2021 Israeli-Palestine Conflict - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15172856
wat0n wrote:Why is Egypt allied to the US and Israel?

Because the US sends it vast sums of military aid.

wat0n wrote:Yeah, instead, one should support Russian efforts to do exactly the same

Your style of argument is hilarious. You literally just make shit up and put it in the mouth of your opponents. "Strawman" doesn't even begin to cover it. :lol:

wat0n wrote:I don't buy it.

I don't care. :lol:

wat0n wrote:Yeah because you said so.

One side is a nuclear armed military superpower which receives $4bn per year in free weapons from the USA. The other side is a bunch of stateless, impoverished teenagers living in a concentration camp. So much existential terror on both sides.

wat0n wrote:If so, neither is Hamas yet according to you they once again have no responsibility for their affairs.

Sorry, where did I say Hamas had no responsibility for its actions? Are you making shit up again? :roll:

Of course, "Hamas" =/= "the Palestinians", any more than "the IRA" = "the Irish". Although, I can see why it is important for you to conflate the two.

wat0n wrote:You talk like Hamas has no responsibility here, and it's incredibly dishonest for you to continue to pretend otherwise.

Hamas bears responsibility for its actions, and I have never said otherwise. However, unlike you, I do not unquestioningly buy the standard Israeli line that it bears 100% of the responsibility for casualties that were unquestionably caused by Israeli air strikes. As usual, an enormous proportion of the people killed by Israel are not, in fact, Hamas militants.
#15172867
Heisenberg wrote:Because the US sends it vast sums of military aid.


Why does the US send Egypt vast sums of military aid? Could it be... Because they have shared interests here?

Heisenberg wrote:Your style of argument is hilarious. You literally just make shit up and put it in the mouth of your opponents. "Strawman" doesn't even begin to cover it. :lol:


What are your views of Russia's cooperation with Assad in Syria? This includes bombings of areas with civilians.

Why is the West so evil to you here but Russia is not?

Heisenberg wrote:One side is a nuclear armed military superpower which receives $4bn per year in free weapons from the USA. The other side is a bunch of stateless, impoverished teenagers living in a concentration camp. So much existential terror on both sides.


And the other had the support of all its Arab neighbors back in the day, and currently enjoys Iran's support. Israelis are not that stupid, they aren't that unimaginative and don't forget their history.

Heisenberg wrote:Sorry, where did I say Hamas had no responsibility for its actions? Are you making shit up again? :roll:


What are Hamas' responsibilities here? You talk a lot about Israel but don't see you saying anything about it. And I don't mean just Hamas' tactics, I also mean its foreign policy.

Heisenberg wrote:Of course, "Hamas" =/= "the Palestinians", any more than "the IRA" = "the Irish". Although, I can see why it is important for you to conflate the two.


I clearly made a distinction between Hamas and Palestinian civilians, now that is an actual straw man. I think that you are calling some fake straw men so hard because you are projecting. Or maybe that's because you are a journalist IIRC, and thus it's part of the profession.

Heisenberg wrote:Hamas bears responsibility for its actions, and I have never said otherwise. However, unlike you, I do not unquestioningly buy the standard Israeli line that it bears 100% of the responsibility for casualties that were unquestionably caused by Israeli air strikes. As usual, an enormous proportion of the people killed by Israel are not, in fact, Hamas militants.


I clearly said Israel bears responsibility as well. Should I quote myself again?

Also, for the last part, the source is Hamas' run health ministry. I'd like to see an independent party do its own research after. I thought journalists knew how to evaluate their sources?
#15172878
wat0n wrote:Why does the US send Egypt vast sums of military aid? Could it be... Because they have shared interests here?

Yes, the military dictatorship in Egypt has shared interests with the US and Israel. What is your point?

wat0n wrote:What are your views of Russia's cooperation with Assad in Syria? This includes bombings of areas with civilians.

