Support NeoGAF

[zeroOman]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

No, I think [Netanyahu] is making a very serious mistake. When Hamas in effect accepted the notion of participation in the Palestinian leadership, it in effect acknowledged the determination of that leadership to seek a peaceful solution with Israel. That was a real option. They should have persisted in that.

Instead Netanyahu launched the campaign of defamation against Hamas, seized on the killing of three innocent Israeli kids to immediately charge Hamas with having done it without any evidence, and has used that to stir up public opinion in Israel in order to justify this attack on Gaza, which is so lethal.

I think he is isolating Israel. He's endangering its longer-range future. And I think we ought to make it very clear that this is a course of action which we thoroughly disapprove and which we do not support and which may compel us and the rest of the international community to take some steps of legitimizing Palestinian aspirations perhaps in the U.N.

 

[GaimeGuy]

First thing you probably should want is to demand that the Jewish lobby in the USA politics to wake up and realize how much harm they are doing to Israel by trying to protect their atrocities. It's important to acknowledge that Hamas certainly isn't the good guys, but by punishing the Palestinian people for Hamas's action it's going to be hard for the Israel government to justify their moral ground.

But the recent conflict, even with all the deaths, is probably a necessity. Netanyahu has been greedy for years and thinks that there's no reason for the Israel government to accept a peace deal with Abbas even though Abbas has been willing to offer much. Hopefully this conflict will end with Netanyahu becoming humbler and realizing how far off the end his government has gone.

Jewish lobby, or Israeli lobby? Because, as a Jew, let me tell you, as well known as AIPAC is, it's not a Jewish orgnaization, and it is absolutely dwarfed by the likes of Chrisitans United For Israel and the National Association of Evangelicals, and Jews are not blind supporters of Israel, not by a long shot.

It's the evangelical lobby which has the most clout. Don't call it the "Jewish lobby." I and the vast majority of the Jewish people in Israel and America and elsewhere want nothing more than a two-state peaceful solution to the conflict. And it breaks my heart to see a few wealthy conservative Jews in power and (far more numerous) protestants commit these attrocities, and then for the Jews as a whole to face backlash because of it.

 

[Kenshin001]

Israel COULD but won't because even US won't support more than this. Israel's only leverage is Hamas. take Hamas rockets out of the equation and its a clear genocide...

Genocide? It's like 0.175% of the population over 25 years. 7818 civilians were killed in Iraq last year alone. 500,000 to a million Rwandans were killed in 100 days. Get some perspective.

 

[Terra Firma]

You know America stole Mexico's land right? Do you think America should return to 1847 borders and give the land back?

Are we talking about something that happened over 150 years ago? No. We are talking about something that happened recently, which is the wall, which can be dismantled, and people can be moved back to the 1967 borders because they only recently moved beyond them.

Because hamas is not robbing a bank, they are shooting rockets from their own rural area, your analogy sucks. why do you need an analogy? what is so complicated in this situation? force A who lives among people A fire at people B, Force B fires at force A killing people A too

No, the analogy is apt. I even added on to it. Hamas comes off as the criminal (and in line with Israeli claims). I did not even make the analogy even more realistic by adding genuine and understandable pains of the bank robbers.

The situation is not complicated. By using analogy, it is easier to show those defending the massacre of civilians just because they are human shields are completely wrong. A human shield does not mean you kill both the perpetrator and the human shield. There is NO JUSTIFICATION.

you may think IDF is shooting aimlessly and systematically and call "genocide", problem is its a thought, i have not seen any proof of aimlessly or systematically fiering. Moreover aimlessly anyhow is mostly disregarded easily as misfire, or targeting error - such as the 4 kids at beach.

You contradict yourself. Which is it, are they not aimlessly firing or is there a "targeting error" that you are going to brush every aimless attack under? And no, you're not even playing the IDF line, where they claimed that there were Hamas launch sites on the beach, which was completely denied by journalists that happened to be right there.

Also you must remember that to cover their soldiers, which can be in threat during invasion into gaza, IDF is allowed to use fire which may hurt "non-involved" citizens. This is just how things work, no one here who lives in a democracy and has an army who has or would fight a force that fights and fires from its own civilian area would acted in any other way.
Not only that, but prior to the invasion, IDF was fiering only from planes, also claimed by many aimlessly, genocide people call, and then IDF go in with infantry, and have many casualties, and people call genocide again when shit goes even worse. I think to call genocide A) things should have been at least the other way around as in infantry left, then planes would just bomb aimlessly, because well if soldiers are dying to just withdraw and bomb'em no?
b) hamas to civilian ratio of dead should be over 150/600 or whatever the number is now, varied to who claims to know now.

this IS the picture of what is going on, people will now counter argue by looking at the bigger picture, adding in other levels of other times, and other conflicts, so be it.

