# Israel strikes Hard at Hamas In Gaza- Dec/ 27/ 2008



## Bruce Monkhouse

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2008/12/27/7860421-cp.html

120 dead in Israeli strike on Gaza

By Ibrahim Barzak
     
GAZA CITY - Israeli aircraft attacked Hamas security compounds across Gaza on Saturday, killing at least 120 people and causing widespread panic and confusion, according to Hamas and Israeli officials. 
In one of the compounds, the bodies of more than a dozen uniformed security officers were seen lying on the ground. One officer who survived raised his index finger in a show of Muslim faith and defiance. 

Gaza health official Moawiya Hassanain said 120 people were killed in the strikes. Among the dead was Gaza police Chief Maj.-Gen. Tawfiq Jaber, witnesses said. 
The Israeli military confirmed it attacked Hamas security compounds with air strikes and residents reported hearing two waves of explosions. In the first wave, there were at least 15 blasts, they said. 

Civilians rushed to the targeted areas, trying to move the wounded in their cars to hospitals. 
There was no sign of an accompanying Israeli ground offensive. In recent days, Israel has warned it would strike back hard for renewed rocket attacks on Israeli border towns from inside Gaza. 

In the West Bank, moderate Hamas rival Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said in a statement he "condemns this aggression" and called for restraint, said an aide, Nabil Abu Rdeneh. 
Many of the Hamas security compounds are in residential areas and the air strikes took place as children were leaving school. Plumes of black smoke rose over Gaza City, sirens wailed through the streets and women frantically looked for their children. 
Israel has targeted Gaza in the past, but the number of simultaneous attacks was unprecedented. 

One man sat in the middle of a Gaza City street close to a security compound alternately slapping his face and covering his head with dust from the bombed-out building. 
"My son is gone, my son is gone," said Sadi Masri, 57. 
The shopkeeper said he sent his son out to purchase cigarettes minutes before the air strikes began and now could not find him. "May I burn like the cigarettes, may Israel burn."


----------



## Yrys

BBC News :

Massive Israeli air raids on Gaza,  with short video
Israeli F-16 bombers have pounded key targets across the Gaza Strip, 
killing at least 195 people, medics say.

Eyewitness: Chaos in Gaza
The BBC's Rushdi Aboualouf in the Gaza Strip described the chaos as Israeli 
warplanes fired missiles at Hamas targets, killing at least 155 Palestinians.

In pictures: Gaza attack aftermath


----------



## Yrys

CNN :

At least 170 killed in Israeli attacks on Gaza

GAZA CITY (CNN) -- Israeli airstrikes pounded targets in Gaza on Saturday, 
killing at least 170 people, Palestinian medical sources said. An Israeli army 
spokeswoman said her country is ready to continue the attacks "as long as it takes."


Times :

The Gaza Air Strikes: Why Israel Attacked

Israel's strike on Gaza had been expected for days, but it was still a surprise 
when it finally came. Taking advantage of good weather, which is forecast 
to last at least three days, Israeli planes bombed some 40 Palestinian police 
stations, posts and other targets early Saturday morning, killing more than 
150 people including a number of senior Hamas military leaders.


----------



## GAP

It should come as no surprise to Hamas........you shoot at me, I shoot back....this is the shooting back.....


----------



## Magic

This is a classic example of Hamas digging their own graves and complaining about it. They often make the first strike on Israeli soil multiple times, only to be firmly warned to end their assault or face military reprisal. 

In this case, the store owner's son death is unfortunate but his own people are to blame.


----------



## Kilo_302

While these attacks may have been justified, the scores of innocent dead is troubling.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> While these attacks may have been justified, the scores of innocent dead is troubling.



Always is but there is a way for Hamas to stop that.....


----------



## Yrys

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> While these attacks may have been justified, the scores of innocent dead is troubling.



In a French article, they say :

Corps gisants et parents horrifiés à l'hôpital de Gaza après les raids

La plupart des victimes portent la tenue des services de sécurité du
mouvement islamiste Hamas qui contrôle Gaza et dont les QG ont été
visés par les frappes israéliennes.

Which mean something like :

Most of the victims wear the dress of the security services of the Islamist 
movement Hamas which controls Gaza and of which HQ were aimed by 
the Israeli strikings.


Not everybody would qualify Hamas personel as innocent, since they are 
vue by most as terrossist organisation ...


----------



## 1feral1

Hamas was warned about the ongoing rocket attacks into Israel.

Israel has simply reacted, and rightfully so.

Again the hornet's nest has been disturbed.

OWDU


----------



## Yrys

Egypt says Israel-Gaza truce unlikely with escalation, Copyright 2008 Reuters

CAIRO - By Alaa Shahine

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit urged Israel and Gaza's Islamist Hamas rulers 
to hold their fire to enable Cairo to try to broker a new truce between them.

But Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, on a visit to Cairo for talks on the escalating violence 
with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, said Hamas must pay for rocket attacks against the 
Jewish state."Egypt will not stop efforts (to broker a truce) as long as the parties want this, 
but I cannot imagine that we can convince the two sides to go back to the calm as long as 
there is this escalation," Aboul Gheit told reporters at a news conference with Livni.

"What we are asking them both is to restrain themselves, and then we see how to come back 
to that period of quiet," he added.

Prospects of restoring the Egyptian-brokered truce dimmed this week after Israeli soldiers 
killed three Hamas gunmen they said were trying to plant explosives along the Gaza-Israeli 
border. Militants responded with rocket fire at southern Israel.

Livni, leader of Israel's ruling Kadima party who hopes to succeed Prime Minister Ehud Olmert 
after the next elections, described the latest escalation as "unbearable." "Hamas needs to 
understand that our aspiration to live in peace does not mean that Israel will take this kind 
of situation any longer. Enough is enough," Livni told reporters in Cairo.

In Jerusalem, Olmert urged Gaza's Palestinians to reject the Hamas government and 
threatened a harsher reply to rocket fire. "I will not hesitate to use Israel's might to 
strike Hamas and (Islamic) Jihad," Olmert said in an interview with Al Arabiya television, 
according to his office.

Under the six-month ceasefire that ended in violence last week, Hamas agreed to halt 
rocket fire in return for Israel easing a blockade that was tightened after the Islamist 
group seized control of the Gaza Strip in June 2007.

Livni said on Wednesday that Israel will "change the reality" of the situation in the Gaza Strip.

Israel and Hamas have both signaled interest in extending the truce. Emad Gad, an Egyptian 
political analyst, said the violence was nothing more than "mutual finger biting" to agree better 
terms for the truce. "Hamas wants the siege on Gaza to be lifted and the border crossings 
opened. This was not achieved last time," he said. "Israel probably wants the terms to remain 
unchanged."

Gad said Israel was likely to launch some air strikes and minor raids into Gaza but did not see 
a full-scale invasion.

Israel and Hamas have traded blame over the ceasefire's collapse in early November. Hamas 
said Israel had failed to ease its blockade of the Gaza Strip by allowing in more food and 
medical supplies to alleviate severe shortages.
_Copyright 2008 Reuters_


----------



## Yrys

U.S. urges Hamas to stop rocketing Israel, AP
'These people are nothing but thugs,' NSC spokesman says

CRAWFORD, Texas - The United States on Saturday blamed the militant group Hamas 
for breaking a cease-fire and attacking Israel, which retaliated with strikes of its own 
during what became the single bloodiest day of fighting in years.

The White House called for the cease-fire to be restored, yet there were few indications 
that the violence, which has left more than 200 people dead and nearly another 400 
wounded, was waning. Israeli officials said the operation in Gaza would widen if necessary.

It was "completely unacceptable" for Hamas, which controls Gaza, to launch attacks on 
Israel after a truce lasting several months, said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the 
National Security Council. "These people are nothing but thugs, so Israel is going to defend 
its people against terrorists like Hamas that indiscriminately kill their own people," Johndroe 
said in Texas as President George W. Bush spent the holidays at his ranch here. "They need 
to stop. We have said in the past that they have a choice to make. You can't have one foot 
in politics and one foot in terror."

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak has warned that the operation in Gaza will widen as 
necessary. Asked if the United States would back a continuation of the retaliatory strikes, 
Johndroe said: "The U.S. doesn't want to see any more violence. I think what we've got 
to see is Hamas stop firing rockets into Israel. That's what precipitated this."

*A call from Saudi king*

At the Bush ranch, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice kept the president abreast of 
the situation. The president took a call from King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, who wanted 
to discuss the violence that began eight days after a six-month truce between Israel and 
Hamas expired.

"We strongly condemn the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and hold 
Hamas responsible for breaking the cease-fire and for the renewal of violence in Gaza," 
Rice said in a statement. "The cease-fire should be restored immediately. The United 
States calls on all concerned to protect innocent lives and to address the urgent 
humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza."

The Israeli army says Palestinian militants have fired some 300 rockets and mortars 
at Israeli targets over the past week. In recent days, Israeli leaders threatened to 
launch a major offensive. Israeli warplanes launched counterattacks on dozens of 
security compounds across the Hamas-ruled territory in waves of airstrikes. Most of 
those killed were security men, but an unknown number of civilians were also among 
the dead.

Hamas said all of its security installations were hit, threatened to resume suicide attacks, 
and sent at least 70 rockets and mortar shells crashing into Israeli border communities, 
according to the Israeli military. One Israeli was killed and at least six people were hurt.


*Humanitarian needs*

With so many wounded, the Palestinian death toll was likely to rise. The strikes caused 
widespread panic and confusion in Gaza. Some of the Israeli missiles struck in densely 
populated areas as children were leaving school, and women rushed into the streets 
frantically looking for their children.

Johndroe said the U.S. was concerned that humanitarian needs were being met in Gaza. 
He urged Israel to avoid striking civilians, but he refrained from commenting specifically 
on positions that had been hit on the ground. "I know they are targeting security and 
Hamas headquarters facilities," Johndroe said. "We urge them (the Israelis) to avoid 
civilian casualties."

"The message from the United States is that Hamas is a terrorist organization that is 
firing rockets into Israel and they fired them onto their own people as well," Johndroe 
said, noting reports he had seen about the death of two Palestinian girls. "Hamas has 
done nothing for the people of Gaza."

The offensive has sparked angry protests throughout the Arab world. British Prime 
Minister Gordon Brown, the Vatican, the U.N. secretary-general and *special Mideast 
envoy Tony Blair* called for an immediate restoration of calm. The Arab League 
scheduled an emergency meeting for Sunday to discuss the situation.


----------



## Yrys

Israel set for prolonged Gaza op

Israel says it will widen its attacks on Hamas if necessary to stop 
the Palestinian militant group firing rockets from the Gaza Strip.

Israeli F-16 bombers hit targets across the Gaza Strip on Saturday, 
killing at least 225 people, local medics say. "If what we're doing 
in the air will not suffice we'll continue on the ground," Israeli 
Defence Minister Ehud Barak told BBC News.

Israel's air raids were the heaviest on the Gaza Strip for decades.
Most of those killed were policemen in the Hamas militant movement, 
which controls Gaza, but women and children also died, Gaza officials 
said. About 700 others were wounded, as missiles struck security 
compounds and militant bases, the officials added.

Israel said it was responding to an escalation in rocket attacks from 
Gaza and would bomb "as long as necessary". Air raids have continued 
into the night, while Israeli tanks are deployed just outside Gaza.

Israeli PM Ehud Olmert said the operation "may take some time" - but 
he pledged to avoid a humanitarian crisis. "It's not going to last a few days,'' 
he said in a televised statement, flanked by Defence Minister Barak and 
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

Staff at the main hospital in Gaza said operating rooms were overflowing, 
it was running out of medicine, and there was not enough surgeons to cope.

'*Time for fighting'*

The raids came days after a truce with Hamas expired.

Mr Barak said "there is a time for calm and a time for fighting, and now 
the time has come to fight". He told the BBC it was "not realistic" to call 
off the operation at this stage.The exiled leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, 
called for a new intifada, or uprising, against Israel, in response to the attacks.

The movement's Gaza leader, Ismail Haniyeh, said there would be no white flags 
and no surrender. "Palestine has never witnessed an uglier massacre," he said.

Israel hit targets across Gaza, striking in the territory's main population centres, 
including Gaza City in the north and the southern towns of Khan Younis and Rafah.
Mr Olmert said "we tried to avoid, and I think quite successfully, to hit any 
uninvolved people - we attacked only targets that are part of the Hamas 
organisations".

Hamas said all of its security compounds in Gaza were destroyed by the air strikes, 
which Israel said hit some 40 targets. Hamas vowed to carry out revenge attacks 
on Israel and fired Qassam rockets into Israeli territory as an immediate reply.

One Israeli was killed by a rocket strike on the town of Netivot, 20 kilometres 
(12 miles) east of Gaza, doctors said.

*Ceasefire urged*

The air strikes come amid rumours that an Israeli ground operation is imminent. 
Israeli television said on Saturday evening that Israeli troops were massing on 
the Gaza border "in preparation for a supplementary ground offensive". The 
report has not been confirmed by independent sources.

_US Secretary of State_ Condoleezza Rice accused Hamas of having triggered 
the new bout of violence. "The United States is deeply concerned about the 
escalating violence in Gaza," she said in a statement. "We strongly condemn 
the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and hold Hamas responsible 
for breaking the ceasefire and for the renewal of violence there. The ceasefire must 
be restored immediately and fully respected."

*UN Secretary-General* Ban Ki-moon also urged an immediate halt to the violence, 
condemning what he called Israel's "excessive use of force leading to the killing 
and injuring of civilians" and "the ongoing rocket attacks by Palestinian militants".

Calls for a ceasefire also came from _Middle East envoy_ Tony Blair and the _French 
EU presidency_.

*Hamas bases destroyed*

Palestinian militants frequently fire rockets against Israeli towns from inside the 
Gaza Strip; large numbers of rocket and mortar shells have been fired at Israel 
in recent days.The BBC's Katya Adler in Jerusalem says the timing of Israel's 
operation is significant, as Israeli politicians are keen to score points ahead 
of a general election in February.

A Hamas police spokesman, Islam Shahwan, said one of the Israeli raids targeted 
a police compound in Gaza City where a graduation ceremony for new personnel 
was taking place. At least a dozen bodies of men in black uniforms were 
photographed at the Hamas police headquarters in Gaza City. Most of the dead 
and injured were said to be in Gaza City. The head of Gaza's police forces, 
Tawfik Jaber, was among those killed.

Mr Olmert appealed to Palestinians in Gaza, saying "You - the citizens of Gaza - 
are not our enemies. Hamas, Jihad and the other terrorist organisations are your 
enemies, as they are our enemies. "They have brought disaster on you and they 
try to bring disaster to the people of Israel. And it is our common goal to make 
every possible effort to stop them."

It is the worst attack in Gaza since 1967 in terms of the number of Palestinian 
casualties, a senior analyst told the BBC in Jerusalem. Although a six-month 
truce between Hamas and Israel was agreed earlier this year, it was regularly 
under strain and was allowed to lapse when it expired this month.

Mosques issued urgent appeals for people to donate blood on Saturday and 
Hamas sources told the BBC's Rushdi Abou Alouf in Gaza that hospitals were 
soon full.

In the West Bank, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas - whose 
Fatah faction was ousted from Gaza by Hamas in 2007 - condemned the 
attacks and called for restraint.

Egypt opened its border crossing to the Gaza Strip at Rafah to absorb and 
treat some of those injured in the south of the territory.

Palestinians staged demonstrations in the West Bank cities of Ramallah 
and Hebron, and there were some scuffles with Israeli troops there.

Hamas blamed Israel for the end of the ceasefire, saying it had not 
respected its terms, including the lifting of the blockade under which 
little more than humanitarian aid has been allowed into Gaza.

Israel said it initially began easing the blockade, but this was halted 
when Hamas failed to fulfil what Israel says were agreed conditions, 
including ending all rocket fire and halting weapons smuggling.


----------



## Yrys

Reaction in quotes: Gaza bombing, BBC News

The world has been reacting to the massive Israeli bombardment of Hamas 
targets in the Gaza Strip, which is said by Palestinian sources to have claimed 
some 200 lives.


SPOKESMAN FOR BAN KI-MOON, UN SECRETARY GENERAL

"The secretary general is deeply alarmed by today's heavy violence and bloodshed 
in Gaza, and the continuation of violence in southern Israel.

"[He] appeals for an immediate halt to all violence [and reiterates] previous calls 
for humanitarian supplies to be allowed into Gaza to aid the distressed civilian 
population."


GORDON JOHNDROE, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN

"Hamas' continued rocket attacks into Israel must cease if the violence is to stop. 
Hamas must end its terrorist activities if it wishes to play a role in the future of 
the Palestinian people.

"The United States urges Israel to avoid civilian casualties as it targets Hamas 
in Gaza."


SPOKESMAN FOR JAVIER SOLANA, EU FOREIGN POLICY CHIEF

"We are very concerned at the events in Gaza. We call for an immediate ceasefire 
and urge everybody to exert maximum restraint."


BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE STATEMENT

"The only way to achieve lasting peace in Gaza is through peaceful means. Whilst 
we understand the Israeli government's obligation to protect its population we urge 
maximum restraint to avoid further civilian casualties.

"We also call on militants in the Gaza Strip to immediately cease all rocket attacks 
on Israel."


RUSSIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY STATEMENT

"Moscow considers it necessary to stop large-scale military action against Gaza, 
which has already led to major casualties and suffering among the civilian 
Palestinian population.

"At the same time, we call on the Hamas leadership to stop shelling Israeli territory."


AMR MOUSSA, ARAB LEAGUE SECRETARY GENERAL

"We are facing a continuing spectacle which has been carefully planned. So we have 
to expect that there will be many casualties. We face a major humanitarian catastrophe."


SYRIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY STATEMENT

"Syria is following with great anxiety the barbaric Israeli aggression against the Palestinian 
people in Gaza... a horrific crime and terrorist act.

"Syria calls on the Arab nation and the international community to use all possible 
means to put pressure on Israel to immediately stop the aggression, allow the wounded 
to enter hospital and open all crossing points [to Gaza].

"Syria as president of the Arab League calls on Arab leaders to hold an emergency 
summit to assess the dangerous situation in Gaza."


HASAN QASHQAVI, IRANIAN FOREIGN MINISTRY SPOKESMAN

"Iran strongly condemns the Zionist regime's wide-ranging attacks against the civilians 
in Gaza.

"The raids against innocent people are unforgiveable and unacceptable."


REV FEDERICO LOMBARDI, VATICAN SPOKESMAN

"Hamas is a prisoner to a logic of hate, Israel to a logic of faith in force as the best 
response to hate.

"One must continue to search for a different way out, even if that may seem impossible."


----------



## Yrys

Israel's mixed motives for strikes

Gazans say Saturday's air strikes by Israel are the worst in living memory.
Israeli fighter jets fired at Gaza from morning to evening, spreading fear 
and chaos throughout the strip.

The target of the strikes was Hamas infrastructure - security compounds, 
government buildings and police stations. Most of the dead were policemen, 
including the Hamas chief of police, but Gaza is one of the most overcrowded 
territories in the world.

Wherever Hamas operates, civilians live and work close by. The dead in Gaza 
include women and children. Medical sources suggested up to a third of the 
casualties could be civilian.

There were scenes of desperation in Gaza's hospitals. As the mortuaries filled 
up, bodies piled up in corridors and outside on the street. Doctors warned that 
the seriously injured risked death too. They said they simply did not have enough 
operating tables.

*Frightening prospect*

On Saturday evening, when Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert addressed Gazans 
directly in a speech, telling them that Israel did not want them to suffer, that Hamas, 
not ordinary Gazans, were Israel's enemy, his words were met with bitter scepticism.

Israel says it has been forced to act to stop the constant rocket and mortar shell from 
Gaza, aimed at Israeli towns just over the border.

Palestinians describe Israel's actions as disproportionate. One Israeli civilian was killed 
by rocket fire on Saturday while medical sources in Gaza say they expect the death toll 
there to reach 250.

Israel argues that, while most Gaza rockets are not deadly, they are designed to be.

The quarter of a million Israelis who live close to the Gaza border say they live in fear, 
never far from a bomb shelter. Many are delighted their government is finally taking 
concerted action but they are scared, too, of Hamas reprisals.

Hamas's military wing has vowed to open the gates of hell. The movement's exiled 
political leader, Khaled Meshaal, has called for a third and violent Palestinian uprising.

*Election looms*

So why is Israel acting now and with such force?

Does it really believe it can stop the rocket fire from Gaza when previous Israeli 
governments have tried and failed, using every military means?

Israel's prime minister says that is his objective: to protect Israeli citizens living 
close to the Gaza border. To achieve this, his defence minister, Ehud Barak, said 
Israel would continue, widen and intensify its Gaza operation.

But Israel's politicians are pursuing a parallel campaign, too - an electoral one.
Israel holds parliamentary elections in just over a month's time.

The Israeli public has a generally low opinion about how their government has 
handled what they call "Hamastan" - Hamas-controlled Gaza. Until it started talking 
tough, the hawkish opposition leader, Binyamin Netanyahu, was leading in the polls. 
Now the gap has narrowed.

Undoubtedly, Israel's military has also been keen to destroy Hamas's weapons and 
the rocket launchers in Gaza. There has been talk of a possible wide-scale, military 
invasion by Israel since Hamas took internal control of Gaza 18 months ago.

It is not clear that is where Israel is now heading.

There is little appetite in Israel's political circles for its soldiers to come home in 
body bags but military sources have suggested Israel may return to launching 
repeated, limited incursions in Gaza.

"We don't want Hamas to have a moment's peace," said one source.

*Obama factor*

It is also possible that Israel has decided to act against Hamas now, during the last days 
of a friendly Bush administration in the United States. The United States is arguably the 
only outside power Israel deeply cares about. President-elect Barack Obama is seen 
in Israel as being more sympathetic to the Palestinians.

Later on Saturday, there were vows of more violence from Israel and Hamas.

Yet, up until a week ago, there was a shaky truce in place between the two sides. It 
is possible that, as quickly as this situation has flared up, it could settle again, if the 
key players believe it to be in their interests.

For now, though, the streets on both sides of the Gaza border remain eerily quiet, 
with Israelis and Gazans there at home with their families, fearful of what tomorrow 
might bring.


----------



## tomahawk6

Target info:


----------



## Colin Parkinson

I suspect a lot of intel was leaked by Fatah members to the IDF as to what Hamas had and where. Expect Hamas to arrest and execute Fatah members in revenge.


----------



## Yrys

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Target info



Well, as the info on the pic post by tomahawk6 says that they were in the buildings of the 
Palestinian Authority, isn't that more or less public ?


----------



## Kilo_302

> The dead in Gaza
> include women and children. Medical sources suggested up to a third of the
> casualties could be civilian.



These attacks are becoming harder to justify. While Israel may have gained at best a short respite from rocket attacks, it has killed perhaps nearly a hundred civilians. I bet I can tell you which families will be supplying the replacements for the Hamas dead.  Israel has every right to defend itself, but air strikes like this only serve to rally support for its enemies. Surely, we (fighting the "war on terror") all must realize this reality by now.


----------



## Kat Stevens

My thinking is that the easiest way to reduce innocent civilian deaths in Gaza is to stop causing innocent deaths in Israel with rocket attacks.  Don't throw the first punch, the fight doesn't happen.


----------



## Nauticus

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> My thinking is that the easiest way to reduce innocent civilian deaths in Gaza is to stop causing innocent deaths in Israel with rocket attacks.  Don't throw the first punch, the fight doesn't happen.


I have to agree, but I also stress that there is no excuse for civilian casualties. Of course they will always happen, but one must always try to avoid civilian casualties.

The problem with this Israel/Hamas scenario is that, despite whose fault it is, it has become one giant poo-sling contest. Hamas attacks Israel, but the Israeli government is accused of discriminating against Palestinians. I haven't been there, so I cannot truthfully comment on the realities of this.

Despite who started what, there should be a response by the international community not only to these indiscriminate airstrikes, but also to Hamas' rocket attacks on civilians. The longer this keeps going, the worse a situation this will become.


----------



## 1feral1

Nauticus said:
			
		

> 1. I have to agree, but I also stress that there is no excuse for civilian casualties.
> 
> 2. I haven't been there, so I cannot truthfully comment on the realities of this.
> 
> 3. Despite who started what, there should be a response by the international community not only to these indiscriminate airstrikes, but also to Hamas' rocket attacks on civilians.



1. Start doing airstrikes in built up areas, even with smart bombs there is bound to be civilian casualties, thats WAR and the nature of the beast. Remember these civilian casualties are not deliberate, and are not the targets. Don't be so niaive or misled, think with your brain not your heart.

2. Exactly.

3. What can we do as a whole? Israel has a right to defend itself from attacks KILLING their citizens. We have no right to stop a nation from lawfully defending itself, especially when dealing with an Enemy who wants you completly wiped off the planet. Israel should be commended for fighting back, and Hamas should be condemmed for there ongoing attacks on civilian areas. If Hamas would not have launched their attacks, all killed both uniformed and civilian would be alive right now.

Hamas is to blame. Their blood is on all casualties from this raid. Israel attacked a military target, and rightfully so.

OWDU


----------



## Nauticus

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> 1. Start doing airstrikes in built up areas, even with smart bombs there is bound to be civilian casualties, thats WAR and the nature of the beast. Remember these civilian casualties are not deliberate, and are not the targets. Don't be so niaive or misled, think with your brain not your heart.
> 
> 2. Exactly.
> 
> 3. What can we do as a whole? Israel has a right to defend itself from attacks KILLING their citizens. We have no right to stop a nation from lawfully defending itself, especially when dealing with an Enemy who wants you completly wiped off the planet. Israel should be commended for fighting back, and Hamas should be condemmed for there ongoing attacks on civilian areas. If Hamas would not have launched their attacks, all killed both uniformed and civilian would be alive right now.
> 
> Hamas is to blame. Their blood is on all casualties from this raid. Israel attacked a military target, and rightfully so.
> 
> OWDU


Well, like I said, I pretty much agree with you. I'm aware that civilian casualties happen in war, but what sounds like indiscriminate bombing takes no regard to civilian deaths. I know civilians die in war, but I still feel that _some_ measures should be taken to try and avoid it. After all, that is what separates Hamas and Israel as a terrorist organization and a civilized nation.

But I also understand that Hamas is to blame. My point, which I realize I didn't actually outline clearly, was that this has been going on for years now and many, many people have died as a result of it. Although Hamas is to blame, something more has to be done. Launching rockets at Israel and them bombing Gaza Strip isn't really solving a whole lot, and we all know that this will continue to go back and forth for years to come. I think that's a bad thing, so the international community should at the very least support a truce before this goes on repeat for many more years to come.

I'm not anti-war at all, but I do feel that other measures could be considered when war isn't actually solving the problem, like in this case.


----------



## 1feral1

Gaza was attacked for its command and control centres.  There was no indiscriminate bombing like you say, and wear did you hear that?

This war will continue to rage for 100s of years, and it  has so, not like how you mention its been a short term thing.

What type of measures are you talking about, maybe a big group hug and an I am sorry? If only it was that simple.


----------



## wannabe SF member

I think that Nauticus meant that more permant measures should be taken against Hamas, replicating with bombings, as justified as it may be will only validate the view that the Palestinians have of the Israelis and give strenght to the Hamas. A way must be found to weaken Hamas.


----------



## tomahawk6

The Israelis are using the perfect tool to deal with Hamas - military force. Note that most arab governments have blamed the Israeli response on Hamas. They broke their own truce by lobbing 200 rockets into Israel last week. Israel thinks they have taken out half of Hamas' stockpile of rockets. The best way to procede is with a ground invasion.


----------



## TN2IC

The incongruous said:
			
		

> I think that Nauticus meant that more permant measures should be taken against Hamas, replicating with bombings, as justified as it may be will only validate the view that the Palestinians have of the Israelis and give strenght to the Hamas. A way must be found to weaken Hamas.



This there anyway to "blockade" them?


----------



## wannabe SF member

Mr Plow said:
			
		

> This there anyway to "blockade" them?



I believe that the Gaza strip is already under a strict embargo.


----------



## Kat Stevens

The incongruous said:
			
		

> I think that Nauticus meant that more permant measures should be taken against Hamas, replicating with bombings, as justified as it may be will only validate the view that the Palestinians have of the Israelis and give strenght to the Hamas. A way must be found to weaken Hamas.



You convince the Palestinians that their innocent children will continue to be killed, as long as they allow Hamas, Hezbolah, or any of these other organizations, to launch rockets into Israel, killing their innocent children.


----------



## Nauticus

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Gaza was attacked for its command and control centres.  There was no indiscriminate bombing like you say, and wear did you hear that?
> 
> This war will continue to rage for 100s of years, and it  has so, not like how you mention its been a short term thing.
> 
> What type of measures are you talking about, maybe a big group hug and an I am sorry? If only it was that simple.


Please, use your head next time, and a little common sense.

1. Israel claims they attacked Hamas security centres. Logically, though, if the United States can accidently bomb a school of children, I'm willing to imagine Israel is more likely going to accidently do that. I'm not blaming Israel, don't get me wrong - but I don't believe two wrongs make a right. I don't believe that Hamas bombing Israeli citizens justifies Israel bombing Hamas civilians, in the same sense that the USA couldn't bomb Iraq's cities after the attack in New York.