I believe that Russia and the Syrian government are a lesser evil than the Nusra front and ISIS.

wat0n wrote:Why is the West so evil to you here but Russia is not?

Because the west lost any pretense to the moral high ground when it invaded and destroyed Iraq and Libya. Why should I support their attempt to do the same thing to Syria? :eh:

wat0n wrote:I clearly made a distinction between Hamas and Palestinian civilians, now that is an actual straw man.

:lol: I dunno man, your claim that it was "whining" to be upset by civilian casualties caused by Israel has somewhat destroyed your credibility here. You quite clearly don't give a damn about the civilian victims. I wish you'd just say so, because this switching between macho posturing and faux-wounded outrage is getting quite tiresome.

wat0n wrote:I think that you are calling some fake straw men so hard because you are projecting. Or maybe that's because you are a journalist IIRC, and thus it's part of the profession.

I do love armchair Freudians. Would you like to explore my childhood relationship with my mother next? Maybe we can discuss this in terms of the good breast/bad breast dichotomy.

But once again, I see we're back to discussing my many moral failings, rather than the original topic of discussion. Funny how that keeps happening.

wat0n wrote:I clearly said Israel bears responsibility as well. Should I quote myself again?

But not for the civilian casualties it causes, of course. :lol:

wat0n wrote:Also, for the last part, the source is Hamas' run health ministry. I'd like to see an independent party do its own research after. I thought journalists knew how to evaluate their sources?

You have no problem taking the IDF's press office at face value when it calls residential buildings "Hamas HQ", so spare me the lectures, please.
#15172884
Heisenberg wrote:Yes, the military dictatorship in Egypt has shared interests with the US and Israel. What is your point?


What are those interests when it comes to Gaza but the fact that Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood? Maybe if it doesn't want to negotiate with Israel it could try its luck with Egypt?

Heisenberg wrote:I believe that Russia and the Syrian government are a lesser evil than the Nusra front and ISIS.


And I happen to believe Israel is a lesser evil than Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and even worse Islamists than those two.

Heisenberg wrote:Because the west lost any pretense to the moral high ground when it invaded and destroyed Iraq and Libya. Why should I support their attempt to do the same thing to Syria? :eh:


How does that make Russia not evil or a lesser one?

Heisenberg wrote::lol: I dunno man, your claim that it was "whining" to be upset by civilian casualties caused by Israel has somewhat destroyed your credibility here. You quite clearly don't give a damn about the civilian victims. I wish you'd just say so, because this switching between macho posturing and faux-wounded outrage is getting quite tiresome.


Weird, I think exactly the same about you when it comes to the scores of Syrian Sunnis killed by the SAA.

I feel sorry for the Palestinians who have to deal with the conflict, and I'm aware they are not in a position to do much about it. Yet it turns out that you have provided no alternative to aerial bombings to stop rocket launches, have you? What can Israel do about it?

Heisenberg wrote:I do love armchair Freudians. Would you like to explore my childhood relationship with my mother next? Maybe we can discuss this in terms of the good breast/bad breast dichotomy.


How much anal stimulation have you had lately? I think Freud was all about that too.

Heisenberg wrote:But once again, I see we're back to discussing my many moral failings, rather than the original topic of discussion. Funny how that keeps happening.


The original topic of discussion being what, how Israelis should stand still so rockets can fall on them and kill them? Again, what other alternative does Israel have to stop rocket launches that hurt Palestinian civilians less than what it's currently doing? You have yet to provide any.

I haven't heard of any and I've also not heard any military experts mention any as well. If you can find such experts you could point me to that person, along with the IDF and the SAA.

Heisenberg wrote:But not for the civilian casualties it causes, of course. :lol:


If you can find an alternative tactic to stop rocket launches from urbanized areas that would not just kill less civilians but are also backed up by some military experts I'll be more than happy to reassess. So far I've seen lots of whining, disregard for tactics that have had more costs to civilians when done by others aligned with your geopolitical goals such as the SAA and zero proposals about the issue at hand.