Again, it does NOT make it okay to bomb a place just because you send some flyers to the population, warning them to move out. Would it have made a difference if the US sent flyers to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the people to move out so that they can nuke the cities?

Yes, military forces do have someone covering them but that is if someone is firing at them. Not a single US operation in Iraq had as bad civilian to insurgent ratio as Israel has in this operation and operations before this one. Even Fallujah, where hundreds of civilians died, did not have such a horrible ratio.

And the ratio of Hamas to civilian deaths is worse than what you have said.

 

[Zeeman]

No, the analogy is apt. I even added on to it. Hamas comes off as the criminal (and in line with Israeli claims). I did not even make the analogy even more realistic by adding genuine and understandable pains of the bank robbers.

The situation is not complicated. By using analogy, it is easier to show those defending the massacre of civilians just because they are human shields are completely wrong. A human shield does not mean you kill both the perpetrator and the human shield. There is NO JUSTIFICATION.

The analogy is terrible, honestly. There is a difference between a bank robber holding hostages (the only people in danger are the hostages) and someone actively shooting at you and your family from behind someone else who has no involvement. In that case, the human shield is in danger only because of the shooter, but the shooter is also endangering others.

 

[Maninthemirror]

so....remember Rula Jebreal who was an MSNBC contributer who bashed MSNBC for their pro-Israeli bias coverage on the Gaza conflict and then was temporarily kicked off as a contributer? well she came back with a slight change to her title...

stay classy MSNBC, stay classy

 

[Terra Firma]

The analogy is terrible, honestly. There is a difference between a bank robber holding hostages (the only people in danger are the hostages) and someone actively shooting at you and your family from behind someone else who has no involvement. In that case, the human shield is in danger only because of the shooter, but the shooter is also endangering others.

Did you even read where I expanded the analogy to include them shooting outside at bystanders? Either way, a human shield is no excuse to kill both the shooter and the hostage indiscriminately.

 

[m_shortpants]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

Great post. It's clear this was the move Israel was and is making.

 

[Kenshin001]

Are we talking about something that happened over 150 years ago? No. We are talking about something that happened recently, which is the wall, which can be dismantled, and people can be moved back to the 1967 borders because they only recently moved beyond them.

Please answer the question. Do you think America should return to 1847 borders and give the land back?

 

[Maninthemirror]

Genocide? It's like 0.175% of the population over 25 years. 7818 civilians were killed in Iraq last year alone. 500,000 to a million Rwandans were killed in 100 days. Get some perspective.

Would ethnic cleansing work for you?

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

Great post. You see the the apologists claim this was a response to the kidnapping, but a little dillegence shows how this flare up began and how it was initiated.

 

[Dude Abides]

All of that is true. Hospitals, schools and civilian homes are certainly hit and presumably deliberately targeted considering how good the IDF is at this sort of thing. The question then is: are they trying to avoid civilian deaths?

Kinda, it seems. Not very good at it, apparently.

Sending warnings to get out etc. Are they only targeting places that house rockets/munitions/tunnel entrances.

Who knows? They do not seem to be particularly careful about it, in any event. What is the acceptable dead civilian:destroyed rocket ratio in your estimation?

But your solution to stop the rocket attacks and eliminate the tunnels is what. You forgot to mention it.

What is the point of this question? Is it your assertion that there is no limit to the number of civilians that can be justifiably killed so long as they are killed in an attempt to destroy rockets and tunnels?

 

[Zeeman]

Did you even read where I expanded the analogy to include them shooting outside at bystanders? Either way, a human shield is no excuse to kill both the shooter and the hostage indiscriminately.

What is the proper response then, if the shooter is legitimately endangering and killing bystanders as well?

I'm not trying to get to root causes here, I'm legitimately curious. How do police forces and militaries typically respond to that sort of thing?

 

[RustyNails]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

This post must be stickied on every page.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Please answer the question. Do you think America should return to 1847 borders and give the land back?

The 1847 border was settled with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo where

Mexico ceded all of California, Nevada and Utah and parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming and Colorado to the USA in exchange for $15 million dollars and forgiveness of about $3 million more in previous debt.

No such agreement exists here in Palestine and Israel.. That agreement was essentially a peace treaty, something which can only come with the 1967 border treaty or a similar treaty.

Please learn about the history of the american-mexican war.

 

[theignoramus]

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

Im not a fan of this man, but he's usually sound and reasonable about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

 

[KtSlime]

What is the proper response then, if the shooter is legitimately endangering and killing bystanders as well?