2. Yes, this will rage on for many, many years. *That is exactly what I said.* This is going to be, and has been, long-term, so where you got that idea that I said otherwise, I haven't a clue.

3. What type of measures? There can be trade embargos (crippled Iraq), ceasefire meetings (if North and South Korea could do it...). My point is, since war has been fought over this for _years_, I'm suggesting war may not be the answer to this specific problem.


----------



## Shec

Nauticus said:
			
		

> Please, use your head next time, and a little common sense.
> 
> 1. Israel claims they attacked Hamas security centres. Logically, though, if the United States can accidently bomb a school of children, I'm willing to imagine Israel is more likely going to accidently do that. I'm not blaming Israel, don't get me wrong - but I don't believe two wrongs make a right. I don't believe that Hamas bombing Israeli citizens justifies Israel bombing Hamas civilians, in the same sense that the USA couldn't bomb Iraq's cities after the attack in New York.
> 
> 2. Yes, this will rage on for many, many years. *That is exactly what I said.* This is going to be, and has been, long-term, so where you got that idea that I said otherwise, I haven't a clue.
> 
> 3. What type of measures? There can be trade embargos (crippled Iraq), ceasefire meetings (if North and South Korea could do it...). My point is, since war has been fought over this for _years_, I'm suggesting war may not be the answer to this specific problem.



Given geographic density it is reasonable to presume that if Israel's targetting had been somewhat less surgical a hell of a lot more than 270 odd pals would be meeting 72 virgins right now.


----------



## 1feral1

Nauticus said:
			
		

> Please, use your head next time, and a little common sense.
> 
> 1. Israel claims they attacked Hamas security centres. Logically, though, if the United States can accidently bomb a school of children, I'm willing to imagine Israel is more likely going to accidently do that. I'm not blaming Israel, don't get me wrong - but I don't believe two wrongs make a right. I don't believe that Hamas bombing Israeli citizens justifies Israel bombing Hamas civilians, in the same sense that the USA couldn't bomb Iraq's cities after the attack in New York.
> 
> 2. Yes, this will rage on for many, many years. *That is exactly what I said.* This is going to be, and has been, long-term, so where you got that idea that I said otherwise, I haven't a clue.
> 
> 3. What type of measures? There can be trade embargos (crippled Iraq), ceasefire meetings (if North and South Korea could do it...). My point is, since war has been fought over this for _years_, I'm suggesting war may not be the answer to this specific problem.



I have more than enough common sense, thanks, and the targets hit were genuine, although unfortunate that some civilians were caught up in it.

Embargos don't work Naut, and only the citizens suffer, which increases the overall HATRED towards not only Israel, but the rest of the west, and generates an ever increasing extremist pan-arabic brotherhood, which fans more hatred towards Israel and again the west.

HAMAS must be stopped from future attacks, and this can only be done by crippling them with direct and precise military action by air or ground.

Right now, Eqypt has opened its borders and allah only knows what is coming in or going out.

The Hamas propaganda machine will now swing into full gear, with the showing of dead children and women, and they are even to be known to transport corpses to other locations, lay them out and film again. Thats pretty sick, but when you're evil and know it, they'll do anything to make them look like the victims, when in fact Hamas and facimilie factions in the region are the true root of bad news, and are nothing but a bunch of murderers.

The entire arab world hates Isreal, thats a fact of life, and Hamas conducting terror attacks ONLY against Israeli civilian targets is again ongoing, with 200 HE rockets just last week (these are not toys, many are over 3m long and 122mm in calibre, packing quite a HE wallup. I've been on the recieving end of these before, and not a pleasant experience). Now Naut, your post comparing Hamas's DELIBERATE attacks on civilian tagets to Israel's direct attacks on genuine Hamas military tagerts tells me you have some type of agenda brewing, or you can't really comprehend the reality of what is going on. 

Considering the majority of terrorists who conducted the 9-11 atatcks on the USA were KSA citizens, why would the USA target cities in Iraq back in 2001? This just really confirms the level of knowledge you have.


----------



## cameron

While I do not always support Israel's actions and policies, Israel like every other SOVEREIGN nation (note my emphasis, because Israel is a sovereign nation whether or not the Arab nations wish to recognize it as such) has a right to defend itself.  It is rather hypocritical of Hamas to cheerfully lob rockets at Israel and then cry bloody murder when Israel reacts.


----------



## tomahawk6

A couple of strike video released by the IDF. Hamas intentionally located their launchers/rockets in populated areas. Casualties to civilians is on Hamas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmSAp4Qt068&eurl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdvaKhaCBZA&eurl


----------



## Retired AF Guy

A little roundup on news reports about the Israel/Hamas dust-up:

Gaza residents breach Egypt border; Israel bombs 40 smuggling tunnels -



> Gaza residents on Sunday breached the border fence with Egypt ....hundreds have crossed the frontier prompting Egyptian border guards to open fire





> Of the Palestinians killed on Saturday, most were militants. The fatalities included three senior Hamas officers: Tawfik Jabber, the commander of Hamas' police force in Gaza; his adjutant, Ismail al-Ja'abri, commander of the defense and security directorate; and Abu-Ahmad Ashur, Hamas' Gaza central district governor.





> Militants often operate against Israel from civilian areas, and that has led to steep civilian casualties in the past when Israel has retaliated. Late Saturday, thousands of Gazans received Arabic-language voice mails on their cell phones from the Israel Defense Forces, urging them to leave homes where militants might have stashed weapons.



I find that last statement very interesting. Not exactly the actions of a "terrorist nation" to give warning that attacks are coming. Not the first time that Israel has warned civilians of incoming attacks.

ANALYSIS / IAF strike on Gaza is Israel's version of 'shock and awe' 



> Palestinian sources in Gaza report that 40 targets were destroyed in a span of three to five minutes.





> Israel has assigned modest goals for itself: weakening Hamas rule in Gaza and restoring a prolonged lull along the border under terms that are more convenient for us following an internationally imposed compromise. Hamas, .... erred in judging Israeli intentions and has been dragged into a war that it doubtful wanted. Now, Israel needs to be careful in not falling into a trap of its own.



Analysis: Fighting Hamas in the shadow of 2006's mistakes. 



> The first wave of Saturday's air strikes targeted Hamas training bases, military facilities, weapons stores and other locations used by the Hamas security apparatus; Hamas has some 15,000 armed men in the Strip, defense officials estimate. In the second wave, targets included underground rocket-launch sites - where Hamas had readied rockets for remote-control fire. Other such sites, as well as weapons stores and factories, located near schools or on the lower floors of apartment blocks, were not touched. *At this stage.*


 My emphasis.

Analysis: The Hamas army



> Were the IDF to embark on a ground operation in Gaza, it would face an army of close to 20,000 armed men, among them at least 15,000 Hamas operatives. The rest are from Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Popular Resistance Committees. *Since the cease-fire went into effect in Gaza in June, Hamas has used the lull in action to fortify its military posts in the Strip and dig tunnel systems as well as underground bunkers for its forces.* IDF estimates put the length of the tunnels at over 50 kilometers.


 My emphasis. That's the problem with ceasefires, the bad guys usually use it to reinforce their forces and to dig in deeper. 

And finally; the usual suspects are out protesting Canadians take to streets to protest air strikes. I'm willing to bet that while Hamas was bombarding Israel these same people were cheering when every rocket exploded in Israel.


----------



## 1feral1

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> And finally; the usual suspects are out protesting Canadians take to streets to protest air strikes. I'm willing to bet that while Hamas was bombarding Israel these same people were cheering when every rocket exploded in Israel.



Had a squizz at that link, the pic looks more like Palestinians living in Canada protesting.

The same ones who danced in the streets when 9-11 happened?  

Here is a quote from the link: "Blasting Palestinian music and flying Palestinian flags, the protesters — many wearing the distinctive black-and-white checked keffiyeh — marched through the city's downtown core as shoppers stopped to gawk and take photographs."

“They're living in fear,” said Abdul Elsalfiti of his family in the Gaza Strip. 

The enemy from within IMHO.


OWDU


----------



## CougarKing

I wonder...Did they have them in the back in 2006 during the last Lebanon invasion too?



> *IAF uses new US-supplied smart bomb*
> Dec. 29, 2008
> Yaakov Katz , THE JERUSALEM POST
> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...ticle%2FPrinter
> 
> The Israel Air Force used a new bunker-buster missile that it received recently from the United States in strikes against Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip on Saturday, The Jerusalem Post learned on Sunday.
> 
> The missile, called GBU-39, was developed in recent years by the US as a small-diameter bomb for low-cost, high-precision and low collateral damage strikes.
> 
> Israel received approval from Congress to purchase 1,000 units in September and defense officials said on Sunday that the first shipment had arrived earlier this month and was used successfully in penetrating underground Kassam launchers in the Gaza Strip during the heavy aerial bombardment of Hamas infrastructure on Saturday. It was also used in Sunday's bombing of tunnels in Rafah.
> 
> The GPS-guided GBU-39 is said to be one of the most accurate bombs in the world. The 113-kg. bomb has the same penetration capabilities as a normal 900-kg. bomb, although it has only 22.7 kg. of explosives. At just 1.75 meters long, its small size increases the number of bombs an aircraft can carry and the number of targets it can attack in a sortie.
> 
> Tests conducted in the US have proven that the bomb is capable of penetrating at least 90 cm. of steel-reinforced concrete. The GBU-39 can be used in adverse weather conditions and has a standoff range of more than 110 km. due to pop-out wings.
> 
> Also Sunday, Military Intelligence's Psychological Warfare Department broke into radio broadcasts in Gaza and warned Palestinian civilians not to cooperate with Hamas terrorist activity.
> 
> *Palestinians reported that they received phone calls to their cellular phones and landlines from the IDF. The phone call, the Palestinians said, conveyed a recorded message ordering the immediate evacuation of homes that were next to Hamas infrastructure or being used by the terrorist organization. *
> 
> On Sunday, head of the Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration Col. Moshe Levy was interviewed by several Arab news outlets during which he stressed that Israel was not against the Palestinian public in Gaza but was operating against Hamas.
> 
> Defense officials said Sunday that Israel would, however, not hesitate to target the homes of civilians who protected Hamas terrorists throughout the operation.
> 
> "We will go after every Hamas operative, no matter where he is," one official said. "We urge the Palestinians not to cooperate with terrorists."


----------



## Rifleman62

The Gaza Strip is approx 125 Sq miles  (twice the size of the city of Washington, DC), with a population of 1.5 million. Densly populated, built up area with the terrorists living and fighting amongst their own *large* families. To date I believe there has been a total of 324 reported killed and 1,500 wounded. The IAF is very professional. Anyone who thinks that the IAF is targeting civilians is just plain stupid.
Did you see the film clip from Afghanistan of the school children walking past the SUV which was then detonated. The school kids were not the target, but the terrorists did not give a shidt they would be killed. 
If you don't understand the difference between these you are stupid. If you are wearing a uniform, you shouldn't.


----------



## old medic

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-israel-analysis29-2008dec29,0,3905805.story

NEWS ANALYSIS - LA TIMES 
Israel has learned from its failure in Lebanon

By Richard Boudreaux
December 29, 2008
Reporting from Jerusalem --





> As they prepared for lightning airstrikes on the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, Israel's leaders drew sobering lessons from their stalemate against another Islamic paramilitary force, Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas.
> 
> In that setback in the summer of 2006, Israel rushed to battle without a detailed plan or realistic goals, and was handed its first failure to vanquish an Arab foe in war. Hezbollah not only withstood the 34-day offensive, but it also emerged stronger politically.
> 
> Faced with frequent Hamas rocket fire across its southern border, Israel planned its Gaza operation more meticulously, over nearly two years. As a result, Israeli officials said Sunday, their intelligence services developed a longer list of targets to bomb, enabling the air force to inflict more damage on the militant Palestinian group before Israel contemplates a risky ground assault.
> 
> And instead of boasting that they would "destroy" the enemy, as they did in the case of Lebanon, Israeli leaders set the more modest aim of "improving the security" of terrorized Israeli communities.
> 
> That less ambitious approach could make it easier for Israel to withdraw from the conflict on its terms, avoiding the kind of demoralizing stalemate that developed in Lebanon.
> 
> So far, Israel considers its Gaza offensive a success. Since it began Saturday, waves of airstrikes have destroyed dozens of Hamas paramilitary facilities, weapons-smuggling tunnels from Egypt and underground rocket-launching sites. Rocket fire from Gaza has diminished well below what was once considered Hamas' capacity.
> 
> Although many risks and uncertainties lie ahead, in particular the specter of getting bogged down in a ground war, the offensive has brought Israel to a psychological turning point, restoring a measure of the country's confidence in its capacity to confront armed adversaries.
> 
> "Hamas is dazed and confused and has no explanation to offer its people," Amos Gilad, a senior Israeli Defense Ministry official, told Israel Radio on Sunday. "But we must refrain from bragging and marking dramatic objectives."
> 
> Rather than remove Hamas from power, he and other Israeli officials say, the goal is to weaken the movement and demonstrate the price it would pay for continuing to launch rockets. Sooner or later, Israel hopes to restore and strengthen an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire that worked for nearly five months before it started to break down in November.
> 
> "The army doesn't even have the pretense of neutralizing Hamas' ability to launch rockets. We have tried that before and failed," said Alon Ben-David, military correspondent for Israel's Channel 10 television.
> 
> "This operation," he explained, "is directed at Hamas' motivation to fire rockets at Israel rather than its actual ability to do so."
> 
> For reasons that became evident during the Lebanon conflict, it is far from certain whether even that limited goal can be achieved.
> 
> Hamas leaders have gone into hiding but given no hint of backing down. On the contrary, they have threatened to wage suicide attacks in Israel for the first time since 2005, apparently by infiltrating from the West Bank or from Gaza by way of Egypt.
> 
> "The ostensible aims of the operation amount to requiring Hamas not to behave like Hamas: not to fire into Israel or target Israeli civilians or soldiers, not to prepare for such attacks, not to store or smuggle in the material for such attacks," David Horovitz, editor of the Jerusalem Post, wrote in a Sunday editorial. "And that is not going to be achieved quickly."
> 
> Israeli officials have indicated that the offensive could last weeks or months. But as details of civilian casualties emerge from Gaza, Israel is coming under international pressure to halt the operation, just as it did in Lebanon. Health Ministry officials in Gaza estimate that as many as a third of the dead are noncombatants.
> 
> And it remains to be seen whether Israeli leaders have prepared adequately for the complications that may lie ahead if their army launches a ground campaign against Hamas' 15,000-man paramilitary force, which has drawn its own lessons from Hezbollah's success in the Lebanon war.
> 
> Anticipating a Lebanon-style ground war, Hamas used the recent cease-fire to fortify its military posts in Gaza, dig underground bunkers, acquire a large number of antitank missiles and install them in foxholes. How much of that defensive weaponry remains intact is unclear.
> 
> Israeli analysts believe an Israeli ground offensive is only a matter of time. The Lebanon war demonstrated that Israel's air force alone could not stop Hezbollah from lobbing rockets across the border.
> 
> But analysts also agree that a ground operation in the densely populated enclave would be messy, carrying the risk of an even higher civilian death toll and heavy casualties to Israeli soldiers. Hamas, which is still holding an Israeli soldier it captured in June 2006, is believed to have plans to try seizing others entering Gaza.
> 
> Despite support across Israel's political spectrum for a strong response to Hamas, many Israelis are wary of a prolonged offensive.
> 
> "How many soldiers are expected to be killed in the first wave?" columnist Zvi Barel asked in Sunday's Haaretz newspaper. "How many months is the [army] expected to spend in Gaza, sweeping its houses and tunnels? How many Palestinian civilians will be killed?"
> 
> Reuven Pedatzur, head of the security studies program at Israel's Netanya College, said the longer Israel fights in Gaza, the more difficult it will become to justify withdrawing.
> 
> "Yes, the operation started successfully, but we need to ask ourselves how we get out and arrive at negotiations," he said.
> 
> Such decisions now rest in the hands of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Olmert had been elected just four months before the Lebanon war and later endured censure by a government-appointed panel for the way he and his top aides had conducted it. Amir Peretz, the wartime defense minister, later stepped down.
> 
> Disgraced by corruption charges and forced in September to resign, Olmert remains a caretaker leader with a major military conflict on his agenda before elections in February to choose his successor.
> 
> Israeli commentators who watched him announce the offensive Saturday said he looked more subdued than the overconfident leader who addressed the nation at the start of the Lebanon war.
> 
> "Olmert was a serious, reserved man, who has learned that some situations call for modesty," columnist Sima Kadmon wrote on Ynet, a news website. "His words lacked the grandiose promises made on the eve of the Lebanon war."


----------



## tomahawk6

The Israelis are in a tough spot. Do they go all out and destroy Hamas or do they settle for an air campaign only ? If Hamas is in place at the end of the operation their reputation is enhanced. A ground operation by the IDF into Gaza must go all out and seize control of Gaza then they can figure out what they do after Hamas has been crushed. I just dont see leaving Hamas in place. If Hamas is destroyed then Israel would only have to worry about its northern border instead of a multi-front war.


----------



## belka

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The Israelis are in a tough spot. Do they go all out and destroy Hamas or do they settle for an air campaign only ? If Hamas is in place at the end of the operation their reputation is enhanced. A ground operation by the IDF into Gaza must go all out and seize control of Gaza then they can figure out what they do after Hamas has been crushed. I just dont see leaving Hamas in place. If Hamas is destroyed then Israel would only have to worry about its northern border instead of a multi-front war.



I think the only solution to this whole Hamas terrorism issue is to go in and take control of Gaza. There will be casualties on both sides but it's the only way to effectively disarm Hamas, airstrikes can only go so far.


----------



## tomahawk6

The IDF now has its own youtube channel for Gaza strike video.

http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk


----------



## a_majoor

Looking at the larger context of the conflict:

http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2008/12/29/the-battle-of-gaza-and-the-real-war/



> *The Battle of Gaza and The Real War*
> 
> Posted By Michael Ledeen On December 29, 2008 @ 10:03 am In Uncategorized | 35 Comments
> 
> It was only a matter of time before Israel lashed out at Hamas in Gaza.  Even the appeasers in Israel, of whom there are many, could not indefinitely accept thousands of rockets landing in civilian centers, especially after the battle against Hezbollah in 2006, which was widely viewed as a fiasco for the Israeli Army and for the leaders in Jerusalem who are facing an election in two months.  Defense Minister Barak says it’s “all-out war,” which suggests ground operations.  The usual rule in these cases is that Israel doesn’t have much time to accomplish its objectives;  the “international community” rallies to the side of Israel’s enemies, and Israel’s leaders invariably convince themselves that if they play ball, they’ll be rewarded for it.  But that never happens.  So far the Brits and the Vatican have already demanded an end to operations against Hamas, and by the time I finish typing this there will be more.
> 
> Israeli leaders say they want to bring an end to the rocket and missile attacks from Gaza.  But, as opposition leader Netanyahu said, that can’t be done without regime change.
> 
> _Our goal should be twofold - stopping the attacks on our cities and eliminating the threat of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip…Stopping the attacks can be done within a short period of time, while eliminating the threat of rocket attacks from Gaza will entail toppling the Hamas rule over the Strip and *uprooting the Iranian base there*_.
> 
> The last five words are key, because, as others have said, this is one more battle in the terror war in which we have been engaged since 2001.  The Battle of Gaza cannot be understood as a thing in itself, but only as part of a broader whole:  the war against the terror masters.  And Iran is the most lethal, the most dangerous, and the most aggressive terror master in the world today.
> 
> Step back from the Gaza battle for just a second, and look at the war itself:  it extends from Afghanistan to Pakistan and India, to Somalia, to Gaza/the Palestinian Authority/Israel, to Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia, with occasional skirmishes in the vast Kurdish domain (which embraces areas of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran), across Europe, into the United States and Canada and down to South America, including Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, with attendant terror/narcotics mafias that in turn operate in West Africa.  Iran is present in all these theaters, primarily via its proxies Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards (Quds Force).
> 
> Like the global totalitarian movements and regimes that threatened Western civilization in the last century, the Iranians come with a messianic ideology that admits no compromise with its enemies.  This war will only end with a winner and a loser, not with two contented negotiators.  We can win this war–we’ve delivered a stunning defeat to Iran and her proxies in Iraq, for example–and our most powerful weapons are political, not military.  Had we taken the war to Tehran, the terror forces in Gaza would, at a minimum, be a lot weaker today, as they would be in Afghanistan and Lebanon.  But we continue to dither, and the new American leaders are fooling themselves when they say that vigorous diplomacy can induce the mullahs to retreat.  It won’t happen, any more than the Israelis got the terrorists to retreat from all-out war against the Jews when the Oslo Agreement was signed, or when Rabin shook hands with Arafat.  It only delayed the days of reckoning, at the cost of many lives, mostly of innocents, on both sides.
> 
> There is a disgusting conceit that underlies the “realist” position that negotiations will solve these problems:  the conceit that tyrants will be easier to deal with than free peoples.  Rabin and Peres actually said this, once upon a time, with their smug statements to the effect that Arafat and the others would control the terrorists because they didn’t give a damn about the Geneva Conventions or other legal niceties.  They, and those who think the same applies to the Iranians, forget that our enemies want us dead or dominated, they don’t want a world at peace in which they will have to deal with real problems of governance.  They are waging jihad, not diplomacy.
> 
> It follows from this that you cannot “solve” Gaza by fighting in Gaza alone, you have to win the terror war.  And to do that, you must accomplish regime change, just as Netanyahu said.  But the crucial regime change must be accomplished in Iran.  Whatever Israel accomplishes in Gaza (and the same holds for our battles in Iraq and Afghanistan), it is only a matter of time before the mullahs reorganize, rearm, and return to battle.  And the next battle may involve nuclear weapons.
> 
> Paradoxically, those people who fume at the very idea of challenging the Iranian regime are actually making a truly terrible war more likely, not less.  Those few of us who believe that support for Iranian democratic dissidents could bring down the mullahs are almost universally scorned, and even accused of seeking war.  It is just the opposite.  The same accusations were directed against us when we supported Soviet dissidents, and called for regime change in Moscow.  And yet the Soviet Empire came down.  The Iranian regime is far weaker than the Soviet state.  An overwhelming number of Iranians oppose the regime, and are dreaming of the day when we finally embrace their cause.  Perhaps there are still some brave men and women in the Democratic Party who understand that America is a revolutionary country, and that we are bound by our honor, our principles, and our national interest to support the democratic forces in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, the three leading terror masters, along with those in Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia, now scurrying to jump on the bandwagon of Islamic tyranny.
> 
> Finally, if I am right, it is impossible to address the Arab/Israeli conflict by itself, for the context is all wrong.  Nobody in Gaza or the West Bank, nor in Amman or Cairo, can guarantee peace for Israel.  Today, that decision rests in the hands of Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran.  Until there is a different government in Tehran, there cannot be peace between Arabs and Israelis, any more than there can be peace in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Lebanon.
> 
> It’s a big war, but we’re a big country with enormous capacities.  Time to fight the real war.
> 
> Faster, Please.
> 
> UPDATE:  David Horovitz in the Jerusalem Post gets it:  [1] http://www.jpost.com
> <http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230456504726&pagename=JPArticle
> %2FShowFull>
> 
> Article printed from Faster, Please!: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2008/12/29/the-battle-of-gaza-and-the-real-war/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> [1] http://www.jpost.com: http://www.jpost.com/


----------



## Shec

Thought readers might be interested in relevant excerpts from a note I just received from a bud who lives just outside current missle range:

"Day 4 of Operation Cast Lead
....We are still hearing jets and choppers flying over at all hours of the day and night.  The only time you don’t hear them is when the IDF opens the gates to Gaza to let in humanitarian aid...

...They have hit targets in the 40 Km range now so they are using the Russian made GRAD Missiles now and less of the home made KASSAMS and mortar shells. (We took out most of the machine shops that made them) The GRADS are going to be less and less in my mind since the drones are picking up the transport trucks and the IAF is taking them out along with the crews. (Hence the growing body counts on their side)..."


----------



## Brad Sallows

>While Israel may have gained at best a short respite from rocket attacks, it has killed perhaps nearly a hundred civilians.

Israel can't fight a war against Hamas without causing civilian casualties.  The question is one of proportionality: how many innocent civilians are at risk for a given operation/target?  Some not-strictly-military persons and things are legitimate targets.


----------



## Rodders

Shec said:
			
		

> Given geographic density it is reasonable to presume that if Israel's targetting had been somewhat less surgical a hell of a lot more than *270 odd pals would be meeting 72 virgins right now*.



You know, this is the kind of post that really pi$$es me off!

First off, I don't fault Israel for its actions, and I think they are justified. Hamas was killing it's civilians, so Israel has every right to defend it's territory and it's people.
But if killing civilians is not preferred, if not unacceptable, is it not always so?

I don't suggest that Israel is targeting civilians in the way that Hamas is. But the above statement makes it sound like simply being Palestinian makes one a viable target. It shows a great deal of cultural intolerance.
Are all Palestinians supporters of Hamas? Beats me, but I doubt it! 
Even if they are, do the deaths of civilians who have not engaged in rocket attacks against Israel warrant such a cold and dismissive comment as that made above? If so, then how is that any different than the attitude clearly held by Hamas?


----------



## belka

Rodders said:
			
		

> Are all Palestinians supporters of Hamas? Beats me, but I doubt it!



Probably not all, but a majority are since Hamas was elected by the Palestinians. 

The Palestinians are not helpless children who bear no responsibility for their own actions. They have utterly failed to take steps to improve their lot in life. They have collectively decided that a continuing violent conflict with Israel is somehow in their own interest. It is stupidity on a massive scale. The solution to this issue is simple:

1. Elect/Select representatives who actually work to achieve the interests of the Palestinian People rather than those who support the status quo of death, destruction, and terrorism.

2. Stop attacking Israel in any way, shape, or form.

If they really did that, the pressure on Israel to deal with this issue would become overwhelming, even the US would insist on fundamental changes in Israeli policy.

On the other hand, if the Palestinian grand strategy is to continue with the rockets, bombing, and terrorism,… well then, they should probably expect serious consequences for that choice too.


----------



## aesop081

Nauticus said:
			
		

> but what sounds like indiscriminate bombing takes no regard to civilian deaths.



It may sound indiscriminate to you, but that does not make it so.


----------



## Scottheus

Wow, there seem to be a lot more opinions than facts in this thread. Such "matter of fact" responses from some. I do not in any way support the continued Hamas rocket attacks, but maybe there is a reason that they persist. It might not be a bad idea for some to investigate the Israeli blockade that was set up during the ceasefire. What about the excessive force that is being used? 1 Israeli civilian was killed and now over 300 Palestinians have been killed?? Please do not for one second think that everything was peaceful and Hamas decided to get up one day and start a fight with the Israelis. If you lived in the same conditions that many Palestinians do then I am sure that some of you would post drastically different responses. Don't believe everything that you hear in the media. Things are not as black and white as they like to portray it. And God Bless us for living in Canada!


----------



## aesop081

Scottheus said:
			
		

> If you lived in the same conditions that many Palestinians do then I am sure that some of you would post drastically different responses.



The Palestinians have it in their power to get rid of Hamas, rather than support them.


----------



## tourza

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> You convince the Palestinians that their innocent children will continue to be killed, as long as they allow Hamas, Hezbolah, or any of these other organizations, to launch rockets into Israel, killing their innocent children.



The Hizballah don't operate in the Occupied Territories, just in Southern Lebanon. 

Regards.


----------



## FastEddy

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >While Israel may have gained at best a short respite from rocket attacks, it has killed perhaps nearly a hundred civilians.
> 
> Israel can't fight a war against Hamas without causing civilian casualties.  The question is one of proportionality: how many innocent civilians are at risk for a given operation/target?  Some not-strictly-military persons and things are legitimate targets.




So you really think they are just poor innocent civilians, they just happen to be the ones who voted them in and rally around their Banner and cheer them on as they launch their Rockets.

Did your heart bleed for the poor civilians in Germany when our Bombers flatted practically every City there.

And how about storing Weapons and Ammo in Religious Sites and Training Facilities near schools and hospitals, it really seems that Hamas cares a whole lot about collateral damage, except for propaganda.


----------



## Rodders

NINJA said:
			
		

> Probably not all, but a majority are since Hamas was elected by the Palestinians.



But surely voting someone into power doesn't automatically make you responsible for all things that government does.

I have family in the States who vote Republican because of their economic policies, yet (hold on to your hats) they don't support the war in Iraq.
I won't profess to know a great deal about the entire political philosophy of Hamas, but I refuse to believe that the only (or even the chief) reason that some (if not many) Palestinians voted for them was/is because of their position on Israel. At very least I do not accept that every single Palestinian supports Hamas attacking Israeli civilians. No one side in a conflict is pure and noble while the other devoid of any positive human qualities!

As I stated, I'm not condemning Israel. Not at all! They have as much right as any other sovereign nation to defend and protect its territory and citizens. I just despise the attitude expressed by a very few here that any and all Palestinians are accountable for the actions of Hamas, and as such, are individually deserving of any fate that befalls them.

