| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: "The goal is to topple Hamas" Posted by: Perm Dude - [3111212919] Mon, Dec 29, 2008, 20:35 No end in sight as bombings continue in Gaza What a mess. But when the stated goal of Israel is to militarily topple the democratically elected party controlling the PNA, this is really going to be ugly. Before you all go "tree" on me, let me state that Hamas, while not as corrupt as Fatah, is a belligerant organization who has passed up several chances at peace, IMO. But the nature of a messy Middle East is that no one has clean hands. I was somewhat heartened last February when Hamas seemed interested in a "10 year truce" with Israel, but the sticking points there were the state of Jerusalem, the Israeli settlements, and the Palestinian "right of return." | |||||||
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] | ||||||||
| 125 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 13:48 | Weycool, but don't you see you made said it all right there The police in this case is the government and have hundreds of ways to effectively deal with gang members that dont include mortars. And that was what i was trying to get at. Attacking Hamas with mortars makes about as much sense as fighting gangs with mortars. Maybe gangs and elected governments are not the same, but i bet you would find that many of the same tactics gangs use to control there turf are employed by Hamas to get elected. | ||||||
| 126 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 14:17 |
Attacking Hamas with mortars makes about as much sense as fighting gangs with mortars. Maybe gangs and elected governments are not the same, but i bet you would find that many of the same tactics gangs use to control there turf are employed by Hamas to get elected. maybe so. maybe not. but totally unrelated. one, as you said, are gangs. the other, is A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT SPONSORING TERRORIST ATTACKS AGAINST ANOTHER NATION. | ||||||
| 127 | Boldwin ID: 5704850 Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 16:50 |
Nerveclinic #118 1) I did not imagine child homicide bombers 2) or their parents celebrating after the fact 3) or their community celebrating after the fact 4) nor did I imagine the deliberate use of small children as combatants in organized infantadas If Dubai is less inclined to see their small children as suicide bombers and target practice at the front, good for them. | ||||||
| 128 | nerveclinic ID: 26107108 Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 17:42 |
If Dubai is less inclined to see their small children as suicide bombers and target practice at the front, good for them. YA know it's really weird Baldwin, it's almost, (I don't want to get carried away but) almost like they are human, I swear. I know that's hard to believe but I watch them walk around and I think, jeez, they are almost human. I'm sure you'd be shocked. | ||||||
| 129 | Boldwin ID: 5704850 Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 22:23 | But palestinians celebrating successfully turning their kids [and a dozen innocent bystanders] into hamburger in some sub shop in Jerusalem doesn't shock you. | ||||||
| 130 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 09:36 |
Hezbollah denies firing rockets on Israel mmmhmmmm.... | ||||||
| 131 | Boldwin ID: 5704850 Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 10:14 | almost like they are human | ||||||
| 132 | Boxman ID: 337352111 Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 11:09 |
mmmhmmmm.... Elaborate? | ||||||
| 133 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 12:09 | as in "suuuuuuuuuuuure, Hezbollah knows nothing about it..." | ||||||
| 134 | Perm Dude ID: 59022923 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 00:48 |
The 1937 plan (accepted by the Jews but rejected by the Palestinians). Take a look at what must now look like a mythic land for Palestinians. Palestinians have been getting let down by their leaders for many decades. | ||||||
| 135 | Mith ID: 148402816 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 07:48 |
Let down? For what reason would the Arabs in Palestine have wanted to just hand over 1/5 of their territory in 1937, in the middle of the Arab revolt? It is worth noting however that the story began well before 1948. Everyone seems to like to pick a different starting point to explain the origin of the conflict. | ||||||
| 136 | Perm Dude ID: 59022923 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 08:46 |
What are you talking about? "Just hand over" (wtf?). I think you are substituting someone else's argument for mine. And before you go and look it up, do you even known what the Peel Plan was, and how it come about? This is a long and convoluted plan. And since 1937 (not 1948--I never mentioned 1948) the area Palestinians have been able to claim (as a result of negotiations directly, on their behalf, or through other means) have gotten smaller and smaller. | ||||||
| 137 | WiddleAvi ID: 361157177 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 09:20 |