I'm not trying to get to root causes here, I'm legitimately curious. How do police forces and militaries typically respond to that sort of thing?

Don't they negotiate?

 

[Terra Firma]

Please answer the question. Do you think America should return to 1847 borders and give the land back?

Someone already answered the question but in addition, even if there was no treaty, there have been generations of Americans living on that land, so they have roots. Those displaced are not living in refugee camps and are living under a country's jurisdiction, a country that has an army, a government, infrastructure, etc.

So no, I don't think it is feasible for Israel to cease existing, in case that's what you're trying to coax out of me, but that does not give them a right to expand beyond its borders using "security" as an excuse, as we see with the Great Wall of Racism.

 

[Terra Firma]

What is the proper response then, if the shooter is legitimately endangering and killing bystanders as well?

I'm not trying to get to root causes here, I'm legitimately curious. How do police forces and militaries typically respond to that sort of thing?

Negotiations. Or if the demands cannot be met, covert operations. Israel sure has the technology and the manpower to take out Hamas and Hamas only. The problem is, that would lead to an increase in Israeli military deaths although nowhere near the Palestinian civilian deaths.

 

[sindbadthesailor]

This post must be stickied on every page.

I second this.

Might reduce the amount of circular arguments and spin that comes up every few pages.

 

[Orenhy]

Are we talking about something that happened over 150 years ago? No. We are talking about something that happened recently, which is the wall, which can be dismantled, and people can be moved back to the 1967 borders because they only recently moved beyond them.



No, the analogy is apt. I even added on to it. Hamas comes off as the criminal (and in line with Israeli claims). I did not even make the analogy even more realistic by adding genuine and understandable pains of the bank robbers.

The situation is not complicated. By using analogy, it is easier to show those defending the massacre of civilians just because they are human shields are completely wrong. A human shield does not mean you kill both the perpetrator and the human shield. There is NO JUSTIFICATION.



You contradict yourself. Which is it, are they not aimlessly firing or is there a "targeting error" that you are going to brush every aimless attack under? And no, you're not even playing the IDF line, where they claimed that there were Hamas launch sites on the beach, which was completely denied by journalists that happened to be right there.



Again, it does NOT make it okay to bomb a place just because you send some flyers to the population, warning them to move out. Would it have made a difference if the US sent flyers to Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the people to move out so that they can nuke the cities?

Yes, military forces do have someone covering them but that is if someone is firing at them. Not a single US operation in Iraq had as bad civilian to insurgent ratio as Israel has in this operation and operations before this one. Even Fallujah, where hundreds of civilians died, did not have such a horrible ratio.

And the ratio of Hamas to civilian deaths is worse than what you have said.

People view the claim of human shields wrongly, the hamas mentality at the very least, and i dare someone to dispute this:
We set shoot sites in rural areas within civilian population.
Therefore when someone comes to attack us, they will have to consider the civilian people near the launchers. The launchers are not just there, they are used, and have the potential to harm israel, it is irrelevant how effective it actually is, the potential is there therefore it is a security risk and there is legitimacy for israel to strike the launchers, and it must do so to provide security for its civilians.
From IDFs view, they MUST eliminate the launchers, its their job, they also must consider the local palestenians near the launchers, as in they cannot just nuke the place flat, but thats is as far as they must - consider. Can you dispute they are not considering? I cannot, they shoot warning rockets, they call people to leave etc, cant leave, wont leave or w.e not israels problem, and we see the result.

As to whether idf fires aimlessly or not, they claim not, there is shit ton of footage from planes showing shooting targets. As to the beach incident, i cannot speak officially, as i have heard, they fired at a crate at the beach, the kids ran from it, and they targeted them and killed them, claiming it was a wrong identification, as in they thought they were hamas fighters, its weird as one would claim how could the pilot not notice they are tiny kids, so.. I cannot judge.

As to ratios, if its not 1/4 its 1/5 1/6,, up to you to prove the efficiency of the USA army but also you must remember they were not fighting a town that is literally built with its infrastructure for guerrilla fighting not to this level, but these ratios would support the human shield claim of hamas fighting within its own civilians over genocide. You may call IDF brutal, would not argue with that.

 

[sangreal]

Please answer the question. Do you think America should return to 1847 borders and give the land back?

Are you unfamiliar with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo or something?

 

[Kenshin001]

The 1847 border was settled with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo where

No such agreement exists here in Palestine and Israel.. That agreement was essentially a peace treaty, something which can only come with the 1967 border treaty or a similar treaty.

Please learn about the history of the american-mexican war.