And to another poster, some of the Palestinians who have been killed ARE innocent children. And should you decide to call me a "bleeding heart" or some other dated term of convenience, I hold such tragedies in equal regard no matter their race, colour, or religious affiliation.


----------



## Shec

Rodders said:
			
		

> You know, this is the kind of post that really pi$$es me off!
> 
> First off, I don't fault Israel for its actions, and I think they are justified. Hamas was killing it's civilians, so Israel has every right to defend it's territory and it's people.
> But if killing civilians is not preferred, if not unacceptable, is it not always so?
> 
> I don't suggest that Israel is targeting civilians in the way that Hamas is. But the above statement makes it sound like simply being Palestinian makes one a viable target. It shows a great deal of cultural intolerance.
> Are all Palestinians supporters of Hamas? Beats me, but I doubt it!
> Even if they are, do the deaths of civilians who have not engaged in rocket attacks against Israel warrant such a cold and dismissive comment as that made above? If so, then how is that any different than the attitude clearly held by Hama



If being intolerant of a culture whose mighty warriors hide behind their children rather than standing in front of them makes me "culturally intolerant" than I plead guilty as charged.   And, quite frankly pal, I don't care whether that "really pi$$es you off" or not.


----------



## aesop081

Rodders said:
			
		

> It shows a great deal of cultural intolerance.



Hamas considers any Israeli a legitimate target. What would you call that then ? Doesnt it sound exactly like what you have called "cultural intolerance " ?

Hypocrite.



> Even if they are, do the deaths of civilians who have not engaged in rocket attacks against Israel warrant such a cold and dismissive comment as that made above?



Hamas lanches these attacks from within Palestinian neighbourhoods. Do you see many Palestinins stopping them ? Its not like your average Palestinian is not aware of who is Hamas and who is not. They know full what what Hamas is doing right under their nose and allow it to happen. They know full well what will result.


----------



## Rodders

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Hamas considers any Israeli a legitimate target. What would you call that then ? Doesnt it sound exactly like what you have called "cultural intolerance " ?
> 
> Hypocrite.



You find a quote by me that suggests in any way that I defend what Hamas has done! I defy you to find such a quote!
In fact, I have said several times that I think Israel's response IS justified!

And yes, Hamas is a great example of a VERY culturally intolerant group! One of the many reasons I have no sympathy for any fate that befalls them.

But if you will actually read my initial reply, I was stating an opposition to the implication that any and all Palestinians are by default responsible for the actions of Hamas, and therefore the deaths of Palestinian civilians is grounds for flippancy.  
Not all Germans were Nazis, and not all Palestinians support the attacks by Hamas.

If you wish to engage in name calling, fair enough. But make sure your basis for doing so is as a result of something I've actually said, and not simply because I don't subscribe in entirety to your opinion.


----------



## Rodders

Shec said:
			
		

> If being intolerant of a culture whose mighty warriors hide behind their children rather than standing in front of them makes me "culturally intolerant" than I plead guilty as charged.   And, quite frankly pal, I don't care whether that "really pi$$es you off" or not.



Condemn these "warriors" all you want! I won't disagree with you!

But when you lump the entire culture, regardless of age, or non-involvement, than culturally intolerant is a pleasant term.


----------



## 1feral1

Rodders said:
			
		

> You find a quote by me that suggests in any way that I defend what Hamas has done! I defy you to find such a quote!
> In fact, I have said several times that I think Israel's response IS justified!
> 
> And yes, Hamas is a great example of a VERY culturally intolerant group! One of the many reasons I have no sympathy for any fate that befalls them.
> 
> But if you will actually read my initial reply, I was stating an opposition to the implication that any and all Palestinians are by default responsible for the actions of Hamas, and therefore the deaths of Palestinian civilians is grounds for flippancy.
> Not all Germans were Nazis, and not all Palestinians support the attacks by Hamas.
> 
> If you wish to engage in name calling, fair enough. But make sure your basis for doing so is as a result of something I've actually said, and not simply because I don't subscribe in entirety to your opinion.



Kind Sir,

I took every word you said the same way the Cdn Av did, so if I was you, I'd rethink what you've been gobbing off about.

EDIT: Civilians die in war. Sad but true, but when you are told that an attack is on its way, and you have rockets in your back yard and you don't leave - too bad, you were warned. Israel is not directly atatcking civilians, and are doing their best to keep these casualties light. The reality of war pal, the nature of the beast. You can shove your cultural intolerence.


----------



## aesop081

Rodders said:
			
		

> or non-involvement,



You dont have to personaly launch rockets to be involved. Allowing it to happen is also being involved.


----------



## Rodders

I'll fill out my profile if it means so much to you.

But it is your kind of reply that was the basis for my initial reply. That anyone who doesn't whole-heartedly and absolutely conform to the ideal that all people on a given side are either the enemy or ally. The world is not white and black, good and evil. Anyone who believes the world is so simple has watched entirely too many John Wayne movies.

Try reading my initial post/reply, and tell me what was so incorrect. Was it the fact that I think Israel is justified, while at the same time thinking it's unfortunate that people who are not involved in the conflict are being killed? Should I only feel bad for the Israeli civilians? I think civilian deaths on any side are unfortunate, and if you actually read my reply, and read objectively, you would see that's all I was saying!

If such duality is not welcome here, or if I am only permitted to lament the death of allied civilians, then I think I understand why there was some problems here some time ago.

So feel free to name call and spew venom. But I hope you will read what I've posted, and make a serious effort to understand what I was saying.


----------



## Rodders

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Kind Sir,
> 
> I took every word you said the same way the Cdn Av did, so if I was you, I'd rethink what you've been gobbing off about.
> 
> EDIT: Civilians die in war. Sad but true, but when you are told that an attack is on its way, and you have rockets in your back yard and you don't leave - too bad, you were warned. Israel is not directly atatcking civilians, and are doing their best to keep these casualties light. The reality of war pal, the nature of the beast. You can shove your cultural intolerence.
> 
> Have a happy do-diddly day.



Well since you have clearly inferred something from my posts that was not present, why don't you tell me what I've said that was so inaccurate or incorrect! Tell me what part of my "gobbing off" you disagree so vehemently with!

Of course civilian casualties are a part of war. Does this mean that we denigrate them? 
Does thinking civilian deaths are unfortunate make me a bleeding heart? Apparently it does here.


----------



## Rodders

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You dont have to personaly launch rockets to be involved. Allowing it to happen is also being involved.



Okay. 

Would you then agree that any nation's people who support as a majority the actions of their government are similarly accountable for their government's actions?


----------



## Brad Sallows

>So you really think they are just poor innocent civilians, they just happen to be the ones who voted them in and rally around their Banner and cheer them on as they launch their Rockets.

By "innocent" I mean the civilians who are not contributing materially to belligerent action.  An example of a "not innocent" - hence targetable - civilian is one who works in war industry or establishments.  In an irregularly fought war the line is harder to find - what, really, are the security forces and facilities of Hamas?  How does one distinguish between a proper university and a training/indoctrination camp?


----------



## aesop081

Rodders said:
			
		

> Does thinking civilian deaths are unfortunate make me a bleeding heart? Apparently it does here.



Maybe if you understood the realities of the conflict you would stop lamenting Israel for killing your so-called "uninvolved civillians" and instead protest the fact that Hamas hides itself, and conducts its attacks from, within those civillians.


----------



## Rodders

For the final time. My only position was that I don't agree with someone lumping an entire culture, regardless of age, into the same group as those who are responsible for the violence. THAT is intolerant!

So if that position offends so many people here, than I guess I'll just have to accept that.


----------



## Rodders

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Maybe if you understood the realities of the conflict you would stop lamenting Israel for killing your so-called "uninvolved civillians" and instead protest the fact that Hamas hides itself, and conducts its attacks from, within those civillians.



Why should I stop lamenting Israel? I think the deaths of their civilians is EQUALLY as unfortunate. Hence my (repeatedly) stated position of supporting their actions.

Again I ask, find one reference to where I've offered even the most remote support of Hamas. You can't because I don't.

Unless you also assert that NO Palestinian (man, woman, child, infant) is an innocent casualty, then I don't understand your difficulty with comprehending my point.


----------



## Kirkhill

Not from the most PC site on the web

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/12/palestinian-girl-loses-family-in.html#linksGatewayPundit




> Palestinian Girl Loses Family In Bombing... Blames Hamas! (Video)
> 
> Palestinian Media Watch captured this clip of a young girl who lost family members in the bombing raids this weekend.
> She blames "Hamas is the cause of all wars"."
> Here is the video:
> 
> PMW reported:
> 
> 
> A Palestinian girl whose family members was killed yesterday in Gaza after an Israeli air attack was interviewed today on Palestinian TV and placed the blame for the war on Hamas:
> 
> [Girl] "We were sleeping 7 girls in the room. We were asleep and didn't know what was happening. In the morning all the bricks were on top of my head, and the heads of all my sisters. My 4 year old sister next to me was dead."
> 
> [Interviewer] "How many were you?"
> 
> [Girl] "Seven.In the other room were my mother, my father, my yonger brother and another sister, who is 13 days old. I say, Hamas is the cause, in the first place, of all wars."
> [Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas) Dec. 29, 2008]



I don't think I need to prove my credentials to anybody on this site -  and, for the record, I do support Israel's actions, I do not support Hamas - and, frankly I accept that the above link could be out and out propaganda - don't care.

In amongst all the rabid Grannies and teenage Hoodlums and middleaged Fanatics with grand delusions there are also others that "get it" as far as we are concerned, but just can't get out of their situation.

Slinging insults helps nobody.


----------



## tomahawk6

What is absolutely amazing to me is that lack of concern for Israeli citizens killed by Hamas rockets. Not one thread here about how terrible it is that innocent Israeli civilians were killed. Plenty of threads when Israel gets fed up and strikes back against Hamas/Hizbollah aggression. Plenty of concern for Palestinian/arab civilian deaths and opinions about Israeli proportionality or the lack of it.


----------



## Rodders

But that's what I don't understand. What is it that you disagree with so strongly about my initial post???

All you've done is attack me on an assumption you've already made about me. Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like you've decided I support Hamas because I find Palestinian civilian deaths to be unfortunate. Is this the case?


----------



## Shec

Fair ball staff.  Rodders,  I stand by my statement given my point that the ethos of any culture that lionizes such "mighty warriors" , upon whom we seem to agree are somewhat less than worthy of respect,  does not earn itself a lot of tolerance.  Tell me where else does one see a culture that dances in the streets and celebrates the murder of innocents as the Pals have done time and time again?


----------



## Rodders

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> What is absolutely amazing to me is that lack of concern for Israeli citizens killed by Hamas rockets. Not one thread here about how terrible it is that innocent Israeli civilians were killed. Plenty of threads when Israel gets fed up and strikes back against Hamas/Hizbollah aggression. Plenty of concern for Palestinian/arab civilian deaths and opinions about Israeli proportionality or the lack of it.



Don't know about others, but I have expressed several times that I equally lament the loss of Israeli lives as much as I do any other.

Difference is, no one here has been flippant about the Israeli civilians.


----------



## Rodders

Shec said:
			
		

> Fair ball staff.  Rodders,  I stand by my statement given my point that the ethos of any culture that lionizes such "mighty warriors" , upon whom we seem to agree are somewhat less than worthy of respect,  does not earn itself a lot of tolerance.  Tell me where else does one see a culture that dances in the streets and celebrates the murder of innocents as the Pals have done time and time again?



And do those people represent the absolute entirety of the Palestinian people? Does every single Palestinian man, woman and child do a dance when an Israeli is killed?
Do any Israelis take satisfaction in the death of Palestinians? Probably very few, but I'll wager both my kidneys that they exist.

To blanket condemn an entire people is a very dangerous attitude, and has been responsible for a lot of ugliness in the world. That's not a veiled insult, I assure you. Right and wrong are a matter of which side you're on, and for any Palestinian to condemn/hate all Jews or Israelis is repugnant and equally worthy of my condemnation. 
But I won't accept that it's only wrong for certain groups, and not for others to think this way.


----------



## 1feral1

Rodders said:
			
		

> And do those people represent the absolute entirety of the Palestinian people? Does every single Palestinian man, woman and child do a dance when an Israeli is killed?
> Do any Israelis take satisfaction in the death of Palestinians? Probably very few, but I'll wager both my kidneys that they exist.
> 
> To blanket condemn an entire people is a very dangerous attitude, and has been responsible for a lot of ugliness in the world. That's not a veiled insult, I assure you. Right and wrong are a matter of which side you're on, and for any Palestinian to condemn/hate all Jews or Israelis is repugnant and equally worthy of my condemnation.
> But I won't accept that it's only wrong for certain groups, and not for others to think this way.



I don't see any Israelis buring Palestinian flags on the news, however the past 72 hrs I have seen Israeli flags along with the US flag burned by a very finatical crowd of Paletinians and their supporters throughout the arab world.


----------



## Rodders

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> I don't see any Israelis buring Palestinian flags on the news, however the past 72 hrs I have seen Israeli flags along with the US flag burned by a very finatical crowd of Paletinians and their supporters throughout the arab world.



And ... ?

Is it therefore logical to conclude that because we've only seen such demonstrations/action by Palestinians/Arabs that ALL Palestinians/Arabs hold exactly the same view?

Why is my belief that there is such a thing as an "innocent" Palestinian, or the fact that I equally lament the loss of Palestinian AND Israeli civilians cause such a disapproving response here? That's not an assertion, THAT'S a question!


----------



## Kat Stevens

What alternative do you suggest then, Rodders?  What is Israel to do in response to indiscriminate rocket attacks into their civilian neighbourhoods?  If you were the Israeli PM, what's your response to repeated attacks?  And in order to appease your indignation, I lament ANY death of innocents, no matter what they eat, what they believe, or their skin pigment.


----------



## Shec

Rodders said:
			
		

> And do those people represent the absolute entirety of the Palestinian people? Does every single Palestinian man, woman and child do a dance when an Israeli is killed?
> Do any Israelis take satisfaction in the death of Palestinians? Probably very few, but I'll wager both my kidneys that they exist.
> 
> To blanket condemn an entire people is a very dangerous attitude, and has been responsible for a lot of ugliness in the world. That's not a veiled insult, I assure you. Right and wrong are a matter of which side you're on, and for any Palestinian to condemn/hate all Jews or Israelis is repugnant and equally worthy of my condemnation.
> But I won't accept that it's only wrong for certain groups, and not for others to think this way.


  

This enmity transcends the political reality of the 20th century.  The Palestinians are quite literally the Philistines of the Biblical era, indeed that is the etymology of the name.  That makes both parties natural enemies in a war that, like it or not, will never end.  That being the case David is still slaying Goliath and I admit that I am on David's side.  If you wish to play Thought Police and condemn me for that, go ahead.


----------



## Rodders

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> What alternative do you suggest then, Rodders?  What is Israel to do in response to indiscriminate rocket attacks into their civilian neighbourhoods?  If you were the Israeli PM, what's your response to repeated attacks?



Do people actually read replies from others here, or do they just assume?

For the last time, I support Israel's actions! I've said so many times!!!


----------



## Kat Stevens

Okay then, and I've already said I'm sad people died, you win.  Can we all go home now?




			
				Rodders said:
			
		

> Do people actually read replies from others here, or do they just assume?
> 
> For the last time, I support Israel's actions! I've said so many times!!!


----------



## Rodders

Shec said:
			
		

> This enmity transcends the political reality of the 20th century.  The Palestinians are quite literally the Philistines of the Biblical era, indeed that is the name.  That makes both parties natural enemies in a war that, like it or not, will never end.  That being the case David is still slaying Goliath and I admit that I am on David's side.  If you wish to play Thought Police and condemn me for that, go ahead.



Um ... how are the Palestinians representative of Goliath? I should say in this instance, the roles are reversed. 

If Israel was so inclined, they could steamroll their way across Gaza, wiping them out completely. Hamas does not have that capability.

Having said that (as I seem to be required to repeat myself ad nauseam here), I support Israel's response. I just don't take a flippant attitude to the death of any civilians.

That's all.

Have a nice evening


----------



## Kirkhill

Source

Kat, in fairness, this is how he opened his side of the discussion 



> First off, I don't fault Israel for its actions, and I think they are justified. Hamas was killing it's civilians, so Israel has every right to defend it's territory and it's people.



Unfortunately Rodders, when you wade in with an opening line of "you pi$$ me off", you are more than likely to be greeted in kind.

These guys, and women, round here are probably a whole lot more familiar than you with the concept of civilians in a war zone - and the consequences.  That is certainly true of Overwatch Downunder.


----------



## Rodders

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> IMHO opinion, the majority hate Israel (oh, and the west too for supporting them), yes. It is common knwoledge that many arab nations hate Israel and want them destroyed.
> 
> I am now beginning to sense there is an agenda you have on here, and your message is getting stronger, so before I end up getting fired up, I am bowing out.
> 
> You win.
> 
> I know where I stand, and I am beginning to know what your up to.
> 
> Seen your kind on here all too often. Again, an empty promise from you, you promised to fill out your profile, still nothing. Remember Rodders, its your credibility on here, not ours, and you only get one chance at a first impression.
> 
> Enjoy your freedom as you eat your greasy pizza tonight. I wonder how many French, Dutch, and German 'innocent' citizens paid for it.
> 
> OWDU
> Veteran
> 
> EDITed for spelling and clarity



I do not have an agenda, and I know the "kind" you refer to. I am not one of them.

I made a simple statement about not appreciating a flippant attitude towards the death of civilians. That was all I ever said! Several people (yourself included) disagreed with my position, and made assumed extrapolations about my supposed position and politics.

It is interesting that no one has told me why it is so improper of me to hold the aforementioned position. Because aside from my repeatedly stating my support for Israel, that is the only point I have made here.

Good evening to you sir


----------



## Kat Stevens

Given, and I've calmed down a bit.  At no point did I ever take a "fukkitt, they're Palestinians, they deserve it" attitude.  I've never been to the ltterbox, but I was one of the first 100 UN troops into Croatia in '92, and was on the recce to Vukovar (google it).  I've seen plenty of civilian suffering from indiscriminate applications of HE and SA, enough to keep me up at night, and to think I was being flipant is a pretty galling insult.


----------



## Rodders

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Source
> 
> Kat, in fairness, this is how he opened his side of the discussion
> 
> Unfortunately Rodders, when you wade in with an opening line of "you pi$$ me off", you are more than likely to be greeted in kind.
> 
> These guys, and women, round here are probably a whole lot more familiar than you with the concept of civilians in a war zone - and the consequences.  That is certainly true of Overwatch Downunder.



Hey! I'm not saying I possess the experience or the knowledge to surpass anyone here. I never stated any personal insight, knowledge or experience. I simply made a statement, and then it was assumed that I condemned Israel, that I supported Hamas, and that I have some hidden "agenda". None of the above are the case.

I have been reading this board for a very long time, and have posted when I really felt compelled to do so. I have seen what has sometimes become of new posters, so I post with great trepidation. And now I remember why.

I don't mind a good debate, but when people reply based upon assumptions, and assume that because I haven't filled out my profile to their satisfaction, that I have something to hide, that's not debating.

Sorry for the rant. I very much enjoy this site, and visit it daily.

Happy New Years to all!


----------



## Loachman

I have reviewed this entire thread at some length, and am thoroughly baffled by the turn that it has taken. Several of you should also review the whole thing, and actually read what is being said, _*before the lock is lifted*_. This topic is worthy of discussion, and we do not need to see it go downhill again or anybody in the warning system.

Yes, it is sometimes easy to misinterpret things said on the internet, but much of what has been said yet misrepresented by others seems pretty clear to me.

This is where it appeared to first go wrong:



			
				Shec said:
			
		

> Given geographic density it is reasonable to presume that if Israel's targetting had been somewhat less surgical a hell of a lot more than 270 odd pals would be meeting 72 virgins right now.



That post is factually accurate, if stated in a less-than-politically-correct manner. I took no offence from it - many of us have somewhat dark senses of humour.

But, someone did...

It happens sometimes.



			
				Rodders said:
			
		

> You know, this is the kind of post that really pi$$es me off!



I see that as a mild over-reaction or misunderstanding. I believe that more was read into Shec's post by Rodders than was really there.



			
				Rodders said:
			
		

> do the deaths of civilians who have not engaged in rocket attacks against Israel warrant such a cold and dismissive comment as that made above?



Was Shec "cold and dismissive"? I can be flippant, too, but that does not necessarily mean that I am cold and callous. I do not know Shec, but I see no indication that he is either.

Anyway, that was mild, and it should have ended there. It got worse.

Elsewhere in the post from which I took those two quotes, Rodders says - _*quite clearly*_:



			
				Rodders said:
			
		

> First off, I don't fault Israel for its actions, and I think they are justified. Hamas was killing it's civilians, so Israel has every right to defend it's territory and it's people.



Got that? _*No*_ blaming Israel for defending itself, Israel is *justified*, _*Israel has every right*_ to defend its territory and its people.

Does everybody that was getting so upset with him understand that?

It seems pretty straight forward to me.

He even made similar statements several times.

He also challenged his attackers to find anything in his posts which said anything to the contrary, again, several times.

Despite continuing attacks upon him for things that he never said, nobody found anything in response to his repeated challenge.

Nobody.

I could not, either. And I looked.

Meanwhile, the disagreement with what he was _*not*_ saying and the agreement with what he _*was*_ saying just got ridiculous.

He lamented the loss of innocent lives in that post, and suggested that perhaps not all of the dead were Hamas supporters, and that their deaths were, therefore, unfortunate.

I agree with that.

Who here does not?

Who here thinks that all of these people deserved to die?

Who thinks that every single one was an active Hamas supporter?

Who here does not regret the deaths of innocents, even if only one or two of the total were such?

Some - many - of those killed were innocent. I, too, regret their deaths.

I also realize, as does Rodders, that Israel has no choice.

As for the profile issue, there is no requirement, as G2G has pointed out, to fill one out. Yes, it helps with credibility at times, but there is nothing in any of Rodders' posts where service would add any and a sketchy profile is, therefore, irrelevant.


----------



## old medic

Israel allows Palestinian holders of foreign passports to flee Gaza fighting
By Associated Press
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-ml-palestinians-fleeing-gaza,1,1684622.story
January 1, 2009



> EREZ CROSSING, Israel (AP) — Israeli officials say they are allowing dozens of Palestinian holders of foreign passports to flee the fighting in the Gaza Strip.
> 
> Army spokesman Peter Lerner says nearly 300 Palestinians are pouring through the Israeli-controlled Erez crossing Friday morning.
> 
> He says the Palestinians hold citizenship from a number of other countries, including the U.S., Russia, Turkey and Kazakhstan.
> 
> For nearly a week, Israel has been bombing targets linked to the ruling Hamas militant group in Gaza. More than 400 Palestinians have been killed, and dozens of buildings have been damaged or destroyed.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Army.ca members are not the only ones who can move a discussion downhill, fast.

In the USA the B C List _celebrities_ are also weighing in - see _"i told my friend don't go!"_

I only found this because my local radio station thought (thought?) fit to include Ms. Barr's commentary as a 'news' item. Must be a really slow news day or America's obsession with even the most minor celebrity means that we are, indeed, doomed.


----------



## NL_engineer

I wonder how many hold an Canadian Passport out of convenience  :  I just hope I don't hear that Canada is going to rescue these people, as they made their own choice to live there, and not in our country (not including Government/large Corporations that may have people in the country).


----------



## Shec

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Army.ca members are not the only ones who can move a discussion downhill, fast.
> 
> In the USA the B C List _celebrities_ are also weighing in - see _"i told my friend don't go!"_
> 
> I only found this because my local radio station thought (thought?) fit to include Ms. Barr's commentary as a 'news' item. Must be a really slow news day or America's obsession with even the most minor celebrity means that we are, indeed, doomed.



It seems that as Roseanne Barr's recent gambit for stardom crashed and burned she launched her own Operation Cast Tripe.   Excerpts From my buddy's daily e-diary:

"... last week they ran her “COMEBACK” stand up show on the local TV. And within 10 minutes of the start 99% of Israelis that were watching it had either changed the channel, turned off the TV and went to bed, or sat there wishing a Hamas suicide bomber would take them to their graves as this fat whale flopped like a hooked mullet on stage, So it seems to me she heard the reviews  and is countering with “NAZI STATE".   I’ve heard from a few folks that said to me the “This was the funniest thing she has ever said” and I tend to agree with them on the facts!..."

I trust no one will be offended by the black humour.


----------



## George Wallace

Looking at Roseanne Barr's comments, I don't think it will be long before she become branded as "Antisemitic".  At the very least, someone who should be locked up, as it would appear that she has lost some of her faculties.......if she had any.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Wow, there is a severely wobbly wheel on her apple cart, isn't there?

EDIT*  Pretty hard for her to be anti-semitic, she's Jewish, I believe.


----------



## Good2Golf

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Army.ca members are not the only ones who can move a discussion downhill, fast.
> 
> In the USA the B C List _celebrities_ are also weighing in - see _"i told my friend don't go!"_
> 
> I only found this because my local radio station thought (thought?) fit to include Ms. Barr's commentary as a 'news' item. Must be a really slow news day or America's obsession with even the most minor celebrity means that we are, indeed, doomed.



Edward, curse you, I think I just became a little bit stupider by reading some of Ms. Barr's blog...  :-\

Great 'street gang' analogy, Roseanne -- indeed, the Bloods and Crips regularly launch Katyusha rockets at each other in L.A. in a manner similar to other 'street gangs' like Hamas (I think she actually meant the fighting faction Hezbollah, as opposed to the elected party Hamas, but don't let a small thing like detail get in the way of something called accuracy)....  :


----------



## a_majoor

Google's new motto: "Do Evil"

http://www.onlinevideowatch.com/



> *IDF Takes to, and Fights YouTube*
> December 30th, 2008
> 
> Military propaganda efforts in new media can be entertaining to watch, the U.S. Department of Defense has its Multinational Force Iraq (MNFIRAQ) YouTube channel. Iraqi insurgents and other terrorist organizations have an online video operation in the form of attack videos uploaded to YouTube and across the web. Palestinian militant group Hamas had a YouTube clone until it was recently shut down, and now the Israel Defense Forces have taken to YouTube.
> 
> But how do you determine what can stay and what can go? YouTube has taken steps to remove content from militant organizations that post videos of attacks on American soliders in Iraq and propaganda posted by terrorist organizations. Now they have taken the step of removing IDF videos of Israeli operations in Gaza - one with more than 10,000 views.
> 
> From the IDF YouTube channel:
> 
> We are saddened that YouTube has taken down some of our exclusive footage showing the IDF’s operational success in operation Cast Lead against Hamas extremists in the Gaza Strip. As the State of Israel again faces those who would see it destroyed, it is imperative that we in the IDF show the world the inhumanity directed against us and our efforts to stop it. It is also worth noting that one of the videos removed had the highest number of hits (over 10,000) at the time of its removal.
> 
> Jewish Daily Forward reports
> 
> The removal appears to have been the result of a function of YouTube, which flags videos when a certain threshold of complaints is passed and routes them to an employee who decides whether or not to remove them. Some IDF videos showing footage of bombings were allowed to remain, apparently because they did not pass the threshold of complaints.
> 
> So YouTube is now employing a combination of crowdsourcing and a human censor to determine what is worthy of calling a TOS violation, but what if it’s news? It’s a thin line - how do you make that call?


----------



## old medic

Palestinians with foreign passports cross into Israel, fleeing Gaza bloodshed

By ARON HELLER | Associated Press Writer
    12:37 PM CST, January 2, 2009


> EREZ CROSSING, Israel (AP) — Israel allowed nearly 300 Palestinians with foreign passports to leave besieged Gaza Friday after pleas from other governments to let them go.
> 
> The Gazans were notified Thursday by foreign consulates that they were being evacuated, though some stayed behind. Those who left crossed into Israel then boarded buses to Jordan en route to other countries.
> 
> "These are people who are not part of the fighting, they are not part of the equation. They have no affiliation with Hamas," Israeli military liaison officer Maj. Aviad Zilberman said. "This move is part of our humanitarian assistance to the civilian population."
> 
> More than 400 Palestinians and four Israelis have been killed in a week-old offensive against Gaza's Hamas rulers triggered by an escalation of militant rocket fire at Israel. The U.N. estimated Friday that a quarter of the Palestinians killed were civilians.
> 
> Gaza teenager Jawaher Hajji, who lost two close relatives in the past week, was one of 270 Palestinians who left.
> 
> "There is no water, no electricity, no medicine. It's hard to survive. Gaza is destroyed," said Hajji, 14, who has U.S. citizenship. "There is no place to hide."
> 
> Hajji said her uncle was killed in one of the first strikes while getting medicine for her cancer-stricken father, who died of his illness a few days later. She said their home east of Gaza City was destroyed and a classmate was also killed.
> 
> "They are supposed to destroy just the Hamas, but people in their homes are dying too," she said at the Erez crossing between Gaza and Israel.
> 
> Children cried at the crossing as they were processed by diplomatic officials from various countries. Then they boarded buses to Amman, Jordan. Hajji said she, her mother and five siblings would fly to family in Virginia from there.
> 
> Hajji's 13-year-old sister, Nashwa, said they were both born in the U.S. and had family there and in Canada. They moved to the Gaza Strip three years ago, and she said life was rather comfortable until the Israeli offensive began.
> 
> She said the Israeli military had called their home before attacking it, telling residents to leave for their own safety. She said her family did, but others refused.
> 
> "People said 'We don't want to go. We will die where we are,'" Nashwa Hajji said.
> 
> Those who left hold citizenship from the U.S., Russia, Turkey, Norway, Kazakhstan and other countries. Foreign women married to Palestinians were among those leaving.
> 
> In Washington, the State Department said it had assisted 27 American citizens and members of their immediate families to leave Gaza on Friday and stood ready to help others. Department officials said earlier this week they were aware of about 30 Americans in Gaza but that there could be others.
> 
> "I believe there are still Americans citizens left in Gaza," spokesman Gordon Duguid told reporters.
> 
> At the Erez crossing, Caroline Katba, 15, said her family emerged unscathed from explosions near their home. She said she, her Russian-born mother and three siblings would be fleeing to Russia to join other family members. But her Palestinian father, who did not have a foreign passport, was not allowed to leave.
> 
> "I feel happy and sad. Happy, because I am going to Russia, and sad, because my father is left behind," she said.
> 
> Despite the upheaval, Jawaher Hajji seemed calm and composed. She spoke confidently.
> 
> "I have to forget what happened. I have to be strong and happy or we will lose," she said.


