2014 Israel-Gaza Conflict [UN: 1,525+ Palestinian dead, mostly civilian; 66 Israeli]
- Thread starter L0st Id3ntity
- Start date
- Status
It's hard to progress and move forward when people are currently getting bombed. You cannot expect anything to come out of it within a few weeks of reconciliation. Only a fool would expect to see changes immediately. They might not agree 100% on anything but it's a step in the right direction. Just don't expect anything to come out of it any time soon.
It don't want to ban them because they don't benefit my opinion. The picture is clearly pro palestina, since it's implies that it was a big state until Israel came along and eat it.
Which is of course wrong. The article and the picture just pop up every few pages and are called out by people for being misleading. It's just not worth anything for the discussion.
Don't we have better pictures for this? The graphic ignores important milestones in the conflict and implies that Palestina was a state.
No its not, at all. What Costia said is false under international law. The internationally and legally recognised borders are those from 47. Doesn't matter whether the Arab nations disagreed, nor whether during the war Jordan, Egypt etc occupied much of the Palestinian territory. Those nations did what occupying nations that have won or lost a war eventually do, they leave the territory. Problem is, Israel didn't, and has since continued stealing more and more Palestinian land and expanding their illegal settlements.
This image is accurate, only historic Palestine is referred to as the British Mandate for Palestine, Palestine under British rule.
According to a 2013 report, Palestine now only accounts for 8% of historic Palestine. That's how much Israel has stolen since the borders. This is a somewhat more up to date map.
Something has certainly came out of it, the current Israeli action. Interesting that Hamas and Fatah are still sticking to their piece of paper despite the pressure not to from both internal and external sources.
No it doesn't. The picture misleads people into thinking that Palestine was a self governing state all along which is false. It was owned by the Brits and distributed according to the UN. Then of course the pic ignores the 1948 and 1967 wars that help shape the map. If the Arab League would have not tried to erradicate Israel upon it's inception things would have been different. And it ignores that Gaza and the West Bank should be labeled under Egypt and Jordan accordingly post 1948 and pre 1967. So know the picture oversimplifies and misleads history for it's own benefit.
And as for bringing up West Bank. This is a Gaza strip battle. Hamas has no voice for the West Bank they can't complain about what goes on there.
So which one is official policy and which one are popular held beliefs?
I did get my facts straight. Weapons were found in a UN school and given back to the hammas.
This is not directly related to the UN incident but perfectly demonstrates why the IDF might have thought that weapons were concealed there as well.
Please refrain from personal attacks.
Not sure if i mentioned it in this thread: I am from Israel. ( i did mention it before but i am not sure if I did here, and some people might not read the other threads)
They knew civilians and staff were in the building. UN staff requested to have time to evacuate. IDF never responded...well technically they did, with shelling.
Again, this is categorically false, and against international law and acceptance of the territorial boundaries. Your argument is a false one often propagated by supporters of Israel who have a lack of understanding of these matters and a disregard for international law.
I briefly explained why in my post above. This assertion that territory occupied during war scenarios and engagements, then belonging to the said nations, is an absolutely idiotic one, and against all conventions and laws.
Their policy now is as said before, a return to the 1967 borders, but don't be surprised to see many in Hamas still express views that go further. They're a political party, after all.
Not exactly. Hamas does have members in the West Bank, hence them being blamed by Netanyahu for the kidnappings. In fact, the mass arrests Israel conducted in the West Bank are what started all this shit to begin with.
Nothing happened between them because Israel REFUSED to let anything happen.
deathkiller
Member
I agree that it doesn't tell what happened in the 1948 and 1967 war but why do you think that it doesn't show the current situation of the Palestinians in West Bank? I think that the current situation in West Bank is something very important if you want to understand the conflict.
I am curious what part of his post is wrong?
He is right about these:
Prior to 1948 there was no Palestinian state, it was controlled by the British and prior to that the Ottomans.
That Gaza and the West Bank both were under the control of Egypt and Jordan respectively between '48 and '67.
The problem is the Hammas wants the 100% historic Palestine. The Palestinians were offered a state based on 1967 lines several times and refused.
To get back to the 100% historical Palestine they will have to kill all of the Israeli's that currently live here - which is exactly what the Hammas intends to do.
Like I said before, this specific incident is being reveiwed by the IDF. I have only offered some explanations to why the IDF might have suspected the facility - due to UN's previous actions.
Israel is not involved in the fatah-hammas hostilities. But i do agree that israel failed miserably when negotiating with abu mazen.
And how does that justify shelling a place where they knew civilians and UN staff were located? Might as well bomb all UN facilities while they're at it just in case Hamas might have stored weapons. There's really no excuse for it.
Edit: IDF reviewing it means jack shit since they tried blaming Hamas for it and it's not the first time they've shelled UN facilities. See Lebanon 2006.
m_shortpants
Member
False. As has been mentioned repeatedly in this thread, Hamas is fine with 67 borders and has accepted this.