Maybe you should. The forced agreement was after the Mexicans had been defeated, their capital taken and they had to give up huge swaths of land. I guess Israel should offer 15 million for most of the West Bank and Gaza then.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Negotiations. Or if the demands cannot be met, covert operations. Israel sure has the technology and the manpower to take out Hamas and Hamas only. The problem is, that would lead to an increase in Israeli military deaths although nowhere near the Palestinian civilian deaths.

They tried that in Jenin in 2002. There was a storm of manufactured outrage over a huge massacre.

 

[Jea Song]

Excuse my ignorance on the matter because I never seemed to give a Fuck what happens in the middle east but after stumbling here I'm fairly interested. But let me get this straight.

The main reason why they are fighting is because after WW2 a group of nations basically created a country for jews somewhere in Palestine by force? And the Palestinians who were already living there were either forced out or had to live under the new formed country's rules?

Is this the story in basic terms?

And to top it off, the United States aids Isreal with weapons and such?

Now I don't have a dog in this fight but doesn't that seem pretty fucked up for the Palestinians?

 

[Zeeman]

Negotiations. Or if the demands cannot be met, covert operations. Israel sure has the technology and the manpower to take out Hamas and Hamas only. The problem is, that would lead to an increase in Israeli military deaths although nowhere near the Palestinian civilian deaths.

Negotiations are difficult, and meanwhile, things are still happening on the ground and people are still in danger.

Do you honestly think that covert ops would work? As far as I know, there's no real technological advantage available for neighborhood or tunnel fighting (unless you level the neighborhood, which would not solve the issue). What does international law say about this? If protecting civilians means endangering your soldiers, do you still have that obligation? I could only find this article https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/2822-bohrer-z-osiel-m-proportionality-in-military-force (written, coincidentally, about the 2008-2009 Gaza war), which says these things aren't clear under international law. (Admittedly, I've only skimmed it but it seems to be a matter of much debate)

 

[Terra Firma]

They tried that in Jenin in 2002. There was a storm of manufactured outrage over a huge massacre.

It was still a massacre, but it was better than what is going on now. Majority of those killed were combatants in Jenin. So it is most definitely a better option.

 

[Maninthemirror]

Maybe you should. The forced agreement was after the Mexicans had been defeated, their capital taken and they had to give up huge swaths of land. I guess Israel should offer 15 million for most of the West Bank and Gaza then.

Does a treaty exist between Palestinians and Israelis ?

 

[Terra Firma]

Excuse my ignorance on the matter because I never seemed to give a Fuck what happens in the middle east but after stumbling here I'm fairly interested. But let me get this straight.

The main reason why they are fighting is because after WW2 a group of nations basically created a country for jews somewhere in Palestine by force? And the Palestinians who were already living there were either forced out or had to live under the new formed country's rules?

Is this the story in basic terms?

And to top it off, the United States aids Isreal with weapons and such?

Now I don't have a dog in this fight but doesn't that seem pretty fucked up for the Palestinians?

The UN created the State of Israel. Those that were actually going to be affected (the Arab world) voted against it. It passed easily because no one in the Arab world has veto power. It went to the UN in the first place because Britain wanted to wash its hands off the place, especially due to political pressure by Zionist leaders in Britain and political pressure followed by terrorism conducted by Jewish groups within Palestine. Before the State of Israel was declared, Jews in Palestine had just about 7% of the land to their name. After it was declared, a majority of the land was set aside for Israel, which resulted in expulsion of the native Palestinian Arab population, either forcibly or voluntarily to avoid being caught up in the war that was to happen between the new State of Israel and a joint force of Arab nations.

Anyway, time has passed before we can get anything meaningful done about what happened, because a lot of Israelis who now live on land taken from the Palestinians were not involved in any way in taking of that land. What is at issue is the land that Israel continues to grab by building settlements in the West Bank.

 

[MisterFalcon]

It was still a massacre, but it was better than what is going on now. Majority of those killed were combatants in Jenin. So it is most definitely a better option.

At the time I remember seeing a headline 'Worse Then Hiroshima' to describe Jenin.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

so....remember Rula Jebreal who was an MSNBC contributer who bashed MSNBC for their pro-Israeli bias coverage on the Gaza conflict and then was temporarily kicked off as a contributer? well she came back with a slight change to her title...

stay classy MSNBC, stay classy

Embarrassing.

 

[inm8num2]

so....remember Rula Jebreal who was an MSNBC contributer who bashed MSNBC for their pro-Israeli bias coverage on the Gaza conflict and then was temporarily kicked off as a contributer? well she came back with a slight change to her title...

stay classy MSNBC, stay classy

LOL. News networks never cease to amaze me.

Also, Jebreal made an appearance on Democracy Now.

 

[nib95]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

Excellent post. Breaks down some of the reasons why other political analysts etc have essentially come to the same conclusion.