----------



## old medic

Bush says Hamas attacks on Israel an 'act of terror'; outlines conditions for Gaza cease-fire

By BEN FELLER | Associated Press Writer
    11:47 PM CST, January 2, 2009



> WASHINGTON (AP) — President George W. Bush on Friday branded the Hamas rocket attacks on Israel an "act of terror" and outlined his own condition for a cease-fire in Gaza, saying no peace deal would be acceptable without monitoring to halt the flow of smuggled weapons to terrorist groups.
> 
> Bush chose his weekly taped radio address to speak for the first time about one of the bloodiest Mideast clashes in decades. It began a week ago. Israeli warplanes have rained bombs on Gaza, targeting the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which has traumatized southern Israel with intensifying rocket attacks.
> 
> "The United States is leading diplomatic efforts to achieve a meaningful cease-fire that is fully respected," Bush said. "Another one-way cease-fire that leads to rocket attacks on Israel is not acceptable. And promises from Hamas will not suffice — there must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure that smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end."
> 
> The White House released Bush's radio address a day early. It airs on Saturday morning.
> 
> Despite Bush's account of a U.S. leadership role, with time running out on his presidency, the administration seemed increasingly ready Friday to let the crisis in Gaza shift to President-elect Barack Obama. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice briefed Bush on developments in Gaza, and she continued furious telephone diplomacy to arrange a truce. Yet, she said she had no plans to make an emergency visit to the region.
> 
> More than 400 Palestinians and four Israelis have been killed in the latest offensive. The U.N. estimated Friday that a quarter of the Palestinians killed were civilians. In their waning days in power, Bush and Rice have been working the phones with world allies.
> 
> Bush offered no criticism of Israel, depicting the country's air assaults as a response to the attacks on its people. The White House will not comment on whether it views the Israeli response as proportionate or not to the scope of rockets attacks on Israel.
> 
> "This recent outburst of violence was instigated by Hamas — a Palestinian terrorist group supported by Iran and Syria that calls for Israel's destruction," Bush said.
> 
> The president said Hamas ultimately ended the latest cease-fire on Dec. 19 and "soon unleashed a barrage of rockets and mortars that deliberately targeted innocent Israelis — an act of terror that is opposed by the legitimate leader of the Palestinian people, President (Mahmoud) Abbas."
> 
> Hamas-run Gaza has been largely isolated from the rest of the world since the Islamic militants won parliamentary elections in 2006. Then Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip in June 2007, expelling forces loyal to the moderate Abbas.
> 
> Bush expressed deep concern about the humanitarian suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza. U.N. officials say Gaza's 1.5 million residents face an alarming situation under constant Israeli bombardment, with hospitals overcrowded and both fuel and food supplies growing scarce.
> 
> "By spending its resources on rocket launchers instead of roads and schools, Hamas has demonstrated that it has no intention of serving the Palestinian people," Bush said. "America has helped by providing tens of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid, and this week we contributed an additional $85 million through the United Nations. We have consistently called on all in the region to ensure that assistance reaches those in need."
> 
> The White House has cautiously said Israel must be mindful of the toll its military strikes will have on civilians. Here, too, Bush blamed Hamas for hiding within the civilian population. "Regrettably, Palestinian civilians have been killed in recent days," he said.
> 
> International calls for a cease-fire have been growing. Bush promised to stay engaged with U.S. partners in the Middle East and Europe and keep Obama updated. Obama is receiving the same intelligence reports on Gaza that Bush is.
> 
> Rice has spoken to both Obama and his choice for secretary of state, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, about the situation at least once in the last week. Obama and Clinton have remained mum out of deference to Bush, who still has 18 days in office.
> 
> There have been growing calls for Rice to intervene with Israel in person amid rising international concern about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza. Her decision to stay away will likely disappoint those calling for a more robust U.S. role, particularly as French President Nicolas Sarkozy intends visit the region next week.
> 
> In recent days, U.S. officials had said that a Rice trip to the Middle East, as a first stop on a long-planned visit to China next week, was under consideration. But those officials said Friday that Rice would stay in Washington. They spoke on condition of anonymity because an announcement is not expected before the weekend.


----------



## old medic

Hamas warns against ground attack
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7809154.stm
05:59 GMT, Saturday, 3 January 2009

The Hamas leader-in-exile, Khaled Meshaal, has warned Israel that it would face a "black destiny" if it launched a ground offensive on Gaza.



> Speaking publicly for the first time since Israeli air strikes started a week ago, he said Hamas resistance and infrastructure were intact.
> 
> His remarks came as the UN warned of a worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
> 
> The UN said it believed 25% of more than 400 Palestinians killed by Israeli action so far were civilians.
> 
> Meanwhile President George W. Bush has blamed the Hamas movement for the violence, describing rocket attacks on Israel as an act of terror.
> 
> He added that no peace deal would be acceptable without monitoring to halt the flow of smuggled weapons to what he called Palestinian terrorist groups.
> 
> Israeli air strikes on Gaza continued early on Saturday.
> 
> Israel has threatened to launch a ground offensive. It has called up army reservists, and tanks and troops are massed on the Gaza frontier.
> 
> BBC Middle East Editor Jeremy Bowen says a week of bombardment has not been able stop militant rocket attacks, and Israel now has to decide whether to send in ground troops.
> 
> 'Foolish'
> 
> In a pre-recorded statement broadcast on al-Jazeera TV, Damascus-based Khaled Meshaal, said Israel would be making a "foolish mistake" if it sent tanks into Gaza.
> 
> "We will not break, we will not surrender or give in to your conditions," Mr Meshaal said in a speech aimed at the Israelis, the Palestinians and the wider Muslim world.
> 
> Al-Jazeera reaches millions of people across the Arabic-speaking world in the Middle East and beyond.
> 
> To them, Mr Meshaal said this was not a battle against Hamas alone, but against the entire umma, or nation - analysts say an apparent reference to a populist Islamist idea that the Palestinians are defending the Muslim world against a modern form of Crusades.
> 
> The UN said the Israeli military escalated its offensive against the Hamas leadership in Gaza on Friday, targeting the homes of more than 20 Hamas officials in its latest air strikes.
> 
> In response, Palestinian militants fired on Israel, launching more than 60 missiles in 24 hours, injuring four people in the southern city of Ashkelon.
> 
> Four Israelis have been killed so far by militant rocket fire.
> 
> Humanitarian crisis
> 
> Earlier on Friday, five Palestinian civilians - including three children - were killed in an Israeli strike on Gaza.
> 
> The UN says up to 421 Palestinians may have been killed by Israeli action so far and more than 2,000 injured - though it says it cannot confirm those figures.
> 
> Israel is refusing to let international journalists into Gaza, despite a Supreme Court ruling to allow a limited number of reporters to enter the territory.
> 
> The UN says the week-long assault has worsened the crisis in Gaza, despite an increase in humanitarian shipments.
> 
> Israel tightened its control of what gets in and out of the crowded coastal Strip after Hamas, the elected power, seized control of the area from rival Fatah forces 18 months ago.
> 
> Since then, the UN says there has been a significant deterioration in infrastructure and basic services, with 80% of the 1.4m population unable to support themselves.
> 
> In a statement, the Israeli foreign ministry said it was working with international organisations in Gaza as well as various governments "in order to assess the humanitarian needs... and make the necessary response".
> 
> All reports indicate that there is sufficient medicine and food in Gaza, the statement read.
> 
> 'Pressure Hamas'
> 
> In his weekly radio address President Bush said Hamas was responsible for the latest violence and rejected a unilateral ceasefire that he said would allow Hamas to continue to fire on Israel.
> 
> And he called for tougher action to prevent Hamas and other groups from receiving weapons.
> 
> "There must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure the smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end," he said.
> 
> "I urge all parties to pressure Hamas to turn away from terror and to support legitimate Palestinian leaders working for peace," Mr Bush added.


----------



## FastEddy

old medic said:
			
		

> Palestinians with foreign passports cross into Israel, fleeing Gaza bloodshed
> 
> By ARON HELLER | Associated Press Writer
> 12:37 PM CST, January 2, 2009




1. GOOD !, let die where they stand, at least you can credit them on principle and conviction.

2.Boy are we SUCKERS here in North America. We hunt and round illegal Aliens from south of the Border who toil in our Fields and Orchards to feed us and toil at jobs no Canadian or American would touch with a ten foot pole. Yet we can hand out Green Cards and Cizenships to Countless milions who couldn't care less about Canada or the U.S.A, until its convenient or their asses are on fire.

3. These are the same people who danced in the street and cafes on 9/11. Yes that's right,

4. In a shooting war, either your on my side or the other, I couldn't care less who gets in the way of my fire when the bullets are zipping by my head.

5. Its a pity that we can't round up all the So called Intellectuals, PC , Milksops, Bleeding Hearts and Do Gooders and ship them over there and see how they handle it as the Hamas Rockets rain down on them daily. If you belong to any of the forementioned and wish to rag on this post, Please Do, at least you'll be identifying your selves, more than your Profiles do.


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105

OK FastEddy, for this little rant you are going up the warning system.  You've been on Verbal, now you move up to Recorded Warning.

*The Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_, is an essay/*opinion* piece by a retired Canadian diplomat that, I suspect pretty much reflects the position that _official Ottawa_ (the PCO’s Foreign and Defence Policy team and DFAIT) present to Prime Minister Harper and Foreign Affairs Minister Cannon:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090102.wcoessay0103/BNStory/specialComment/home

 Pathless in Gaza
*Ceasefire, reoccupation, pulling up Hamas by the roots - none of these options offers a solution*

MICHAEL BELL

From Saturday's Globe and Mail
January 2, 2009 at 10:32 PM EST

The imbalance of casualties in the tragic confrontation between Hamas and Israel is stark. Hundreds of Palestinians have been killed or injured, from toddlers to the aged. Television footage suggests almost all are innocents. Israeli spokespeople dispute that impression and speak in frigid terms of "collateral damage," meaning everything from the destruction of mosques to the loss of civilian lives. Viewers react with outrage, as is only human. Compared with Palestinian losses, Israeli victims of Hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets are few. There is a lurid sense of disproportion. Many, including reflective Israelis, question the morality of their government's action. Many question its effectiveness.

The Israeli government was placed in an impossible situation when Hamas refused to renew its six-month-old ceasefire on Dec. 19. From that day on, Hamas has laid down an array of rockets and increasingly sophisticated missiles, with a range reaching Ashdod and Beersheva, some 46 kilometres away from the Gaza border. This raises the question whether Tel Aviv itself could be vulnerable. Even the most placid of governments would have to react in order to survive. And the Israelis have done so, massively.

*ELECTION PENDING*

Israel will hold a general election on Feb. 10. Most polls show that the right-wing Likud opposition leader and former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is likely to come to power. A weak-willed reaction to Hamas's rocket attacks would have exposed the present government to sharp criticism from Mr. Netanyahu, against the background of a frustrated and angry populace. It would have opened the governing coalition's departing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, the Kadima Party's new leader, and, most of all, Ehud Barak, the Defence Minister and Leader of the formerly dominant Labour Party, to devastating criticism and their portrayal as leaders unable to safeguard their country's most basic interests. Inaction would have meant humiliation for Mr. Olmert, electoral defeat for Ms. Livni and the end of Mr. Barak's political career.

Reverberations from the debacle of the 2006 war in Lebanon are keenly felt. There is no room for a second failure. Contingency planning had been under way for more than six months. Many politicians and military commanders have limited objectives. They want to weaken Hamas as a guerrilla organization and force it to give up the missile threat, but leave its domestic rule in Gaza intact. Mr. Barak's chief of staff, Brigadier-General Mike Herzog, has been explicit. He says the aim of Operation Cast Lead is strictly confined to creating deterrence and forcing a sustainable ceasefire. His candour has been ill received in some military circles.

These officers worry that leaving Hamas intact, even if seriously weakened, would be only a temporary palliative. They believe Hamas would spring back with newfound support from the Palestinian and Arab grassroots, much as Hezbollah did in Lebanon. Hamas members claim to have driven Israeli soldiers and settlers out of Gaza in 2005, restoring Palestinian honour. The current confrontation, for them, is simply a continuation of that struggle against what they call Zionist aggression. Hamas will reinforce its inflammatory rhetoric aimed at discrediting the mainstream Fatah movement, depicting it as not capable of carrying the Palestinian banner to a satisfactory end.

*TARGETING LEADERS*

Given Hamas's ambitions, some Israelis argue that destroying infrastructure in Gaza and killing off its leadership will not be enough. They say Israel must go further. The assassination on New Year's Day of the senior Hamas leader Nizar Rayyan does not change the equation for these skeptics. They cite the March, 2004, assassination by Israel of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, Hamas's leader at the time. Those who argued then that pinpoint assassinations would decapitate Hamas have long since been proved wrong, as the past weeks' events vividly demonstrate. What is needed now, hard-line skeptics say, is boots on the ground, to eliminate the entire Hamas organization, root and branch.

Even if Hamas were extirpated, the question remains who would take over. The Palestinian Authority and Fatah are too weak. The Israelis will never pay the physical, moral and emotional cost of renewing the occupation. The Egyptians will not take on the impossible burden of trying to govern Gaza. Israeli hopes for a strong international presence are naive. They are in a Catch-22 dilemma.

*NO EXIT PLAN*

In Israel, the military action has thus far been portrayed as a success. The domestic standing of the key ministerial and military players, particularly Ehud Barak's, has improved. But what is the Israeli exit strategy? One would have expected this to have been decided far in advance, but cracks are beginning to show in the Israeli leadership. Ehud Barak wants to consider the 48-hour ceasefire proposed by the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, to test Hamas's intentions. Such a ceasefire would go some way toward meeting international and humanitarian concerns. This could then be stretched into a renewal of the six-month cessation of hostilities, should Hamas be willing. It would reduce the possibility of ground troops being caught in a quagmire. The Prime Minister's office, however, has denied that any consideration has been given to winding down. Several on the general staff agree. The debate goes on in public. Such is the chaos of Israeli politics.

No matter how much their views differ, the entire Israeli leadership knows that international pressure is on them to stop the fighting as soon as possible, if only because its continuation radicalizes the Arab and Muslim streets throughout the region. If the Sarkozy proposal develops into a six-month option, this would give them a reprieve. It would be greeted with relief by European, Arab and American leaders because it would postpone the crisis to an undefined future. President Sarkozy would have his day in the sun, the incoming Obama administration would have time to consolidate, and moderate and conservative Arab governments would get their feet out of the fire, no longer having to temporize with their own peoples. Egypt in particular is seen in much of the Arab world as a collaborator with Israel. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has publicly described Hamas as "those who are seeking political gain at the expense of the Palestinian people," while demonstrators in Cairo carry banners reading "Down with Mubarak" and "Where is the Egyptian Army?"

Always with an eye for the main chance, Mr. Sarkozy will be in Israel on Monday. Ms. Livni has just completed a visit to Paris.

The Israeli government might prefer to put such a visit off and surely would if it felt confident enough.

Ceasefires buy time. They can be a tool in conflict management but they lead to resolution only if the parties are prepared to accommodate each other's needs. That is not the case in Gaza. When former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon decided to withdraw the Israel Defence Forces from Gaza in 2005, he made that withdrawal unilateral, without co-ordination with the Palestinian Authority or outside governments. What was needed then was a carefully planned and co-ordinated action to ensure stability and decent governance in a territory where the rule of law had been notoriously weak. Israeli policy had been to break up such institutions and organizations from the time its occupation began in 1967, some 38 years before. Now that power vacuum has been filled by Hamas, as foresight would have told.

*RAGGED RIVALS*

Hamas is a radical, political-Islamic organization. There are those who think that bringing its leadership into dialogue and negotiation would facilitate concord and in the longer run pave the way to a comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine. They suggest reconciliation between Hamas, on the one hand, and the Palestinian Authority and Fatah, on the other. There is, however, nothing to indicate this is possible, except perhaps wishful thinking. Hamas and Fatah are rivals for the ragged mantle of Palestine in both the West Bank and Gaza. Fissures run deep. Philosophies differ markedly and personal antagonisms are pervasive. These rivals will not work together, nor can Hamas, which rejects the very concept of a Jewish state, be trusted to negotiate in good faith.

If there are Palestinian partners for peace, they are the Palestinian Authority and Fatah, despite their many imperfections and weaknesses. If Western countries ever want to see peace in the Middle East, they must embolden Israelis to meet the basic needs of Palestinians for dignity and self-respect. Without real movement on West Bank roadblocks, Israeli settlements and the prospect of real independence, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his supporters will be viewed more and more as Israeli quislings. Moderates must be bolstered and empowered. They must be seen by their populations as able to deliver on basic aspirations. Only in this way will extremism lose its appeal. Without profound changes in the way we think about accommodation and peace, the current Gaza confrontation will be nothing but a bridge on the road to the next bloodletting.

_Michael Bell is a former Canadian ambassador to Israel, the Palestinian territories, Egypt and Jordan. He is also Paul Martin Senior Scholar in Diplomacy at the University of Windsor._
--------------------

Prof. Bell’s opening paragraph is, I believe, a pretty fair summary of the (nearly) global media/_commentariat_ and, therefore, public reaction. We, broadly, are offended by the apparent _unfairness_ of it all: "Yes," we say to ourselves, "the Palestinians started it (it being this current crisis, the _umpteenth_ of a seemingly endless number) with their rocket attacks; and yes, Israel must do _something_; but a casualty ratio of 100+:1 is just *wrong*, isn’t it?"

I think Bell’s point about the Israeli domestic politics that underlie this particular event bears consideration.

Israelis understand, I think, that they are on their own. The US, under President (elect) Obama, will continue to pour in cash but it will try – and, in my opinion inevitably *FAIL* - to mollify the _Arab street_. The EU and other _’friends’_ (like Australia and Canada) will wring their hands, hang their heads and stand aside unless, like Sarkozy, there is some immediate, local political advantage in taking a stand.

There is no, not one, _partner for peace_ for Israel anywhere in the entire Muslim ‘world.’ No Muslim leader, no matter how strong, needs Israel. All the good things that peace with Israel promised, back in the ‘70s, can be had from guilt ridden, fearful (of Muslim minorities) European governments. There is no benefit in antagonizing the Jew hating _imans_, _mullahs_ and _sheiks_ who excite the _street_ and threaten Muslim governments from the safety of their mosques.

I am persuaded that the only sensible solution, for Israel, is a complete disconnect – a large, complete, fairly secure, high fence that separates Israel and all things Israeli (like jobs and emergency medical care) from all its neighbours. The great disconnect means that Israel must become self-reliant (no cheap Palestinian labour, for example) and must sell its goods and services in a tough, global market. The great disconnect also means that both Gaza and the West Bank become, _de facto_ huge outdoor prisons: breeding grounds for poverty, despair, hatred and radicalism. This does no great ‘good’ for anyone, including Israel, but it appears to me to do the least harm all ‘round.

Israel is not central or even peripherally important to our foreign policy (‘our’ being that of the American led West) - *except* in so far as it antagonizes the Muslims. The Muslims, all 1,750,000,000± of the, are not important either – except that they produce/sell 65% of the world's _light_ (sweet) crude oil.

(Parenthetically, Europe, Japan and China, combined, import about 40% of the total available _light_ (sweet) crude. The EU and the USA each ‘need’ (consumption minus domestic production) 12.5 to 15 billion barrels of _imported_ oil per day and either (maybe even, in a pinch, both) markets could be met without a drop of Arab/Muslim oil, for a while.)

Israel is a vibrant liberal democracy isolated in a sea of despotic _kleptocracies_ and it would will be a shame to see it crumble and fail under a never-ending onslaught of Arab attacks and Western indifference.

I can see no *peaceful* solution to the Arab-Israeli mess - not in lifetime of the grandchildren of our youngest Army.ca members.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_, is an OpEd piece which runs quite counter to my views, expressed just above:
--------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/Arab+Israeli+conflict+over/1133234/story.html

 The Arab-Israeli conflict is over



BY BARRY RUBIN

JANUARY 2, 2009



In decades to come, when the Middle East's history for this era is written, the current war in Gaza will be deemed a skirmish in the great Arab-Persian; Sunni-Shia; Arab nationalist-Islamist; Iran-Syria versus Egypt-Saudi Arabia conflict that is going to be the region's -- and perhaps world's -- main feature for the rest of our lifetimes.

The Arab-Israeli conflict, as it existed from 1948 to the late 1980s or thereafter, is over. Whatever they say in public, all the Arab states except for Syria have basically withdrawn from active participation. Indeed, strong statements in speeches and media have long been a substitute for action. Egypt, Jordan and the PLO signed peace agreements with Israel, which may not have yielded warm relations but certainly ended their direct involvement in any conflict. The Persian Gulf and North-African Arab states are just not focused on it.

Why has this happened? There are basically four reasons why the Middle East today is totally different from that of the previous period.

First, almost all the Arab states -- Syria being the exception -- concluded that they could not defeat and destroy Israel. This came about both due to the experience of war and the collapse of the Soviet bloc, their main ally in the conflict. To stir people's passions over an unwinnable conflict is profitable for rulers -- to distract them from their own dictatorial government -- but defeat by Israel could bring down the regimes. Even Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein turned toward trying to dominate the Persian Gulf rather than fight Israel.

Second, the Arab states have became preoccupied with other problems. Those with oil -- Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates -- focus on making money and enjoying the good life. Those without -- Egypt, Jordan, Morocco -- strive to survive. Both groups need good relations with the West: the poor to get aid, the rich for markets and safe places to invest.

Third, they concluded the Palestinians were incapable of defeating Israel militarily or making peace with Israel diplomatically. Once the PLO signed an agreement with Israel in 1993, intended to produce a political settlement, Arab states were freed from their obligations. They didn't even give the Palestinians much economic aid, most such help coming from the West. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was quite unpopular in the Arab world, being viewed as corrupt and untrustworthy. His successors were seen as weak. Why, they asked, should Arab rulers let Arafat and the PLO determine their policy?

Fourth, the Arab world is beset by a new conflict which takes up much of its attention and resources: the radical Islamist challenge to Arab nationalist regimes. In every country, the conflict is waged, sometimes violently, at other times through propaganda battles and electoral manoeuvres. The Palestinians, too, fought among themselves along these lines. After winning an election victory and then making a deal for a coalition government, Hamas turned on its nationalist rivals and drove them out of Gaza by force.

Every Arab state is battling Hamas's friends inside its own borders. In Lebanon, Hezbollah Shia Islamists bully Sunni Muslim, Christian and Druze rivals. Bloody civil wars between Islamists and nationalists erupted in Algeria and Egypt; terrorist campaigns swept Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

Finally, the Arab states face a powerful Iranian-Syrian axis whose clients include Hezbollah, Hamas and Iraqi insurgents. This is a danger far exceeding the largely fabricated one from Israel, and Arab rulers know it. In response to the Hamas attacks on Israel, Tariq Alhomayed, editor-in-chief of Saudi newspaper, Al-Sharq al-Awsat, proclaimed that Hamas is the tool of Iran and "Iran is a real threat to Arab security, as today it launched a war against Egypt, tomorrow against Saudi Arabia, and then the whole house of cards will collapse."

That is how the current fighting is being viewed in the leading circles of the Arab world, not as an Arab-Israeli struggle but as part of the Islamist-nationalist conflict. Hamas and Hezbollah, Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit proclaimed, are at war with Egypt and want to bring war and chaos to Egypt as they have in their own countries.

Hamas and its allies see the issue in similar terms. Why, asked deputy Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem according to one translation, "is Gaza besieged? Because the people of Gaza and Palestine have rejected the humiliating political options, and have chosen the proud political option of jihad -- the option of resistance."

What does this really mean? To accept "humiliating political options" signifies a compromise peace which would gain a Palestinian state in exchange for accepting Israel's existence. It also means getting along with the West rather than fighting against it.

"Resistance" is a favourite code word coined by Syria's regime for a program of battling for decades, sacrificing many thousand lives, using terrorism, fighting wars, and staying intransigent until final, total victory is achieved. The goal is to destroy Israel, expel western influence from the Middle East, and make every regime a radical Islamist dictatorship.

Aside from the catastrophic cost and bloody defeat that this strategy entails, Mr. Qassem is leaving out a lot more. The Palestinian Authority-ruled West Bank isn't besieged, it's prospering. There's no fighting because the nationalists there don't glorify the sacrifice of everything to carry out an ultimately losing jihad.

Inasmuch as the West rescues Hamas from its own mistakes, the result will be strengthening radical forces throughout the region, demoralizing moderates, and ensuring even more violence and suffering in the future. Vladimir Lenin, leader of the previous big revolutionary movement, Communism, predicted that democratic states would sell their enemies the rope that would be used to hang themselves. Radical Islamists are counting on it. Relatively moderate Arab nationalists fear it. Israel is fighting to prevent it.

_Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader; The Truth About Syria; and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East._

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
--------------------


While I agree that the Shia/Sunni, etc, fractures are serious problems for the Arabs and for all Muslims, I am not persuaded that Arab states will not continue to want to use Israel as a target for the wrath of their own peoples for decades to come. Israel is a convenient whipping boy for all the Arab despots - and supporting anti-Israel _movements_ keeps the focus away from the inept, corrupt Arab dictatorships - pretty much all of the Arab states.


----------



## GAP

I suspect, to our detriment, something theocratic related will unite the Arab population. You are right that Israel is the convenient whipping boy, but underneath all this mess is a thread of theocracy that is fueling the ignorance of the populations.....I don't think they have yet found a charismatic enough leader to gather them together, but once they do, there will be devastation for them and others around them....


----------



## George Wallace

I would suspect that this is only the "Face" that they want to put forward to the world, but what is being transported "unknowingly" by their governments, "out their back door" is quite another matter.  Gaza has no manufacturing infrastructure to manufacture arms or munitions, so where are they coming from, and who is financing them?


----------



## Good2Golf

An interesting read from Prof. Barnett Rubin, in particular the "bigger picture" views of the Israeli-Middle East conflict from a Jewish writer.  Prof. Rubin teaches on Foreign Relations at NYU and is well regarded for his work recent with Afghanistan, where he was involved in helping Afghanistan form its National Development Strategy.  I believe there is no relation between Prof. Rubin and the Barry Rubin quoted in E.R. Campbell's post.