Heisenberg wrote:You have no problem taking the IDF's press office at face value when it calls residential buildings "Hamas HQ", so spare me the lectures, please.


You mean what Hamas labels as "residential buildings"? :lol:
#15172889
wat0n wrote:And I happen to believe Israel is a lesser evil than Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and even worse Islamists than those two

I think we both know that your support of Israel runs quite a bit deeper than thinking they are the "lesser evil", given you show up in every single Israel thread to complain about "whining" and insinuate that any criticism of Israel must be antisemitic.

Besides, given that it is quite clear that you support the Islamist insurgents in Syria (maybe because they are "aligned with your geopolitical goals"?), I'm not sure I believe you are opposed to Islamists per se. ;)

wat0n wrote:Weird, I think exactly the same about you when it comes to the scores of Syrian Sunnis killed by the SAA.

Lol, you mean that completely separate issue that you introduced to the discussion as a deflection, and then made various silly assumptions and wild exaggerations about my views?

wat0n wrote:Yet it turns out that you have provided no alternative to aerial bombings to stop rocket launches, have you? What can Israel do about it?

Immediately stop settlements, stop treating Palestinians as third class citizens, and make a serious effort towards peace that is not predicated on unconditional surrender by the Palestinian people.

There is no military solution to this conflict unless the far right "carpet bomb them" crowd gets its way, which is unfortunately looking increasingly likely.

wat0n wrote:The original topic of discussion being what, how Israelis should stand still so rockets can fall on them and kill them? Again, what other alternative does Israel have to stop rocket launches that hurt Palestinian civilians less than what it's currently doing? You have yet to provide any.

Last I checked, Israel had a very expensive defensive apparatus called the Iron Dome, which is the thing that actually defends them from rocket attacks. All the rest is just collective punishment.

Of course, badgering someone with no military experience to come up with a foolproof solution to a military conflict is quite a silly little stunt.

wat0n wrote:So far I've seen lots of whining

I see that "whining" now means "disagreeing with me". Cool.

wat0n wrote:disregard for tactics that have had more costs to civilians when done by others aligned with your geopolitical goals such as the SAA

I love how desperate you are to make this discussion about Syria, rather than Israel. Guilty conscience, maybe?

For the fifth or sixth time, the war in Syria is a total war. The "war" between Israel and the people of Gaza is not, by any stretch of the imagination. The two situations are very different, and your repeated attempts to present them as the same are not at all convincing to anyone but yourself.

wat0n wrote:You mean what Hamas labels as "residential buildings"?

I think we're done here. This discussion is clearly pointless if you actually cannot fathom the idea that the IDF has targeted residential buildings, despite the enormous evidence to the contrary. :roll:
#15172895
Heisenberg wrote:I think we both know that your support of Israel runs quite a bit deeper than thinking they are the "lesser evil", given you show up in every single Israel thread to complain about "whining" and insinuate that any criticism of Israel must be antisemitic.


I have also criticized Israel here, that won't fly. That doesn't mean I agree with over the top criticism, particularly when it's wholly hypocritical.

Heisenberg wrote:Besides, given that it is quite clear that you support the Islamist insurgents in Syria (maybe because they are "aligned with your geopolitical goals"?), I'm not sure I believe you are opposed to Islamists per se. ;)


I don't support either side there. The moderate Arab opposition was disposed off relatively quickly and there is no one for me to support, besides the Kurds.

Heisenberg wrote:Lol, you mean that completely separate issue that you introduced to the discussion as a deflection, and then made various silly assumptions and wild exaggerations about my views?


I already explained how it's not all that separate. In fact, it's a different battlefield in the broader geopolitical conflict.

Heisenberg wrote:Immediately stop settlements,


No disagreement there. In fact I've said before they should be unilaterally removed, particularly those Israel won't be keeping anyway.

Heisenberg wrote: stop treating Palestinians as third class citizens,


They are under occupation. They are not citizens. And if Israel treated them as such and extended its laws to the West Bank, then we'd hear whining about how it's annexing the West Bank.

