Support NeoGAF

[zeroOman]

Nice gift

 

[CesspoolofHatred]

This is a good article! It has some issues, which I will address below, but as I've said before, I do think that antisemitism is behind some of the opposition to Israel and what Israel does. Antisemitism is a powerful force which has been around for thousands of years, and while it has declined in some places since World War II's end, unfortunately some still believe such things.

<Heavy sigh>

I keep seeing this thrown about. So I'll just drop this here as a rebuttal. It's from the topic we had on the Palestinian teen from Florida being brutalized by Israeli law enforcement, but it should serve well enough here.

For stuff like this it's probably necessary to have a degree of separation between the Israeli government and the Jewish community as a whole, just like separating the Pope from the whole of Christianity (he only really speaks for one sect anyways).

I don't think anybody in their right mind is attacking the entirety of the Jewish people for these things. They're attacking the people in charge of running Israel, and the people who are enforcing the laws there, because they are doing things like this, and also forcing nonviolent Palestinians out of their homes that they've lived in for generations by claiming their land as the government's, and stating that the trees are "illegally planted on state land". In that sense, you can't necessarily say that this is an "isolated incident". It's a symptom of prejudice between Israel and Palestine.

In other words, we are attacking the actions of the government, and not necessarily attributing them to the entirety of the Jewish people. Are there bigots who are using Israel's actions to latch onto the chance to do the latter? Yeah, there are. It's kind of difficult to avoid that when Israel is labeled and presents itself as a Jewish state.

But I believe that dismissing all of the criticisms of the Israeli government - or of any government, really - as "attacking its people" is a huge mistake, because using that rhetoric distracts from the chance for further debate and allows shit like this to go on.

 

[zeroOman]

Mass grave uncovered containing dozens of Palestinians killed in 1948 war that founded Israel

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/mass-graves-jaffa-israel-palestine-1948_n_3385011.html

 

[Jagernaut]

Maybe it's because I'm an American, but I absolutely don't think that that is the whole explanation, no. In the US at least being opposed to Israel is probably only slightly more common on the left than it is on the right, and on both ends it's only the extremes that are like that.


Are you conflating blockades with military actions? Because the two things are entirely different. Israel does what it can to only punish those who are guilty, and not collectively punish everyone, in these wars in Gaza. The relatively few civilian casualties are accidents.

As for blockades, of course the blockade hurts everybody, but still it is targeted at Hamas, and the things restricted all have potential military uses. As you can see from Hamas's financial troubles, the blockade is having success, particularly now that Egypt is unfriendly.

Also, I generally reject the idea that a blockade is an act of war. It isn't; it's an act short of war. I know that Israel went to war once based on a blockade, but in American law, blockades are generally not a cassus belli for war. The British blockade of Europe did admittedly help push the US into the War of 1812, though, so that isn't absolute -- but while it was a push, that was not the only reason; impressment, something that goes beyond just a blockade, was another major one, among others. And before World War I the German submarine warfare in the Atlantic helped pull America in, but subs sinking ships is more violent and deadly than a conventional blockade of the sense I mean. If I think of more standard blockades, such as the American blockade (and no-fly-zone) of Iraq through the '90s for example, that wasn't war. It was an ongoing blockade with the goal of keeping Sadaam from getting nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons, and hurting his rearmament in general as well. The blockade was criticized harshly by some, but succeeded at its goal of keeping Iraq from rebuilding its nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs. But it was not a war, and the wars before and after it (1991 and 2003) were not caused by the blockade.


It sure would be nice if Israel's critics would consider the reality that what they are asking for is to allow one of the world's worst terrorist groups freer reign to attack its enemies, but that clearly isn't going to happen. Sad.


"If it was a Hindu nation it'd be the same"? I'm sorry, but that's just ludicrous... well, unless it was a Hindu nation in Pakistan or Bangladesh of course; then, yes, it would be the same. The religious hatred between Muslims and Hindus on the Indian Subcontinent has to rival antisemitism in its virulence.

Also, once again, there were many population transfers in the 20th century. No other one caused so many problems that have lasted to the current day as the formation of Israel has. That is not a coincidence.


Of course the goals of the groups were different. You're right that the Arabs before, sort of like Arab governments today, weren't interested in Islamic-law government. What is similar is the antisemitic hatred of the concept of a Jewish state. That is what binds those groups together, even if little else does. Claiming that it's all just because they are invaders and not because of religion as well is hopelessly naive and clueless. Antisemitism is one of the oldest biases, after all. The point is that those people and groups are or were frequently antisemitic, and their antisemitism pushes them to hate Israel more than they would if Israel was not a Jewish state.


You really can't see how this conflation of 'Jews' with 'Israel' is essentially antisemitism? Really?


I think that Hamas only claimed to support the '67 borders because they knew that it'd never happen. It makes them look good to people who don't pay any attention to what Hamas actually believes, while having no chance whatsoever of actually happening, because of course unlike a group actually willing to make peace they won't compromise from that position. And yes, if they could, of course Hamas would love to kill all the Jews, or at least a lot of them, all of the ones not willing to live under Hamas' thumb.


What in the world are you talking about? The Arab-Israeli wars have been ongoing ever since 1948, or, perhaps, the 1930s. It is not just a thing that started in the last few years, it is a long-term continuum of war and hatred. This period includes the Vietnam War. Those numbers there are for the casualties in the Arab-Israeli wars, which means no, it doesn't include the Israel-Palestinian conflicts of the past two decades, since those have happened since the ending of the Arab-Israeli wars. But of course, the current conflict is just a running offshoot of the ones before it, as the Palestinians took up violence after the Arab states gave up on defeating Israel on the battlefield.