I see. So the underlying tension still exists in practical terms - just changing the official lettering doesn't do much to change the beliefs of the people using that lettering.
I see that the 1967 borders include the loss of Jerusalem for the Israelis... is that tenable for them?
I don't know if it has been posted, but:
Can't confirm it personally, source is MAAN: http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=716791&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed2 settlers attempt to kidnap Palestinian child in Jerusalem
Published today
JERUSALEM (Ma'an) -- Two Israeli settlers attempted to "kidnap" a two-year old Palestinian from Jerusalem while he was walking with his father and two sisters in Shufat neighborhood in northern Jerusalem on Monday, the family said.
So IDFs MO ist to kill on supsicion with no regards for human life, huh.
It is more useful to think of it as any formal position of a party, there will be people who believe it does not go far enough. Obviously for them to come to the point to officially support th 1967 borders means that they have come to a a new consensus overall to get to the point.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Any one that truly believes Iran cares about Palestinians, needs to sit down and realise the meta game being played in the Middle East. To be honest, I don't think there's a single government in the Middle East that actually cares about the Palestinians.
Jordan slaughtered them during Black September, the Gulf countries kicked them out during the first Gulf War, and Syria/Lebanon refuse to let them be anything but camp living refugees. Throw in Hamas being cunts of the highest order, and Fatah being absolutely useless, and you realise just how screwed these people are.
They signed the 1949 Armistice Agreements. The United Nations established supervising and reporting agencies to monitor the established armistice lines.
That sounds pretty legit and not against any laws seeing as the members involved and the United Nations agreed to this.
You mean prior to 47.
Prior to 47, the territory was indeed British controlled and owned, as I said in my post. However Britain tasked the UN with drawing up the borders which they did in 47, and these are the internationally accepted territories of Palestine and Israel. Doesn't matter whether Egypt and Jordan had control over parts of Palestine during a war, they ceased that occupation and control as all countries are expected to do by international law after a military engagement, whether they win or lose. On-going occupations and land grabs are illegal, and that's what Israel continues to do.
Like most of your posts in this thread, this is also factually incorrect. Please do a bit of research. It is Hamas that has agreed to and proposed treaties based on the 67 borders, and it is Israel/Netanyahu that has rejected them.
MisterFalcon
Member
Hamas knows perfectly well they cannot kill even a tiny fraction of the Israeli population. They just need to keep the struggle alive with mostly symbolic attacks until the balance of power shifts towards them in the future. A dream of Israel going up in smoke once sanctions are imposed, if US support stops or a UN force swoops in.
1967 border would actually only involve the loss of east Jerusalem.
But the short answer is no.
But the short answer is also, these were the agreed upon borders that Israel has violated illegally under international law.
Yes you can - in the past. They have one another yet have now agreed to a unity government for what they perceive as the greater good. As they say, progress has been made, and mutual animosity is slightly irrelevant to the aims of a unity government.
Hamas is the elected government in Gaza and only Gaza. Whether the terrorist organization has members in West Bank and a leader in Quetar is irrelevant. They only speak and act for Gaza. However that doesn't stop them.
And many argue that Israel is conducting this current offensive to keep the fires burning and disempower cooler heads among the Palestinians.
At the very least, Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah who is expressly anti-violence was made to look foolish during this affair.
It's an interesting line of attack by the Zionists, essentially ignoring the UN mandate which created Israel in the first place.
But Israel at least does not teach The Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a fucking fact! They do that in the UN sponsored textbooks that are suppose to teach their children, but all it do is spreading hate and misinformation.
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=783
http://www.palwatch.org/STORAGE/OpEd/Protocols_of_the_Elders.pdf
theignoramus
Member
The popular belief among Hamas is that the Palestinians cannot realistically hope to defeat Israel in the theater of violence, therefore a two state settlement along the 67 borders is the only alternative.
But even that is pretty much impossible now, as Israel has no intention of giving up East Jerusalem or removing its soldiers from the West Bank. Maybe 15 years ago it was possible, but with the right wing, fascist-lite elements playing such a critical role in current Israeli politics, the two state solution is dead.
Right, but this was an agreement between Israel and other nations that have no actual right to Palestinian territory under international law, but fought Israel as they disagreed with the way the UN separated up the borders. In no way does it mean them fighting such a war then gives them right to own or govern Palestine. The UN supervising agencies set up as a result of the agreement are by no means an acceptance of new territorial borders, in fact the whole agreement was more a temporary one to stop hostilities between Israel and the Arab nations.
There is a difference between them being elected in the West Bank and them having a presence in the West Bank. You said they "complain about what goes on there". They most certainly can complain when Israel arrests dozens of their members over a kidnapping they didn't commit.
It doesn't.
In lebanon the UN were worse than useless. the IDF had to defend to escort the UN troops stationed on the israeli-lebanon border out of lebanon to safety. IT was the UN's job to stop this war - instead they ran away.