----------

*Rubin: Against Holocaust Denail, Against Naqba Denial*
Link



> 'I try to be friendly, I try to be kind.
> Now I'm gonna drive you from your home, just like I was driven from mine.
> Someday baby you ain't gonna worry po' me any more.'
> 
> Bob Dylan, Someday Baby.
> 
> May 8, Israeli Independence Day, will mark the 60th anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel, an occasion to be marked in Israel and Jewish communities around the world with celebration. As always, Independence Day is preceded by Holocaust Remembrance Day (May 2) and Yom ha-Zikaron (Memorial Day, on May 7, in memory of those fallen for the state.
> 
> May 15 will mark the 60th anniversary of the Naqba (catastrophe), as Palestinians call the founding of Israel and their consequent defeat, expulsion, and exile. Palestinian and other communities will mark the day with mourning, protest, and anger.
> 
> The founding of Israel is often justified, at least partly, as reparation for the genocide of European Jews by the German Nazi regime. For many Jews, the creation of this state redeems, if anything can (and in my view it can't) not only that ultimate atrocity, but also the entire history of Jewish suffering and persecution, seen as a prelude to national rebirth.
> 
> Of course the Nazi genocide and all the rest of the history of persecution of the Jews does not and cannot provide any moral justification for punishing Palestinian Arabs. (When I mentioned this in a previous post, a commenter listed various incidents in history where Jews have suffered in Muslim countries. Of course such incidents occurred. But Palestinians are no more guilty of the 1840 blood libel of Damascus, not to mention various outbreaks in 12th and 11th century Cordoba and Granada, than they are of the Holocaust. Palestinian Arabs began to attack Jews only after the Zionist movement began its efforts to establish a Jewish state in Palestine.)
> 
> Nonetheless, a few anti-Zionists (notably President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran) have resorted to denial of the historical fact of the Holocaust in order to undermine one of the justifications for the Jewish state. Some non-Jews may not understand how painful, threatening, and offensive this denial of history is. It is like denial of our our own experience, which validates our very existence.
> 
> I learned of the Holocaust as a child. When I was 12 or 13, a friend's father, all of whose family had been killed, told us sitting on his lawn one night what it felt like to be whipped at Auschwitz. In the Jewish Day School I attended, we saw Nazi documentary footage of the Warsaw Ghetto, including piles of starving bodies. When my grandfather died, my great aunt found letters in Yiddish in the basement informing his father (after whom I am named) of the death of his sisters, who had stayed behind in Balti, Bessarabia. (This area was in Russia when my great-grandfather left it around 1900. It became part of Romania after World War I and the Russian Revolution, and was joined to the USSR as the Bessarabian Soviet Socialist Republic after World War II. Today it is part of the Republic of Moldova. The violent peregrination of ethno-national borders in Eastern-Central Europe is not as irrelevant to this story as may first appear -- the same process is now going on in many other places, Israel-Palestine among them.)
> 
> I also learned about Israel and Zionism as a child. I learned that the Jewish settlers in Palestine scrupulously respected the rights of the few Arabs who lived in the mostly abandoned country, buying whatever land they obtained for a fair market price. I learned that the corrupt shaikhs and bureaucrats stirred up the common people against the Jews because they feared the ideology of equality, democracy, and socialism that they were bringing. I learned that the international community recognized the right of Jews to a homeland in establishing the British Mandate over Palestine after the defeat of the Ottomans, but that anti-Semitic British officials favored the Arabs, even while the Jews of Europe were being massacred by Hitler. I learned that in 1948, after the establishment of the State of Israel by the United Nations, and the declaration of Independence by the Yishuv (the political organization of the Jewish settlers in Palestine) the new Israeli government urged all Arabs to remain in their homes, where they would be protected as equal citizens of the State of Israel, but that the reactionary Arab regimes, which were trying to destroy the new state, broadcast repeated calls to the Arabs of Palestine to flee until the Jews were destroyed, and that most of the Arabs carried out this instruction, showing their bad intentions. The Jewish state miraculously survived and then rescued the Jews of the entire Arab and Muslim world from persecution. It brought these communities to Israel, while the Arabs and their supporters refused to accept this exchange of populations. Instead they preferred to use the Palestinian refugees as political tools.
> 
> In other words, I learned to deny the Naqba. My subsequent reading and experience have led me to conclude that the account I learned of the founding of Israel, is not much closer to the truth than the claim that the deaths at Auschwitz were mostly due to disease and war conditions. Of course some people in concentration camps did die of disease and war conditions.
> Arab leaders certainly exploited the Palestinians for political gain. But the denial of the Naqba that I learned is, I imagine, as painful, threatening, and offensive to Palestinians as denial of the Holocaust is to Jews.
> 
> (I am not equating the Holocaust and the Naqba. Murdering an entire population is worse than expelling most of a population from their homes, treating those who remain as second-class citizens, occupying more of their land, and repressing them through military reprisals, mass detentions, blockades, and targeted killings. Racist genocide is worse than nationalist ethnic cleansing. But no action can be justified on the grounds that even worse actions are possible).
> 
> This is not an issue for historians. It is one of the core issues blocking a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. It is the issue that prevents Hamas from offering to recognize Israel. It is the issue that makes Israel resist any recognition, however symbolic, of the right of return of Palestinian refugees. Dr. Mahmoud al-Zahar, a founder of Hamas, referred to this dispute in his recent Op-Ed in the Washington Post. After recounting the killing of his two sons and his son-in-law, he signaled his recognition of the Holocaust by comparing the resistance of Gazans to that of the Warsaw Ghetto. But he added:
> 
> Our movement fights on because we cannot allow the foundational crime at the core of the Jewish state -- the violent expulsion from our lands and villages that made us refugees -- to slip out of world consciousness, forgotten or negotiated away.
> 
> Naqba denial is as non-negotiable to Palestinians as Holocaust denial is to Jews.
> 
> [But Hamas is a terrorist organization! I can't spend time here exploring all the hypocrisies surrounding the word "terrorist." Suffice it to say that I never heard an American official apply it to the Afghan mujahidin in the 1980s, though their missiles caused far more civilian deaths in Kabul than missiles from Gaza or South Lebanon have in Israel. I am totally opposed to killing civilians for political purposes, either intentionally or because the attacker cannot be bothered to avoid it. But I am also against using that principled opposition to evade accountability for other kinds of crimes.]
> 
> We need a common history so that we can have a common future. Here's my outline:
> 
> Zionism arose as Jewish nationalism in Central and Eastern Europe in the nineteenth century as ethno-nationalism of other groups threatened the Jews of the Hapsburg and Russian empires. The European struggles over creating nations and states in that region resulted in both World Wars, the Holocaust, the ethnic cleansing of Germans from much of Eastern Europe, the ethnic cleansing of much of Yugoslavia, and mass migrations of many groups to create the more homogeneous states that exist there today. Ideologically, Zionism was one of several alternatives open to the Jews of Europe. The Dreyfus Affair convinced Theodor Herzl (from the Hungarian part of Austria-Hungary) that liberal integration would fail. Some turned to nationalism, and others to socialism. The largest number, including my ancestors, found an apolitical solution in emigration to the U.S. or elsewhere.
> 
> Simultaneously, the Ottoman Empire, like its European counterparts, was becoming weakened by international competition and internal nationalist movements. The weakening of the Ottomans opened the possibility for European Jews to settle in Palestine as part of a nationalist movement rather than, as previously, as religious pilgrims. To an extent that those unfamiliar with Jewish texts might not appreciate, the "Land of Israel" occupied and occupies a central place in the Jewish imagination. Three times a day religious Jews prayed for God to return them to the land from which they had been exiled, and in times of national catastrophe, chiliastic or messianic movements had repeatedly formed around a return to the land. Zionism provided a secular national transformation of this cultural pattern, and therefore melded Jewish nationalism (a new phenomenon) with the messianic passion of the return.
> 
> Palestinian Arabs (and most of the rest of the world) were not aware of these currents, nor, quite understandably, did they conclude that because of these beliefs they should allow a group of foreigners to form a state on their land. Britain could call on related Biblical narratives in sympathy with the plan for a Jewish National Home in Palestine, though strategic objectives (desire for a friendly population near the Suez Canal) certainly played a role.
> 
> Jews were persecuted, even massacred, in much of Europe, but they largely shared the European assumption that Western colonialism represented progress, and that the decision by the League of Nations to award a Mandate over Palestine to Britain, including the creation of a Jewish National Home, was a legitimate and binding decision in international law. In Palestine as elsewhere the subjects of colonial rule had a different perspective.
> 
> The creation of Israel was part of the global redrawing of borders, forced migrations, ethnic cleansing, imperial breakdown, and genocide that overwhelmed much of the world during and after World War II. As the Jewish state was established in Palestine, resulting in war and expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Arabs, a Muslim state, Pakistan, was carved out of India, leading to far bloodier wars and many more deaths. Germans were expelled from Czechoslovakia, Poland, and elsewhere, by virtue of their affiliation to the former occupier. Serbs, Croats, Albanians and others in and around Yugoslavia started the process of ethnic cleansing that continues today. The USSR seized territory from all the states to its west, with huge concomitant population transfers. These are just a few random examples. The formation of ethno-nationalist states through violence and population transfer was the rule rather than the exception -- which did not make it any more legitimate or tolerable for its victims.
> 
> In this general violent upheaval of nationalism, Jewish survivors were not welcome in their former homes and were even massacred at times on their return. The victorious countries of World War II, including the US, still emerging from both Depression and wartime deprivation, were not willing to open their borders to millions of refugees. As after other historical incidents of disaster (the various Jewish Naqbas) a movement (with messianic components such as the teachings of Rav Kook) arose around the return to the land, this time taking the form of nationalism. What happened in Palestine was nothing unusual -- it was happening all over the world. National movements recruited desperate, idealistic, devoted, cruel, thoughtful, and thoughtless people in service of creating states on territories by excluding others. After all they had been through, the Jews would not rely on anyone else for their security, and if their desperate and heroic act of national revival created other victims, it was up to the rest of the world to compensate them.
> 
> Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, and others in the colonial world narrated these events as part of a different story. The European powers that won the war were also the major colonial powers and used their domination of the United Nations and the world scene to create a state in Palestine without consulting its inhabitants, who naturally resisted. Some saw this as part of an ongoing struggle of Muslims against their enemies, who aimed to destroy them.
> 
> Perhaps if the Arab states, still emerging from colonial domination themselves, had been stronger and had more resources, they could have reached an agreement that would include absorption of the Palestinian refugees, as Germany accepted the repatriated Germans or India and Pakistan accepted each others' refugees. But these countries were insecure and poor themselves. Their populations, and most of all, the Palestinians themselves would not accept it. Nor was there any reason that they should. No people is obliged to surrender its sovereignty and security to redress wrongs committed by others. Every person has the same individual human rights that the world affirmed (if hypocritically) largely in response to the Holocaust itself. Among these basic rights, included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (passed by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948) is the "right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country." There is no exception for Palestinian refugees. But it wasn't enforced for Jews or many others. Why for them? But this is not a question likely to interest Palestinians expelled from their homes and still living under occupation or as refugees 60 years later.
> 
> That was the "foundational crime" of which Dr. al-Zahar wrote. I propose a reframing: the Jews and the Palestinians are joint victims of the Holocaust and the Naqba, of the history of nationalism, racism, and colonialism, from which we are all suffering. They should jointly demand of the rest of the world assistance and support in finding a way out of this tragedy.
> 
> Therefore: no to Holocaust denial, no to Naqba denial. There are still plenty of difficult issues to resolve. But let's start with the tragic truth.


----------



## tomahawk6

Looks like the IDF is getting ready to move into Gaza prepping the battlefield by hitting 40 targets with arty fire for the first time. Hamas control of Gaza is weakening with mass desertions of Hamas foghters - mainly teenagers who have decided to go home to their parents. An Israeli invasion may not be as bloody an affair as one would have thought. I think the Gazans are fed up with Hamas and may settle for peace and economic  stability.


----------



## Kirkhill

> That was the "foundational crime" of which Dr. al-Zahar wrote. I propose a reframing: the Jews and the Palestinians are joint victims of the Holocaust and the Naqba, of the history of nationalism, racism, and colonialism, from which we are all suffering. They should jointly *demand* of the rest of the world assistance and support in finding a way out of this tragedy



G2G:

I agree with everything that Prof. Rubin says right up until that word "demand".  From that I infer that he considers Jews and Palestinians conjoint victims to whom the rest of the world owes a debt.  And yet at the same time he invokes the pre-holocaust history of Zionism as a cause of the current problems - basically saying that Jews were every bit as Nationalist, Racist and Colonialist as the Arabs and everybody else.  Racism-Nationalism-Tribalism are all expressions of collectivity beyond the nuclear family and as such are all largely fabrications.  Edit: They require myths to sustain them as unifying beliefs.  Colonialism was, and is, driven by the need to secure resources and the need to impose order.

For Lawrence's Arabs their desire was to break down the Ottoman borders and taxes and laws and impose their own regime, more convivial to their needs and wants, over a territory that suited their lifestyle.  Herzl's Zionists, Rubin's Bessarabians and Hitler's Germans were all engaged in the same pursuit as were Churchill's Brits and Napoleon's Franks. 

The only "guiltless" parties are those inhabitants of large cities that have never moved......Of course, on the other hand, they are the same people that sit home and demand that other people bring them cheap food and water,  heat their homes and remove their wastes and then hire armies to enforce their will on the recalcitrant that don't see their need as being greater than their own.

And so it goes......Lex Talionis.

The only fix is from within the struggle - and it is always only likely to be temporary.  It is possible to impose order but given that the universe tends to move from order to chaos it requires constant inputs of energy and effort to counter the chaos.  Thus soldiers will never be out of work.  It is possible to find ordered states that may not require as much energy to achieve, but energy will always be required. Thus soldiers will never be out of work.  The preconditions that allow a specific ordered state to exist will always change and mutate over time requiring new ordered states to be imposed.  Thus soldiers will never be out of work.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

2nd Hamas leader killed in Israeli air strike
Last Updated: Saturday, January 3, 2009 | 9:45 AM ET CBC News  
An Israeli air strike in the Gaza Strip has killed a senior commander of Hamas, the armed wing of the political group said Saturday.

Hamas said Abu Zakaria al-Jamal died from wounds sustained in an Israeli air strike overnight. He was the second top Hamas figure to die in the week-long offensive in the Gaza Strip.

Earlier in the week, another Hamas leader, Nizar Rayyan, was killed along with several family members when the Israeli air force bombed his house.

The deaths were reported as Israel's offensive against Gaza's Islamist militant rulers entered a second week and Palestinian militants fired more rockets into southern Israel.

About 430 Palestinians have been killed in the offensive. Meanwhile, four Israelis have died in Hamas rocket attacks.

Israeli warplanes and gunboats struck more than two dozen Hamas targets Saturday, including weapons storage facilities and training centres.

There were tentative signs that the current phase of fighting may be nearing an end. Most of the air strikes targeted empty buildings and abandoned sites, suggesting Israel may be running out of targets.

Leaflets warn Palestinians to leave
The Israeli army has dropped thousands of leaflets over Gaza, warning people to leave their homes before targeted bombing raids.

Ground troops have assembled on the border, waiting for a signal to invade Gaza, but international ceasefire efforts have also gained momentum.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and several Arab foreign ministers were flying to New York over the weekend to urge the UN Security Council to adopt an Arab draft resolution that would condemn Israel and demand a halt to its bombing campaign in Gaza.

The United States, however, said the draft is "unacceptable" and "unbalanced" because it makes no mention of halting the Hamas rocketing of southern Israel, which led to the Israeli offensive.

Robert Serry, the UN Special Co-ordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, said Hamas rockets are reaching 40 kilometres into Israel.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is visiting the region next week and President George W. Bush and UN chief Ban Ki-moon have both spoken in favour of an internationally monitored truce.

In his weekly radio address, Bush blamed the fighting in Gaza on Hamas, accusing militants of waging a campaign of violence against Israel with little regard for Palestinian civilians.

"In response to these attacks on their people, the leaders of Israel have launched military operations on Hamas positions in Gaza," Bush said. "As a part of their strategy, Hamas terrorists often hide within the civilian population, which puts innocent Palestinians at risk."

Chris Gunness, spokesman for the UN Relief and Works Agency, said damage to Gaza's infrastructure is creating a humanitarian crisis.

"Life has become intolerable for civilians," he told CBC News. "This mad bombing has simply got to stop. It's as simple as that."

About 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza are living under a blockade by neighbouring Israel and Egypt, curbing supplies of fuel needed to run generators.

The Israeli air strikes have further crippled the economy, although Israel had increased its humanitarian aid to the territory.

With files from the Associated Press


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Israeli ground troops enter Gaza Strip
Updated Sat. Jan. 3 2009 2:01 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

A column of Israeli military vehicles and soldiers have entered the Gaza Strip, after artillery units and warplanes hammered the border area and attacked more Hamas targets.

According to Israeli defence officials, 10,000 troops had gathered at the edge of Gaza, including tanks and special operations units.

"We will do all that is necessary to provide a different reality for southern Israel, which has been under constant attacks for the past eight years," Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told Channel 2 TV.

Israeli artillery units joined the offensive in Gaza on Saturday, as planes dropped bombs on more than 40 Hamas targets. A mosque was also damaged, killing 10 people and injuring 33.

The conflict began on Dec. 27, with Israel saying it would no longer tolerate rocket attacks from Hamas on its border towns -- attacks that had intensified after the end of a truce agreement.

Leading up to the ground invasion, Israel dropped leaflets in downtown Gaza City to warn people to stay off the streets.

The strike on the mosque, which is located in the northern town of Beit Lahiya, left seven of the injured in critical condition. Some reports have said children were at the mosque.

It is unclear if the dead are Hamas militants or civilians. According to The Associated Press, the mosque is named after a founder of Hamas who was killed by Israel in 2004.

After nightfall Saturday, an artillery shell hit a house in Beit Lahiya and wounded a number of people.

According to Israeli officials who spoke on condition of anonymity, some army commanders are concerned the ground invasion could lead to heavy casualties, while others feel that the air offensive has already dealt Hamas a heavy blow.

Meanwhile, world leaders have called on both Israel and Hamas to agree to an internationally-monitored truce.

On Saturday, Israel targeted weapons storage facilities, training centres and the homes of two Hamas leaders.

The air strikes also struck the American International School, which is considered the most prestigious school in Gaza. The educational institution teaches an American curriculum in English, but is not connected to the U.S. government.

The strike destroyed the main building and killed a guard.

On Friday, Israel allowed nearly 300 Palestinians with foreign passports to flee the region.

Israeli troops entered the Gaza Strip after it appeared the latest air offensive had lost some steam, hitting more benign targets such as empty and abandoned buildings.

The offensive has caused considerable damage to Gaza's infrastructure. Air strikes have knocked out power and water in many areas, which has raised concerns of a pending humanitarian disaster.

Maxwell Gaylard, the UN humanitarian co-ordinator for the Palestinian Territories, said the offensive has wounded about 2,000 people in the last week.

"There is a critical emergency right now in the Gaza Strip," Gaylard told reporters.

Israel disputes this, but has increased the shipment of goods into Gaza.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy will visit the region this week, while U.S. President George Bush and UN head Ban Ki-moon have both come out in favour of an internationally monitored truce.

International pressure

Speaking at the United Nations in New York, Ban encouraged world leaders to step up efforts to establish a ceasefire that would be enforced by international monitors. He also suggested that an international force could offer protection to Palestinian civilians. 

On Friday, Bush called the rocket attacks launched by Hamas an "act of terror" and said that a peace deal would have to include monitors to stop the smuggling of weapons into Gaza. 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and several other Arab foreign ministers were scheduled to fly to New York this weekend to speak to the UN Security Council. 

The group hopes the council will adopt an Arab draft resolution condemning Israel and demanding an end to the air strikes. 

The U.S. has called the resolution, which should be debated by the council on Monday, "unacceptable" and "unbalanced" because it does not include a guarantee that Hamas will halt its rocket attacks against Israel. 

The air strikes have killed more than 400 Palestinians, and 25 per cent of them may have been civilians, according to the UN. Four Israelis have also been killed by rocket attacks. 

With files from The Associated Press


----------



## Edward Campbell

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Looks like the IDF is getting ready to move into Gaza prepping the battlefield by hitting 40 targets with arty fire for the first time. Hamas control of Gaza is weakening with mass desertions of Hamas foghters - *mainly teenagers who have decided to go home to their parents*. An Israeli invasion may not be as bloody an affair as one would have thought. I think the Gazans are fed up with Hamas and may settle for peace and economic  stability.




Where they can remain in relative safety and, once the Israelis leave, from which they can rejoin Hamas - good as new.

I suspect the IDF will meet little resistance - a few rock throwing children, the occasional sniper, maybe an RPG now and again. They will not find a _main force_ to engage and destroy because the Hamas 'bench strength' is at home, eating Mom's chickpeas and olives.

Unless the IDF decides to round up tens hundreds of thousands of teen-agers - and the do what with/to them? - the invasion will be, largely, pre-election and pre-cease fire window dressing.


----------



## tomahawk6

Video about the myths of the Mid East conflict.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfiev_lk5_A&eurl


----------



## The Bread Guy

...with more links to resources below quote.

"Second Stage of Operation Cast Lead Begins"


> The Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, gave a statement regarding the newly implemented second stage of Operation Cast Lead: “A few hours ago, Israeli ground forces entered the Gaza Strip as part of Operation Cast Lead against the Hamas terrorists, their affiliates, and their infrastructure in Gaza.
> 
> So far, the Israel Defense Forces have dealt an unprecedented heavy blow to Hamas. In order to complete their mission, we have now launched the ground operation.
> 
> I have said all along that our military activities will widen and deepen as much as needed. Our aim is to force Hamas to stop its hostile activities against Israel and Israelis from Gaza, and to bring about a significant change in the situation in southern Israel.
> (....)
> On Saturday evening (Jan.3), IDF forces began implementing the second stage of Operation Cast Lead. Ground forces have begun to maneuver within the Gaza Strip.
> "The objective of this phase of the operation is to intensify the heavy blow already dealt to Hamas and to take control of area from where most of the rocket attacks against Israel originate, in order to reduce those rocket attacks," says the IDF Spokesperson, Brigadier General Avi Benayahu.
> 
> The IDF Spokesperson emphasizes that this stage of the operation will further the goals of Operation Cast Lead as communicated: To strike a direct and hard blow against Hamas while increasing the deterrent strength of the IDF, in order to bring about an improved and more stable security situation for residents of southern Israel in the long now term.  "Stage two of Operation Cast Lead has been launched to support our central goals which are to deal a heavy blow to the Hamas terror organization, to strengthen Israel's deterrence, and to create a better security situation for those living around the Gaza Strip that will be maintained for the long term," states Brig. Gen. Avi Benayahu
> 
> A large number of IDF forces are taking part in this stage of the operation including infantry, tanks, engineering forces, artillery and intelligence, along with the support of the Israel Air Force, Israel Navy, Israel Security Agency and other security agencies.
> 
> The operation is in accord with the decisions of the Security Cabinet. This stage of the operation is a part of the IDF's overall operational plan, and will continue on the basis of ongoing situational assessments by the IDF General Staff.
> 
> The forces participating in the operation have been highly trained and were prepared for the mission over the long period that the operation was planned. The Commander of the operation is Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant, GOC Southern Command.
> 
> The IDF and the Home Front Command has taken the necessary steps to protect the civilian population. All residents of Southern Israel are requested to follow the guidelines of the Home Front Command as communicated via the media.
> 
> The IDF Spokesperson wishes to reiterate that the residents of Gaza are not the target of the operation. Those who use civilians, the elderly, women and children as human shields are responsible for any and all injuries to the civilian population. Anyone who hides a terrorist or weapons in his house is considered a terrorist.
> 
> Based on a situational analysis, The IDF is taking steps to raise the level of alert for its forces in other areas of the country.



_More on link_

Some more links for news/information, in no particular order:

IDF's "View from the Front" news page
European Commission news aggregator:  Israel
Wikipedia:  Gaza-Israel Conflict (MSM caveats apply)
Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center (IICC), "an NGO dedicated to the memory of the fallen of the Israeli Intelligence Community"
ABYZ Newspapers Listing:  Israel
NewsNow aggregator:  Israel - NewsNow aggregator:  Israel/Gaza - NewsNow:  Hamas
Al Jazeera "War on Gaza" page(love it or hate it, still worth watching) - AlJazz Twitter feed on Gaza
theunjustmedia.com (English, shares statements from "the other side"


----------



## 1feral1

WRT the currrent Gaza situation.

I thought I'd take the temperature of what www.islamicsydney.com had to say. When I go here, I always try to go in with an open mind.

Lots of topics to ponder, but some things alarm me, and this one of them.

I know opinions are just that, but to read whats going on in the minds of young musims in Sydney Australia, does draw me some concern, and I am happy I left Sydney in 2005 for Queensland.

Here is some quotes which you will find:

1. "QUOTE (Urdu @ Jan 4 2009, 03:24 PM) 
I wish the armies of the muslim countries would band together and fight off Israel, why have everyone except the jihadis abandoned them? Are muslim countries so scared of America that they can't get together for the sake of defending their brothers and sisters in Islam?

2. "YES!.. They are cowards. May Allah will the destruction of Israel. Ameen. "

3. Today, 11:55 AM Post #13
Group: Brothers
Posts: 5,540
Joined: 26-Jan 04
From: Sydney
Member No.: 720

 QUOTE (Yehudit @ Jan 4 2009, 04:29 AM) 
"....There's only one grievance and Hamas is open about it. Israel's very existence.

Err..Israel's very existence is an occupation. "

IMHO, what a mess down there.

Here ya go...http://muslimvillage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48621


----------



## tourza

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Video about the myths of the Mid East conflict.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfiev_lk5_A&eurl



Video about the myths of the Mid East conflict.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrieBhaGgHM

Regards.


----------



## 1feral1

Tourza, I don't know your intentions on posting these video links, but I will say those Hamas kids videos are the most sickest thing I have ever seen when it comes to the so called 'education' of children. 

Preaching hatred from the get go into the minds of toddlers through the TV. No wonder the youth in the region are so bent and twisted and so full of hate, pounded in to them using Mickey Mouse and other kid friendly characters. That on top of whatever they are taught in school, and at home by their parents, makes an ongoing generation after generation hell bent for leather of fueled hatred towards Israel.

These videos are par with The Nazi films/books on their 'education' of German children from the 1930's to the demise of their regime.  Overall these Hamas videos most disturbing to say the least, and puts a whole new meaning to Disney and Sesame Street, adn how these characters can be used for both good (the alphabet and basic learning) and evil (to the promotion of pure hatred).

These ideals only re-inforce that Hamas and their supporters must be wiped out at all costs! 

Hamas is as bad as the Nazi regime or worse. Anyone who supports such hatred or a group that does, has no place in todays society. 


OWDU


----------



## Shec

Today's complete entry from my buddy's e-diary, himself an IDF vet and the father of an IDF soldier: 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 9 of “Operation Cast Lead”

Unless you are living under a rock of very large size you know that yesterday evening the IDF ground pounders went in to hit Hamas face to face. This means Infantry, Combat Engnr.s; etc the local news has been on all night and every mother who has a kid in the army didn’t sleep a wink. It started with the Artillery Corps. Doing their thing.   Firing pin point and raising hell like only a true “Red Leg” can. (Ok I’m biased because I was Arty).

What you don’t hear on the news is something that I’ve been harping on over and over through the years and some folks say I’m just full of sh** but today it’s in print and it is out there for all to see, Palestinian on Palestinian violence! Violence so great that it makes even my thick skin crawl and makes us wonder who are these f’n animals?

THE FULL STORY

 http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230733155685&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Hamas moves on Fatah 'collaborators'

Jan. 4, 2009
Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST 

The Hamas government has placed dozens of Fatah members under house arrest out of fear that they might exploit the current IDF operation to regain control of the Gaza Strip. 

The move came amid reports that the Fatah leadership in the West Bank has instructed its followers to be ready to assume power over the Gaza Strip when and if Israel's military operation results in the removal of Hamas rule. 

Fatah officials in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Hamas militiamen had been assaulting many Fatah activists since the beginning of the operation last Saturday. They said at least 75 activists were shot in the legs while others had their hands broken. 



OK now they are “kneecapping” folks! Acting like the old IRA and making the Mafia look like a bunch of ***** cats.

Wisam Abu Jalhoum, a Fatah activist from the Jabalya refugee camp, was shot in the legs by Hamas militiamen for allegedly expressing joy over the IDF air strikes on Hamas targets. 

"Hamas is very nervous, because they feel that their end is nearing," a senior Fatah official said. "They have been waging a brutal campaign against Fatah members in the Gaza Strip." 



Things are getting worse, and you will see so in the following.

Meanwhile, sources close to Hamas revealed over the weekend that the movement had "executed" more than 35 Palestinians who were suspected of collaborating with Israel and were being held in various Hamas security installations. 

The sources quoted Hamas officials as saying that the decision to kill the suspected collaborators was taken out of fear that Israel might try to rescue them during a ground offensive. The officials claimed that at least half of the victims were killed by relatives of Palestinian militiamen who were killed as a result of information passed on to Israel by the "collaborators." 



Now it’s looking like the last days of the “Third Reich” when they started hanging folks on the street just because they knew it was over.

I wonder how fat a$$ Rosanne Barr would react to this type of violence on the side of her heroes and possibly her last fans?

This isn’t the first time this type of violence has happened in the areas but it is a landmark as it isn’t directed at the Christian Arabs, like it has been over the years. Hell even on Christmas day when the local Christians were allowed to live the strip to celebrate the holyday the Hamas lobbed a mortar shell into the building where they sat waiting for clearance from the IDF to enter Israel. Lucky for them a sort of Christmas miracle happened and the shell was a dud as if it had gone off there would have been close to 300 less Christians for them to torture after the holyday.

I wonder why the world press forgets to mention this kind of stuff. I wonder why when we blow up a mosque they forget to mention that the Mosque was housing weapons.  How come the people who protest against Israel’s defensive actions on the streets of every country in the world weren’t out there protesting the 8 long years that the people living in southern Israel were being shelled   each and every day? Where were the burning flags of Hamas and Palestine? Where were the outrage and hate? 

This too makes me wonder.  This too makes me want to puke!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Rob, take care and the next time we see each other the GoldStar is on me !

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


----------



## thunderchild

Regretable as it is that this whole mess started in the first place, the Idea that Fatah members are making Hamas worried enough to arrest and or kill them may be the "End Game " plan that may end this war.  I'm thinking that now Israel has reached the Med and split the area in two might not this be the time to start bringing in the convoys of food and water and/or let Jordan set up a field hospital for civilians? Win the hearts and minds so to say.  Or is it still too soon.