 

[Terra Firma]

Negotiations are difficult, and meanwhile, things are still happening on the ground and people are still in danger.

Do you honestly think that covert ops would work? As far as I know, there's no real technological advantage available for neighborhood or tunnel fighting (unless you level the neighborhood, which would not solve the issue). What does international law say about this? If protecting civilians means endangering your soldiers, do you still have that obligation? I could only find this article https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/2822-bohrer-z-osiel-m-proportionality-in-military-force (written, coincidentally, about the 2008-2009 Gaza war), which says these things aren't clear under international law. (Admittedly, I've only skimmed it but it seems to be a matter of much debate)

Covert ops can also involve infiltration or by using a second party, such as those people who are not loyal to Hamas and willing to bring them down. Covert ops can also involve getting Fatah on board.

Either way, Hamas is a symptom, which would largely go away if the cause is removed. Remove the blockade, give the people self governance, let them live in peace, show some good faith by winning the hearts of the people, and Hamas would naturally dwindle in size and be seen as a clear enemy by the Gazans if it launches rockets when Gaza is prospering. Gaza right now and for the past few years has been a pit, a prison.

Anyone attacking the US from Canada would be seen as an enemy of Canada by Canadians. Gazans need to be shown that Hamas is their enemy if it attacks Israel. That can only happen if Israel can show them that it bears no ill will towards them, that it is in both Israeli and Gazan interest to decry and eliminate violence, that Israel is a genuine partner in Gaza's development and prosperity and not a party to its destruction.

 

[Terra Firma]

At the time I remember seeing a headline 'Worse Then Hiroshima' to describe Jenin.

It doesn't matter. The battle in Jenin may have resulted in destruction of more property in a smaller area, but it led to a much smaller civilian death count. I'd rather have all of Gaza leveled if that entailed minimizing civilian deaths. Structures can be rebuilt. The dead cannot be brought back.

 

[Kenshin001]

Does a treaty exist between Palestinians and Israelis ?

No. I think Israel offered the Palestinians 73% on the WB and 100% of Gaza but they rejected it. Mexico lost 55% of their pre 1836 land when they signed their treaty.

 

[Zen]

If my country was under a brutal occupation, structures and countless homes being destroyed and my people being displaced in masses on a weekly, monthly and yearly basis, essentially being colonised. If I was under siege, my nations supplies, electricity, trade, import/export, building materials, food and water etc being controlled by the occupation and had been for decades on end. And for resisting the occupation and colonisation, I'd seen my friends or family brutalised, arrested, jailed, tortured or worse, then yea, I can't say I wouldn't be there to fire rockets back at the occupier and aggressor either.

Anyway…

Al-Jazeera Gaza offices evacuated after direct hit by Israeli fire
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/22/al-jazeera-gaza-offices-hit-israeli-fire

BBC Arabic Reporter Feras Khatib Attacked On Air By 'Angry Israeli'
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...d-by-angry-israeli-live-on-air_n_5609764.html

I guess that poster that prior claimed AJ offices were shelled is now vindicated. Maybe he came from the future.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Excuse my ignorance on the matter because I never seemed to give a Fuck what happens in the middle east but after stumbling here I'm fairly interested. But let me get this straight.

The main reason why they are fighting is because after WW2 a group of nations basically created a country for jews somewhere in Palestine by force? And the Palestinians who were already living there were either forced out or had to live under the new formed country's rules?

Is this the story in basic terms?

And to top it off, the United States aids Isreal with weapons and such?

Now I don't have a dog in this fight but doesn't that seem pretty fucked up for the Palestinians?

The british colony of palestine was set to be partitioned into an Arab state and a Jewish state. Jews accepted the partition plan, arabs did not. After Israel declared its independence, joint Arab forces from Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Palestinians, and I think one or two other nations, invaded Israel. different sections of land came under control of different militaries over the course of the war. When the war ended in 1949, the land that had been partitioned for a rejected palestinian state was now under the occupation of different countries - Egypt (The UAR) was administering the Gaza Strip. Jordan was in control of the West Bank. Syria was in de facto control of the Golan Heights. And the rest of the former british colony of Palestine was under control of Israel. There was no Palestine. Just Israel, Jordan, and Egypt (I don't remember if the golan heights were considerd part of the colony or not)

In 1967, a ramp up to war between Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Israel was occurring. All countries had troops and tanks placed at the borders. Israeli intelligence intercepted Egyptian communications about an Egyptian airstrike followed by a joint force land invasion set to be executed late June 5th / June 6th. Israel launched a pre-emptive airstrike early June 5th which crippled the Egyptian air force, and the six day war broke out. Six days later, Israel had captured the Gaza Strip AND the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

The Yom Kippur War in 1973 saw Syria overrun most of the Golan Heights, but then Israel retake it in a counterattack.