Deaths in war and deaths which may or may not have been caused by a blockade or occupations are very different things, though... the former are much easier to quantify than the latter, and it's always debatable about how many of that latter group should be counted, etc. I'm sure that there are very different figures presented by each side, for how many Palestinians could be considered to have died because of the insurrections of the last few decades...


No they wouldn't. Only a few hundred civilians dead? If this was an African country where it was happening in, it'd probably not even merit a single mention in the press, much less any kind of worldwide uproar... how much uproar civilian deaths cause depends entirely on who those people were and the circumstances of why it happened. A lot of that is unfortunate -- those African wars should get more attention than they have -- but in the case of Israel, as all of the protests show, they actually they get a quite disproportionate show of anger compared to the amount many other war dead today do.

Look at the poll in this link

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/pol...-more-strongly-than-democrats/article/2550855

"Among ideological groups, conservative Republicans sympathized with Israel over Palestinians by a 77-percent to 4-percent margin. In contrast, just 39 percent of liberal Democrats said they sympathized with Israel, compared with 21 percent who said they sympathized more with Palestinians."

Edit. Overall 73% of Republicans sympathize more with Israel, but only 44% of Democrats.

 

[Hitokage]

To make a crude comparison, I look at like attacking the Bush Administration when it was around. Much like Netanyahu, Bush was a right winger who made foreign policy fuckups and probably made us less safe in the long run, but saying his administration was wrong, misguided, or immoral wasn't the same thing as being Anti-American, despite Bush's party's efforts to claim it was, and other countries who didn't agree with it would have been right in saying they did not agree with "America's" position on such matters at the time.

I'm sure they'll find those WMDs in Gaza, though.

 

[dripdripsplash]

WATCH: Dozens of bodies strewn in the streets of Gaza City following bombardment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyZqqlQNZT4

Why we criticize Israel:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/israel-gaza_b_5591954.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

Seventeen members of a single family wiped out in a missile strike. A centre for disabled people bombed. Schools and mosques attacked. Operation Protective Edge has been a humanitarian disaster for the residents of Gaza. This, apparently, is how Israel defines "self-defence".

The experts disagree. The UN's top human rights official, Navi Pillay, has said the killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza raises "serious doubt... whether the Israeli strikes have been in accordance with international humanitarian law". Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have gone further, urging the hapless president, Mahmoud Abbas, to make the Palestinian Authority join the International Criminal Court and bring war crimes charges against Israel.

For its many supporters in the west, Israel is being unfairly singled out for criticism. As the country's former foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami angrily said to me in an interview for al-Jazeera English in 2013: "You are trying to turn Israel into a special case."

According to the likes of Ben-Ami, there are much more vile regimes, and more violent groups, elsewhere in the world. Why pick on plucky Israel? What about the Chinas, Russias, Syrias, Saudi Arabias, Irans, Sudans and Burmas? Where are the protests against Isis, Boko Haram or the Pakistani Taliban?

There are various possible responses to such attempts at deflection. First, does Israel really want to be held to the standards of the world's worst countries? Doesn't Israel claim to be a liberal democracy, the "only" one in the Middle East?

Second, isn't this "whataboutery" of the worst sort? David Cameron told those of us who opposed the Nato intervention in Libya in 2011: "The fact that you cannot do the right thing everywhere does not mean that you should not do the right thing somewhere." Well, quite. And the same surely applies to criticism of Israel - that we cannot, or do not, denounce every other human-rights-abusing regime on earth doesn't automatically mean we are therefore prohibited from speaking out against Israel's abuses in Gaza and the West Bank. (Nor, for that matter, does the presence of a small minority among the Jewish state's critics who are undoubtedly card-carrying anti-Semites.)

Trying to hide Israel's crimes against the Palestinians behind, say, Syria's barrel bombs, China's forced labour camps or Russia's persecution of gays won't wash. After all, on what grounds did we "single out" apartheid South Africa in the 1980s for condemnation and boycott? Weren't there other, more dictatorial regimes in Africa at the time, those run by black Africans such as Mengistu in Ethiopia or Mobutu in Zaire? Did we dare excuse the crimes of white Afrikaners on this basis?

Taking a moral stand inevitably requires us to be selective, specific and, yes, even inconsistent. "Some forms of injustice bother [people] more than others," wrote Peter Beinart, the author of The Crisis of Zionism, in December 2013. "The roots of this inconsistency may be irrational, even disturbing, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't act against the abuses they care about most."

Third, Israel is "singled out" today, but by its friends and not just by its enemies. It has been singled out for unparalleled support - financial, military, diplomatic - by the western powers. It is indeed, to quote Ben-Ami, a "special case".

Which other country is in receipt of $3billion a year in US aid, despite maintaining a 47-year military occupation in violation of international law? Which other country has been allowed to develop and stockpile nuclear weapons in secret?

Which other country's prime minister could "humiliate" - to quote the newspaper Ma'ariv - a sitting US vice-president on his visit to Israel in March 2010, yet still receive 29 standing ovations from Congress on his own visit to the US a year later? And which other country is the beneficiary of comically one-sided resolutions on Capitol Hill, in which members of Congress fall over each other to declare their undying love and support for Israel - by 410 to eight, or 352 to 21, or 390 to five?