----------



## Kirkhill

> Or is it still too soon. (?)



No it isn't.  It has been happening for a while now.  Google is your friend.



> ...Israel let some 100 trucks carrying humanitarian supplies from Jordan, Turkey and international aid groups into the Gaza Strip via the Kerem Shalom border crossing on Tuesday.
> 
> In addition, five new ambulances given by Turkey were allowed into the Strip.
> 
> A Jordanian diplomat said 21 Jordanian army doctors and four field hospitals would be allowed to enter on Wednesday, though Israeli officials could not immediately confirm that.



Source  Dec 30, 2008



> Israel to allow 40 aid trucks into Gaza
> 
> 
> www.chinaview.cn  2008-11-26 17:23:18      Print
> 
> 
> GAZA, Nov. 26 (Xinhua) -- Israel will open a border crossing into Gaza Strip Wednesday to allow vital humanitarian aid in, Palestinian officials said.
> 
> "The Israeli side told us late at the night that Kerem Shalom crossing will be partially open to allow 40 trucks of food and aid in," said Raed Fatouh, head of a private sector company that liaises the cargo flow into Gaza.
> 
> 20 of the trucks carry aid for international relief agencies and the rest carry flour, frozen meat and dairy products imported by private companies, Fatouh said.
> 
> Israel will also open Karni crossing in eastern Gaza city to allow limited shipment of wheat and animal fodder in, he added.
> 
> On Tuesday, Israel closed Kerem Shalom crossing in southeast Gaza Strip only one day after allowing some aid in.
> 
> Israel has been sealing off the Hamas-controlled territory, home to 1.5 million Palestinians since November 5th after a new wave of violence. 15 Palestinian militants were killed since then and the armed groups resumed rocket attacks at Israel, rocking a shaky ceasefire brokered by Egypt in June.


  

Source 26 Nov 2008

I do hope you're not relying on people supplying you with info.  Sometimes you have to go find it yourself.


----------



## Kat Stevens

About the only way for Israel to win Palestinian hearts and minds would be for the entire population of Israel to form up 20 abreast, and march themselves into the Med.


----------



## tomahawk6

The IDF has actually cut the Strip into three parts and its way too soon for humanitarian aid,maybe when the shooting subsides. Israel has stated they are not opposed to the palestinians, just the terrorists in their midst.
I think it will be interesting to see how many "foreign" fighters are killed or captured. There were some Quds Force people in Gaza that if taken alive will keep the Shin Bet/Mossad/Aman folks busy.


----------



## GAP

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> About the only way for Israel to win Palestinian hearts and minds would be for the entire population of Israel to form up 20 abreast, and march themselves into the Med.



Then they would complaining and wanting aid to help clean up the beaches and renovate all those empty houses....tsk tsk.....


----------



## thunderchild

Imagine the crap that would hit the fan if thy captured IRGC troops helping Hamas.  How long before they'd go after Iran or Syria?


----------



## George Wallace

thunderchild said:
			
		

> Imagine the crap that would hit the fan if thy captured IRGC troops helping Hamas.  How long before they'd go after Iran or Syria?



I highly doubt any uniformed or easily identified members of any foreign armed force will be found.


----------



## Kilo_302

What do you guys think about IDF using Willy-Pete shells on Gaza City? I was under the impression that WP is pretty indiscriminate, and using it in urban areas seems irresponsible.


----------



## geo

White Phosphorus Not Banned
Use of white phosphorus is not specifically banned by any treaty, however protocol III of the 1980 Geneva convention prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilian populations or by air attack against military forces that are located within concentrations of civilians."


----------



## George Wallace

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> What do you guys think about IDF using Willy-Pete shells on Gaza City? I was under the impression that WP is pretty indiscriminate, and using it in urban areas seems irresponsible.



WP is the most common Smoke Round used by all nations, in all calibres.


----------



## tomahawk6

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I highly doubt any uniformed or easily identified members of any foreign armed force will be found.



Iranian agents have been caught in Gaza before. Iranian Quds Force have been active helping Hizbollah in Lebanon and of course we have caught scores of Iranian Quds Force in Iraq. They are active in training and advising their proxies.


----------



## George Wallace

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Iranian agents have been caught in Gaza before. Iranian Quds Force have been active helping Hizbollah in Lebanon and of course we have caught scores of Iranian Quds Force in Iraq. They are active in training and advising their proxies.



I'm not denying that they are there, only that it is highly unlikely that they will be easily identified.  Their true nature would come out in interogation, if captured/arrested.  Again a case of them blending in with the "Locals".


----------



## Rifleman62

Hamas has a fundamental advantage. They have chosen the battlefield. If the battlefield is located in a very densly populated urban area, so be it. Advantage to Hamas. Civilians get killed, advantage to Hamas. Hardly anyone wears a uniform anyway. Drop the weapon and run. Your a civilian. Your wife and children get killed or injured, they are martyrs. Hamas guy gets killed, he gets virgins. I guess his wife was a nothing anyway, as all he wanted besides killing infidels, was some virgins.

Look at this from Liveleak. Good use of an ambulance festooned with UN markings (and probably driven by a UN employee).

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=116_1231063776&c=1#comments


----------



## CougarKing

_Israeli armoured military vehicles move towards the border with the Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. U.S. ally Qatar said on Sunday Israel's attack on Gaza amounted to a war crime and renewed calls for an emergency summit of Arab countries.
REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun_






_An Israeli helicopter releases a flare during an attack inside the northern Gaza Strip. Tens of thousands of Israeli troops backed by tanks battled Hamas fighters in Gaza on Sunday as the death toll from the offensive to end militant rocket attacks passed 510.
(AFP/Jack Guez)_






_Israeli artillery fire shells towards the Gaza Strip. Tens of thousands of Israeli troops backed by tanks battled Hamas fighters in Gaza on Sunday as the death toll from the offensive to end militant rocket attacks passed 510.
(AFP/Shay Shmueli)_






_Israeli armoured personnel carriers move towards the border with the Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. (Ronen Zvulun/Reuters)_






_An Israeli soldier lies atop an armoured military vehicle near Kibbutz Nahal Oz, just outside the Gaza Strip, January 4, 2009. (Ronen Zvulun/Reuters)_






_A smoke bomb explodes over the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009.
(Yannis Behrakis/Reuters)_






_Shelling Gaza : Smoke rises into the air and an artillery shell explodes over the central Gaza Strip. (AFP/Jack Guez)_






_Explosions from Israeli fire are seen over the northern Gaza Strip, as seen from the Israel side of the border,Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009. Thousands of Israeli troops backed by tanks and helicopter gunships pushed deeper into Gaza Sunday, fighting militants at close range and surrounding the coastal territory's largest city in the first full day of an overwhelming ground offensive. (AP Photo/Jini,Eliyahu Ben Igal)_


----------



## FastEddy

FastEddy said:
			
		

> 1. GOOD !, let die where they stand, at least you can credit them on principle and conviction.
> 
> 2.Boy are we SUCKERS here in North America. We hunt and round illegal Aliens from south of the Border who toil in our Fields and Orchards to feed us and toil at jobs no Canadian or American would touch with a ten foot pole. Yet we can hand out Green Cards and Cizenships to Countless milions who couldn't care less about Canada or the U.S.A, until its convenient or their asses are on fire.
> 
> 3. These are the same people who danced in the street and cafes on 9/11. Yes that's right,
> 
> 4. In a shooting war, either your on my side or the other, I couldn't care less who gets in the way of my fire when the bullets are zipping by my head.
> 
> 5. Its a pity that we can't round up all the So called Intellectuals, PC , Milksops, Bleeding Hearts and Do Gooders and ship them over there and see how they handle it as the Hamas Rockets rain down on them daily. If you belong to any of the forementioned and wish to rag on this post, Please Do, at least you'll be identifying your selves, more than your Profiles do.




Whereas the above Post was the Cause of my "Recorded Warning" as being inflammatory. I therefore in all Justice resubmit it in a diesected and explanatory form in my Defense and it was only the result of a Selected few Forum Moderators who either find my style,humor,buntless and comparable illustrations personably objectable along with the possibility of biases or hostility towards my Military and Civilian Occupations.

Futher as a side note, it is stated that I received a "Verbale" warning on Dec 8th 2008, I have no record nor is there any evidence to that effect or what reference it was to. However, I did receive a PM from Mike Bobbit on the 18th of Dec., requesting that I contact him personally if I have a complaint against a Modorator rather than Publically taking a Jab.

Reference Nr.1; I referred to those Palestinians that elected to stay and die in a complementary manner, in that they had Conviction and True to their Principals.
(tell me is this Inflammatory)

Reference Nr.2; A comment and reference to our Immigration Dept. which many if not all the Members here can bear witness to and reference to our Migrant Workers and the injustice in their cases.
(if stating a fact or reference or truth is inflammatory, then we're in trouble)

Reference Nr.3; It was Televised  Worldwide of the Jubilation in the Muslim and Arab World on 9/11. I personally witnessed it here in Montreal.
(so this is inflammatory, maybe it was , to all the Western World who watched it) 

Reference Nr.4; I recall your attention to the APC Gunner who opened fire on a overtaking Taxi, did he or would you care about who was in the Taxi.
(I rest my case, inflammatory I think not) 

Reference Nr.5; I suggested that a assortment of Sympathizing groups travel
 to the region and provide a solution while living under Hamas Rocket Attacks. My inclusion of Profiles was admittedly Sarcastic.
(what is inflammatory here or to who?)

In closing, if we are to be Publically Accused and Labled, then we all are entitled to Defend our selves as publically as we are Accused, or is this not the CANADIAN way, which you Men and Women are fighting and dying for.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from Saturday’s _Ottawa Citizen_, is an editorial that I hope, but doubt, will resonate with most Canadians:
--------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/editorials/Child+sacrifices/1136753/story.html

 Child sacrifices

JANUARY 3, 2009
  
Yesterday morning a two-sentence item moved across the news wire. The first sentence reported the deaths of three Palestinian children, killed in an Israeli air raid in Gaza. The second sentence noted that Israel was targeting a Hamas rocket launcher near the children's home.

Israel is fighting an asymmetrical war against Hamas, and the asymmetries are crystal clear. Israel is a liberal democracy with western values, one of which is respect for life. This is why the Israeli government takes such extraordinary measures -- bomb shelters, security fences, you name it -- to protect its citizenry.

Hamas is a fundamentalist Islamic outfit that helped pioneer suicide terrorism and celebrates "martyrdom." This is why Hamas and other Islamist groups set up rocket launchers near where children live; why they use ambulances to transport weapons; why their gunmen shoot from hotels, mosques and other civilian infrastructure.

It's a sad paradox. Israel ends up killing more Palestinian civilians than Hamas does Israeli civilians, even though Israel's goal is to minimize civilian deaths and Hamas's is to maximize civilian deaths. How can this be?

The answer is obvious: Hamas deliberately puts its own children at risk. It may be that martyrdom is the greatest gift one generation can give another. And then there's the propaganda value that dead Palestinian children bring to the cause of demonizing "Zionists."

With Hamas rockets terrorizing Israeli towns, the Jewish state has little choice but to seek and destroy the launching pads. Yet because those are hidden in populated centres, Palestinian children will die.

This is heartbreaking, even for Israel. One hopes that Palestinian parents recognize that their children's blood is on the hands of their leaders.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
--------------------


One is reminded of Golda Meir’s oft quoted (but less often sourced) admonishment to Anwar Sadat. _“We can_,” she is reported to have said, “_forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours_.”

There is, and will remain, a majority opinion in Canada that Israel is a cruel oppressor of the innocent Arabs. All war, all killing is cruel but sometimes, as Margaret Thatcher used to say, there is no alternative.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Shec said:
			
		

> Today's complete entry from my buddy's e-diary, himself an IDF vet and the father of an IDF soldier:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> .................
> 
> THE FULL STORY
> 
> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230733155685&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
> 
> Hamas moves on Fatah 'collaborators'
> 
> Jan. 4, 2009
> Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST
> 
> The Hamas government has placed dozens of Fatah members under house arrest out of fear that they might exploit the current IDF operation to regain control of the Gaza Strip.
> 
> The move came amid reports that the Fatah leadership in the West Bank has instructed its followers to be ready to assume power over the Gaza Strip when and if Israel's military operation results in the removal of Hamas rule.
> 
> Fatah officials in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Hamas militiamen had been assaulting many Fatah activists since the beginning of the operation last Saturday. They said at least 75 activists were shot in the legs while others had their hands broken.



You have a good point. As with many civil wars/insurgencies the unrest provides good cover for people to settle political/personal scores. From the wikipedia article on the first intifada :

_"Over the course of the first intifada, an estimated 1,100 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces and 160 Israelis were killed by Palestinians. In addition, *an estimated 1,000 Palestinians were killed by Palestinians as alleged collaborators*, although fewer than half had any proven contact with the Israeli authorities."_

As for the second intifada : _"B'Tselem _ [Israeli human rights NGO] _reports that through April 30, 2008, there were 4,745 Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces, and 44 Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians. B'Tselem also reports 577 Palestinians killed by Palestinians through April 30, 2008." _ or this;

_For over a decade the PA has violated Palestinian human rights and civil liberties by routinely killing civilians—including collaborators, demonstrators, journalists, and others—without charge or fair trial. Of the total number of Palestinian civilians killed during this period by both Israeli and Palestinian security forces, 16 percent were the victims of Palestinian security forces. ...According to Freedom House's annual survey of political rights and civil liberties, Freedom in the World 2001-2002, the chaotic nature of the Intifada along with strong Israeli reprisals has resulted in a deterioration of living conditions for Palestinians in Israeli-administered areas. The survey states: "Civil liberties declined due to: shooting deaths of Palestinian civilians by Palestinian security personnel; the summary trial and executions of alleged collaborators by the Palestinian Authority (PA); extra-judicial killings of suspected collaborators by militias; and the apparent official encouragement of Palestinian youth to confront Israeli soldiers, thus placing them directly in harm's way."_

However, on the other hand HAMAS may have reason for rounding up Fatah supporters. From Jeffery Goldberg's website (Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act):

_"A Fatah Friend Writes: I'm Supporting the Israeli Air Force

30 Dec 2008 10:01 am
It's a strange world, but there you have it. I've been talking to friends of mine, former Palestinian Authority intelligence officials (ejected from power by the Hamas coup), and they tell me that not only are they rooting for the Israelis to decimate Hamas, but that Fatah has actually been assisting the Israelis with targeting information. One of my friends -- if you want to know why they're my friends, read this book -- told me that one of his comrades was thrown off a high-rise building in Gaza City last year by Hamas, and so he sheds no tears for the Hamas dead. "Let the Israelis kill them," he said. "They've brought only trouble for my people."_


----------



## tourza

For your consideration, two articles below; both written by Israeli (Jewish, if it matters - but it shouldn't) writers from Haaretz. 

Regards.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051317.html

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1052606.html


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> For your consideration, two articles below; both written by Israeli (Jewish, if it matters - but it shouldn't) writers from Haaretz.
> 
> Regards.
> 
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051317.html
> 
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1052606.html



While I have my own views about the writers of the articles at least they are able to express their opinions in a paper of record in a democratic state.    I wonder to what extent that would be tolerated in the Gaza Daily Tribune?


----------



## thunderchild

So if we know that Iran is assisting these guys, why not deal with Iran directly.  I know it's a major undertaking but when Nazi Gemany invaded Poland we declared war on Nazi Germany, when the Japanese attacked pearl harbour we declared war on Japan, Iraq invades Kuwait we attack Iraq twice.  It seems to me that we are fighting around the problem this time rather than dealing with it. If Iran is supporting terrorists openly enough as to have a formal organization to supply and train them then shouldn't we deal with the source of the problem?


----------



## CougarKing

_Israeli soldiers advance in the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009.
(Baz Ratner/Reuters)_






_Israeli soldiers look out from atop a tank near the border with the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. (Baz Ratner/Reuters)_






_An Israeli soldier takes position during scuffles with Palestinian stone-throwers, protesting Israel's offensive in Gaza, in the West Bank city of Hebron January 4, 2009. Israeli troops and tanks split the Gaza Strip and ringed its main city on Sunday in an offensive against Hamas militants but civilians trapped in the Palestinian enclave suffered more bloodshed. (Nayef Hashlamoun/Reuters)_






_An Israeli soldier advances at the border with the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. (Baz Ratner/Reuters)_






_Israeli soldiers prepare artillery shells at their position outside the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. (Yannis Behrakis/Reuters)_






_Israeli mobile artillery units fire shells towards Gaza from their position outside the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. (Yannis Behrakis/Reuters)_






_Israeli soldiers look towards the border with the Gaza Strip near Kibbutz Nahal Oz January 4, 2009. (Ronen Zvulun/Reuters)_






_Smoke from Israeli shelling covers the town of Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip. Israeli troops and Hamas fighters battled at dawn in Gaza on Monday amid tank, artillery and air strikes, as the death toll from the offensive to end rocket attacks passed 510. (AFP/Patrick Baz)_






_An Israeli soldier prays on top an Armored Personnel Carrier positioned near the border between southern Israel and the Gaza Strip, Monday, Jan. 5, 2009. Israeli forces pounded Gaza Strip houses, mosques and tunnels on Monday from the air, land and sea, consolidating their grip in the territory's northern half without quelching the rocket fire that provoked Israel's bruising, 10-day-old offensive.
(AP Photo/Ariel Schalit)_


----------



## The Bread Guy

Interesting think tank solution - let's see how much coverage THIS gets in MSM....

*Ending the War in Gaza*
International Crisis Group, 5 Jan 09
News release link - Full report link (28 pg. .pdf) - Exec Summary


> ....To be sustainable, cessation of hostilities must be directly followed by steps addressing both sides’ core concerns:
> 
> *  an indefinite ceasefire pursuant to which:
> o Hamas would halt all rocket launches, keep armed militants at 500 metres from Israel’s border and make other armed organisations comply;
> o Israel would halt all military attacks on, and withdraw all troops from Gaza;
> *  real efforts to end arms smuggling into Gaza, led by Egypt in coordination with regional and international actors;
> *  dispatch of a multinational monitoring presence to verify adherence to the ceasefire, serve as liaison between the two sides and defuse potential crises; countries like France, Turkey and Qatar as well as organisations such as the UN could play an important part in this;
> *  opening of Gaza’s crossings with Israel and Egypt, together with:
> o return of an EU presence at the Rafah crossing and its extension to Gaza’s crossings with Israel; and
> o coordination between Hamas authorities and the (Ramallah-based) Palestinian Authority (PA) at the crossings
> 
> “None of this can happen if the international community refuses to shift its approach on Hamas”,  says Nicolas Pelham, Crisis Group Senior Analyst....


----------



## tomahawk6

Blue on blue.

"Three IDF soldiers were killed and 24 others were injured, one critically and three seriously on Monday evening, in a friendly fire incident in northern Gaza. 

Among the fatalities were two officers and a soldier. Colonel Avi Peled, commander of the Golani Brigade sustained minor injuries in the incident. 

The injured were triaged and cared for on site before being airlifted to the Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Soroka University Medical Center in Beersheba, Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem and the Rabin Medical Center in Petah Tikva. All of the families have been notified. 

According to the IDF Spokesman's Unit, the grave incident occurred when a tank, deployed as part of Operation Cast Lead, accidentally fired a live round at an abandoned building in Jabalya, in which Golani forces, who were operating in the area, took cover. "

http://www.ynetnews.com/articl...40,L-3651165,00.html


> Cleared for publication: Three IDF soldiers were killed and 24 others were injured, one critically and three seriously on Monday evening, in a friendly fire incident in northern Gaza.
> 
> Among the fatalities were two officers and a soldier. Colonel Avi Peled, commander of the Golani Brigade sustained minor injuries in the incident.
> 
> The injured were triaged and cared for on site before being airlifted to the Chaim Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Soroka University Medical Center in Beersheba, Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem and the Rabin Medical Center in Petah Tikva. All of the families have been notified.
> 
> According to the IDF Spokesman's Unit, the grave incident occurred when a tank, deployed as part of Operation Cast Lead, accidentally fired a live round at an abandoned building in Jabalya, in which Golani forces, who were operating in the area, took cover.
> 
> According to available information, shortly after 6 pm, a blast took out part of the building, causing some of its walls to collapse and injuring the entire force.
> 
> Earlier Monday, the IDF explored the possibility that the building collapsed due to the detonation of explosives in it – an option which was ruled out as the details of the incident unfolded.
> 
> The injured were extracted under the cover of heavy IDF artillery fire and with the assistance of IAF helicopters which dropped illuminating bombs in order light their way.
> 
> Colonel Peled reportedly refused to leave the scene despite his injuries, opting to see to the rescue and triage of his troops. He sought medical care only after the last of his troops were evacuated.
> 
> Peled's conduct and actions, said an IDF source, show courage and "personified the kind of behavior the IDF expects of its commanders in such times."
> 
> Peled, a former Egoz Brigade and Battalion 51 head, assumed command of Golani last summer. Prior to his Golani assignment Peled headed the Gaza Division's southern brigade. It was during that time that Gilad Shalit was kidnapped by Hamas, but a subsequent military inquiry found no fault in Peled's conduct.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Plans Collide In Gaza

January 3, 2009: The Israeli attack on Hamas forces in Gaza on December 27th, hit fifty targets within 220 seconds. The fifty Israeli aircraft assembled off the coast, and delivered a well rehearsed attack designed to take out Hamas targets before key commanders could get away. Israeli intelligence had discovered Hamas plans for such an Israeli attack, which involved key Hamas personnel  immediately dispersing to hiding places. These included hospitals, where the Hamas men would dress in staff uniforms and blend in. Other safe havens included nursery schools, and other places where the Hamas officials would be surrounded by lots of civilians at all times. Thus the tight timing for the Israeli attack, intended to catch the key Hamas personnel before they could disperse. 

Hamas knew that the Israelis have an informant network in Gaza. The key to Israeli success in dealing with Palestinian terrorists has always been an informant network within the Palestinian community. Many of these Palestinian informants are doing it for the money. Israelis pay for information. They also use other inducements (help with the bureaucracy, medical care, etc). If that fails, they use blackmail and threats. Palestinian terrorist organizations have been unsuccessful in their attempts to shut down the informant networks, and many innocent Palestinians have died simply because they were falsely accused of being informants. 

In addition, the Israelis gain a lot of information via electronic intelligence work and UAVs that are constantly in the air over Gaza. Israel seeks to make the terrorists think that it's the gadgets, not informants, gathering the information. To the Israelis, inducing paranoia among the Palestinians is seen as a successful weapon. All this has helped keep the terrorists out of Israel for nearly five years now, something no one thought was possible. 

The Israelis also have hundreds of police and military operatives who can pass as Arabs (their families came from Arab countries shortly after Israel was founded in 1947). These Israelis speak fluent Arabic (with a Palestinian accent), in addition to their Arab appearance. These agents dress as Palestinians and enter Palestinian areas to recruit and run Palestinian informants. At least in the West Bank. In Gaza, the Israelis use pro-Fatah Palestinians. At least a third of the Gaza population is still pro-Fatah, and continued Hamas pressure has not changed that. 

The Israelis also make use of the phone system to avoid civilian casualties. For example, the bombing campaign after the initial attack was directed mostly at the thousands of rockets Hamas had stockpiled. Most of these were stored in civilian housing. This was a technique pioneered by Hezbollah in Lebanon. There, some homes would have a basement excavated, to provide more space for rockets. Israeli intelligence is still identifying these storage locations. When one is found, the Israelis will phone the home just before the attack and tell the civilians they have a few minutes to get out before the place blows up. In at least one case, the civilians were defiant, and went to the roof, believing that the Israelis would not bomb with women and children in plain sight. In response, the Israeli fighter came in low and fired some 20mm cannon shells right next to the building. The panicked civilians fled the building and the place blew up shortly thereafter. 

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htintel/articles/20090103.aspx


----------



## chris_log

Not related to the military campaign itself, however...

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090105/cupe_israeli_090105/20090105?hub=TopStories

 :

I didn't realise every university in Ontario was as backwards, ignorant and utterly stupid as York University (oops did I just say that). Apparently we (students, university employees et al) unconditionally support Hamas, Palestinians and every other ignorant twit who supports them. I didn't even realise that CUPE had this kind of pull on our campuses. Apparently, free speech...ain't. 

Almost makes me want to get those custom tees made with my personal version of the 'Free-Free-Pal-es-tine' chant....


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_, is a proposal, by MGen (ret’d) Lew MacKenzie for UNEF III:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090105.wcogaza06/BNStory/specialComment/home

 What is the UN waiting for? Deploy a strong force to Gaza

LEWIS MACKENZIE

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
January 6, 2009 at 12:00 AM EST

I first served in the Gaza Strip in 1963, seven years after Lester Pearson's diplomatic stick-handling led to the creation of the United Nations Emergency Force, the UN's first peacekeeping force. I served there for two years, living with more than 1,000 other Canadian soldiers in Camp Rafah, just inside Gaza. I returned to the region eight years later, this time to Cairo and Ismailia as part of Canadian support for UN ceasefire protocols after the 1973 Yom Kippur War. I have returned to the region many times during the past decade.

In my opinion, the Israeli-Hamas conflict is the only one in the world where there is no hope whatsoever of the participants resolving the key issues on their own, by any means. Hamas makes no secret that, aided and abetted by Iran, it is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Any idea of a ceasefire in the current fighting leading to a change in Hamas's dedication to Israel's elimination is naive to the extreme. Any cessation of hostilities, no matter how temporary, will be used by Hamas to enhance its weapons arsenal in preparation for the next round of terrorist attacks against its neighbour.

On their own, Israel and Hamas are doomed to a perpetual state of war no matter how much international diplomatic horsepower is applied to resolving the conflict. But there is a solution that the world has been adroitly avoiding for 40 years.

Israel deserves security. Its population is prepared to live in peace with its neighbours providing they aren't dedicated to its extermination. If Israel deals with the threat from Hamas on its own, the situation will not improve over the long term - Hamas will simply resuscitate itself and carry on with its terrorist actions against Israel. The Security Council needs to show some rare backbone and authorize a strong UN force under the UN Charter's Chapter 7, which authorizes the use of deadly force as necessary, and deploy it within the Gaza Strip, taking on the responsibility to provide the security to which Israel is entitled.

The force would need to be strong enough to interdict weapons smuggling by sea, land (including by tunnel) and air from outside sources, to eliminate rocket attacks on Israel, to stop suicide bombers through use of border controls and, most important, to be strong enough militarily to take on Hamas if need be. The oft-expressed idea of putting international monitors into the Gaza Strip to control smuggling and the firing of rockets is ludicrous: Hamas would run rings around any unarmed outsiders whose only mandate was to "observe and report." Such monitors wouldn't even qualify as yet another Band-Aid solution.

Israel would not like this solution. It is extremely suspicious of the UN, which has all too often demonstrated anti-Semitic policies and statements thanks to the fact that most member states sympathize with such attitudes. Israel did not recognize the UNEF from 1956 to its withdrawal in 1967. In fact, when we had to drive through Israel to get some of our supplies in Lebanon, we were not allowed to get out of our vehicles while inside Israel.

The UN Relief and Works Agency, which provides aid to Palestinian refugees in the Gaza Strip, has been accused by Israel - with some justification - of anti-Israel bias. Nevertheless, with a UN force deployed across the border from Israel and capable of providing the security desired by its citizens, the Israelis would soon see the benefits.

The UN has maintained a peacekeeping force in Cyprus since 1964. There has been no fighting between the Greek and Turk Cypriots for the past 34 years. The peacekeepers are now popular tourist attractions. When you arrive on the south coast of Cyprus, you can sign up for a bus tour of Nicosia, where you can observe the peacekeepers executing their boring duty in sentry boxes first manned by Canadian soldiers some 38 years ago. If you are polite, they will let you have your picture taken with them.

The UN Security Council and member states should be ashamed. While UN resources are providing peacekeepers in a country safer than most of our major cities, just across the Mediterranean, scores of innocent Palestinians are being killed because a terrorist organization with the stated aim of ridding the world of Jews is permitted to sacrifice its own people without protest or intervention by the international community.

_Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of UN peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo._
--------------------

I’m not a big fan of UN, baby-blue beret type peacekeeping missions anywhere but the UN may be the only source of a _trusted mandate_ – anything but a UN mandated, indeed UN flagged  force might be unacceptable to the key players in Gaza.

Anything sent will have to be more than just militarily capable (which cuts the number of potential force contributing nations from 175+ to 30±), it will have to have a sophisticated intelligence gathering capability – or, *better*, be able to rely upon Israel for ‘steerage.’


----------



## Edward Campbell

And here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_, is a report on the status of 39_ish_ Canadians – mostly, apparently, dual-national – in Gaza:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090105.wcdnsgaza0105/BNStory/International/home

 Canada lagged in getting citizens out of Gaza

CAMPBELL CLARK AND ORLY HALPERN

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
January 5, 2009 at 10:09 PM EST

OTTAWA/EREZ CROSSING, ISRAEL — Canada only asked Israel for help in getting its stranded citizens out of Gaza after hundreds of other foreign nationals were able to depart, and as a ground assault was preparing to roll in.

