[jessupjonesjnr87]

Israel killed over 1400 Palestinian civilians last year I'm sure many of them were elderly ladies as well as small babies and young children. I think the youngest casualty of the operation was a ten day old Palestinian baby, how many ten day old babies were stabbed this year?

[wat0n]

Not many, though a year old baby was stabbed in the Itamar attack in 2011.

Not that collateral damage and direct attacks are really comparable anyway. If the Israeli bodycount is lower it is simply because the Israelis are not dumb enough to allow their enemies to be in a position to defeat them.

[skinster]

It's actually because the Israelis have high-tech weaponry, whereas Palestinians don't.

[GandalfTheGrey]

Not that collateral damage and direct attacks are really comparable anyway. If the Israeli bodycount is lower it is simply because the Israelis are not dumb enough to allow their enemies to be in a position to defeat them.

No, bombing hospitals and using white phosphorus on civilians is every bit as heinous as stabbing babies.

Its just that western audiences are well trained to believe that airstrike casualties = moral grey area.

[Pongo]

Two terrorist attack. The terrorists lives were saved by the police who protect them against lynch mob.

https://www.facebook.com/IsraelHayom/po ... 39783058:0

It won't happen anywhere in the Arab world. These terrorists will now get happy life in all-include Israeli prisons and will release sooner rather than later in one of prisoner exchange deals. Better to kill them on spot. That is justice.

More craziness

Palestinian knifing martyrs “married” at funeral

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/11/pa ... t-funeral/

[wat0n]

No, bombing hospitals and using white phosphorus on civilians is every bit as heinous as stabbing babies.

Its just that western audiences are well trained to believe that airstrike casualties = moral grey area.

Or maybe because airstrikes are actually the less dangerous option as far as civilians are concerned. Certainly much less dangerous for the civilian population than a ground operation that devolves into a house-by-house fighting, which are proven to lead to higher civilian casualties (as it happens each and every time operations escalate to that stage).

Which is why, in the end, the aggregate statistics by BT'selem show that Palestinians armed groups' actions have a higher civilian casualty ratio than those by the IDF (and which is itself much, much lower if it is only restricted to that resulting from air raids).

[GandalfTheGrey]

Or maybe because airstrikes are actually the less dangerous option as far as civilians are concerned. Certainly much less dangerous for the civilian population than a ground operation that devolves into a house-by-house fighting, which are proven to lead to higher civilian casualties

And safest of all for the IDF

[wat0n]

Absolutely, a nice added bonus.

[jessupjonesjnr87]

So the only alternative to blowing up hospitals and children playing on the beach is a ground incursion?

[wat0n]

So the only alternative to blowing up hospitals and children playing on the beach is a ground incursion?

If the Gazan authorities don't want to hold peace talks or halt rocket launches, yes.

[skinster]

But they do. It was Israel that decided to boycott Gaza's authorities after they democratically won their election and it was Israel that broke ceasefires before the rockets came out of Gaza.

[wat0n]

When did Hamas offer to engage in peace talks with Israel? It has never done so. Their position consists on basically "give the PA everything they want and we'll leave you alone for some time". It's nonsense.

As for the post Pillar of Cloud ceasefire, I don't recall that Hamas and Israel negotiated all the practical aspects related with the implementation of the ceasefire, itself part of the agreement.

[skinster]

Israel boycotted Hamas when they won the election.

Here is a history of the ceasefires Israel broke.

[wat0n]

Israel boycotted Hamas when they won the election.

Hamas declared from day one that it would not negotiate with Israel or respect any agreements between it and the PA. Why would Israel play along with it? That's nonsense.

Here is a history of the ceasefires Israel broke.

In most of those cases, neither Hamas nor Israel had signed any agreements or truces. Even worse, they mention that Israel broke a ceasefire on November 5 2008, even though the Israeli military was stopping an attempt by Hamas to build a tunnel leading into Israeli territory - hardly a legitimate action by Hamas I think.

In short, more nonsense.

[Pongo]

Occupation

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6669/ ... terrorists

[Silver10]

This site does make me laugh. The same people arguing in every thread about basically the same thing when it comes to Israel and the middle east.

In a perfect world there would be peace, but it isnt a perfect world. BOTH Sides have done massive wrongs to the other. However...if Hamas had Fighter jets they would use them, so why because they haven't is it bad for Israel to use theirs? To protect their people and army? It is like saying Real Madrid cant play Ronaldo because the other side doesnt have a player as good. The number of dead, Hamas dont build shelters, fire rockets from built up areas and hide behind civilians. Hoping when Israel strikes back they kill civilians which can then be paraded on the news...Look all over the middle east the same things happens. In Syria, Yemen, Libya etc...both sides show the dead to the world. if Hamas cant find any dead worth showing the have been caught using photos from Syria etc.

As for attacking old ladies in the street with a knife, how do those attackers think that will advance their goals? Seriously how? forget all the other BS how does that help their cause. I dont want to hear well Israel bombed a family in Gaze blah blah. if Hamas the PA etc are declaring that all Israelis are targets then they cant really cry when Israel hits back. Or they come out and say attacking the troops yes, but old ladies and kids no. then again a pig might fly...