In 1978, as part of the Egypt-Israel peace agreement, Israel returned the Sinai pensinsula to Egypt.

That's a really short version of how Israel was established, how the arab state of Palestine was proposed but never came to be, and how Israel came to occupy Gaza and the West Bank.

 

[Zeeman]

Covert ops can also involve infiltration or by using a second party, such as those people who are not loyal to Hamas and willing to bring them down. Covert ops can also involve getting Fatah on board.

Either way, Hamas is a symptom, which would largely go away if the cause is removed. Remove the blockade, give the people self governance, let them live in peace, show some good faith by winning the hearts of the people, and Hamas would naturally dwindle in size and be seen as a clear enemy by the Gazans if it launches rockets when Gaza is prospering. Gaza right now and for the past few years has been a pit, a prison.

Anyone attacking the US from Canada would be seen as an enemy of Canada by Canadians. Gazans need to be shown that Hamas is their enemy if it attacks Israel. That can only happen if Israel can show them that it bears no ill will towards them, that it is in both Israeli and Gazan interest to decry and eliminate violence, that Israel is a genuine partner in Gaza's development and prosperity and not a party to its destruction.

I agree with that, but it's complicated by the fact that Hamas isn't just some entity, it's currently the government of Gaza, so how does Israel open up Gaza without allowing Hamas to bring in weapons? Or is that a risk that's seen as worthwhile for the potential that Gazans will eventually bring down Hamas?

 

[Terra Firma]

No. I think Israel offered the Palestinians 73% on the WB and 100% of Gaza but they rejected it. Mexico lost 55% of their pre 1836 land when they signed their treaty.

I already answered your question. Obviously that was not fair for Mexico, but it has been 150 years. If we are going to talk about history, then we can even bring up the question of why Israel was created in the Middle East in the first place, but that is not relevant nor is there any realistic answer anymore. What we know is that there are millions of Israelis who were born there now and should not be moved from where they have set strong roots. Israel is a country that is there to stay. But it has enough land to relocate settlers who are a newer group and do not have any real historical tie to the settlement they're living in.

Either way, we are talking about the wall, which encroaches on Palestinian land. Israel even had the audacity to completely put not just Jerusalem in its entirety but its suburbs behind the wall.

 

[Jea Song]

The british colony of palestine was set to be partitioned into an Arab state and a Jewish state. Jews accepted the partition plan, arabs did not. After Israel declared its independence, joint Arab forces from Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Palestinians, and I think one or two other nations, invaded Israel. different sections of land came under control of different militaries over the course of the war. When the war ended in 1949, the land that had been partitioned for a rejected palestinian state was now under the occupation of different countries - Egypt (The UAR) was administering the Gaza Strip. Jordan was in control of the West Bank. Syria was in de facto control of the Golan Heights. And the rest of the former british colony of Palestine was under control of Israel. There was no Palestine. Just Israel, Jordan, and Egypt (I don't remember if the golan heights were considerd part of the colony or not)

In 1967, a ramp up to war between Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Israel was occurring. All countries had troops and tanks placed at the borders. Israeli intelligence intercepted Egyptian communications about an Egyptian airstrike followed by a joint force land invasion set to be executed late June 5th / June 6th. Israel launched a pre-emptive airstrike early June 5th which crippled the Egyptian air force, and the six day war broke out. Six days later, Israel had captured the Gaza Strip AND the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

The Yom Kippur War in 1973 saw Syria overrun most of the Golan Heights, but then Israel retake it in a counterattack.

In 1978, as part of the Egypt-Israel peace agreement, Israel returned the Sinai pensinsula to Egypt.

That's a really short version of how Israel was established, how the arab state of Palestine was proposed but never came to be, and how Israel came to occupy Gaza and the West Bank.

Damn. The whole situation is all fucked up. How the hell would a negotiation work at this point? Seriously, what could put an end to this?

 

[Terra Firma]

I agree with that, but it's complicated by the fact that Hamas isn't just some entity, it's currently the government of Gaza, so how does Israel open up Gaza without allowing Hamas to bring in weapons? Or is that a risk that's seen as worthwhile for the potential that Gazans will eventually bring down Hamas?

Hamas is a governing party with its actual governors being outside of Gaza (specifically in Qatar or was it Kuwait? I forget). Disarming Hamas is nowhere near as complicated as even a coup, let alone a regime change. Iraq was better than Gaza under Saddam.