Indeed, which other country has been protected from UN Security Council censure by the US deployment of an astonishing 42 vetoes? For the record, the number of US vetoes exercised at the UN on behalf of Israel is greater than the number of vetoes exercised by all other UN member states on all other issues put together. Singling out, anyone?

Fourth, the inconvenient truth is that we in the west can happily decry the likes of, say, Assad or Ayatollah Khamenei yet we can do little to influence their actual behaviour. Have sanctions stopped Assad's killing machine? Or Iran's nuclear programme? In contrast, we have plenty of leverage over Israel - from trade deals to arms sales to votes at the UN. Israel is our special friend, our close ally.

Yet when Israel started bombing Gaza this month, claiming it was acting in response to incoming rocket fire and was trying to kill Hamas operatives, Cameron merely "reiterated the UK's staunch support for Israel" and "underlined Israel's right to defend itself". And the hundreds of Palestinian dead? Didn't they have a right to self- defence? There was not a word from our PM. This, ultimately, is the fundamental difference when it comes to comparing Israel's abuses with those of other "rogue" nations. We single out Israel because, shamefully, we are complicit in its crimes.

Mass graves of '48 discovered:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...l-palestine-1948_n_3385011.html#slide=2530440

The bodies of about 200 Palestinians have been found in mass graves in Jaffa, Israel. AFP reports that an official at a Muslim cemetery in the coastal town announced the discovery of six secret tombs on Friday after workers stumbled upon the remains while conducting renovations.

"We discovered mass graves forgotten by time inside the al-Kazkhana cemetery," Abdul Majid Eghbariyeh, head of religious affairs at the al-Aqsa Association for Religious Endowment and Heritage, told Lebanese daily as-Safir, according to a translation by al-Monitor. "The presence of these graves might have been known by some of Jaffa’s elderly residents, but their true stories remain a mystery. Today, fate led us to discover them anew so that their real stories may be told."

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Since you asked nicely I'll give extra effort on why I think this article is wrong in its articulation.

Currently at work but just wanted to let you know I sincerely appreciate the level headed, detailed and informative reply. I'll catch up with the discussion again later this evening. In the mean time, you've helped answer some of the lingering questions about the unique nature of this conflict that have been troubling me, as well as given me food for thought and further discussion.

 

[LNBL]

Perhaps the "only X amount killed" is becoming part of the script. It's not the first time this rather sick attempt to directly legitimise the killing of civilians and thereby devalue their lives down to complete expandability has been used.

It's disgusting. Indeed it had not been the first time. I was watching a video of a little kid being rushed into the hospital and to then come to this thread and read that post is infuriating. It lacks any sense of respect towards to the people that died and the people they leave behind.

 

[Buzzati]

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Israel knows their crimes will go unchecked. Each veto has paved the way to this point.

 

[RustyNails]

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Like someone mentioned in the Ukraine plane crash thread, UN is the best worst solution we have. Even though it is useless in situations like these, it does play the role of watchdog well in other times, such as pointing out Israel's violations.

 

[jakonovski]

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Israel knows their crimes will go unchecked. Each veto has paved the way to this point.

How do you replace the UN when it is comprised of the nations of this world? It is what the world is.

 

[Alucrid]

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Israel knows their crimes will go unchecked. Each veto has paved the way to this point.

The UN has more functions than just settling conflicts.

 

[sindbadthesailor]

Kerry caught on open mic

Secretary of State John Kerry was caught on an open mic just before his interview with “Fox News Sunday” candidly speaking about the conflict in Gaza.

“It’s a hell of a pinpoint operation, it’s a hell of a pinpoint operation,” Kerry said to an aide on the phone, with some measure of frustration.

His comments seemed to be criticizing the Israeli government’s assurances about the limited scope of its attack and ground invasion of Gaza.

 

[sindbadthesailor]

Rich Lowry: Boys killed on Gaza beach should have gotten out of the way of Israeli explosion

National Review Editor Rich Lowry asserted over the weekend that Israelis were not at fault for the deaths of four boys who were killed while playing on a Gaza beach last week because Hamas should have told them to move out of the way.

Israelis gather on hillsides to watch and cheer as military drops bombs on Gaza

People drink, snack and pose for selfies against a background of explosions as Palestinian death toll mounts in ongoing offensive

As the sun begins to sink over the Mediterranean, groups of Israelis gather each evening on hilltops close to the Gaza border to cheer, whoop and whistle as bombs rain down on people in a warzone hell a few miles away.

Old sofas, garden chairs, battered car seats and upturned crates provide seating for the spectators. On one hilltop, a swing has been attached to the branches of a pine tree, allowing its occupant to sway gently in the breeze. Some bring bottles of beer or soft drinks and snacks.

On Saturday, a group of men huddle around a shisha pipe. Nearly all hold up smartphones to record the explosions or to pose grinning, perhaps with thumbs up, for selfies against a backdrop of black smoke.

Despite reports that millions of Israelis are living in terror of Hamas rockets, they don't deter these hilltop war watchers whose proximity to Gaza puts them within range of the most rudimentary missiles. Some bring their children.

The thud of shellfire, flash of an explosion and pall of smoke are greeted with exclamations of approval. "What a beauty," says one appreciative spectator.