So we go back to the same old arguments. Those on either side of the discussion wont be swayed by what others post. At the end of the day as was quoted last night at a Anti DBS meeting in London - 'If the Arabs wanted a state more than they hated Israel they would have had one by now'. that my friends is so true. Israel isn't going anywhere certainly not into the sea to please a few muslims who will turn it into the usual Islamic dump. Please think on that point all you nice comfortable westerners living nice easy lives. Maybe take a trip to an area in your city that has been taken over by muslims and tell me if would be happy to move there? I know I wouldnt and that is before the locals know I am jewish. So why would expect Israel to just give up and let in millions of muslims.

Still makes for good read during my lunch break..all this discussion

[jessupjonesjnr87]

The West Bank tried peace with Israel but Israeli settlers continued their land grab of the region under the protection of the IDF. The loop hole was that while the IDF were not officially allowed to go into the border areas they were permitted to follow and protect the illegal settlers wherever they went and they exploited it shamelessly. Israel don't want peace with Palestine. There is no two state solution, Israel wants to expand and it knows that in the future it will need to. Let's just hope that between now and then they don't accidentally turn the whole place into a hazardous wasteland with their highly dangerous WMD's programme.

[Zionist Nationalist]

Israel boycotted Hamas when they won the election.

Here is a history of the ceasefires Israel broke.

There are no reason why not to boycott them

if Palestinians want Hamas they will get war

[Pisa]

To you and I, perhaps, but most MSM viewers aren't aware what that means; that Israel is violently and illegally occupying Palestinian territories in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and in recent years is placing "settlers" there: Jews from America, Europe and Russia.

Define "palestinian territories".

Illegally according to what law? Please enlighten me.

We'll talk about "violently" later, it's a fascinating subject. It can't be separated from other issues though, so let's not rush to conclusions before seeing the wider picture.

Here's a piece of this wider picture, since you mentioned East Jerusalem:

[youtube]ol8FCf-wq_o[/youtube]

Care to comment?

I asked before, and I ask now, even though I never received an answer - probably never will: why doesn't anyone decry the violent takeover of some 60% of palestinian land by hashemite bedouins of the Arabian Peninsula, while the wailing and hair pulling never stop when it comes to jews settling less than 1% of said territory?

The MSM does not report that Israel is brutally occupying Palestinians in totality and has been for many decades and that that is the cause of what sets off Palestinian violence.

As I mentioned, Jordan occupies some 60% of the palestinian territory, palestinian arabs included.

Israel is not occupying Gaza. Iran is occupying Gaza, by its proxy Hamas, as it occupies Lebanon by its other proxy Hezbollah.

Israel is not occupying the PA territory.

Palestinian violence, as I already proved (but you continue to ignore everything that does not satisfy your information bias), has been set off long before the establishment of the modern state of Israel, courtesy of Haj Amin al-Husseini and other arab leaders. You want the short, or the long version?

It does not report the imprisonment, the checkpoints, the kidnapping of children and holding them in prison without access to their families, the beatings, the torture, the killings, etc.etc.etc. I could go on but I'm tired.

When I came here, at the beginning of the '80's, there were no roadblocks, no checkpoints. People traveled freely. Israelis shopped in Gaza, palestinian markets and businesses thrived. My uncle took me to the market in Qalqilya. It took him a long time to find a parking spot. When I pointed to the empty side streets, he said that he needed to park the car in a crowded spot, otherwise someone might put a bomb in it. Still, the market was packed with people.

The "children" you talk about are often 16-17 years old, members of terror groups. However, you are more than welcome to publish any specific information regarding kidnapped children, beatings, torture, killings, etc. Then we can compare data and maybe reach a common ground.

these settlers believe the land belongs to them because in their warped minds "god says so".

You mean, unlike the arabs who believe Jerusalem rightly belongs to them because is the third holiest site in Islam?

Here the most moral Israeli occupying army threaten, in their own words, to "gas Palestinian children, youth and old people" in a refugee camp:

Here is Skinster not getting it right, why am I not surprised? The guy is a policeman, not a soldier. The most moral israeli occupying army is still...err...moral.

Two terrorist attack. The terrorists lives were saved by the police who protect them against lynch mob.

Better to kill them on spot. That is justice.

No, that is murder. Do we want to show our bloody hands to a baying mob? I hope not.

But they do. It was Israel that decided to boycott Gaza's authorities after they democratically won their election and it was Israel that broke ceasefires before the rockets came out of Gaza.

Well, if throwing one's political partners off the roofs is what one does after democratically winning elections, we can safely assume that Hamas is democratic.

Let's see who decided what:

Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"

Article Thirteen:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."

Now and then the call goes out for the convening of an international conference to look for ways of solving the (Palestinian) question. Some accept, others reject the idea, for this or other reason, with one stipulation or more for consent to convening the conference and participating in it. Knowing the parties constituting the conference, their past and present attitudes towards Moslem problems, the Islamic Resistance Movement does not consider these conferences capable of realising the demands, restoring the rights or doing justice to the oppressed. These conferences are only ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Moslems as arbitraters. When did the infidels do justice to the believers?

[GandalfTheGrey]

However...if Hamas had Fighter jets they would use them, so why because they haven't is it bad for Israel to use theirs?

Its not about whether or not Israel should use fighter jets - its the moral narrative we have developed that says Palestinians stabbing and blowing up civilians = outrageous, but Israelis causing mass slaughter of civilians from above - errrrr, moral grey area. If we were honest we would say slaughtering civilians is equally outrageous regardless of the method. Hiding behind the 'collateral damage' excuse to justify slaughtering civilians is not only hypocritical, once we start being selective about which brand of terrorism is acceptable and which is not, it basically gives the Israelis and the west in general a blank check to go round terrorising civilians with jets and drones at will.