link Meanwhile, Syria-based Palestinian militant groups including Hamas on Saturday rejected deploying international observers or troops in Gaza. A statement issued by the groups after a meeting attended by Hamas political leader Khaled Mashaal also rejected any security arrangement that "infringes on the right of resistance against Israeli occupation." | ||||||
| 138 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 16:21 |
Hamas chief says no chance of deal with Israel A top Hamas leader says the Gaza war has killed the last chance for settlement and negotiations with Israel. Damascus-based Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal condemned Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip as a "holocaust" in a fiery speech broadcast on the Arabic news channel Al-Jazeera... ...Mashaal also called for an end to Israeli attacks, the removal of its forces from Gaza, and a lifting of the Gaza blockade. BUT WE WILL NOT NEGOTIATE!!! i like that. Hamas wants to make demands, but not work on a deal. cute. | ||||||
| 139 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 37838313 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 17:34 |
i like that. Hamas wants to make demands, but not work on a deal. cute. Isn't that exactly what Israel is doing? They have said there aren't interested in any ceasefire and will not let up until their objectives are met: crushing Hamas' ability to launch rockets. That's not moral relativism mind you, just pointing out that Israel is guilty of precisely the same thing you take exception to on Hamas' part. | ||||||
| 140 | WiddleAvi ID: 361157177 Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 17:42 | MITH - Is Hamas willing to give up rocket attacks in exchange for Israel leaving gaza ? Does not seem like it. Israel has said their goal is to end rocket attacks. Meaning if Hamas says they will cease launching rockets Israel will leave. | ||||||
| 141 | Boldwin ID: 34044918 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 00:23 |
Mith If someone is outside my house throwing a steady stream of molotov cocktails at my house, I reserve the right to attack him and take every last bottle and anyone who isn't planning to assist with that can just butt out. Isreal may have a non-negotiable demand, 'stop all rocket firing at us' and the palestinians have a non-negotiable demand, 'we won't stop killing jews until they are all driven into the sea'. Those are both non-negotiable, but they are not morally equivalent as you are in fact claiming. | ||||||
| 142 | nerveclinic ID: 26107108 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 01:35 |
Widdle MITH - Is Hamas willing to give up rocket attacks in exchange for Israel leaving gaza ? Does not seem like it. Israel has said their goal is to end rocket attacks. Meaning if Hamas says they will cease launching rockets Israel will leave. Is Israel willing to end the nearly year long blockade of food, medicine and energy into Gaza? If they had never started this during the cease fire Hamas may not have launched the rockets after the cease fire ended. Everyone who supports Israel only wants to mention one side of the equation. I am not supporting Hamas but you can't discuss rockets or Baldwins Molotov cocktails in a vacuum. | ||||||
| 143 | nerveclinic ID: 26107108 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 01:41 |
Baldwin If someone is outside my house throwing a steady stream of molotov cocktails at my house, I reserve the right to attack him and take every last bottle and anyone who isn't planning to assist with that can just butt out. If you surrounded someones house, didn't allow any food in, shut off their energy 12 hours a day, when they got sick refused to allow a doctor and medicine in...would they have a right to take action to feed and care for their family? You must only have one eye because you seem to be able to only see one side of the story. | ||||||
| 144 | Mith ID: 148402816 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:26 |
Post 136 And before you go and look it up, do you even known what the Peel Plan was, and how it come about? I did have to refresh myself but after reading through the Peel Mandate I fail to see what point that makes in response to my post. That the Palestinians were all just fcuked anyway and might as well have just ceded a big hunk of their ancestral territory which had been promised to them as a reward for siding with the Allies in WW1? And that they should have done this because they should have known that the Jews, who were immigrating to Palestine in droves, would receive statehood and the authority to offer citizenship to every last Jewish man and woman on the planet anyway after the next world war? And that massive amounts of military aid from one of the world's emerging superpowers would ensure that reality? Sure, the big letdown for the Palestinians lies with the 1937 leadership for not accepting the land cessation deal offered to them at that time. I never mentioned 1948 When I wrote that it is worth noting that the story began well before 1948, my intent was actually to compliment your reference to events prior to 1948. Or perhaps it was more of a subtle jab at others, such as