Shimrit Peretz, 19, has come with her off-duty soldier boyfriend, Raz Sason, whose army-issue assault rifle is slung across his shoulders. "We come to look at the bombing," Peretz says, adding that this is their fourth visit to the hilltop. They plan to stay several hours: "It's interesting." The pair have brought a backpack filled with bottles of water and bags of crisps.

Peretz says that she doesn't worry about the Palestinian civilians caught in the bombing; Sason disagrees. Despite his concern for the innocents caught in the assault, the young conscript soldier wished he was with his comrades across the border in Gaza. "I'd like to be going in, to help my country and help the soldiers inside," he said.

On another nearby hilltop, an ugly scene develops as a group of Israeli men threaten a photographer, accusing him of being a "leftist". We are warned against asking for interviews, as another cheer goes up.

 

[Real Hero]

'Israelis were not at fault for the deaths of four boys who were killed while playing on a Gaza beach last week because Hamas should have told them to move out of the way.'

Jesus fucking Christ. This is INSANE

 

[Father_Brain]

Those kids' connection to the Hamas hivemind must have malfunctioned.

 

[Banglish]

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Israel knows their crimes will go unchecked. Each veto has paved the way to this point.

The UN is a farce, a bureaucracy to facilitate those already in power.

 

[ivysaur12]

Rich Lowry: Boys killed on Gaza beach should have gotten out of the way of Israeli explosion

I don't understand how this is a thing a human could write.

 

[RedShift]

Finding the BBC's reporting of this bizarre.

Their web story is putting way more emphasis on the 13 Israeli soldier deaths and then mentioning the 80+ Palestinian civilian deaths sort of as an afterthought. It's crazy.

 

[Aaron]

Finding the BBC's reporting of this bizarre.

Their web story is putting way more emphasis on the 13 Israeli soldier deaths and then mentioning the 80+ Palestinian civilian deaths sort of as an afterthought. It's crazy.

Why? It's consistent with their reporting of this conflict.

 

[Real Hero]

Tony Benn had it right about the BBC on this issue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E21MdXe3BOQ

 

[ironcreed]

Rich Lowry: Boys killed on Gaza beach should have gotten out of the way of Israeli explosion



Israelis gather on hillsides to watch and cheer as military drops bombs on Gaza

Sometimes it makes me sad to be human. As I cannot believe humans can be so cold.

 

[m_shortpants]

60+ killed in Shujaeya? Is that right?

 

[LNBL]

Heard on TV that Hamas has captured 1 Israeli Soldier in the fighting. This must not have been in Netanyahu's plan, wonder what he will do.

 

[Linkhero1]

60+ killed in Shujaeya? Is that right?

According to AJ, yes.

http://live.aljazeera.com/Event/Gaza_Blog/122132991

 

[LNBL]

Sophia Jones of the huffingtonpost is tweeting troughout the whole day, in case someone wants to follow her. She just got accused of tweeting under threaths of Hamas..

 

[Linkhero1]

Sophia Jones of the huffingtonpost is tweeting troughout the whole day, in case someone wants to follow her. She just got accused of tweeting under threaths of Hamas..

After the flack that celebrities were getting, I'm not really surprised.

 

[LNBL]

Peaceful demonstration in Amsterdam today for Gaza, 3000 to 4000 people were attending.

 

[Linkhero1]

"Electricity has been cut in all of the neighbourhoods east of Gaza city."

http://live.aljazeera.com/Event/Gaza_Blog

 

[Omiee]

im not the agressive type, never been in a fight to be honest. reading shit like this though....

 

[A Black Falcon]

Finding the BBC's reporting of this bizarre.

Their web story is putting way more emphasis on the 13 Israeli soldier deaths and then mentioning the 80+ Palestinian civilian deaths sort of as an afterthought. It's crazy.

Pay attention to the context of that they died because Hamas refused to allow them to leave and was using them as human shields and you might understand why the Israeli soldiers' deaths, trying to stop Hamas, are more important...

Rich Lowry: Boys killed on Gaza beach should have gotten out of the way of Israeli explosion

If there were any Hamas people around (and this is unknown, so it'd be complete speculation) why would they do anything? Civilian deaths do a great job of getting people like you angry at Israel, and Hamas knows it!

Israelis gather on hillsides to watch and cheer as military drops bombs on Gaza

That is in somewhat bad taste, but you certainly must understand why people would be happy that terrorists attacking their nation and killing their people are being stopped. That's human nature.

The UN needs to be replaced. It is a beacon of impotence and should stand as a hindsight example of how to construct a powerless international community for better nations in a better world.

If they can't ameliorate this situation, what is its purpose?

Israel knows their crimes will go unchecked. Each veto has paved the way to this point.

Nobody in the international community is on Hamas's side in this one except for you people here. Not even one Arab state has spoken up this time, because they know how bad the threat from radical Islamist groups like Hamas is. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/w...ab-nations-amid-offensive.html?ref=middleeast

60+ killed in Shujaeya? Is that right?

Israel warned the people of the town to leave, but Hamas refused to let them go and kept them as human shields. They also set up a large number of landmines, so when the Israeli troops came in they set them off and killed 13 soldiers. 60 civilians also died in the fighting, but that would not have happened if Hamas had not forced them into harms' way as human shields. The area, Shejaiya, was a major Hamas area of operations -- apparently 8% of the rockets fired from Israel came from there, and they found ten tunnels to Israel after taking the district as well. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/world/middleeast/gaza-israel.html?ref=middleeast

What are you supposed to do in a case like this? Just ignore a major terrorist stronghold because they are holding human shield prisoners, and let them keep shooting rockets and infiltrating terrorists through those tunnels like the ones that killed two soldiers a few days ago? It's a horrible choice, but it's Hamas that forced it on Israel.