Edit: People in israel and in the middle east in general have 0 faith in the UN. which i think is understandable.
Wow, a foreign minister said something in an interview.
It's useless, just PR. What we need is 2 signatures: of abu mazen and Haled Mashaal. As far as i am aware haled Mashaal never even recognized the existence of Israel, there is no chance he will agree to a 2 state solution. Abu mazen seemed to be more willing to cooperate - but in the end did not sign anything since then he might loose palestinian support and get overthrown - rendering the agreement worthless. I feel it was israel's failure with abu mazen and the west bank, but currently there is no chance of peace with Hammas in gaza - only a long ceasefire.
Given their terrible circumstances and history, I do not find that level of distortion surprising. Nor does it mean much in the grand scale (if it is indeed still being taught).
m_shortpants
Member
So what? It's a step to peace. Israel ignored Hamas's request for a 10 year ceasefire as well.
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/report-israel-conditions.html
It's clear Israel doesn't want any lasting peace.
If you want to understand the conflict you have to look back at Egypts, Iran's, Jordan's, Syria's, Lebanon's, Israel's and the British's history in that area first. A simple picture labeled incorrectly pretending Palestine was ever a self governing state is misleading. It also ignores how little the other arab nations care for that area. They invaded it to better attack Israel during the 1948 war. They also don't want any of the Palestininans in their countries post 67. Egypt walls off Gaza as well.
It's a very complex situation in the middle east. That picture is misleading on purpose and explains nothing of current events.
I would argue that it explains the most important issue.
and please listen to this then come back
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzWJDqYx6NM&feature=youtu.be&t=35m30s
and please listen to this then come back
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzWJDqYx6NM&feature=youtu.be&t=35m30s
The British draw up of the land division never called for a Palestinian state. How could it when the Arabs living there weren't called Palestinians until decades later? The lands designated as Arab land were to be absorbed by the surrounding Arab countries. None of this matter anyways as the Arab states refused the partition plans, and instead decided to solve the issue on the field. That resulted in the 49 armistice agreement. The 1967 borders are the ones internationally recognised. No one in their right mind is advocating borders based on a British partition plan that were never implemented or agreed upon.
As for Hamas, I don't think I'd put much stock in the mouths of people whose founding charter (which they still have listed as part of their group beliefs) calls for nothing short of the dismantling of Israel. But fear ye not my Jewish friends, Hamas will let you coexist with them under the banner of Islam (actual words in their charter). These guys will say whatever they have to.
Regardless, there's no justification for shelling UN facilities with staff and/or civilians. IDF doesn't care, "investigation" or not. The problem with the UN is any resolution they try to pass, the US comes in and vetoes.
Not suspition - images and videos from drones that are constantly flying over gaza/ You can even hear them in the live broadcasts - the constant humming noise.
It is a step to peace - it will happen eventually, but not now.
Have you read the article? Hammas are trying to set conditions for the ceasefire while refusing to meet any of the israeli ones.
there are currently 2 options for a ceasfire:
1) no conditions - both sides stop firing. Hammas refuses this and already broke several cease fires that were started unilaterally by israel.
2) agreeing on some middle ground about the conditions - wich is what the israeli and hammas leaders are currently trying to do/
This isn't the problem with the UN. Even without US's vetoes all they would do is to sign papers. The problem is that the UN lacks the firepower to enforce their decisions. Whenever a war breaks out - the UN troops are the first to leave.
If you want some kind of international force to be here you should be asking for NATO.
Jag
Member
The problem with the UN is they come in with good intentions of helping people but end up becoming a tool of the combatants while also helping civilians.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Shouldn't we ask a moderator to update the thread title? 'at least 40 dead this morning' isn't exactly an accurate depiction of the situation at hand.
Again, false. The 47 borders are the ones the UN, and by virtue international community agree upon. The 67 borders are used in treaty talks between Israel and Palestine (as well as the US) because Israel has stolen so much land since then, the 47 borders are no longer realistic.
To the second part of your post, that's just fearmongering propaganda, and choosing to ignore facts in place of hyperbole. Hamas has already agreed to the 67 borders, and stated they no longer abide by that charter, both of those things are fact. If Hamas has proposed and IS continually proposing a treaty based on the 67 borders and Israel's right to exist, you cannot say they haven't simply because of a decades old charter. It's simply false. However, what is not false is the mounting evidence that it is in fact Israel that does not want to agree to the 67 borders, nor a sovereign Palestinian state.
theignoramus
Member
m_shortpants
Member
Those demands are perfectly reasonable. Again, it's a given that during a truce, Hamas wouldn't fire rockets. Can't believe I have to type that out even...that's what a truce is. They don't exactly have much to compromise on other than that. But Israel of course won't agree to it. Why would they? They are able to maintain the status quo and even bomb the shit out of civilians with no international scrutiny.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked