Gaza's on-going Palestinian civilians Killing

[jjj]

Some people simply enjoy hurting others. Religion, race or whatever is simply the excuse they use to have their 'fun'.
Others are after power, assets, money. Religion, race or whatever is simply the excuse they use to get their way.

[Alan Klein]

Countries that are governed by a terrorist organisation and who deny the right of their neighbour to exist should be forced to disarm through pressure from the world community. Treaties mean nothing to criminals. I place terrorists in the category of criminals. Don't you?

One man's terrorist is another's patriot.  It depends what side of the line you're standing on.  All this is about are two groups of people fighting over the same plot of land.  It's a turf battle.  Gaza and Hamas with their AK47's, tunnels, and unguided rockets, and slingshots, are not an existential threat to Israel with their modern, first-class military including A bombs, laser guided bombs, naval vessels, fighter jets and helicopters, tanks, etc.  You're just being hyperbolic.  Both sides have to give a little if there's to be peace.   Having lost a niece on 911, you don't have to ask me straw-man rhetorical questions about terrorism.  My family has been personally touched by it. 

[texshooter]

I find it interesting how Monaco is one of the richest, smallest, and most densely populated countries in the world and yet they don't fight their neighbors for more land. If you fight, be prepared to lose.

[texshooter]

Terrorists don't come from the Land of Mordor. They come from civilian populations.

[Ray]

Gaza and Hamas with their AK47's, tunnels, and unguided rockets, and slingshots, are not an existential threat to Israel with their modern, first-class military including A bombs, laser guided bombs, naval vessels, fighter jets and helicopters, tanks, etc. 

Do you not think that the reason for this is largely due to the blockade imposed by Israel?

[Alan Klein]

Blockade or not, there still would be no existential threat to Israel.  In any case, a blockade is legally an act of war.  That on its face will prevent peace.  The Israelis know this that's why they just offered to extend the range for the  Gazans fishing boats beyond the 3 mile blockade that's been enforced for a long time.    You can't make peace if you're constantly at war.  Whether the Gazans will reciprocate, I don't know.    But it has to start somewhere.

[Alan Klein]

The 1967 war when Israel was attacked simultaneously by the armies and air forces of Egypt, Syria and Jordon was an existential threat to the survival of Israel.  Iran and maybe IS at some point might become one.  But Gaza?

[Alan Klein]

Isaac, do you always attack people's intelligence when you disagree with their views?  Is that the best you can do?

[Alan Klein]

"But Gaza?" succinctly expresses your disbelief, and it doesn't provide anything more than that expression of disbelief -- you don't believe it because you don't believe it.

If you read all my posts above,  you will see I indicated that Gaza only had AK47's, unguided rockets, tunnels, and slingshots.  Even if their military was improved, do you really think they could take on Israel's modern armed forces, destroy it and "capture" Isreal?  So you tell me how Gaza is an existential threat?

[kers]

Dutch news today :

Israel again does not allow Amnesty and HRW to enter Gaza
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) can not inquire into possible violations of human rights in the Gaza Strip.

For many years Israel prevents that employees of both organizations can travel to the Gaza Strip. They would not have the right papers. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry gave no response to the question of why the employees of the two organisations can not enter the Palestinian area the from egyptian territory.
Israel disputes that it has committed human rights violations in the Gaza Strip.  It also opposes an investigation by the United Nations, because that would be biased.

- typical israeli world ignorance

[john beardsworth]

The 1967 war when Israel was attacked simultaneously by the armies and air forces of Egypt, Syria and Jordon was an existential threat to the survival of Israel. 

Curious history. Even if it could be described as a pre-emptive attack, it was Israel who attacked them simultaneously.

[BernardLanguillier]

Israel news today -- "Israel has been refusing to allow employees of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch to enter the Gaza Strip in order to conduct their own independent investigations into the fighting, using various bureaucratic excuses."

Yes, there is obviously an increasing awareness inside Israel about various questionable sides of the official hard core story defended by the government.

Thousands of people gathered yesterday to protest against the approach too.

It gives me hope that those voices may end up changing the direction to favor peace and negotiation instead of re-inforcing the position of Hamas by generating more hatred as the result of thousands of innocent civilians killing.

You reporting this side of the story also gives me hope that you have perhaps chosen to be more objective about the on going events?

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

I'm still waiting for your condemnation of the killing of children by rockets launched from Gaza.

Go back and re-read what I wrote several times Isaac.

I have already clearly condemned several times Palestinian actions. If you are referring to that one incident where a rocket shot by Hamas would have killed one Palestinian children, yes I condemn that too, although the relevance of this tragic incident to the discussion at hand I find questionable.

You have been a lot less clear about your condemnation of the actions of the Israeli army to the extent that you come across as an inconditional supporter of their actions.

Your quotation had given me hope, but I guess from the follow up post that the Israel gov remains, in your mind and/or under your keyboard, free of any wrong doing or, at least, not any more guilty than Hamas?

Cheers,
Bernard

[Ray]

If you read all my posts above,  you will see I indicated that Gaza only had AK47's, unguided rockets, tunnels, and slingshots.  Even if their military was improved, do you really think they could take on Israel's modern armed forces, destroy it and "capture" Isreal?  So you tell me how Gaza is an existential threat?