 

[Jagernaut]

Pay attention to the context of that they died because Hamas refused to allow them to leave and was using them as human shields and you might understand why the Israeli soldiers' deaths, trying to stop Hamas, are more important...


If there were any Hamas people around (and this is unknown, so it'd be complete speculation) why would they do anything? Civilian deaths do a great job of getting people like you angry at Israel, and Hamas knows it!


That is in somewhat bad taste, but you certainly must understand why people would be happy that terrorists attacking their nation and killing their people are being stopped. That's human nature.


Nobody in the international community is on Hamas's side in this one except for you people here. Not even one Arab state has spoken up this time, because they know how bad the threat from radical Islamist groups like Hamas is. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/w...ab-nations-amid-offensive.html?ref=middleeast


Israel warned the people of the town to leave, but Hamas refused to let them go and kept them as human shields. They also set up a large number of landmines, so when the Israeli troops came in they set them off and killed 13 soldiers. 60 civilians also died in the fighting, but that would not have happened if Hamas had not forced them into harms' way as human shields. The area, Shejaiya, was a major Hamas area of operations -- apparently 8% of the rockets fired from Israel came from there, and they found ten tunnels to Israel after taking the district as well. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/world/middleeast/gaza-israel.html?ref=middleeast

What are you supposed to do in a case like this? Just ignore a major terrorist stronghold because they are holding human shield prisoners, and let them keep shooting rockets and infiltrating terrorists through those tunnels like the ones that killed two soldiers a few days ago? It's a horrible choice, but it's Hamas that forced it on Israel.

Did you read my earlier response to you? About the poll that shows Democrats and Republicans do not have the same level of support for Israel.

 

[dripdripsplash]

Pay attention to the context of that they died because Hamas refused to allow them to leave and was using them as human shields and you might understand why the Israeli soldiers' deaths, trying to stop Hamas, are more important...


If there were any Hamas people around (and this is unknown, so it'd be complete speculation) why would they do anything? Civilian deaths do a great job of getting people like you angry at Israel, and Hamas knows it!


That is in somewhat bad taste, but you certainly must understand why people would be happy that terrorists attacking their nation and killing their people are being stopped. That's human nature.


Nobody in the international community is on Hamas's side in this one except for you people here. Not even one Arab state has spoken up this time, because they know how bad the threat from radical Islamist groups like Hamas is. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/w...ab-nations-amid-offensive.html?ref=middleeast


Israel warned the people of the town to leave, but Hamas refused to let them go and kept them as human shields. They also set up a large number of landmines, so when the Israeli troops came in they set them off and killed 13 soldiers. 60 civilians also died in the fighting, but that would not have happened if Hamas had not forced them into harms' way as human shields. The area, Shejaiya, was a major Hamas area of operations -- apparently 8% of the rockets fired from Israel came from there, and they found ten tunnels to Israel after taking the district as well. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/world/middleeast/gaza-israel.html?ref=middleeast

What are you supposed to do in a case like this? Just ignore a major terrorist stronghold because they are holding human shield prisoners, and let them keep shooting rockets and infiltrating terrorists through those tunnels like the ones that killed two soldiers a few days ago? It's a horrible choice, but it's Hamas that forced it on Israel.

Do you have any trustworthy sources for this ? I think it's quite ludicrous of Israel-supporters parroting the IDF narrative of human shields every single time a civilian dies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/world/middleeast/gaza-israel.html?ref=middleeast

As the family dashed through the streets to avoid crashing shells, Ms. Harazin, said, she saw the decapitated body of a boy who looked about 4, and a wounded woman in a black abaya nearby, both lying on the sidewalk. An ambulance came and took them both away.

“We are not Hamas, and we are not with the others,” Ms. Harazin said. “We just want to live in our homes. The people are not Hamas. Israel has a problem with Hamas. What’s the fault of the other people? We have nothing to do with it.”

Asked what she thought of Hamas’s handling of the current war, she said, “Sometimes it’s difficult to express your opinion.”

She primarily faulted Israel, saying, “They are shelling houses, people indiscriminately.” But she said that when it comes to Hamas’s actions, “If you say any word, it’s held against you.” She said her husband had been beaten for complaining about Hamas.

Does she sound like a person who would stand as human shields volunterily as the IDF claims people do.

EDIT: And I can't seriously believe you are defending the cheering of people on hills overlooking Gaza as bombs hit the ground. Shame on you. 'Terrorists who want to kill your family', sure I'd be lying if I said I didn't get your point, but when the fact of the matter is that %60+ of the casualties are civilians then I get my doubts on what people really are cheering for.

EDIT: Off-Topic: Does anyone have any links for updated casualty lists for both sides ?

 

[A Black Falcon]

Do you have any trustworthy sources for this ? I think it's quite ludicrous of Israel-supporters parroting the IDF narrative of human shields every single time a civilian dies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/world/middleeast/gaza-israel.html?ref=middleeast

RIght, right, because it comes from the IDF of course it's all lies, huh? Disgusting. They attacked the district because they knew they would find what they did -- a place lots of rockets had launched from. Then they also found many tunnels there. That Hamas held so many civilians essentially hostage shows the area's importance -- they probably wouldn't do that just anywhere.