I'll give you a counteroffer: Since settlers would be removed, their lives would likely improve and they'd be in no contact with each other. The IDF could also be redeployed to further reduce contact with civilians since a part of its current deployment is to defend settlers. Would that be satisfactory while a final agreement was signed?

Heisenberg wrote: and make a serious effort towards peace that is not predicated on unconditional surrender by the Palestinian people.


What the hell is that supposed to mean exactly?

Also, how would that make Hamas stop launching rockets?

Heisenberg wrote:There is no military solution to this conflict unless the far right "carpet bomb them" crowd gets its way, which is unfortunately looking increasingly likely.


There isn't indeed.

Heisenberg wrote:Last I checked, Israel had a very expensive defensive apparatus called the Iron Dome, which is the thing that actually defends them from rocket attacks. All the rest is just collective punishment.


The Iron Dome is expensive, but it doesn't and can't stop all rockets. One way to overwhelm it is to launch several rockets at once. Why do you think there have been people killed by rockets in Israel proper?

Heisenberg wrote:Of course, badgering someone with no military experience to come up with a foolproof solution to a military conflict is quite a silly little stunt.


But you're speaking as if you knew about one.

Heisenberg wrote:I see that "whining" now means "disagreeing with me". Cool.


No, it means whining.

Heisenberg wrote:I love how desperate you are to make this discussion about Syria, rather than Israel. Guilty conscience, maybe?

For the fifth or sixth time, the war in Syria is a total war. The "war" between Israel and the people of Gaza is not, by any stretch of the imagination. The two situations are very different, and your repeated attempts to present them as the same are not at all convincing to anyone but yourself.


Should I repeat my response to that stupid claim for a fifth time?

Heisenberg wrote:I think we're done here. This discussion is clearly pointless if you actually cannot fathom the idea that the IDF has targeted residential buildings, despite the enormous evidence to the contrary. :roll:


I can imagine it actually. What I can't understand is why would you take Hamas' claims at face value or believe that those buildings cannot have double uses. Ever thought that maybe Hamas could store rockets inside residential buildings just like it's done in mosques and schools?
#15172899
wat0n wrote:One difference is that Hamas has a policy of targeting civilians, Israel does not.


I have no doubt that if they had access to state of the art precision weaponry Hamas would happily and efficiently take out key Israeli command and control, airbase and other military targets that are currently posing a direct existential threat to the Palestinians. They would probably even have the courtesy of providing 30 minute warnings to vacate personnel before they hit those targets. Who knows, with this sort of "civilized" and acceptable style of combat, the international community might even forgive hamas for the inevitable increase in civilian casualties this would undoubtedly cause.

Now I really don't know if Israel could conduct their air and artillery strikes more carefully and reduce civilian casualties - though it does seem unlikely given the size and population density of the strip. But what does seem pretty obvious to me is that such horrific Palestinian casualties, not to mention damage to civilian infrastructure that *always* happens in this cycle of conflict with hamas (2009, 2014 and now) is clearly factored in by the Israelis and therefore considered acceptable.