More than 200 foreigners, including 39 Canadians, were to leave war-ravaged Gaza Monday, but the Israelis said security risks forced them to shut down access to the Erez Crossing into Israel. They said they would try again to get them out Tuesday.

It's unclear why Canada's officials did not ask sooner for Israeli assistance to get Canadians out – before the start of the ground war on Saturday that made travelling in Gaza far more dangerous.

Several countries clamoured last week for Israel to help their citizens leave Gaza, before an expected ground assault, prompting the Israelis to allow about 300, including Americans, Russians, Ukrainians and Moldovans, to leave on Friday.

A spokesman for the Foreign Affairs Department in Ottawa, Rodney Moore, said that's the day that Canada sent a list of 36 Canadians who wanted to leave Gaza, and asked for Israeli assistance.

But Peter Lerner, a spokesman for the Israel government civil administration in the occupied territories, said Canadian officials only approached them for help the day after, on Saturday.

“Canadian diplomats approached us on the third 3rd of January,” he said. “On Saturday, they said 36 people. Later, they raised it to 39.”

He said that Monday's departure of foreigners was cancelled because of security concerns that made access to the Erez Crossing, the only point where civilians in Gaza can cross into Israel, too dangerous.

Canadian diplomats arrived at the Israeli side of the crossing into northern Gaza Monday, but left without the Palestinian-Canadians – believed to be mostly dual citizens – they were meant to receive. The diplomats refused to speak with journalists.

Diplomats of many other countries also left the crossing empty handed, and Mr. Lerner said that the 200 people scheduled to leave included citizens of the Philippines, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Holland, Malta, Norway, Romania and Spain.

A spokesman for Israel's embassy in Ottawa, Orit Kremer, said that high-level Israeli and Canadian officials are in contact, and another effort to get the Canadians out will be made Tuesday.

“Everything was organized in order to get them [out] Tuesday. Unfortunately, it wasn't successful Tuesday, but we'll do our best to get them tomorrow,” she said.

During the 2006 Lebanon war, Canadian officials were criticized for the slow pace of their efforts to evacuate about 13,000 citizens from Beirut, as they struggled to arrange safe passage for ships for days after the United States and several European countries began ferrying out their nationals.

In this case, it's not clear why Canada did not ask for help sooner, before the situation on the ground in Gaza became dramatically more dangerous.

“We are deeply concerned about the security of Canadians in Gaza and are working with Israeli authorities to confirm the soonest available window of opportunity to assist Canadians in leaving Gaza,” Mr. Moore said.

The evacuation of the 200 foreign citizens was to be organized by the Red Cross, which had asked them to assemble at a meeting point in Gaza City.

They were to board buses that would take them north, where they were to be allowed into Israel to be bused directly to Jordan, because Israel would not give permission for them to remain inside Israel.

Mr. Moore said that there are currently 58 registered Canadians in Gaza, but several have not asked for assistance to leave.

He said that since 2000, Canada has warned Canadians not to travel to Gaza, and that it has helped 155 Canadians leave the territory, now under Hamas rule, in six operations in 2007 and 2008.
--------------------


The primary reason it (making a request for help) took so long, I’m *guessing*, is that the predominantly _Arabist_ professional foreign service hates to deal with Israel.  Most of the striped pants set in _Festung Pearson_ are convinced that the Arabs and Palestinians have right, even a god or two, on their side and that the Israeli are slobbering brutes stamping about the otherwise quiet, peaceful, culturally advanced region in hobnailed jack boots and coal-scuttle helmets. Asking Israel for anything - other than explanations for their latest _outrages_ - goes against the 'cultural' grain in DFAIT.

The article, of course – being written by Canadians, for Canadians - blames the government for having “lagged” and only in passing notes that the 39 or so Canadians put themselves in the soup by ignoring the government’s warnings.


----------



## The Bread Guy

I'm curious why Lew-Mac used this example in his piece discussing Gaza:


> ....The UN has maintained a peacekeeping force in Cyprus since 1964. There has been no fighting between the Greek and Turk Cypriots for the past 34 years. The peacekeepers are now popular tourist attractions. When you arrive on the south coast of Cyprus, you can sign up for a bus tour of Nicosia, where you can observe the peacekeepers executing their boring duty in sentry boxes first manned by Canadian soldiers some 38 years ago. If you are polite, they will let you have your picture taken with them....


Isn't this apples & oranges?  The way Turkey & Greece get along is a far cry from how Hamas & Israel get along.  What kind of UN force, mandated by countries who share some of Hamas' views on Israel/Jews, would have the teeth to get in there and keep Hamas accountable?  Or does he mean it'll take a generation to calm things down here too?


----------



## Rigger052

If things are truly that calm and peaceful now in Cyprus, why are the peacekeepers still there then? I've been to Nicosia, it's a far cry from what I've seen of the Gaza strip on the news, so yes the UN has worked there, but it's not a complete success *until the peacekeepers can go home IMHO.*
     I personally don't believe a UN peace keeping (or as we saw in Bosnia peace *making*) force would quell the violence in the region. According to Lewis MacKenzie's article, the Israelis have always been distrustful of the UN and wouldn't provide the support required for such a force. On the arab side, considering that several of the member nations required to provide the soldiers and equipment on the ground are currently embroiled in conflicts of their own around the middle east, which would cause distrust and possible hostility towards those nations involved in UN contingent there. 
     This contingent would be very resource intensive, last a long time, and in the information age possibly longer than some governments are willing to sustain. In order to really make it effective you would essentially create a no man's land style buffer along the border of the strip, and then consider counter-insurgency/anti-smuggling ops as well to further stabilize the region. Another question, what might happen if Israel is involved in another conflict with either an insurgency or another nation while the UN is involved in such operations there? That would once again raise tensions in Gaza as they would have to rely on the UN forces to protect them, no disrespect to those who served in Bosnia in the early 90's, but the UN doesn't have the best track record of protection.
     Peace-keeping was a wonderful idea and worked when both sides of the conflict wanted to stop fighting but neither side trusted the other, but in this case Israel claims they want security, Hamas and their supporters want the annihilation of the Jewish state. I would love to see peace restored, but I'm not sure if an international force would be the most effective means necessary.


----------



## dapaterson

From a demonstration in NYC:  Why illiteracy and anti-Semitism don't mix (or perhaps he's still upset with the outcome of OJ Simpson's murder trial)

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_spine/archive/2008/12/29/quot-death-to-all-juice-quot.aspx


----------



## Bo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-death-un

Israeli shelling kills dozens at UN school in Gaza

• Reports of more than 40 killed in and around UN shelter
• 12 members of family killed in Gaza City air strike

The civilian death toll in Gaza increased dramatically today, with reports of more than 40 Palestinians killed after missiles exploded outside a UN school where hundreds of people were sheltering from the continuing Israeli offensive.

Two Israeli tank shells struck the school in Jabaliya refugee camp, spraying shrapnel on people inside and outside the building, according to news agency reports.

The medical director of the hospital in Jabaliya told the Guardian 41 bodies had been brought in so far and more could be on the way. Reuters journalists filmed bodies scattered on the ground amid pools of blood and torn shoes and clothes. A donkey lay on the ground in its own blood.

In addition to the dead, several dozen people were wounded, hospital officials said. The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports.

"I saw a lot of women and children wheeled in," Fares Ghanem, a hospital official told the Associated Press. "A lot of the wounded were missing limbs and a lot of the dead were in pieces."

Majed Hamdan, an AP photographer, who rushed to the scene shortly after the attacks, said many children were among the dead. "I saw women and men parents slapping their faces in grief, screaming, some of them collapsed to the floor. They knew their children were dead," he said.

"In the morgue, most of the killed appeared to be children. In the hospital, there wasn't enough space for the wounded."

Elsewehere, at least 12 members of an extended family, including seven young children, were killed in an air strike on their house in Gaza City. The bodies of the Daya family were pulled from the rubble of a house in Gaza city's Zeitoun district after it was hit by two Israeli missiles. The dead included seven children aged from one to 12 years, three women and two men. Nine other people were believed to be trapped in the rubble.

Hours earlier, three young men – all cousins – died when the Israelis bombed another UN school, the Asma primary school in Gaza City. They were among about 400 people who sought shelter there after fleeing their homes in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza.

*The UN, which said the school in Jabaliya was clearly marked, said it was "strongly protesting these killings to the Israeli authorities and is calling for an immediate and impartial investigation".

"Where it is found that international humanitarian law has been violated, those responsible must be held to account. Under international law, installations such as schools, health centres and UN facilities should be protected from attack. Well before the current fighting, the UN had given to the Israeli authorities the GPS co-ordinates of all its installations in Gaza, including Asma elementary school."*

The killings take the total toll in Palestinian lives since the Israelis launched their assault on the Gaza Strip 11 days ago to above 600. Doctors at Gaza hospitals say that at least one-fifth of the victims are children and a large number of women are among the dead.

Israel continues to insist that the bulk of those killed are Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters, although its claim to be going to extraordinary lengths to target only "terrorists" has been undermined by one of its own tanks firing on a building being used by Israeli troops, killing four.

The sharp spike in the number of civilian casualties came as Israeli troops and tanks moved into Gaza's second largest city, Khan Younis, for the first time today, supported by intensive artillery strikes as the military pledged to press on with its attack.

In a separate attack earlier in the day, three Palestinians were killed in an air strike on another school run by Unwra, the UN relief agency.

Nine Israelis, including three civilians hit by rocket fire, have been killed in the conflict. At least five rockets fired from Gaza landed in Israel today, including one that hit the town of Gadera, 17 miles from Tel Aviv, police said. A three-year-old girl was wounded.

The heaviest fighting has been in northern Gaza, with witnesses reporting wave after wave of bombing strikes across the north of the territory accompanied by gunfire from helicopters and artillery from land and sea. Thousands of Palestinians have been ordered to leave their homes or forced to flee the fighting.

In Shajaiyeh, east of Gaza City, Israeli troops seized control of three apartment blocks and set up gun positions on the rooftops. Residents were locked in their homes and soldiers confiscated their mobile phones, neighbours said.

Three of the four Israeli soldiers killed by friendly fire died when a tank mistakenly fired on a building where the soldiers had taken up positions. There was heavy artillery fire to cover the evacuation of 24 soldiers who were injured, including the commander of the Golani infantry brigade, one of Israel's key fighting forces.

Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, said his country's troops would continue their operation despite mounting Palestinian casualties and growing international calls for a ceasefire.

"Hamas has so far sustained a very heavy blow from us, but we have yet to achieve our objective, and therefore the operation continues," Barak said.

The Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said the offensive was intended to change permanently the shape of Israel's conflict with Hamas. "When Israel is targeted, Israel is going to retaliate," she said. Israel has rejected calls for a ceasefire.

The military said it had bombed more smuggling tunnels across the border with Egypt, in the south, and hit more than 40 other sites across Gaza including buildings storing weapons and rocket launching areas.

In Gaza, Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in the strip and a hardliner in the movement, appeared on the party's al-Aqsa television station and gave a defiant speech threatening attacks not only in Gaza but elsewhere.

"The Zionists have legitimised the killing of their children by killing our children. They have legitimised the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people," Zahar said. He urged Hamas fighters to "crush your enemy".

Another Hamas figure, a recognised military spokesman called Abu Ubaida, said thousands of Hamas fighters were waiting in Gaza to take on the Israeli military, and that rocket attacks would increase. More than 40 were fired into southern Israel yesterday, including one that landed in an empty kindergarten, which, like all schools near the Gaza border, has been closed since the conflict began.. Israeli police said a total of 520 rockets had been fired in the past 11 days of fighting.

Israeli troops are now deployed in and around the major urban areas of Gaza, particularly to the north, in Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya and Jabaliya. Using leaflets, telephone calls and radio announcements, they have ordered residents in many areas to leave their homes, forcing at least 15,000 Palestinians to flee to safety elsewhere. At least 5,000 are staying in 11 different UN schools and shelters.

The UN said more than 1 million Gazans were still without electricity or water and that it was increasingly difficult for staff to distribute aid or reach the injured. It said more industrial diesel was needed to reopen the strip's sole power plant, which has been shut for a week. Ten transformers have been damaged in the fighting.

More wheat grain is needed for food handouts, and the UN said Karni, the main commercial crossing, should be reopened to allow it in. Four ambulances and three mobile clinics were destroyed when bombs hit the headquarters of the Union of Health Care Committees in Gaza City.

John Holmes, the UN emergency relief coordinator, said Gaza represented an "increasingly alarming" humanitarian crisis, and that the territory was running low on clean water, power, food, medicine and other supplies since Israel began its offensive. Israeli leaders claim there is no humanitarian crisis.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Could an international _peacekeeping_ force work in Gaza (and maybe in the West Bank, too)?

Yes, but:

•	To be broadly acceptable it probably must be under the ‘direction’ of the UNSC;

•	To be acceptable to the Muslims it must, probably, have some Muslim contingents – from, say, Malaysia and Turkey – and no direct US participation;

•	To be acceptable to the Israelis it must have a large, strong, *dominant* Western component based on, say, Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Netherland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

I think, also, that Russia and America need some sort of _remote supervisory_ role (beyond their UNSC membership) in order to reassure both the Arabs and the Israelis but I’m not sure how that might work – possibly the mission’s _political managers_ could be drawn from America, China and Russia.
  
I would suggest that, initially, command and the C2 system would have to come from the ABC countries (Australia, Britain and Canada) and intelligence would have to be fed from Israel and then _filtered_ through the USA to the ABC organization and then into the UN Force HQ. Later, after a coherent ‘system’ is in place and working, command can rotate amongst troop contributing nations.

I would *guess*, based on my memories of the geography, that four _brigades_ would be needed:

1.	Gaza City – a motorized and dismounted force;

2.	Central Area/Salaheddin Road/Netzarim – a motorized and (light) armoured force;

3.	Rafah/Khan Yunis – a motorized and dismounted ; and

4.	Mobile/Reserve – rapid reaction air mobile and (light) armoured forces .

Additionally, a fairly robust flotilla of fast naval vessels will be needed as will extensive air assets: aircraft, UAVs, etc.

Let’s say, just for the sake of argument, 10± battle groups (2 X Turkey, 1 X Malayasia, 1 X Germany, 1 X Italy, 1 X UK, 1 X Europe (Less Germany, Italy and UK), 1 X Australia/Canada/New Zealand, 1 X Japan, 1 X Korea) plus supporting troops; 10± X warships and an ‘allied’ air wing.

Could the UN cobble something like that together? Maybe.

Would it work? Well, as Bill Clinton might have said, it all depends on what you mean by ‘work?’

What’s the aim? If Lew MacKenzie is right – and I think he’s close – the sole aim of the force is to prevent attacks on Israel; nothing else. That will, of course, deprive Israel of any reason to attack Gaza. Making Gaza ‘work’ is a whole other issue.

How long? How does forever sound? Hamas _et al_ are not going away and they will not change their aims and objectives so they will find other ways to attack Israel – probably by using longer range rockets fired from other Middle Eastern bases and/or by killing Jews in Australia, Europe and North America. For practical purposes I would say that two human generations (35 to 50 years) ought to do it – think Cyprus.


----------



## tourza

Bo said:
			
		

> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-death-un
> 
> Israeli shelling kills dozens at UN school in Gaza
> 
> • Reports of more than 40 killed in and around UN shelter
> • 12 members of family killed in Gaza City air strike
> 
> The civilian death toll in Gaza increased dramatically today, with reports of more than 40 Palestinians killed after missiles exploded outside a UN school where hundreds of people were sheltering from the continuing Israeli offensive.
> 
> Two Israeli tank shells struck the school in Jabaliya refugee camp, spraying shrapnel on people inside and outside the building, according to news agency reports.
> 
> The medical director of the hospital in Jabaliya told the Guardian 41 bodies had been brought in so far and more could be on the way. Reuters journalists filmed bodies scattered on the ground amid pools of blood and torn shoes and clothes. A donkey lay on the ground in its own blood.
> 
> In addition to the dead, several dozen people were wounded, hospital officials said. The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports.
> 
> "I saw a lot of women and children wheeled in," Fares Ghanem, a hospital official told the Associated Press. "A lot of the wounded were missing limbs and a lot of the dead were in pieces."
> 
> Majed Hamdan, an AP photographer, who rushed to the scene shortly after the attacks, said many children were among the dead. "I saw women and men parents slapping their faces in grief, screaming, some of them collapsed to the floor. They knew their children were dead," he said.
> 
> "In the morgue, most of the killed appeared to be children. In the hospital, there wasn't enough space for the wounded."
> 
> Elsewehere, at least 12 members of an extended family, including seven young children, were killed in an air strike on their house in Gaza City. The bodies of the Daya family were pulled from the rubble of a house in Gaza city's Zeitoun district after it was hit by two Israeli missiles. The dead included seven children aged from one to 12 years, three women and two men. Nine other people were believed to be trapped in the rubble.
> 
> Hours earlier, three young men – all cousins – died when the Israelis bombed another UN school, the Asma primary school in Gaza City. They were among about 400 people who sought shelter there after fleeing their homes in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza.
> 
> *The UN, which said the school in Jabaliya was clearly marked, said it was "strongly protesting these killings to the Israeli authorities and is calling for an immediate and impartial investigation".
> 
> "Where it is found that international humanitarian law has been violated, those responsible must be held to account. Under international law, installations such as schools, health centres and UN facilities should be protected from attack. Well before the current fighting, the UN had given to the Israeli authorities the GPS co-ordinates of all its installations in Gaza, including Asma elementary school."*
> 
> The killings take the total toll in Palestinian lives since the Israelis launched their assault on the Gaza Strip 11 days ago to above 600. Doctors at Gaza hospitals say that at least one-fifth of the victims are children and a large number of women are among the dead.
> 
> Israel continues to insist that the bulk of those killed are Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters, although its claim to be going to extraordinary lengths to target only "terrorists" has been undermined by one of its own tanks firing on a building being used by Israeli troops, killing four.
> 
> The sharp spike in the number of civilian casualties came as Israeli troops and tanks moved into Gaza's second largest city, Khan Younis, for the first time today, supported by intensive artillery strikes as the military pledged to press on with its attack.
> 
> In a separate attack earlier in the day, three Palestinians were killed in an air strike on another school run by Unwra, the UN relief agency.
> 
> Nine Israelis, including three civilians hit by rocket fire, have been killed in the conflict. At least five rockets fired from Gaza landed in Israel today, including one that hit the town of Gadera, 17 miles from Tel Aviv, police said. A three-year-old girl was wounded.
> 
> The heaviest fighting has been in northern Gaza, with witnesses reporting wave after wave of bombing strikes across the north of the territory accompanied by gunfire from helicopters and artillery from land and sea. Thousands of Palestinians have been ordered to leave their homes or forced to flee the fighting.
> 
> In Shajaiyeh, east of Gaza City, Israeli troops seized control of three apartment blocks and set up gun positions on the rooftops. Residents were locked in their homes and soldiers confiscated their mobile phones, neighbours said.
> 
> Three of the four Israeli soldiers killed by friendly fire died when a tank mistakenly fired on a building where the soldiers had taken up positions. There was heavy artillery fire to cover the evacuation of 24 soldiers who were injured, including the commander of the Golani infantry brigade, one of Israel's key fighting forces.
> 
> Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, said his country's troops would continue their operation despite mounting Palestinian casualties and growing international calls for a ceasefire.
> 
> "Hamas has so far sustained a very heavy blow from us, but we have yet to achieve our objective, and therefore the operation continues," Barak said.
> 
> The Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said the offensive was intended to change permanently the shape of Israel's conflict with Hamas. "When Israel is targeted, Israel is going to retaliate," she said. Israel has rejected calls for a ceasefire.
> 
> The military said it had bombed more smuggling tunnels across the border with Egypt, in the south, and hit more than 40 other sites across Gaza including buildings storing weapons and rocket launching areas.
> 
> In Gaza, Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in the strip and a hardliner in the movement, appeared on the party's al-Aqsa television station and gave a defiant speech threatening attacks not only in Gaza but elsewhere.
> 
> "The Zionists have legitimised the killing of their children by killing our children. They have legitimised the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people," Zahar said. He urged Hamas fighters to "crush your enemy".
> 
> Another Hamas figure, a recognised military spokesman called Abu Ubaida, said thousands of Hamas fighters were waiting in Gaza to take on the Israeli military, and that rocket attacks would increase. More than 40 were fired into southern Israel yesterday, including one that landed in an empty kindergarten, which, like all schools near the Gaza border, has been closed since the conflict began.. Israeli police said a total of 520 rockets had been fired in the past 11 days of fighting.
> 
> Israeli troops are now deployed in and around the major urban areas of Gaza, particularly to the north, in Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya and Jabaliya. Using leaflets, telephone calls and radio announcements, they have ordered residents in many areas to leave their homes, forcing at least 15,000 Palestinians to flee to safety elsewhere. At least 5,000 are staying in 11 different UN schools and shelters.
> 
> The UN said more than 1 million Gazans were still without electricity or water and that it was increasingly difficult for staff to distribute aid or reach the injured. It said more industrial diesel was needed to reopen the strip's sole power plant, which has been shut for a week. Ten transformers have been damaged in the fighting.
> 
> More wheat grain is needed for food handouts, and the UN said Karni, the main commercial crossing, should be reopened to allow it in. Four ambulances and three mobile clinics were destroyed when bombs hit the headquarters of the Union of Health Care Committees in Gaza City.
> 
> John Holmes, the UN emergency relief coordinator, said Gaza represented an "increasingly alarming" humanitarian crisis, and that the territory was running low on clean water, power, food, medicine and other supplies since Israel began its offensive. Israeli leaders claim there is no humanitarian crisis.



Bo,

I received an e-mail from the IDF press office this morning regarding this incident. Please edit accordingly:

"The IDF was responding to _rocket/Katyusha/mortar/mg fire_ emanating from or near the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base_. The IDF works to minimize casualties amongst the _Lebanese/Palestinian/Syrian _ civilian population. The blame for this latest _missile/rocket/mortar/arty_ attack lies entirely with (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army _ who attack us and hide amongst their families. Sources familiar with this incident say that the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base _ was being used to store weapons by (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army_ and the explosion could have been related to the storage of these weapons. The IDF is launching an investigation into this matter."

Bo, I'll let you know when I hear more about the IDF investigation.

Regards.


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> Bo,
> 
> I received an e-mail from the IDF press office this morning regarding this incident. Please edit accordingly:
> 
> "The IDF was responding to _rocket/Katyusha/mortar/mg fire_ emanating from or near the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base_. The IDF works to minimize casualties amongst the _Lebanese/Palestinian/Syrian _ civilian population. The blame for this latest _missile/rocket/mortar/arty_ attack lies entirely with (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army _ who attack us and hide amongst their families. Sources familiar with this incident say that the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base _ was being used to store weapons by (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army_ and the explosion could have been related to the storage of these weapons. The IDF is launching an investigation into this matter."
> 
> Bo, I'll let you know when I hear more about the IDF investigation.
> 
> Regards.



Is that the verbatim e-mail or did you "edit accordingly"?   Obviously the latter given the italics.  Furthermore you do not reference a link to the source.  A pathetic, hamfisted, try at propaganda and disinformation.   I'll give it a "B" Grade for credibility where B = Bad.


----------



## George Wallace

tourza said:
			
		

> Bo,
> 
> I received an e-mail from the IDF press office this morning regarding this incident. Please edit accordingly:
> 
> "The IDF was responding to _rocket/Katyusha/mortar/mg fire_ emanating from or near the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base_. The IDF works to minimize casualties amongst the _Lebanese/Palestinian/Syrian _ civilian population. The blame for this latest _missile/rocket/mortar/arty_ attack lies entirely with (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army _ who attack us and hide amongst their families. Sources familiar with this incident say that the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base _ was being used to store weapons by (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army_ and the explosion could have been related to the storage of these weapons. The IDF is launching an investigation into this matter."
> 
> Bo, I'll let you know when I hear more about the IDF investigation.
> 
> Regards.



Is this a generic statement where one circles the appropriate word to describe a generic situation?  Sort of like saying "that they did/did not publically/privately state for the record/off the record that they had made/did not make this statement".


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Is that the verbatim e-mail or did you "edit accordingly"?   Obviously the latter given the italics.  Furthermore you do not reference a link to the source.  A pathetic, hamfisted, try at propaganda and disinformation.   I'll give it a "B" Grade for credibility where B = Bad.



Shec, a grade of 'B' is way too generous. I would have given it a grade of 'E' for sarcasm, where E = Excellent. 

Mr. Wallace, please refer to above. But I suspect the official IDF line won't be too different from my previous post...

Regards.


----------



## tourza

Both the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz beat me to the storyline...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167272256&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1053138.html

Regards.


----------



## Kilo_302

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_171PImuOl4&eurl=http://www.zmag.org/zvideo/2961


Yes he is being interviewed from Tehran, but he makes some interesting points. I await your flames.


----------



## Shec

Proving yet again that the gallant Hamas fightling man hides behind  a child rather than standing in front of them. 

The fact that Norman Finklestein willing allows himself to be a dupe of Iranian propaganda necessitates no further comment.


----------



## George Wallace

tourza 

Obviously I am missing something here.  To me these types of statements are not CLEAR and quite open to generalizations:

_rocket/Katyusha/mortar/mg fire_ emanating from or near the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base_. The IDF works to minimize casualties amongst the _Lebanese/Palestinian/Syrian _ civilian population. The blame for this latest _missile/rocket/mortar/arty_ attack lies entirely with (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army _ who attack us and hide amongst their families. Sources familiar with this incident say that the _house/refugee camp/school/mosque/UNIFIL base _ was being used to store weapons by (the) _Hamas/PFLP/al-Aqsa brigade/Hizballah/Lebanese Army_ and the explosion could have been related to the storage of these weapons. 


How exactly am I to interpret those?  Is it all or one of my own choosing, or what?  Those are not very clear statements to one event.  Is it suppose to cover several events, and economize on typing?





[Edit to add:  I have been having some serious computer problems today, so that may have contributed to my missing something.]


----------



## tamtam10

You'd think Canada would learn from the mistakes it made in trying to help Canadians out of Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon war. Unfortunately they didn't. Canada again acted too late in helping Canadians out of Gaza while other countries were able to get their nationals out. Now 39 Canadians are trapped in Gaza:

http://informedvote.ca/2009/01/canada-lags-in-helping-citizens-out-of-gaza/


----------



## Michael OLeary

Are people in the area completely incapable of realizing when tensions increase and they should remove themselves from the danger zone?

Why is it suddenly the Canadian Governments fault because they did nothing for themselves?


----------



## SupersonicMax

Is it 39 "oh my God, we're in trouble, but hey, we do have canadian citizenship!  Let's call Canada"

Or 39 Canadian?


----------



## Edward Campbell

I'm sure 39 people think the government is a laggard; I'm not sure I agree. I'm not persuaded that we, Canada as a country, have to rush to rescue people who put themselves in danger.

All Canadians are entitled to some help - whatever can be managed - but immediate rescue from dangerous places is not guaranteed.


----------



## Retired AF Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I'm not a big fan of UN, baby-blue beret type peacekeeping missions anywhere but the UN may be the only source of a _trusted mandate_ – anything but a UN mandated, indeed UN flagged  force might be unacceptable to the key players in Gaza.



I'm with you in disliking UN peacekeeping missions. I did three tours in Cyprus and I saw how the UN screwed things up royally. The military force did its job, but otherwise it was a waste of rations.

As for Mackenzie's article I'm surprised by it. If you've read any of his other news articles he has been extremely critical of the UN, especially his time in Sarajevo,. So I'm kind of surprised that he would propose a UN force for Gaza. And even though I'm a big fan of Mackenzie I disagree with his proposal. First off, the chances of putting an effective force together would be pretty difficult, if not impossible. Heck, even finding countries willing to provide military forces would be difficult. Even if they did get it on-the-ground do you think Hamas would co-operate with the force? I don't think so!

In my mind a more realistic scenario is this one proposed by Daniel Pipes in today's National Post. (As always, reproduced under Section 29 of the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act).

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/06/daniel-pipes-the-back-to-the-future-option-for-gaza.aspx

_Daniel Pipes: The 'back-to-the-future' option for Gaza

Israel’s war against Hamas brings up the old quandary: What to do about the Palestinians? Western states, including Israel, need to set goals to figure out their policy toward the West Bank and Gaza.
Let’s first review what we know does not and cannot work:

•  Israeli control.  Neither side wishes to continue the situation that began in 1967, when the Israel Defense Forces took control of a population that is religiously, culturally, economically and politically different and hostile.

•  A Palestinian state.  The 1993 Oslo Accords began this process, but a toxic brew of anarchy, ideological extremism, anti-Semitism, jihadism and warlordism led to complete Palestinian failure.

•  A binational state.  Given the two populations’ mutual antipathy, the prospect of a combined Israel-Palestine (what Muammar al-Qaddafi calls “Israstine”) is as absurd as it seems.

Excluding these three prospects leaves only one practical approach, that which worked tolerably well in the period 1948-67: Shared Jordanian-Egyptian rule, whereby Amman rules the West Bank and Cairo runs Gaza.