Maybe you hate Israel too much to realize this, but they don't just attack civilian neighborhoods at random. They attacked this one because of all the rocket fire and militants that were known to be there, and the likelihood that it would have tunnels as well. And indeed, it had a lot of all three.

Does she sound like a person who would stand as human shields volunterily as the IDF claims people do.

Maybe you weren't paying attention, but I never said that these were all voluntary human shields -- apparently they were not. As I said Hamas seems to have not allowed the civilians there to leave after Israel warned people to leave the district. In fact Israel warned people to leave that area for three days before the attack, the article says, but Hamas didn't allow it. That's involuntary hostage-taking by Hamas in order to try to keep the Israeli military from attacking or at least to get them to kill more civilians along the way, not voluntary human shields there by choice. Hamas is beyond reprehensible.

Also, that "sometimes it is difficult to express your opinion" quote is a reference to the retaliation Hamas does against any Gazans who question them. The article I linked makes this clear. If you challenge Hamas, say anything other than 'it's all Israel's fault'... they'll beat you up, at minimum, as they did to her husband, as per that article:

She said her husband had been beaten for complaining about Hamas.

The part about "we thought the evacuation order was only for another part of the neighborhood" is a likely lie, made so as to not anger Hamas further.

EDIT: And I can't seriously believe you are defending the cheering of people on hills overlooking Gaza as bombs hit the ground. Shame on you. 'Terrorists who want to kill your family', sure I'd be lying if I said I didn't get your point, but when the fact of the matter is that %60+ of the casualties are civilians then I get my doubts on what people really are cheering for.

So you get my point, but attack me anyway based on no actual point. I'm sure most of those people are happy about the rockets that hit Hamas, and not so much the ones that hit civilians, though again, with how Hamas uses human shields and hides their weapons in civilian locations, separating the two is near-impossible.
Why quote the whole post only to reply to just the first line? Anyway, the actual poll is here, linked from that article: http://www.people-press.org/2014/07...artisan-gap-in-israel-palestinian-sympathies/ Interesting, so there is a partisan gap. Still, American public opinion is very strongly in favor of Israel -- every single category breakdown in the poll results (shown in the table on the side) is at least 2:1 in favor of Israel over the Palestinians. So yeah, you're right, there is a gap... but even the youngest liberal Democrats support Israel over the Palestinians about 2 to 1 or more, with a significant percentage taking neither side -- for liberal Democrats it's 39% Israel, 21% Palestinians, 6% Both, and 17% Neither. I think it's a pretty safe guess that these are different numbers from what you'd see in Europe, with much stronger support for Israel among liberals here than there. Also of course, moderate or conservative Democrats are more pro-Israel -- 48% Israel, 16% Palestinians, 1% Both, 15% Neither. Of course the numbers get even more one-sided the more conservative you get.

Once you get to elected members of congress, though, all of the Democrats support Israel, as do all of the Republicans.

 

[EightBitNate]

Does anyone know of any good, unbiased documentaries about the conflict?

 

[Zen]

Are you conflating blockades with military actions? Because the two things are entirely different. Israel does what it can to only punish those who are guilty, and not collectively punish everyone, in these wars in Gaza. The relatively few civilian casualties are accidents.

As for blockades, of course the blockade hurts everybody, but still it is targeted at Hamas, and the things restricted all have potential military uses. As you can see from Hamas's financial troubles, the blockade is having success, particularly now that Egypt is unfriendly.

Collective Punishment
In 2011 a panel was set up by the UN with the intent of determining if the blockade of Palestine is collective punishment, the panel was comprised of 5 human rights experts appointed by the UN whom came unanimously to the conclusion it IS collective punishment. Collective Punishment is Illegal under international law


"Relatively Few" Civilian casualties in Gaza:
Up to 80% of fatalities in Israel’s bombing of Gaza are civilians – UN

Israel does what it can to only punish the guilty
Israel Deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish ... There were numerous instances of deliberate attacks on civilians and civilian objects
~ United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict The GoldStone Report
The Gold Stone Report
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2009/09/15/UNFFMGCReport.pdf

Israel will call anyone a human shield and outright stated that they are not responsible for the deaths of any journalists if you so much as happen to be in the general vicinity of what might be a hamas agent. In fact they announced this shortly before indiscriminately shelling Gaza's eastern Shejaiya district, with journalists and emts caught in the middle of it.

Israels uses to this day their own developed DIME bombs in Gaza

DIME munitions were developed by the US Air Force in 2006 and have since been tested repeatedly on the people of Gaza, who have long served as involuntary lab rats for Israel’s weapons industry.

DIME bombs contain tungsten, a cancer-causing metal that helps to produce incredibly destructive blasts which slice through flesh and bone, often decapitating the lower limbs of people within the blast radius.

http://mirelamonte.tumblr.com/post/91991843448/doctors-spooked-by-israels-mystery-weapon

Israel using illegal poisonous gas over large areas

MoH: Palestinians arrive at hosp after inhaling poisonous white gas used by IOF in north Gaza+Rafah #GazaUnderAttack pic.twitter.com/q86XL7H8nZ

http://mashable.com/2014/07/18/journalists-form-gaza-idf-israel/

Account of an Ambulance under IDF sniper fire

Things restricted to potential military use
Which is potentially everything as Israel has interpreted time and time again. Hamas aids in this but there are countless examples of Israel not caring about collateral damage. Hamas is awful in their own right, but as I put it to you earlier, an organization like hamas not metastasizing under the circumstances is unlikely.