WiddleAvi, who are fond of citing that year as the starting point for discussing the conflict. Posts 140 and 141 My point had nothing to do with any moral equivalence of Israel's and Hamas' actions or any ethical comparison of those two sides. It was simply that the specific thing that tree chose to whine about - non-negotiable demands, as Baldwin put it - are committed by both sides. The only issue I took is with Tree's generalities. For all his fervor, at times he seems like the least informed person in this discussion. And what a laugh that I can't make any comparisons between the two sides at all without being accused of moral equivalence! It's like committing the sin of making any favorable besides-the-point comparisons regarding Don Mattingly in a thread that happens to be about the Hall of Fame. | ||||||
| 145 | Mith ID: 148402816 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:32 |
Post 136 And before you go and look it up, do you even known what the Peel Plan was, and how it come about? I did have to refresh myself but after reading through the Peel Mandate I fail to see what point that makes in response to my post. Is it that the Palestinians were all just fcuked anyway and might as well have just ceded a big hunk of their ancestral territory which had been promised to them as a reward for siding with the Allies in WW1? And that they should have done this because they should have known that the Jews, who were immigrating to Palestine in droves, would receive statehood and the authority to offer citizenship to every last Jewish man and woman on the planet anyway after the next world war? And that massive amounts of military aid from one of the world's emerging superpowers would ensure that reality? Sorry, but I can't agree that the big letdown for the Palestinians was with the 1937 leadership for not accepting the land cessation deal offered to them at that time. I never mentioned 1948 When I wrote that it is worth noting that the story began well before 1948, my intent was actually to compliment your reference to events prior to 1948. Or perhaps it was more of a subtle jab at others, such as WiddleAvi, who are fond of citing that year as the starting point for discussing the conflict. Posts 140 and 141 My point had nothing to do with any moral equivalence of Israel's and Hamas' actions or any ethical comparison of those two sides. It was simply that the specific thing that tree chose to whine about - non-negotiable demands, as Baldwin put it - are committed by both sides. The only issue I took is with Tree's generalities. For all his fervor, at times he seems like the least informed person in this discussion. And what a laugh that I can't make any comparisons between the two sides at all without being accused of moral equivalence! It's like committing the sin of making any favorable besides-the-point comparisons regarding Don Mattingly in a thread that happens to be about the Hall of Fame. | ||||||
| 146 | Mith ID: 148402816 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:34 | Meant to delete post 144 but I cant. | ||||||
| 147 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:44 |
The only issue I took is with Tree's generalities. For all his fervor, at times he seems like the least informed person in this discussion. far from it. but the issue is a simple one. Israel is well within her right - in every possible sense of the word - to protect herself - from the rocket attacks that another government launches at her. if that includes closing a border, so be it. If Mexico started launching missiles into El Paso from Cuidad Juarez, then would you have a problem with a strict blockage from the US side? we're talking about one government attacking another here - this isn't some rogue group. this is a democratically elected by the Palestinian people government attacking Israel, for no reason other than their desire to see Israel cease to exist. blame the blockade, or anything else, but you're fooling yourself if you think it has anything to do with Hamas' stated desire to see Israel wiped off the map. | ||||||
| 148 | Mith Dude ID: 01629107 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:50 |
...in every possible sense of the word What does that mean? this is a democratically elected by the Palestinian people government attacking Israel, for no reason other than their desire to see Israel cease to exist. Well that's certainly not true. Not that Hamas doesn't want to see Israel "cease to exist", but to say that was their objective in launching rockets - much less their only objective, is another one of those nonsensical things that leads me to believe that you are the least informed person in this discussion. | ||||||
| 149 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 10:17 |
Israel's blockade was in response to the long-running attacks Hamas as perpetuated against her. this blockade - nor these attacks by Hamas - do not exist in a vacuum. | ||||||
| 150 | nerveclinic ID: 26107108 Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 02:17 |
