worse than Muslims.

[Fragony]

Funny how you do not extend the same kind of goodwill towards the Palestinians that you do towards the Israeli's. You excuse Israeli nutjobs, while you denounce all palestinians because of their nutjobs.

As for the suggestion that "the left" only cares about Israel; when was the last time you went to a free west-Sahara rally? I've been to several, and I see plenty of my fellow lefties there. I see basically noone from the right there. Ditto for Sri Lanka, the Congo, Sudan, Kurdistan, etc. Tibet is an exception, maybe because of evil commies.

It really is one of the worst "arguments" of all. It fails on every level.

I don't denounce them, I just put the blame somewhere else without excusing Israel from being somewhat harsh.

Guess where, I probably don't have to say it here you know me well enough

[Fragony]

For Frag's information, Feiglin thinks Christians are even worse than Muslims.

So what he is right I grew up in the bible belt, I would have loved a wall and checkpoints at the time

[HoreTore]

I don't denounce them, I just put the blame somewhere else without excusing Israel from being somewhat harsh.

Guess where, I probably don't have to say it here you know me well enough

....which is exactly my point, you excuse one bunch of loonies who are doing exactly the same as the ones you hate.

All without even knowing who or what they are. Ignorance certainly is bliss.

Blinded by hatred.

[Fragony]

....which is exactly my point, you excuse one bunch of loonies who are doing exactly the same as the ones you hate.

All without even knowing who or what they are. Ignorance certainly is bliss.

Blinded by hatred.

I know a few really, I would love to see how you explain yourself to them. You know nothing.

[HoreTore]

I know a few really, I would love to see how you explain yourself to them. You know nothing.

Haha, you claimed just a few posts ago that you had no idea who Moshe Feiglin is.

And I'm the one who knows nothing....

Further, I am quite puzzled by what exactly I am supposed to explain to "them".

[Ja'chyra]

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

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

Seriously? Why would you enter a fair fight when the very existence of the nation people have bled and died for is at risk?

While I don't advocate the bombing of civilians I do defend their right to defend themselves from the thousands of rockets fired their way. Oh, and before we criticize too much, how many civvies dies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

[Pannonian]

Seriously? Why would you enter a fair fight when the very existence of the nation people have bled and died for is at risk?

While I don't advocate the bombing of civilians I do defend their right to defend themselves from the thousands of rockets fired their way. Oh, and before we criticize too much, how many civvies dies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Erm, the existence of Israel isn't at risk. Nothing the Palestinians can do can put the existence of Israel at risk, except maybe pushing for a one state solution and then breeding like rabbits. Individual Israelis may be at risk, but not the Israeli nation. When those bombers blew up 3 tube trains and a bus in 2005, commuters were at risk, but not the British nation, nor even the city of London. I took the tube to St John's Wood for the Lord's Test a few days after that, and I never felt threatened.

[HoreTore]

how many civvies dies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Way too many, which is why I have opposed those wars from the very beginning.

NATO is critized every single day. Don't act like we live in a fantasy world where Israel is demonized and NATO glorified.

[Papewaio]

How many have died to terrorism? Can anyone even quote he worst attack in Israel/Palistine
How many as collatoral damage?

I've said it before, there are much worse things then terrorism and police states is one of them.

Look at the amount of people who disappeared in the South American dictatorships, Apartheid South Africa and a quasi occupied Palistine.

[Pannonian]

Also, for a bona fide threat to the existence of a nation, see one suggested strategy for Gaza. Conquer with the army, expel its current inhabitants, replace with Israelis, and incorporate the territory into Israel. Now that is a bona fide threat to a nation, as opposed to individual members or clusters of people in that nation. And that suggestion was made by the presumed deputy to Israel's current ruling party (he was the only challenger to Netanyahu as Likud leader to get a significant number of votes). And should he ever lead an Israeli government, he'd be in a position to make that suggestion a reality, unlike the pipedreams of any Palestinian leaders.

Other wonderful suggestions of Mr. Feiglin: an upper house that would be open only to Jews. Even the ultra-conservative Wellington forced the King to open up the franchise and government to faiths other than the dominant one, way back in the early 19th century. Also, cut military expenditure (by 30% according to Mr. Feiglin's wonderful calculations) by abandoning non-lethal weaponry like rubber bullets against protestors (read: Palestinians), and use live ammunition instead. The presumed implication is that this will reduce their population as well.

[Kralizec]

Seriously? Why would you enter a fair fight when the very existence of the nation people have bled and died for is at risk?

While I don't advocate the bombing of civilians I do defend their right to defend themselves from the thousands of rockets fired their way. Oh, and before we criticize too much, how many civvies dies in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Most of the civilian casualties Afghanistan and in Iraq died at the hands of the insurgents, so you'll have to take that into account first. Honestly, I have no idea if the armed forces of other countries are more effective at preventing civilian deaths.

---

I think that some people in this thread treat the Gazan rockets too lightly. It's not about the raw casualty numbers they generate (allthough it would have been a lot higher without the Iron Dome) but the fact that they disrupt the daily life of thousands of Israelis. Fortunately for them, the Israeli are well prepared in both seeking shelter and treating their wounded.