I am sorry but we have seen time and time again that the IDF does not do its best to limit casualties, and at its best you could argue that there is a prevalent strain within the IDF that does not give a damn. There are plenty of anecdotal examples as well, such as the accounts of the people on flotilla

Israeli officials claimed that the IDF commandos who killed and wounded dozens of activists on a humanitarian aid convoy bound for Gaza this week faced a potentially lethal attack, and opened fire in self-defense. Eyewitnesses on board tell a different story, saying the special forces troops fired on the ships before boarding, weren't in fact attacked and were unrestrained in their hostility. The question of who attacked whom is irrelevant, however, according to experts in international law. The blockade itself is illegal, and therefore Israel had no right to board those ships in the first place. It renders the argument over culpability moot. Israel committed an illegal act of war attacking the convoy, regardless of who tried to draw "first blood."

Takes a statement about the percentage of civilian casualties in Palestine and compares performs intellectually dishonest whataboutism, comparing it to total civilian casualties in a much larger conflict

Nice obstrificating, but it does not change the facts. The facts paint a very clear picture, one you do not want to accept, and that picture is not one of Israel as you say ~doing its best~ to limit civilian casualties. I find it deplorable that you would have the nerve to make such an argument. For your sake I hope that you are merely ignorant. I wonder if you will answer, or if you will run away like last time and try to change the narrative by responding to concepts that you feel are more potentially defensible.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=121701652&postcount=3461

 

[dripdripsplash]

My responses are bolded in your post.

RIght, right, because it comes from the IDF of course it's all lies, huh? Disgusting. They attacked the district because they knew they would find what they did -- a place lots of rockets had launched from. Then they also found many tunnels there. That Hamas held so many civilians essentially hostage shows the area's importance -- they probably wouldn't do that just anywhere.

No, IDF sources are not as trustworthy as a third party independent source. I say the same thing to Hamas sources. They are opponents in the conflict and will turn each possible story to their advantage. You're still more than welcome to come with sources for your assertions.

Maybe you hate Israel too much to realize this, but they don't just attack civilian neighborhoods at random. They attacked this one because of all the rocket fire and militants that were known to be there, and the likelihood that it would have tunnels as well. And indeed, it had a lot of all three.


Maybe you weren't paying attention, but I never said that these were all voluntary human shields -- apparently they were not. As I said Hamas seems to have not allowed the civilians there to leave after Israel warned people to leave the district. In fact Israel warned people to leave that area for three days before the attack, the article says, but Hamas didn't allow it. That's involuntary hostage-taking by Hamas in order to try to keep the Israeli military from attacking or at least to get them to kill more civilians along the way, not voluntary human shields there by choice. Hamas is beyond reprehensible.

Sources my good man, sources. I can't take a word of you seriously, if you just keep parroting an IDF narrative. You sound like a PR representative.


Also, that "sometimes it is difficult to express your opinion" quote is a reference to the retaliation Hamas does against any Gazans who question them. The article I linked makes this clear. If you challenge Hamas, say anything other than 'it's all Israel's fault'... they'll beat you up, at minimum, as they did to her husband, as per that article:



The part about "we thought the evacuation order was only for another part of the neighborhood" is a likely lie, made so as to not anger Hamas further.

Another assertion. Do you always try to change things to fit your own narrative ?


So you get my point, but attack me anyway based on no actual point. I'm sure most of those people are happy about the rockets that hit Hamas, and not so much the ones that hit civilians, though again, with how Hamas uses human shields and hides their weapons in civilian locations, separating the two is near-impossible.

Why quote the whole post only to reply to just the first line?

Anyway, the actual poll is here, linked from that article: http://www.people-press.org/2014/07...artisan-gap-in-israel-palestinian-sympathies/ Interesting, so there is a partisan gap. Still, American public opinion is very strongly in favor of Israel -- every single category breakdown in the poll results (shown in the table on the side) is at least 2:1 in favor of Israel over the Palestinians. So yeah, you're right, there is a gap... but even the youngest liberal Democrats support Israel over the Palestinians about 2 to 1 or more, with a significant percentage taking neither side -- for liberal Democrats it's 39% Israel, 21% Palestinians, 6% Both, and 17% Neither. I think it's a pretty safe guess that these are different numbers from what you'd see in Europe, with much stronger support for Israel among liberals here than there. Also of course, moderate or conservative Democrats are more pro-Israel -- 48% Israel, 16% Palestinians, 1% Both, 15% Neither. Of course the numbers get even more one-sided the more conservative you get.

Once you get to elected members of congress, though, all of the Democrats support Israel, as do all of the Republicans.

Stands to show the power of the Israeli lobby. Quite a sad thing to see all these politicians taking a bow to foreign interests in their own political system.

And since you dislike the notion of sources for your assertions I will instead provide some for you. You might not like what you're about to read, and I do have my suspicion that these sources and organizations have anti-semitic tendencies so be carefull.

http://goo.gl/Z6QVpm

Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch (16. juli, 2014):

"Israel&#8217;s rhetoric is all about precision attacks but attacks with no military target and many civilian deaths can hardly be considered precise [...] Recent documented cases in Gaza sadly fit Israel&#8217;s long record of unlawful airstrikes with high civilian casualties."