Baldwin I learned some new insights to the Egyptian closing of the border with Gaza. This is from BBC today. There is an outlawed group in Egypt called the "Islamic Brotherhood" which they consider a threat to their government. Egypt considers Hamas an offshoot of this group therefore Egypt doesn't recognize Hamas and will only have relations with the Palestinian Authority. | ||||||
| 151 | Boldwin ID: 34044918 Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 07:49 | I was well aware of the IB but was not aware of the connection Egypt makes. Very interesting. Unfortunately Egypts method of countering the IB seems to be to become more like them. Christians in Egypt are being so persecuted by the official authorities that the average person could scarcely believe the details if I gave them. Christian women are at serious risk of rape, forced conversion, [they just say she has converted whether she has or not], and forced marriage to her rapist. Many many other forms of persecution. Getting sealed up in the coptic church and burned alive would be a ho-hum day in an Egyptian news day. No point in calling the police. They are in on it. | ||||||
| 152 | Baldwin ID: 00321417 Thu, Jan 15, 2009, 10:07 | Because every word, every picture, every video that comes from Hamas or out of Gaza or any other islamofascist area is a fake. Until irrefutably proven otherwise. - Barking Moonbat Early Warning System | ||||||
| 153 | Razor ID: 181051618 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 01:12 |
So in reading up on this a little, I came across this article from the LA Times which puts the civilian casualty toll for Israelis at 4 since the conflict began in late December. And on the other side, this article says that the IDF itself estimates that it has killed between 150 and 250 innocent Palestinian civilians in the past three weeks. That's startling and the very definition of disproportionate response, in my opinion. | ||||||
| 154 | WiddleAvi ID: 361157177 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 08:40 | Rzaor - How many civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor ? How many were killed when we dropped the bombs ? | ||||||
| 155 | walk ID: 181472714 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 09:56 |
I think, Razor, one of the issues is whether the allegation by Israel, that Hamas embeds its weapons, military and military leaders within a civilian infrastructure (mosques, hospitals, schools, apartment buildings, etc.), is true. Israel says it has proof that Hamas military leadership exists under a hospital, that weapons are stored in mosques, and more. So, if this is true, the question is then: Does Israel do nothing or attack these areas holding Hamas accountable for separating their military cache and personnel to safeguard their own civilians? Israel gave ample warning to the civilians, but they had no where to go. Did Hamas have options? These are not easy questions to answer, but I think one could argue that a responsibility falls on both sides to safeguard civilians. There are many issues here: Israel is the lone, but powerful player on one side the region. Israel is constantly attacked by various other "states" or terrorist groups, but not in the same level of magnitude as when Israel responds (due Israel's superior military might and refusal to engage in individual acts of terrorism such as suicide bombing) Israel has blockaded the Gaza strip and made it difficult for Gaza to receive imports potentially making it difficult for Gaza's civilians to live properly, and giving Hamas more reason to attack. I am sure there are many other issues. I don't know the answer, but know that Israel's responsehas to be considered at least within this context. | ||||||
| 156 | Perm Dude ID: 590291514 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 10:34 | As well as the context of refusing any journalists into the area. | ||||||
| 157 | boikin ID: 532592112 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 13:05 |
Rzaor - How many civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor ? 2,345 military and 57 civilians killed, 1,247 military and 35 civilians wounded and they did not have nearly as technologically advanced as Israel. How many were killed when we dropped the bombs ? A total of 140,00 died within the next five years. probably saved lives over and invasion on both sides and nearly everyone involved in the project question the actual use of the bombs, I wonder if the Israel soldiers question there orders to bomb a mosque or hospital? | ||||||
| 158 | WiddleAvi ID: 346482111 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 14:53 |
Walk- Well said. I am not saying Israel is perfect. But Israel has the right to protect itself. You can say all you want that Israel has blockaded Gaza but you need to look at the reason they did so. 2nd, Hamas deseves as much is not more blame for the amount of civilians that are being killed. It's not hard to find online many stories of how Hamas uses civilians. Hamas themselves have a video online showing how they have a little kid leading the way for them as a lookout. | ||||||
| 159 | Mith Dude ID: 01629107 Fri, Jan 16, 2009, 17:00 |
Bob Simon: History has passed by the opportunity for a two state solution. | ||||||