It just seems to me that the rulers of Israel are in this rather convenient situation where every 5 years or so they have this entitlement to bomb gaza into smithereens, slaughter literally hundreds if not thousands of civilians, with little or no consequence for them - in response to, and lets be honest here, a pretty inconsequential provocation - and not have to deal with any responsibility they have as de-facto occupiers. I mean, since 2009 has Israel actually done anything in good faith to try and address and deal with the grievances that leads to the rocket attacks? Like, you know, easing of the medieval style siege of 2 million people crammed into about the smallest area imaginable? Anything at all?? Real and sincere efforts I'm talking about. I think its a pretty pertinent question to ask Israel and its supporters - where do you actually see this ending? Do we just have to accept this ~5 year cycle of lob-sided slaughter will go on forever? Or do you, as the only military and economic power in this conflict, and the power that is actually maintaining the occupation and siege, have some long term ideas of what you will do with the impoverished and powerless people you keep under siege and occupation? Please don't just regurgitate the sad joke about "its up to hamas to stop shooting rockets" - which literally equates to "its up to those under a crippling and brutal siege to stop resisting and stop being pissed off about being under a crippling siege". Surely you can see how retarded that is.
#15172903
GandalfTheGrey wrote:I have no doubt that if they had access to state of the art precision weaponry Hamas would happily and efficiently take out key Israeli command and control, airbase and other military targets that are currently posing a direct existential threat to the Palestinians. They would probably even have the courtesy of providing 30 minute warnings to vacate personnel before they hit those targets. Who knows, with this sort of "civilized" and acceptable style of combat, the international community might even forgive hamas for the inevitable increase in civilian casualties this would undoubtedly cause.

Now I really don't know if Israel could conduct their air and artillery strikes more carefully and reduce civilian casualties - though it does seem unlikely given the size and population density of the strip. But what does seem pretty obvious to me is that such horrific Palestinian casualties, not to mention damage to civilian infrastructure that *always* happens in this cycle of conflict with hamas (2009, 2014 and now) is clearly factored in by the Israelis and therefore considered acceptable.


What makes you believe Hamas would be so kind? How does Hamas deal with the opposition to its rule in Gaza? They drag them over the streets don't they? What makes you believe they'd be any nicer to Israelis?

GandalfTheGrey wrote:It just seems to me that the rulers of Israel are in this rather convenient situation where every 5 years or so they have this entitlement to bomb gaza into smithereens, slaughter literally hundreds if not thousands of civilians, with little or no consequence for them - in response to, and lets be honest here, a pretty inconsequential provocation - and not have to deal with any responsibility they have as de-facto occupiers. I mean, since 2009 has Israel actually done anything in good faith to try and address and deal with the grievances that leads to the rocket attacks? Like, you know, easing of the medieval style siege of 2 million people crammed into about the smallest area imaginable? Anything at all?? Real and sincere efforts I'm talking about. I think its a pretty pertinent question to ask Israel and its supporters - where do you actually see this ending? Do we just have to accept this ~5 year cycle of lob-sided slaughter will go on forever? Or do you, as the only military and economic power in this conflict, and the power that is actually maintaining the occupation and siege, have some long term ideas of what you will do with the impoverished and powerless people you keep under siege and occupation? Please don't just regurgitate the sad joke about "its up to hamas to stop shooting rockets" - which literally equates to "its up to those under a crippling and brutal siege to stop resisting and stop being pissed off about being under a crippling siege". Surely you can see how retarded that is.


I actually recall Israel softened the blockade after the flotilla affair (remember it? 11 years go by quickly) and had also softened the blockade after 2014 as some basic modus vivendi had been reached with Hamas.

What has Hamas done to improve the situation? What concrete concessions has it provided or even offered besides stopping launches so Israel doesn't bomb them?

There's all this talk about Israel holding all cards, but if it were true we wouldn't see this shit every 5 or so years would we? Israel would have done away with all the Palestinian armed groups, there would only be the occasional riot or small group bombing ATMs and the like, and the whole thing would be Israeli. And that would be it, really. But we don't see that, what we see is that actually Israel doesn't have any appetite to retake Gaza at all and Israeli press speaks openly about that being a potential Vietnam, even if they would end up doing so. Hamas has actually managed to achieve some deterrence with regards to Israel in that sense.

I can think of other options, perhaps Israel and Hamas could negotiate separately, while Israel and the PA do the same. But, that means two Palestines, and a permanent division of their nation. I don't think they want that either. Do you have any other ideas?
#15172915
There's all this talk about Israel holding all cards, but if it were true we wouldn't see this shit every 5 or so years would we?


One could argue that we see this shit every 5 or so years precisely *because* Israel holds all the cards.