"The presence of a single, low-level fighter would hardly justify the appalling obliteration of an entire family [...] Israel would never accept an argument that any Israeli home of an Israel Defense Force member would be a valid military target."

"Warning families to flee might reduce civilian casualties but they don&#8217;t make illegal attacks any less illegal [...] The Israeli failure to demonstrate why attacks that are killing civilians are lawful raises serious questions as to whether these attacks are intended to target civilians or wantonly destroy civilian property."

"The longstanding failure of either side to prosecute war crimes in Gaza means that the only meaningful option for justice and accountability is legal proceedings before the International Criminal Court [...] How many more civilians will die as a result of unlawful Israeli attacks before President Abbas submits Palestine to this court?"

http://goo.gl/yCbCqi

Philip Luther, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Amnesty International (11. juli 2014):

"Unless the Israeli authorities can provide specific information to show how a home is being used to make an effective contribution to military actions, deliberately attacking civilian homes constitutes a war crime and also amounts to collective punishment against the families"

"There is no way that firing a missile at a civilian home can constitute an effective &#8216;warning&#8217;. Amnesty International has documented cases of civilians killed or injured by such missiles in previous Israeli military operations on the Gaza Strip"

 

[Zen]

Maybe you weren't paying attention, but I never said that these were all voluntary human shields -- apparently they were not. As I said Hamas seems to have not allowed the civilians there to leave after Israel warned people to leave the district. In fact Israel warned people to leave that area for three days before the attack, the article says, but Hamas didn't allow it. That's involuntary hostage-taking by Hamas in order to try to keep the Israeli military from attacking or at least to get them to kill more civilians along the way, not voluntary human shields there by choice. Hamas is beyond reprehensible.

I too think Hamas is pretty shit, and while the current situation is not clear, following the last go around there was an extensive record from human rights organizations that all unanimously agreed: There was no proof of, or Hamas did not use, Human Shielding.

One of the reports, i suggest you read

Amnesty international: 22 days of Death and Destruction: There is no evidence that Hamas engaged in Human shielding.
http://www.icawc.net/fonds/02_07_09_gaza_report.pdf

And recently

Human Rights Watch, on Israel’s Conduct

After conducting an investigation, Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued a report on Wednesday accusing Israel of carrying out “unlawful” strikes in Gaza, ones that “either did not attack a legitimate military target or attacked despite the likelihood of civilian casualties being disproportionate to the military gain.” It noted that “Such attacks committed deliberately or recklessly constitute war crimes.” HRW Middle East Director Sarah Leah Whitson also added that Israel’s actions raise “serious questions as to whether these attacks are intended to target civilians or wantonly destroy civilian property.”

http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/07/15/israelpalestine-unlawful-israeli-airstrikes-kill-civilians

 

[Xun]

Finding the BBC's reporting of this bizarre.

Their web story is putting way more emphasis on the 13 Israeli soldier deaths and then mentioning the 80+ Palestinian civilian deaths sort of as an afterthought. It's crazy.

The BBC's online editor is a guy called Raffi Berg, who is (unsurprisingly) incredibly pro-Israel.

http://occupiedpalestine.wordpress....colleagues-to-downplay-israels-siege-of-gaza/

Tony Benn had it right about the BBC on this issue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E21MdXe3BOQ

Very well said.

 

[Zaph]

The BBC's online editor is a guy called Raffi Berg, who is (unsurprisingly) incredibly pro-Israel.

http://occupiedpalestine.wordpress....colleagues-to-downplay-israels-siege-of-gaza/

Very well said.

Can't speak to the accuracy of that article (it's obviously bias) but you know something is not right when the BBC app sends a breaking news alert for the 13 killed soldiers but not a single one about civilian deaths in Shaja'ia.

 

[RustyNails]

Wow massive crowds came out to protest in Chicago. My feed is full of it.

Edit: Holy shit, google Kashmir gaza protests. They have us all beat.

 

[Zen]

Wow massive crowds came out to protest in Chicago. My feed is full of it.

Edit: Holy shit, google Kashmir gaza protests. They have us all beat.

Nice to see the world waking up to the full picture of the conflict.

 

[irfaanator]

Wow massive crowds came out to protest in Chicago. My feed is full of it.

Edit: Holy shit, google Kashmir gaza protests. They have us all beat.

It's probably because they've been going through the same situation due to Indian occupation from the late 40s. Parents are from there and I've been there multiple times, and while I don't support the notion of killing civilians on either side. I can see why this came about

 

[dripdripsplash]

https://www.facebook.com/bilal.elfout/posts/10152155328270633

Pictures from yesterdays protest in Denmark.

 

[Dominican Power]

Is Hamas controlling the media? CNN has no shame.

 

[Toxi]

Is Hamas controlling the media? CNN has no shame.

Poe's Law strikes again.

 

[Dominican Power]

Poe's Law strikes again.

It's one of their segments.

 

[RustyNails]

Is Hamas controlling the media? CNN has no shame.

What makes you say that?

 

[DTKT]

I understand that this is an impossible issue to actually fully grasp, but is there a list of 5-10 best books/editorials/papers that present an "objective" (as much as someone can be on this situation) about the Israel/Palestine conflict?

 

[Toxi]

It's one of their segments.

...Wow.

What makes you say that?

I think what Dominican Power is saying is that one of CNN's segments was titled "Is Hamas controlling the media?"