| 160 | Wilmer McLean ID: 390211315 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 03:28 |
Bob Simon and Pollywood: | ||||||
| 161 | Wilmer McLean ID: 390211315 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 03:33 | *Pallywood | ||||||
| 162 | Mith Dude ID: 01629107 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 06:31 |
Making sure I've got the correct handle on Wilmer's post 160, in which he prefaced an expose on fake Palestinian news stringers with, "Bob Simon and Pollywood": That - 9 years ago - 60 Minutes purchased some apparently bogus stringer footage and had Bob Simon file a report on what it depicted, renders anything Simon says on the Israeli conflict untrustworthy? One interesting thing (aside from the standard Wilmer apparently holds the media to - I guess he never watches FOX News Channel) is that the producer of the "Pallywood" expose' ultimately comes to the same basic conclusion as Simon; as he/she puts it, "the end is not in sight". Another interesting thing is that Wilmer (assuming he actually bothered to watch the clip before rushing to shoot the messenger) promptly did exactly what Simon said people do when the issue of the West Bank settlements is raised. He changed the subject. | ||||||
| 163 | Baldwin ID: 490541618 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 10:28 | Someone saying 'the end is not in sight', makes them reliable? Just how much error is that brilliant insight supposed to cover over? | ||||||
| 164 | Mattinglyinthehall ID: 37838313 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 10:55 |
saying 'the end is not in sight', makes them reliable? Uh, no. | ||||||
| 165 | Tree ID: 1311551521 Sat, Jan 17, 2009, 11:32 |
i have to agree with MITH on this. one bad source, one bad piece of information, one item fed to a news reporter does not make everything else that reporter does disreputable. yes, it puts that reporter under a finer microscope, but it doesn't discredit them. The palestinians have shown themselves to be masterful at PR and dis-information. that a reporter was fooled is no surprise. | ||||||
| 166 | WiddleAvi ID: 361157177 Mon, Jan 19, 2009, 14:53 |
Looking forward to hearing all the outrage on this : Hamas rounding up and killing/tortuing Fatah members | ||||||
| 167 | Perm Dude ID: 54131123 Mon, Feb 02, 2009, 15:01 |
Israel PM now crowing about disproportionate response. He can do this, I think, because not one of his "friends" (be they other goverments, or pro-Jewish organizations anywhere) will dare criticize the Israeli government about pretty much anything they do. U.S. Jewish groups, in particular, will hollar about all sorts of things the Palestinians do but can't muster up the least bit of constructive criticism against the Israeli government. They're all enablers. | ||||||
| 168 | Jag ID: 580233023 Mon, Feb 02, 2009, 17:56 | The only way of dealing with these terrorists is a disproportonate response. Those that constantly criticize Israel without calling out HAMAS, (Avi's post is a good example) are terrorist enablers. | ||||||
| 169 | Perm Dude ID: 54131123 Mon, Feb 02, 2009, 18:11 | If they were "dealing with these terrorists" I'd agree. But what is actually happening is that two groups of people are firing at each other's homes, and one of them is happily proclaiming their willingness to do so disproportionally. | ||||||
| 170 | bibA ID: 50131215 Mon, Feb 02, 2009, 18:38 |
Jag - You seem to say that disproportonate response works. Did it in Gaza? What evidence that Israel has achieved its goal? | ||||||
| 171 | Jag ID: 580233023 Mon, Feb 02, 2009, 22:38 | Nothing will work totally, unless Israel wants to completely move out of the Middle East. | ||||||
| 172 | bibA ID: 50131215 Tue, Feb 03, 2009, 12:03 | OK, I guess I misinterpreted your statement: The only way of dealing with these terrorists is a disproportonate response. | ||||||
| 173 | Mith ID: 2894309 Tue, Feb 03, 2009, 12:05 | Perhaps he mean that it's the only thing that he finds personally satisfying. | ||||||
| 174 | Baldwin ID: 9123198 Sat, Feb 28, 2009, 14:32 |
There's not a great current thread to drop this so here it goes... Everyone likes to quote the meme that once the subject 'nazi' is brought up, the discussion is over. Somehow that's irrelevant and makes further discussion irrelevant. To demonstrate just how utterly wrong that is, note the fact that nazi thugs currently occupy parts of Lebanon. The police are not utterly supine. Some SSNP members have been arrested. Weapons and explosives have been confiscated. Clearly, however, the state is more supine than it should be. A police officer who wandered upon the scene of our assault didn’t do anything. Not even the army stopped the SSNP when its black masked fighters conquered the western half of the capital with Hezbollah and Amal in 2008.I'm not an ally of Chrostopher Hitchens by any means but I'm glad he made it out of that situation and I'm glad some people won't tolerate nazi revival. So many other reasons that that meme in my introduction is pernicous and misleading but this is a perfect example. | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) | ||||||||