And yes, for any real, long term peace, that is how it works. If Gazans keep seeing Israel as a threat to their life, removing Hamas will do nothing. Other groups will keep popping up and the only options will be to either show Gazans that Israel is not against them by doing what I have stated before or basically committing genocide.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Damn. The whole situation is all fucked up. How the hell would a negotiation work at this point? Seriously, what could put an end to this?

After Israel and Egypt established peace, Egypt was banished from the Arab League for a decade, and both Anwar Sadat and Yitzhak Rabin were assassinated by extemists from their own countries.

 

[Orenhy]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began

Cool story, after going thorough the links, alot of it is a nicely weaved thread to say "israel started"
- There is no actual proof hamas did/did not have involvement with the murder of the 3 kids, not published.
- The source for the "gag order" over the press is a clear lie, the press did not know the guys were dead until the army found the bodies, period, the gag order revolved around the issue that the press felt it should be able to say "we think the boys are dead" but were instructed to say "the boys might be alive"
- Israel is allowed to rearrest shalit prisoners if they can prove they have broken their release agreement, its not like they had immunity. Its up to both sides to prove guilty/not i did not see any proof one way or another. Moreover, its portrayed as if all hamas wants is his precious prisoners, there are bigger issues demanded.
- Why does it place that the planes bombed before rockets firing in the sentence, and does not place it in a logical order.

This is not to say israel didint start, but seriously, cool story.

 

[nib95]

LOL. News networks never cease to amaze me.

Also, Jebreal made an appearance on Democracy Now.

Awesome video. Already a big fan, and my what a story she has. Also did she say she fairly recently found out she has an Israeli sister who shares the "kill Arabs" mentality? That's awkward lol.

 

[Zen]

U should read this comment in reddit
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/c...f_a_young_unarmed_gazan_man_shot_dead/cj5gcxu

People suddenly seem to have very short memories. I suggest they read this wikipedia page. Or if they'd like, keep reading.

To counter the short memory, I wrote out this long ass thing quoting from major news sites, mostly Israeli and The Economist to avoid accusations of bias, to give context to where we find ourselves now. If it is a link it is a quotation, and all emphasis is mine:

For background, After the last big Israeli effort to stop the rockets, in November 2012, it was agreed that, along with a ceasefire, the blockade of Gaza would gradually be lifted and the crossings into Egypt and Israel would be opened. The ceasefire generally held, but the siege continued. As Gazans see it, they have remained cruelly shut up in an open-air prison. Firing rockets, many of them argue, is the only way they can protest, even though they know the Israelis are bound, from time to time, to punish them.

In early June, Israel was upset that Hamas had made peace with Fatah. Israel meanwhile refused to allow the passage of at least three prospective ministers from the Gaza Strip to the occupied West Bank, while it called on the international community to shun the new Palestinian government.

On Sunday Israel's security cabinet, convened by prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, agreed on a series of punitive measures, including the withholding of some tax it collects on the PA's behalf, and freezing negotiations with the Palestinians as long as Hamas agreed to its the consensus government.

A gag order was placed on all matters relating to the investigation of the 3 kidnapped teens — creating a ringing dichotomy between what some reporters and security officials knew (that the teens had likely been swiftly murdered) and what was being said to the public (namely, that the forces were operating under the assumption that the teens were alive). That evening searchers found the kidnappers’ abandoned, torched Hyundai, with eight bullet holes and the boys’ DNA. There was no doubt.

Yet, operating on the public's assumption that they were alive, Israel launched Brothers Keeper.

Despite releasing no evidence implicating Hamas, Mr Netanyahu sounded determined at the outset to blame Hamas’s leadership, warning that it would “pay a heavy price” for the kidnapping.

It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren’t acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas’ Hebron branch [the suspects] — more a crime family than a clandestine organization — had a history of acting without the leaders’ knowledge, sometimes against their interests. Yet Netanyahu repeatedly insisted Hamas was responsible for the crime and would pay for it.

In the search for the kidnapped Israelis a series of charitable organisations that used to be run by Hamas were closed down and a dairy, which employs hundreds of Palestinians, was demolished. According to the UN, during the search at least ten Palestinians, including two under 18, have been killed in the West Bank. The army has arrested 530 Palestinians, doubling the number of those detained without trial or charge. About half the 1,000 or so Palestinians freed in 2011 in exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been captured by Hamas in 2006, were put back behind bars. The Israeli army also resumed its practice of blowing up the houses of militants, a tactic not used since the end of the Palestinians’ last intifada, or uprising, in 2005.

Hours after the killing was announced, Israeli aircraft pounded the Gaza Strip, which Hamas controls. Palestinians fired dozens of rockets from the coastal enclave into Israel.

The increase in rocket fire was partly intended as a protest against the round-up of prisoners. Any ceasefire, says Hamas, must include the release at least of those detained in the past month.