I mean, what really is the down side of this state of affairs for a politician like Netanyahu and the government he rules? Assuming, that is, if you have no interest in actually facilitating a workable long term solution for the Palestinian people (and all indications point towards Netanyahu having no such interest). Think of it a bit like a pot of boiling water sitting on the stove - if for whatever reason you didn't want to stop the water boiling for good by turning off the stove - all you need to do is periodically take the lid off the pot, let it simmer down, and then put the lid back on and wait for it to boil again. Its a pretty painless and easy routine for you to do, and the boiling water can never really hurt you. This 5 yearly bombathon of Gaza is the equivalent of taking the lid off the pot, and refusing to turn the oven off and letting this state of affairs continue in perpetuity is the equivalent of refusing to explore ways for the Palestinians to live in peace and dignity.

If you think I'm wrong, give me just one tangible way in which the continuation of the status quo vis Palestine, has actually impacted Israeli society in a negative way? And please, don't give me rockets - they are an absolute insignificance to Israeli society as a whole. No, you need to start considering the notion that this status quo situation is allowed to continue at least in some part because it works for Israel and her citizens, and has next to no drawbacks for them. It works better for Israel to continue periodically taking the lid off the boiling water - rather than having to deal with the consequences of turning the stove off altogether.
#15172916
GandalfTheGrey wrote:One could argue that we see this shit every 5 or so years precisely *because* Israel holds all the cards.

I mean, what really is the down side of this state of affairs for a politician like Netanyahu and the government he rules? Assuming, that is, if you have no interest in actually facilitating a workable long term solution for the Palestinian people (and all indications point towards Netanyahu having no such interest). Think of it a bit like a pot of boiling water sitting on the stove - if for whatever reason you didn't want to stop the water boiling for good by turning off the stove - all you need to do is periodically take the lid off the pot, let it simmer down, and then put the lid back on and wait for it to boil again. Its a pretty painless and easy routine for you to do, and the boiling water can never really hurt you. This 5 yearly bombathon of Gaza is the equivalent of taking the lid off the pot, and refusing to turn the oven off and letting this state of affairs continue in perpetuity is the equivalent of refusing to explore ways for the Palestinians to live in peace and dignity.

If you think I'm wrong, give me just one tangible way in which the continuation of the status quo vis Palestine, has actually impacted Israeli society in a negative way? And please, don't give me rockets - they are an absolute insignificance to Israeli society as a whole. No, you need to start considering the notion that this status quo situation is allowed to continue at least in some part because it works for Israel and her citizens, and has next to no drawbacks for them. It works better for Israel to continue periodically taking the lid off the boiling water - rather than having to deal with the consequences of turning the stove off altogether.


Why don't you address the rest? In particular, if Israel truly held all the cards, we wouldn't even be discussing this. There wouldn't be a conflict because no opposition would be able to mount any relevant fight. That's exactly how "holding all the cards" looks like.

As for how this status quo where Netanyahu is a pseudo-king has negatively impacted Israeli society, how many elections has Israel had since 2019 again?
#15172922
wat0n, when will you grasp the fact that there is no "relevant fight" coming from the Palestinian side? Thats precisely my point - Israel can flatten gaza and kill hundreds of civilians literally at will - with virtually no consequences. If hamas or any other Palestinian group had any "relevant fight", then Israel would be dissuaded from behaving like this.

Also, I heard that no one was discussing the Palestinian issue during the last election. Not to mention the fact that the Israeli government are not even pretending they are interested in a 2 state solution any more. Apart from btselem - who in Israel actually cares about Palestinian's welfare any more?
#15172923
GandalfTheGrey wrote:wat0n, when will you grasp the fact that there is no "relevant fight" coming from the Palestinian side? Thats precisely my point - Israel can flatten gaza and kill hundreds of civilians literally at will - with virtually no consequences. If hamas or any other Palestinian group had any "relevant fight", then Israel would be dissuaded from behaving like this.