I can't believe your naivety, Alan. Do you really think that an organisation like Hamas with its terrorist associations would not have the potential to be a very serious threat to Israel if it were allowed unrestricted access to sophisticated weaponry which it could combine with its terrorist, subterfuge tactics?

Have you forgotten how successful a mere handful of terrorists were during the 9/11 attack on the US? Underestimating one's enemy has often been a fatal mistake in the past.

[Isaac]

…after hearing all kinds of news about the conflict in the middle east since decades I'm quite fed up with it…

'Huge hypocrites' was how someone in the United Nations described the Arab world's dealings with the Palestinians to me… The Arab states used the descendents of the 1948 refugees as a political stick to publicly beat Israel on the world stage. They used oil in 1973 when it was the Arab armies getting a pounding, but they didn't use it to pressure America to get a better deal for the Palestinians. … All were encouraged to keep their Palestinian identity by refusing them anything else, even though many refugees have never set foot in the land from which that identity derives. [Only] In Jordan they were given citizenship.
…
'The Israel-Palestinian conflict is quite easy to understand,' a diplomat once told me… 'It's a competition in victimhood,' spat the diplomat. He was referring to the perpetual struggle between Israel and the Palestinian Authority to win international opinion.

Just imagine that the multitudes who were displaced by the partition of India had not been resettled but were kept as stateless refugees.

There is no real political will for peace in the near east… generations who never have experienced peace.

The Second Intifada… reduced parts of the occupied Palestinian territories to war zones. … Many people on both sides lost all sympathy for the suffering of the other.
…
Most Israelis now never set foot inside the West Bank… Their children grew up amid the suicide bombings of that period and are generally more right-wing than their parents. Many Palestinians living on the West Bank or Gaza grew up mixing with ordinary Israelis on beaches or restaurants in Tel Aviv and Haifa. Their children have not had these experiences. They've rarely seen an Israeli who isn't carrying a gun.

[BernardLanguillier]

Please show where.

Sorry no time, it's there for your eyes to read.

How could the killing of an innocent child not be relevant to this discussion?

I am getting tired of your systematic partial quotation tactics. I condemn this action but it is about Palestinians killing other Palestinians. If your point is that the armed arm of Hamas is hurting Palestinians, yes I agree that they are.

It is not directly relevant because the discussion between you and me is not about whether the armed arm of Hamas is doing horrible things, they are as I and others have acknowledged numerous times. The discussion between you and me is about whether the Israeli army is doing things that are an order of magnitude more horrible than what Hamas has been doing.

I've told you (twice) that the UN condemnation of 2012 actions by both Israeli and Palestinian groups applies to current actions by Israeli and Palestinian groups.

OK, thanks for the clarification. How about the many other UN resolutions that the Israeli government has violated? May I derive from your willingness to adhere to the word and spirit of international rulings that you also condemn the successive Israel govs for having not adhered to these other UN resolutions?

Which is it? Is your accusation that I think the Israeli government "free of any wrong doing" -- or -- is your accusation that I think the Israeli government is "not any more guilty than Hamas"?

Since I was asking you a question (you may not have noticed the question mark at the end of my sentence), would you mind answering which it is if any of these 2 it is?

If time constraints forces you to pick one of these 2, please answer the second one.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Alan Klein]

Curious history. Even if it could be described as a pre-emptive attack, it was Israel who attacked them simultaneously.

That's true. Israel attacked first in response to Egypt, Syria and Jordon mobilizing its forces for what seemed like an imminent attack on Israel.   But my point was that these three countries represented an existential threat to Israel's very existence.  Gaza isn't that kind of threat.  Just to clarify, that doesn't mean Israel or any country that is attacked, does not have the right to defend itself and attack back, regardless of the size of the country doing the original attacks.  Certainly, my country America, isn't bashful about these things.   

[Chris_Brown]

Aug. 19, 2014 11:16 a.m. ET:

Israel suspended talks with Palestinian factions in Cairo after three rockets from the Gaza Strip landed in southern Israel, breaking a cease-fire aimed at allowing negotiators to broker a long-term truce for the conflict-ridden territory.

The Israel Defense Forces said the rockets struck open areas around the city of Beersheva, with no immediate reports of damage. Within minutes, the military said it retaliated against militant targets in Gaza and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recalled the Israeli delegation from Cairo.

What does Hamas expect to gain from this kind of provocation? They've violated every cease-fire put in place during this "outbreak". If they want war, they should understand that the "Gaza Strip" could very well become a parking lot.

[texshooter]

The land belongs to Egypt, by right of Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah  (1209 BCE). Everyone now living there are squatters. Time to move out.

[BernardLanguillier]

Isaac,

I have repeatedly chosen to answer your questions diligently, point by point, trying to understand your position.

All I see in return are endless partial quotations attempting to transform my views into those of an enemy of Israel taking unfair sides and lacking objectivity.

I also see you repeatedly avoiding to answer many of my questions.

You may think you are winning something here, but objective readers will probably agree with me that the only measurable effect of your conversational tactics are a confirmation that you are the one lacking objectivity here.

Cheers,
Bernard