That said, from a cost/benefit point of view, the rockets are a laughably ineffective weapon, as are the tunnels that they dig. You could easily compare them with the V-2 missiles that Nazi Germany used (comparing the weapons and their deployment - not the guys using them). They were horribly expensive and didn't accomplish anything, except disrupting the lives of civilians in and around London and making a slight dent in morale.

Pelting Israel with mortars and rockets, and occasionally killing two or three people with a tunnel that costs $500.000 before it's taken down, is completely irrational. It can only be explained by the fact that Hamas has absolutely no other way to fight Israel. Some people say that the Gazans feel compelled to fight Israel because they're islamists. I think the far, far more important reason is that the Palestinians are an opressed people. And they have no "civilized" means to fight back.

Israel's use of force does seem, at first sight, excessive to me this time. But ultimately I don't question their right to respond with military force to terrorist attacks, even if it does result in civilian casualties. They're forced to defend themselves. My problem is that they're to a large degree responsible for this situation in which they're forced to defend themselves. People who lay the blame entirely on Hamas should take into account that Fatah has been extremely cooperative with Israel in the last decade and it has gotten them nowhere, meanwhile Israel continues to colonize the west bank.

[Papewaio]

I think we should stop calling it colonizing which assumes that the invader also takes care of the locals see British Empire.

Settling also assumes that the land is part of Israel and not in a neighboring state.

I'm not sure what to call it but in light of Ukraine I would rename the settlers micro-annexation if trying to be PC. Outright invasion is what it actually is. So does a people have the right to spontaneously defend itself to a country invading its land?

Surely the Palestinians have as much right to eject invaders as Israel does.

[Pannonian]

I think we should stop calling it colonizing which assumes that the invader also takes care of the locals see British Empire.

Settling also assumes that the land is part of Israel and not in a neighboring state.

I'm not sure what to call it but in light of Ukraine I would rename the settlers micro-annexation if trying to be PC. Outright invasion is what it actually is. So does a people have the right to spontaneously defend itself to a country invading its land?

Surely the Palestinians have as much right to eject invaders as Israel does.

It's Old Testament-style conquest. Take over an area using force, expel or exterminate the current population, destroy their culture, and replace with one's own people and culture. See the Canaanites for an example of how to deal with an existing settlement.

[Ja'chyra]

Erm, the existence of Israel isn't at risk. Nothing the Palestinians can do can put the existence of Israel at risk, except maybe pushing for a one state solution and then breeding like rabbits. Individual Israelis may be at risk, but not the Israeli nation. When those bombers blew up 3 tube trains and a bus in 2005, commuters were at risk, but not the British nation, nor even the city of London. I took the tube to St John's Wood for the Lord's Test a few days after that, and I never felt threatened.

Their nation is at risk because to show any weakness would be to see itself wiped out from it's neighbours, Israel is in the unenviable position of having to be strong at all times and that may influence the severity of it's reprisals. Not saying it's right just it's something to be considered.

Way too many, which is why I have opposed those wars from the very beginning.

NATO is critized every single day. Don't act like we live in a fantasy world where Israel is demonized and NATO glorified.

Still reading your own obscure meanings into other peoples posts I see

[Pannonian]

Their nation is at risk because to show any weakness would be to see itself wiped out from it's neighbours, Israel is in the unenviable position of having to be strong at all times and that may influence the severity of it's reprisals. Not saying it's right just it's something to be considered.

So what do you think of Moshe Feiglin's proposal for what to do with Gaza? Does that count as a threat to a nation's existence in your eyes? Or doesn't it count because it's Israel doing the threatening and Arabs being threatened? Let me remind you of his proposal.

1. Conquer Gaza using the IDF.
2. Expel all current inhabitants.
3. Level the place.
4. Rebuild and repopulate with Israelis.
5. Incorporate Gaza into a larger Israel.

Let me also remind you that Feiglin, in his last challenge against Netanyahu for leadership of the Likud party (and thus the Israeli government) was the only challenger to receive significant numbers of votes, effectively making him the no.2 in that party.

[Papewaio]

It's Old Testament-style conquest. Take over an area using force, expel or exterminate the current population, destroy their culture, and replace with one's own people and culture. See the Canaanites for an example of how to deal with an existing settlement.

The original Israelis are probably descendents of Canaanites.

[HoreTore]

Still reading your own obscure meanings into other peoples posts I see

I may be reading too much into things, but it's definitely not obscure. In all honesty, it's a rare day when a new opinion comes around in an Israeli/Palestine-debate. It's usually just page after page of the same ol' talking points. Then we move to a different site and have the exact same debate all over again. Not saying that isn't fun or worthwhile...

Anyway, I took your comment to refer to a supposed unfair treatment of Israel. The argument goes that we ignore the evils done by, for example, NATO, while Israel is demonized for doing the same. If this is not the argument you were trying to make, could you care to elaborate on your point?

[LittleGrizzly]

Wouldn't the defending yourself argument go back to the very beginning of the conflict?

After all a few years into any conflict the argument can be made that the aggressor is defending himself against the defenders counter attacks...

[Papewaio]

How far back should we go?

[LittleGrizzly]

Well, hasn't the violence pretty much existed between the two sides since the mass Jewish immigration and the founding of Israel... always thought of that as the firing of the first shot myself. Although there have been quiet periods and noisy ones the situation has pretty much existed since then...