There is a relevant enough fight that Israelis have been in shelters for several days now due to the rockets (hence paralyzing the economy) and to the point that Israel, too, doesn't want to enter Gaza by land. Israel's behavior shows that's clearly not the case.

GandalfTheGrey wrote:Also, I heard that no one was discussing the Palestinian issue during the last election. Not to mention the fact that the Israeli government are not even pretending they are interested in a 2 state solution any more. Apart from btselem - who in Israel actually cares about Palestinian's welfare any more?


What do you mean that it wasn't an issue? Why do you think Netanyahu managed to survive? Do they have to talk about the Palestinians as nauseam just because you say so?
#15172924
There is a relevant enough fight that Israelis have been in shelters for several days now due to the rockets (hence paralyzing the economy) and to the point that Israel, too, doesn't want to enter Gaza by land. Israel's behavior shows that's clearly not the case.


please define "paralyzing the economy". I'd love to see some metrics on that. Rhetoric aside, I'm sure Israel's economy will survive a few glorified fire crackers mostly landing in the desert. Somehow I'm guessing that if the Palestinians had access to some real weapons that might do actual damage to Israel, then Israel would likely be seeking alternatives to this ~5 yearly bombathon.

Do they have to talk about the Palestinians as nauseam just because you say so?


No. But not talking about it is a good indication of their priorities. I'm old enough to remember when the Palestinian issue used to be a genuine electoral issue in Israeli politics. Probably coinciding with the time when the Palestinians posed a genuine security threat with the weekly suicide bombings. When the death toll was in the 100s, not single digits. Now, unlike back then, Israel really doesn't need peace, they are managing just fine with the status quo. Hamas's puny attempts at resistance is just proof of that.
#15172925
GandalfTheGrey wrote:please define "paralyzing the economy". I'd love to see some metrics on that. Rhetoric aside, I'm sure Israel's economy will survive a few glorified fire crackers mostly landing in the desert. Somehow I'm guessing that if the Palestinians had access to some real weapons that might do actual damage to Israel, then Israel would likely be seeking alternatives to this ~5 yearly bombathon.


Kinda soon to know the economic effects of the current flareup. I agree though that if it's short lived the effects will be minor, as this is basically a lockdown.

However, it does illustrate the disruption. And you didn't mention anything about Israel's reluctance to enter by land. Since you believe it's not because they don't want to affect Palestinian civilians by that, I presume you may agree that it's because Israel would face a high enough cost to be deterred from doing so. I can't think of any other reason.

More importantly, the fact that Israel doesn't just come in and gets rid of Hamas and the other groups shows its limitations. Simply stated, there is no military solution here and that means Israel doesn't hold all the cards by definition.

GandalfTheGrey wrote:No. But not talking about it is a good indication of their priorities. I'm old enough to remember when the Palestinian issue used to be a genuine electoral issue in Israeli politics. Probably coinciding with the time when the Palestinians posed a genuine security threat with the weekly suicide bombings. When the death toll was in the 100s, not single digits. Now, unlike back then, Israel really doesn't need peace, they are managing just fine with the status quo. Hamas's puny attempts at resistance is just proof of that.


I think it's not talked much about because, well, what has changed since the last time it was (2015)? But that doesn't mean it's not lurking beneath the ground, making several types of coalitions hard or even outright unfeasible.
#15172929
Political Interest wrote:I don't think small children are attacking Israel, and they should not have to pay the price for the political situation they happen to find themselves in by mere accident of birth.

It is NOT an accident of birth; it is a deliberate policy by HAMAS. Israel uses its missiles to protect its people. HAMAS uses its people to protect its rockets. Oh by the way; when you hear news reports about Gazan's killed (including children), ask yourself; how many of those where killed by HAMAS rockets misfiring and falling into Gaza ? In the first couple of days, over 200 HAMAS rockets landed in Gaza out of the 1000 fired.

In 2021 this type of indiscriminate carpet bombing is unacceptable.