From the conclusion to The Economist article on 5 July, Whoever is responsible for the murders, Mr Netanyahu seems certain to cite them as a reason to bash Hamas in both the Palestinian territories in the hope that the unity government, which the American government cautiously welcomed, will fall apart. And it is equally certain that a growing number of Palestinians will cheer on those who violently respond.

On July 7 a senior Hamas official told The Times of Israel that the group does not accept the idea that “quiet will be answered with quiet” in the Gaza Strip, saying that if Israel wants peace in the South it must release all the prisoners freed in exchange for Gilad Shalit who were recently re-arrested following the abduction of the three Israeli teens.

"Chief spokesman of the Israeli military, Brigadier General Moti Almoz, speaking July 8 on Army Radio’s morning show: “We have been instructed by the political echelon to hit Hamas hard.”"

Then Protective Edge was launched. Fast forward 2 weeks to today, since the Op. began:

IDF has attacked some 2,800 terror [sic] targets.

The IDF has confirmed at least 1,497 [rockets] have landed in Israel,

and,

More than 600 Palestinians and 30 Israelis have been killed

So basically this operation is about breaking up the unity govt. Not stopping rockets. If it wanted to stop rockets it would have kept the ceasefire agreements or released the Hamas people it had re-arrested on false pretexts, after agreeing to release them. It is almost universally recognised among political analysts that this is the purpose of the attack on Hamas.

Zbiegniew Brzezinski had this to say:

This post needs to be quoted again for anyone who does not have a solid timeline of the events.

Cool story, after going thorough the links, alot of it is a nicely weaved thread to say "israel started"
- The source for the "gag order" over the press is a clear lie, the press did not know the guys were dead until the army found the bodies, period, the gag order revolved around the issue that the press felt it should be able to say "we think the boys are dead" but were instructed to say "there boys might be alive"

The 2014 clashes continued on and off, in the rhythm of Ramadan, throughout last weekend — a sort of brush fire that any gust of wind could take. And yet, despite the Abu Khdeir family’s claims that the murderers were Jews, the police and Shin Bet remained mum. The case was under a gag order. No details related to the investigation could be released.

Do you have any other evidence to support your claim? The New York times said the same thing, did they not?

 

[Goliath]

Excuse my ignorance on the matter because I never seemed to give a Fuck what happens in the middle east but after stumbling here I'm fairly interested. But let me get this straight.

The main reason why they are fighting is because after WW2 a group of nations basically created a country for jews somewhere in Palestine by force? And the Palestinians who were already living there were either forced out or had to live under the new formed country's rules?

Is this the story in basic terms?

And to top it off, the United States aids Isreal with weapons and such?

Now I don't have a dog in this fight but doesn't that seem pretty fucked up for the Palestinians?

Not exactly.....

Israel was formed after WWII as a place for the hundreds of thousands displaced Jews that had no where to go. Most countries took in certain amounts but they didn't want to take on the whole lot so what they did was form Israel on a BRITISH COLONY. (Border creations and countries getting carved apart, two Germanys, was common post WWII)

Now immediately after the declaration of the formation of Israel the Arab League, Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq refused to accept the UN partition plan and proclaimed the right of self-determination for the Arabs across the whole of Palestine. They took their forced to Palestine and mounted an attack. After 10 months of fighting an agreement was made and a set of boarders was established.

However this battle initiated by the Arab League led to a huge demographic shift in what is now Israel. Wealthy arabs fled to protect themselves and their money, other arabs fled out of fear for their life, some fled because they were incouraged by the Arab League and the Grand Mufti to not live under the rule of a Jew and finally some were expelled by Zionists authorities.

So no your idea of it's formation is not correct.

 

[Maninthemirror]

No. I think Israel offered the Palestinians 73% on the WB and 100% of Gaza but they rejected it. Mexico lost 55% of their pre 1836 land when they signed their treaty.

Why not full 1967 borders, you know the one where Hamas says it will drop arms ?

 

[Orenhy]

The 2014 clashes continued on and off, in the rhythm of Ramadan, throughout last weekend — a sort of brush fire that any gust of wind could take. And yet, despite the Abu Khdeir family’s claims that the murderers were Jews, the police and Shin Bet remained mum. The case was under a gag order. No details related to the investigation could be released.

Do you have any other evidence to support your claim? The New York times said the same thing, did they not?.

That is related to the israelis who killed the palestenian guy, not the palestenians who killed the 3 israelis. there is a mini link is that post regarding the actual "gag order" you are talking about. The whole post just links all sorts of stuff from all over with little facts, just general claims that sound like they support the facts.

 

[Coins]

Cutting off flights in Israel is really going to make then feel even more isolated.