Indiscriminate carpet bombing is what HAMAS are currently doing with its rockets. The IAF does NOT do this.
The IDF use white phosphorous and other incendiary weapons which is a disgusting form of warfare. Can you imagine the fear of being in that situation, where you and your loved ones could end up shelled at any moment. It's horrendous.

The IDF used white phosphorous smoke screens, and that was back in 2014. It was not used against personnel, It has not been used since.

The problem is that this is a Western backed state that enjoys an intimate relationship with the USA and several European countries. I do not want to support this and neither should you.

Israel is the only liberal democracy within 2000Km. THAT is why it has a good relationship with European powers. (and the USA).

For all the wrongs of the Palestinian leadership and their excesses the fact remains that Israel purports to be a Western democracy but does not behave like one.

Oh REALY ? In what way - exactly - does Israel not behave like a democracy ? If Wales launched 1000 rockets into England, the British Army would be in there in a flash, and Wales would cease to exist. Being a democracy does NOT mean that you allow enemies to mass-murder your citizens.
#15172930
Heisenberg wrote:If I wanted to avoid civilian casualties, I would simply not lob high explosive missiles into densely populated civilian areas :)

Tell that to HAMAS. Three thousand high explosive missiles and counting.

This policy requires forcing two million people, almost half of whom are under 14, into a ghetto, does it?

Umm.. are you referring to Gaza ? Israel didn't force ANYONE into Gaza.

You seem to have an uncanny ability to read my mind!

These are not the droids we are looking for !

Watch out, the Handforth Parish Council is on the scene. Read the standing orders! Read them and understand them!

Huh ?

No, they do not. But this does not give Israel carte blanche to cause orders of magnitude more casualties in response, and then disavow any responsibility for its actions.

The only reason there is an imbalance in deaths is that Israel has built shelters for its citizens, and trains (and drills) them in air raid precautions. Hence the 3000+ HAMAS rockets killed relatively few people. It also poured resources into developing the remarkable Iron Dome.

HAMAS, in contrast, deliberately launches missiles from civilian areas in order that the retaliation kills civilians. They are the child killers, not Israel.

Finally, why would you EXPECT there to be a parity in deaths ? Do you also demand that criminals to kill as many policemen as are killed by the police ?
#15172994
GandalfTheGrey wrote:Undoubtedly. Just like there were cases of Palestinian being randomly beaten by settler mobs, and on the other side Palestinians committing their fair share of atrocities on jews. But tallying up individual crimes and presenting a score sheet isn't particularly useful. Whats more useful is to consider the actual root causes here. For example, do you agree its unjust that jews having the right, under Israeli law, to claim property that their ancestors were removed from in 1948, yet the Palestinians cannot do the same?


One takes it to court, the other takes it to the rockets.
#15172996
wat0n wrote:Because it could actually lead to a stronger coalition to oust him. It's not like that the forming of the Lapid anti-Bibi coalition was a given at all, since they don't seem to be able to agree on a government program.

A war, however, could lead him to clearly lose the next election should Lapid fail to form a coalition.


He won't succeed now, of course, because Bennet decided to cut loses, and he will pay the price for it, as well.
#15172997
Political Interest wrote:These actions by Israel must stop. Civilian casualties are unacceptable. They must consider that there are many innocent non-combatants in Gaza who can't go anywhere or escape the bombardment. These obviously include children, 31 of whom have been killed. That is simply beyond the pale of civilised behaviour and is completely inexcusable. Even if there are combatants hiding among the civilian population that does not give carte blanche to punish innocent people in such a fashion.

The West must restrain Israeli excesses. Time and time again the West ignores what the Israeli government does.


This will stop once Hamas is on its knees.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
RIP John McAfee....

To be honest, this says more about the pointless[…]

CRT

If ya can't blind them with your brilliance, bury […]

https://media.gq.com/photos/5d9f43b2b[…]

Did they do so while breaking the prevailing la[…]