To be sure, this back-to-the-future approach inspires little enthusiasm. Not only was Jordanian-Egyptian rule undistinguished, but resurrecting this arrangement will frustrate Palestinian impulses, be they nationalist or Islamist. Further, Cairo never wanted Gaza and has vehemently rejected returning there. Accordingly, one academic analyst dismisses this idea as “an elusive fantasy that can only obscure real and difficult choices.”

It is not. The failures of Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas, of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the “peace process,” have prompted rethinking in Amman and Jerusalem. Indeed, The Christian Science Monitor’s Ilene R. Prusher found, already in 2007, that the idea of a West Bank-Jordan confederation “seems to be gaining traction on both sides of the Jordan River.”

The Jordanian government, which enthusiastically annexed the West Bank in 1950 and abandoned its claims only under duress in 1988, shows signs of wanting to return. Dan Diker and Pinchas Inbari documented for the Middle East Quarterly in 2006 how the PA’s “failure to assert control and become a politically viable entity has caused Amman to reconsider whether a hands-off strategy toward the West Bank is in its best interests.” Israeli officialdom has also showed itself open to this idea, occasionally calling for Jordanian troops to enter the West Bank.

Despairing of self-rule, some Palestinians welcome the Jordanian option. An unnamed senior PA official told Diker and Inbari that a form of federation or confederation with Jordan offers “the only reasonable, stable, long-term solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.” Hanna Siniora opined, “The current weakened prospects for a two-state solution forces us to revisit the possibility of a confederation with Jordan.” The New York Times’s Hassan M. Fattah quotes a Palestinian in Jordan: “Everything has been ruined for us — we’ve been fighting for 60 years and nothing is left. It would be better if Jordan ran things in Palestine, if King Abdullah could take control of the West Bank.”

Nor is this just talk: Diker and Inbari report that back-channel PA-Jordan negotiations in 2003-04 “resulted in an agreement in principle to send 30,000 Badr Force members” to the West Bank.

And while Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak announced a year ago that “Gaza is not part of Egypt, nor will it ever be,” his is hardly the last word. First, Mubarak notwithstanding, Egyptians overwhelmingly want a strong tie to Gaza; Hamas concurs and Israeli leaders sometimes agree. So the basis for an overhaul in policy exists.

Secondly, Gaza is arguably more a part of Egypt than of “Palestine.” During most of the Islamic period, it was either controlled by Cairo or part of Egypt administratively. Gazan colloquial Arabic is identical to what Egyptians living in Sinai speak. Economically, Gaza has the most connections to Egypt. Hamas itself derives from the Muslim Brethren, an Egyptian organization. Is it time to think of Gazans as Egyptians?

Thirdly, Jerusalem could out-manoeuvre Mubarak. Were it to announce a date when it ends the provisioning of all water, electricity, food, medicine and other trade, plus accept enhanced Egyptian security in Gaza, Cairo would have to take responsibility for Gaza. Among other advantages, this would make it accountable for Gazan security, finally putting an end to the thousands of Hamas rocket and mortar assaults.

The Jordan-Egypt option quickens no pulse, but that may be its value. It offers a uniquely sober way to solve the “Palestinian problem.”

© 2008 by Daniel Pipes

Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and Taube distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University. _


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

tamtam10 said:
			
		

> You'd think Canada would learn from the mistakes it made in trying to help Canadians out of Lebanon during the 2006 Lebanon war. Unfortunately they didn't. Canada again acted too late in helping Canadians out of Gaza while other countries were able to get their nationals out. Now 39 Canadians are trapped in Gaza:
> 
> http://informedvote.ca/2009/01/canada-lags-in-helping-citizens-out-of-gaza/





well since the Govt. of Canada has been telling passport holders to leave Gaza for over two years now I don't think its any of our business.....


----------



## 1feral1

Canadians by convenience.

Want want want, and take take take and never give back anything except rude ignorant criticism of their adopted country.

OWDU


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Michael O`Leary said:
			
		

> Are people in the area completely incapable of realizing when tensions increase and they should remove themselves from the danger zone?
> 
> Why is it suddenly the Canadian Governments fault because they did nothing for themselves?



Couldn't have said it better myself. As for those who criticized Canada for being slow in getting its citizens out of Lebanon (and now Gaza) here are a couple facts:

- First, Canada is a long ways away from Lebanon. Not so for many European countries. A look at a world atlas would be helpful; 
- Second, European countries have naval forces in the Med that were quickly moved into the conflict area to help evacuate its citizens. Even countries that do not border the Mediterranean (e.g. Britain, the U.S.) maintain a naval presence in the region. Canada, on the other hand, has no _standing_ naval presence in the Med; and
- Finally, many Mediterranean European countries (e.g. France) have state-owned shipping lines that were quickly commandeered into service. All they had to do was kick the tourists off the boats and sail them to Lebanon. Canada has no state-owned shipping lines *Period!*


----------



## tomahawk6

IDF video of Op Cast Lead in Gaza. Notice the Tavor, they have only been issued to the Golani Brigade so far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5TXvrl9CO4&feature=channel_page


----------



## The Bread Guy

Good one, T-6, drawing the eye to the IDF's public affairs YouTube page on the operation:
http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk

Also spotted this use of Twitter for updates by ISR:
http://twitter.com/IsraelConsulate


----------



## CougarKing

adding spice to the already complicated situation........ can someone take notice of Hugo...he's ranting again. :



> *Venezuela expels Israeli ambassador*
> 
> (CNN) -- Venezuela expelled Israel's ambassador to the country Tuesday and accused Israel of attempting to carry out "genocide" against the Palestinian people.
> 
> "In this tragic and indignant hour, the people of Venezuela manifest their unconditional solidarity with the heroic Palestinian people, share in the sadness that overcomes thousands of families through the loss of their loved ones, and extends to them a hand by affirming that the government of Venezuela will not rest until it sees those responsible for these criminal atrocities severely punished," the Venezuelan foreign minister said in a statement read by an anchor on state television.
> 
> The statement added that the government "condemns strongly the flagrant violations of international law" by Israel and "denounces their planned utilization of state terrorism."
> 
> "For the above-mentioned reasons, the government of Venezuela has decided to expel the ambassador of Israel and some of the personnel of the Israeli Embassy in Venezuela," it added.
> 
> In a news conference broadcast by state-run Venezuelan television, President Hugo Chavez blasted the Israeli military.
> 
> "They are cowards," he said. "It's as though a boxing professional were to come here and challenge you to box. Well, how courageous! How courageous is the Israeli army!"
> 
> It said that Chavez "makes a fraternal call to the Jewish people throughout the world to oppose these criminal policies of the state of Israel that recall the worst pages of the history of the 20th century.
> 
> "With the genocide of the Palestinian people, the state of Israel will never be able to offer its people the perspective of a peace that is both necessary and long-lasting."
> 
> Mark Regev, a spokesman for Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, was unswayed.
> 
> "I haven't heard the details yet, but you know the regime in Venezuela has been one of the few countries in the world that gives automatic support to the Iranian extremists, and it doesn't surprise me that they have affinity with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah," he told CNN.
> 
> He predicted that other countries would not follow suit, even in the Middle East.
> 
> "I think, even in the Muslim and Arab countries, there is a fair amount of understanding for what Israel has had to do here," he said.


----------



## CBH99

In my humble, personal opinion - I think the mainstream media here in North America has given Israel a free pass for the most part.  Perhaps the NA (North American) media reports a school bombed here & there, and maybe a few accidental civilian casualties - but for the most part I think the media here in North America has been relatively biased in favor of Israel.

Lets take a step back and look at the current situation somewhat objectively.  Someone who is more current or who has more knowledge of the history, please feel free to correct me...I stopped following the news about Israel/Gaza tensions about 10yrs ago.  (When I realized there was no effective or near solution in sight).

This latest violence comes at the end of a ceasefire, that Israel says was broken when Hamas fired rockets into Israeli residential neighbourhoods.  Israel absolutely has the right & obligation to protect its citizens - and military action against Hamas is an affective means in helping to prevent rocket attacks on Israeli citizens.

However, why does Hamas continually fire rockets into Israel??  Is it because they are a bunch of fanatics who care nothing for human life & are hellbent on doing nothing but terrorism??  Or is Israel at least somewhat responsible for the continued provocation??  (I know, I know...heaven forbid Israel is looked at in anything but a shining light.)

In the latest 'ceasefire' - Israel continued to build residential neighbourhoods in areas that are still being disputed.  The Palestinian people who were living there were forced to leave, and in their place Israeli settlements were continually built.  27 political & religious leaders were killed by Israeli forces, which resulted in several dozen civilian deaths.  (Killing a dangerous terrorist leader is all fine & dandy, but when dozens of civlians are killed due to the action it deminishes one's credibility.)  None of this seems to make the news at all - however when Hamas retaliates with a rocket or two, it makes front page news.

Now I don't want there to be any misconception about what I'm saying, I'm trying to look at this as objectively as possible.  I think its absolutely wrong when Hamas takes any action which harms Israeli citizens.  But when Palestinian civilians are killed in the retaliation, usually in much higher numbers - how can we continue to say that Israel is responding responsibly??

Yesterday, Israel bombed 2 UN schools that resulted in several dozen deaths.  Lets not forget it was only a year or two ago that a Canadian soldier was killed when Israel bombed a UN monitoring post.  And the hospital ship USS Liberty was bombed by Israeli fighter jets roughly 30yrs ago.  The point I'm trying to make is that Israel has been known in the past to kill innocent people.  And while I commend Israel for its attempts to protect its citizens, it is disheartening to see it do so by killing so many civilians in Gaza.

I understand that were are political reasons why Israel must continue to be supported, due to the fact it is one of the only politically stable & democratic countries in the region.  However, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice by continuing to turn a blind eye to Israel's at times irresponsible use of force.

**Please note, I'm not some pot smoking hippy.  I'm a currently serving member of the Canadian Forces, who also spent 6 months in Sudan doing private work for a documentary film.  I am not condemning Israel entirely, and do my best to stay impartial.  I just find it extremely disheartening when we're spoon-fed BS about the current conflict, and continue to view the conflict through the relatively biased eyes of western media.**


----------



## armyvern

CBH99 said:
			
		

> In my humble, personal opinion - I think the mainstream media here in North America has given Israel a free pass for the most part.  Perhaps the NA (North American) media reports a school bombed here & there, and maybe a few accidental civilian casualties - but for the most part I think the media here in North America has been relatively biased in favor of Israel.
> 
> Lets take a step back and look at the current situation somewhat objectively.  Someone who is more current or who has more knowledge of the history, please feel free to correct me...I stopped following the news about Israel/Gaza tensions about 10yrs ago.  (When I realized there was no effective or near solution in sight).
> 
> This latest violence comes at the end of a ceasefire, that Israel says was broken when Hamas fired rockets into Israeli residential neighbourhoods.  Israel absolutely has the right & obligation to protect its citizens - and military action against Hamas is an affective means in helping to prevent rocket attacks on Israeli citizens.
> 
> However, why does Hamas continually fire rockets into Israel??  Is it because they are a bunch of fanatics who care nothing for human life & are hellbent on doing nothing but terrorism??  Or is Israel at least somewhat responsible for the continued provocation??  (I know, I know...heaven forbid Israel is looked at in anything but a shining light.)
> 
> In the latest 'ceasefire' - Israel continued to build residential neighbourhoods in areas that are still being disputed.  The Palestinian people who were living there were forced to leave, and in their place Israeli settlements were continually built.  27 political & religious leaders were killed by Israeli forces, which resulted in several dozen civilian deaths.  (Killing a dangerous terrorist leader is all fine & dandy, but when dozens of civlians are killed due to the action it deminishes one's credibility.)  None of this seems to make the news at all - however when Hamas retaliates with a rocket or two, it makes front page news.
> 
> Now I don't want there to be any misconception about what I'm saying, I'm trying to look at this as objectively as possible.  I think its absolutely wrong when Hamas takes any action which harms Israeli citizens.  But when Palestinian civilians are killed in the retaliation, usually in much higher numbers - how can we continue to say that Israel is responding responsibly??
> 
> Yesterday, Israel bombed 2 UN schools that resulted in several dozen deaths.  Lets not forget it was only a year or two ago that a Canadian soldier was killed when Israel bombed a UN monitoring post.  And the hospital ship USS Liberty was bombed by Israeli fighter jets roughly 30yrs ago.  The point I'm trying to make is that Israel has been known in the past to kill innocent people.  And while I commend Israel for its attempts to protect its citizens, it is disheartening to see it do so by killing so many civilians in Gaza.
> 
> I understand that were are political reasons why Israel must continue to be supported, due to the fact it is one of the only politically stable & democratic countries in the region.  However, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice by continuing to turn a blind eye to Israel's at times irresponsible use of force.
> 
> **Please note, I'm not some pot smoking hippy.  I'm a currently serving member of the Canadian Forces, who also spent 6 months in Sudan doing private work for a documentary film.  I am not condemning Israel entirely, and do my best to stay impartial.  I just find it extremely disheartening when we're spoon-fed BS about the current conflict, and continue to view the conflict through the relatively biased eyes of western media.**



You make some interesting points, but let's not lose sight of the situation regarding goings-on during the cease-fire either ... Israel continued to build settlements; meanwhile, back in the Gaza ... the Palenstinians (more-so Hamas as opposed to an entire group of peoples) continually utilize "cease-fires" as _down-times _ meant simply to re-arm themselves via their underground tunnel network. Neither side is innocent in matters of any 'cease-fire' agreements.

As for the UN school incident --- reports are now saying that Hamas fire was originating from the school - if so, then Hamas itself turned this school into a bonified and legitimate military target (and, quite frankly if this turns out to be true I would be neither shocked nor surprised given prior incidents in contravention of Geneva conventions - transporting *armed*, uninjured Palenstianian combatants in UN marked ambulances for example [nicely caught on video during this latest unrest]).

That all being said, I do agree with you somewhat. The 'simple' North-Americanized media-friendly version of this very long struggle is somewhat tarnished.

I suppose if I took over my neighbours house and forced their entire family to live in what amounts to my hallway for decades upon end and erected checkpoints at each doorway in the hallway which I could "close" randomly on a whim to prevent them from getting to work, seeing family, getting out to buy groceries, or preventing their kids from getting to school, and closing off the tap to the fresh water supply eminating out of Mount Herman sometimes just for days, but sometimes for weeks on end ... should I really be surprised if one day the neighbour picked up a stone and threw it at me or reacted to the situation?

We created this. Both sides feel they can justify any actions they take in this decades old struggle. We created a homeland for the Israelis and in the act of doing so, we took away a homeland from another people.  Sad days indeed - and I'm very certain that absolutely nothing will improve until the international community that cretaed the historical groundwork for this situation adresses the Palenstinian question that they managed to overlook at the beginning of it all.


----------



## FastEddy

CBH99 said:
			
		

> In my humble, personal opinion - I think the mainstream media here in North America has given Israel a free pass for the most part.  Perhaps the NA (North American) media reports a school bombed here & there, and maybe a few accidental civilian casualties - but for the most part I think the media here in North America has been relatively biased in favor of Israel.
> 
> Lets take a step back and look at the current situation somewhat objectively.  Someone who is more current or who has more knowledge of the history, please feel free to correct me...I stopped following the news about Israel/Gaza tensions about 10yrs ago.  (When I realized there was no effective or near solution in sight).
> 
> This latest violence comes at the end of a ceasefire, that Israel says was broken when Hamas fired rockets into Israeli residential neighbourhoods.  Israel absolutely has the right & obligation to protect its citizens - and military action against Hamas is an affective means in helping to prevent rocket attacks on Israeli citizens.
> 
> However, why does Hamas continually fire rockets into Israel??  Is it because they are a bunch of fanatics who care nothing for human life & are hellbent on doing nothing but terrorism??  Or is Israel at least somewhat responsible for the continued provocation??  (I know, I know...heaven forbid Israel is looked at in anything but a shining light.)
> 
> In the latest 'ceasefire' - Israel continued to build residential neighbourhoods in areas that are still being disputed.  The Palestinian people who were living there were forced to leave, and in their place Israeli settlements were continually built.  27 political & religious leaders were killed by Israeli forces, which resulted in several dozen civilian deaths.  (Killing a dangerous terrorist leader is all fine & dandy, but when dozens of civlians are killed due to the action it deminishes one's credibility.)  None of this seems to make the news at all - however when Hamas retaliates with a rocket or two, it makes front page news.
> 
> Now I don't want there to be any misconception about what I'm saying, I'm trying to look at this as objectively as possible.  I think its absolutely wrong when Hamas takes any action which harms Israeli citizens.  But when Palestinian civilians are killed in the retaliation, usually in much higher numbers - how can we continue to say that Israel is responding responsibly??
> 
> Yesterday, Israel bombed 2 UN schools that resulted in several dozen deaths.  Lets not forget it was only a year or two ago that a Canadian soldier was killed when Israel bombed a UN monitoring post.  And the hospital ship USS Liberty was bombed by Israeli fighter jets roughly 30yrs ago.  The point I'm trying to make is that Israel has been known in the past to kill innocent people.  And while I commend Israel for its attempts to protect its citizens, it is disheartening to see it do so by killing so many civilians in Gaza.
> 
> I understand that were are political reasons why Israel must continue to be supported, due to the fact it is one of the only politically stable & democratic countries in the region.  However, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice by continuing to turn a blind eye to Israel's at times irresponsible use of force.
> 
> **Please note, I'm not some pot smoking hippy.  I'm a currently serving member of the Canadian Forces, who also spent 6 months in Sudan doing private work for a documentary film.  I am not condemning Israel entirely, and do my best to stay impartial.  I just find it extremely disheartening when we're spoon-fed BS about the current conflict, and continue to view the conflict through the relatively biased eyes of western media.**



"CBH99: Correct me if I'm wrong, You are a member of a Reserve Unit and as such you have not been Deployed in a active Theater of Operations. That your work in the Sudan was of a purely Civilian and Private Nature.

You claim that the North American Media is glossing over the extent or the severity of the Israeli attacks on the Hamas resulting in considerable civilian causalities, ultimately to the extent that they are BIAS.

Then I do not know what TV News Media Networks I'm watching, as mine are flooded with nothing but Screaming, Heaven Beseeching, Black Burke Clad Women, Anguished Stricken Men Carrying Limp Lifeless Bodies of Children, Scores of Panic Stricken People dashing about seaking refuge and Ambulances screaming up and down.

As for not commenting on your other observations I apologize, as at present I am hamstrung under threat of Banishment for commenting on controversial subjects which are deemed inflammatory to readers or members.

Cheers.


----------



## the 48th regulator

FastEddy said:
			
		

> As for not commenting on your other observations I apologize, as at present I am hamstrung under threat of Banishment for commenting on controversial subjects which are deemed inflammatory to readers or members.
> 
> Cheers.




No...No.

No one has "Hamstrung" you Eddy,

We have guidlines here, and if you can not abide by them, well you are "Hamstringing" yourself.  Here let me help you to find these guidelines.....

Tone and Content on Army.ca

Milnet.ca Conduct Guidelines: MUST READ


More can be found here as well

http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/board,9.0.html

dileas

tess

milnet.ca staff


----------



## Shec

CBH99 said:
			
		

> ...And the hospital ship USS Liberty was bombed by Israeli fighter jets roughly 30yrs ago...



The Liberty was a hospital ship?  In actual fact it was gathering electronic intelligence hence the classification AGTR: 

http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/60/6005.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_(AGTR-5)


----------



## Kilo_302

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

Interesting article regarding the situation in Gaza from an ex-IDF member.


----------



## Shec

And now Hezbollah is getting into the act.  From my buddy:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation “Cast Lead” Day 13.

I woke up this morning a little later than usual, seems that those miles I put on yesterday walking around Tel Aviv taking pictures took its toll on me.
Coffee. Dog walk……  News playing in the background.  Wait something different coming over, the news readers voice has gone up a pitch or two, and he is showing a bit more excitement,   Blurred head still not hearing everything he is saying,,,, WHAT” the coffee is clearing the mud out of the neural pathways,,, CRAP! Katyusha rockets hit northern Israel!  OH BOY HERE WE GO!
Phone call to Army daughter, she is just getting the news herself...  she says everything is cool; I’ll accept that from my personal expert on the subject of the IDF for the time being.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167307373&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Attacks from the north, (Lebanon)  from the allies of Hamas, them fun loving  mushroom heads at Hezbollah have sent us a message of 3 Katyusha rockets into the coastal town of Nahariya, a lovely border town/city (that all depends on your view of it in my mind)  a couple of wounded and a lot of noise that they might have been expecting, (Hezbollah has been rattling the bars of their cage in that monkey house called Lebanon since before we moved on their brothers in Gaza)
So what does this mean for us over here?
Well it means that we were right in calling out extra reservists and sending them north to protect the border for one thing. And it also means that we are now going to have to absorb folks from the northern areas down here in the center of the country if this thing goes RED.!
Now as I’m typing this 2 more rockets came in from the north, and the stuff flying out of Gaza is at about 5, 
Looks like I’m just going to stay in Kfar Saba today and not head out like planned….  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So much for the efficacy of the UN in case anybody was wondering why Israel has no faith in it.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> And now Hezbollah is getting into the act.  From my buddy:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Operation “Cast Lead” Day 13.
> 
> I woke up this morning a little later than usual, seems that those miles I put on yesterday walking around Tel Aviv taking pictures took its toll on me.
> Coffee. Dog walk……  News playing in the background.  Wait something different coming over, the news readers voice has gone up a pitch or two, and he is showing a bit more excitement,   Blurred head still not hearing everything he is saying,,,, WHAT” the coffee is clearing the mud out of the neural pathways,,, CRAP! Katyusha rockets hit northern Israel!  OH BOY HERE WE GO!
> Phone call to Army daughter, she is just getting the news herself...  she says everything is cool; I’ll accept that from my personal expert on the subject of the IDF for the time being.
> 
> http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167307373&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
> 
> Attacks from the north, (Lebanon)  from the allies of Hamas, them fun loving  mushroom heads at Hezbollah have sent us a message of 3 Katyusha rockets into the coastal town of Nahariya, a lovely border town/city (that all depends on your view of it in my mind)  a couple of wounded and a lot of noise that they might have been expecting, (Hezbollah has been rattling the bars of their cage in that monkey house called Lebanon since before we moved on their brothers in Gaza)
> So what does this mean for us over here?
> Well it means that we were right in calling out extra reservists and sending them north to protect the border for one thing. And it also means that we are now going to have to absorb folks from the northern areas down here in the center of the country if this thing goes RED.!
> Now as I’m typing this 2 more rockets came in from the north, and the stuff flying out of Gaza is at about 5,
> Looks like I’m just going to stay in Kfar Saba today and not head out like planned….
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> So much for the efficacy of the UN in case anybody was wondering why Israel has no faith in it.



From the Dailystar:

Lebanese Information Minister Tarek Mitri told AFP that Hizbullah, which is represented in the government, had said it was not involved in the rocket barrage. 
Unidentified Israeli military sources said that they thought Palestinian militants rather than Hizbullah were involved. An earlier report of a second salvo of rockets fired into Israel proved to have been premature, with Israeli sources saying a warning siren had malfunctioned.


And from the CBC:

Both Israeli and Lebanese officials have said they don't believe the attack was launched by Hezbollah.


And, finally, more proof that the IDF genuinely cares for the welfare of innocent Palestinian civilians:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7817926.stm

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1053877.html


Regards.


----------



## Kilo_302

> About 700 Palestinian and 11 Israeli lives are said to have been lost since the offensive began 12 days ago.



This is an  excerpt from the BBC article posted above. With these numbers, how can anyone think that Hamas is the aggressor in this scenario?  Israel broke the ceasefire in November by killing six Hamas officials, and that Israel broke the terms of the agreement by continuing the blockade of Gaza. These are indisputable facts, regardless of what anyone thinks about the overall conflict and its historical causes. While some may view it as such, this post is not "pro-Hamas" nor is it "anti-Israel"; targeting civilians is disgusting no matter who does it. But with over 200 Palestinian children killed, callous disregard for civilian life can be the equivalent. I wonder what other nation could bomb densely populated urban areas killing hundreds of innocents and yet escape international condemnation? Could Turkey do this to the Kurds? Could China do this to the Tibetans? It boggles the mind that in the past few weeks Palestinians are being denied even a basic recognition of victimhood from most Western media outlets.


----------



## Shec

Why are there so few Israeli casualties in comparison with the Palestinian death toll?  It's because Israel's first priority is the safety of its citizens, which is why there are shelters and warning systems in Israeli towns.   If Hamas can dig tunnels, it can certainly build shelters. Instead, it prefers to use women and children as human shields while its leaders rush into hiding.


----------



## dapaterson

Were Israel to display "callous disregard for human life" the Palestinian casualty numbers would be several orders of magnitude greater.  Israel is not targetting civilians.  They are targetting valid, legitimate military targets that Hamas deliberately palces within urban areas, forcing residents of Gaza to becoem unwilling hman shields.

Hamas could have peace at any time; they choose not to.  So be it.


----------



## Kilo_302

> Why there are so few Israeli casualties in comparison with the Palestinian death toll?  It's because Israel's first priority is the safety of its citizens, which is why there are shelters and warning systems in Israeli towns.   If Hamas can dig tunnels, it can certainly build shelters. Instead, it prefers to use women and children as human shields while its leaders rush into hiding.



 How could Hamas provide an early warning system against Israeli arty and LGBs? Gaza has no resources or economy to speak of, aside from whatever the UN can ship in. I agree with you that some hardline Hamas members might consider it advantageous when Palestinian civilians die in hopes of drawing the attention of the world community, but you cannot absolve Israel of responsibility for the ordnance it drops.  The "conflict of equals"  in this case does not exist. Israel is a proper nation, with a military, and total support from the world's sole remaining super power. Gaza is roughly half the size of Toronto, with 1.5 million people and almost no infrastructure. 

I would also argue that similar to Hamas, the Israeli government's main concern IS NOT the safety of it's citizens. Embarking on operations such as this can only prolong conflict, and ensure further retaliation. It hasn't been confirmed yet whether or not the latest rockets were from Lebanon, but at this point, one wouldn't be surprised. Hardliners on both sides are to blame for the ongoing hostilities.





> Hamas could have peace at any time; they choose not to.  So be it.



I refer you to my post above. Hamas kept its end of the bargain in the latest ceasefire, Israel did not. Hamas indicated in November that it was willing to extend the ceasefire (during which Israel was still blockading the Gaza Strip, against the ceasefire conditions), and Israel responded by killing 6 Hamas officials. We don't even have to examine the last 50 years of history here, the last 2 months alone prove that Israel is not genuinely interested in peace.


----------



## Shec

"No resources or economy to speak of"  No wonder.  They hadn’t had one in years but once Israel took control of the strip Israelis poured in to trade with the people of the strip! Why? It was Tax Free! My former kibbutz used to buy furniture and electronics there and they in turn used to come to the kibbutz and purchase cattle and other things,.  But then they shot themselves in the foot. The First Intifada.  Whoops,  where are the shoppers? They went elsewhere!  Where are the teachers? Your terrorist thugs either closed the schools or/and or killed teacher…


----------



## armyvern

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> I would also argue that similar to Hamas, *the Israeli government's main concern IS NOT the safety of it's citizens.*



Wow. Never actually been there have you? 

Try being a white red-headed, freckly-faced girl with a napsack that you sit down on a chair & then walk 5 feet to place your order in a MacDonalds leaving the bag "unattended" in Eilat (well outside the Golan, the West bank or the Gaza) ... you'll have IDF or other security all over you in 15.2 seconds flat. I can certainly assure you that security of their citizens *IS* so their prioirty despite the skin-colour of 'suspicious' person or package; but they've kind of been forced to react this way towards security haven't they? Every time they let it down, some other "martyr" joins the cause of exploding themselves amongst the innocents (that'd be women & kids of Israel enjoying a simple pizza lunch or an evening at the Disco) who happened to have chosen the wrong venue to try to live their lives that fateful day.

A different concept being that these martyrs "target" those populations and non-military targets - all with the aim of instilling "terror." That's the big difference between the two.

Gaza: Roughly 1.4 million people crammed into 151 square kilometeres ... civilian casualty ratio (700) (war _sucks_) seems to be a whole lot lower than it was during Western bombing campaigns over Germany circa the 40s no?


----------



## The Bread Guy

Regarding:


> About 700 Palestinian and 11 Israeli lives are said to have been lost since the offensive began 12 days ago.


let's also remember the source of the information can sometimes..... skew?... such numbers as well.

For example, in December 2008, the Taliban claimed responsibility for (at least) around 70 Canadians killed in Afghanistan on English-language statements, whereas the CF says nine died in December.

Just sayin'....


----------



## armyvern

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> I refer you to my post above. Hamas kept its end of the bargain in the latest ceasefire, Israel did not. Hamas indicated in November that it was willing to extend the ceasefire (during which Israel was still blockading the Gaza Strip, against the ceasefire conditions), and Israel responded by killing 6 Hamas officials. We don't even have to examine the last 50 years of history here, the last 2 months alone prove that Israel is not genuinely interested in peace.



Hamas kept up it's end of the last ceasefire? How? By continuing throughout to smuggle in weapons via the tunnel network that they were supposed to cease? By firing rockets into Negev a mere 4 days after the last cease-fire agreement began (24 June 2008) (amongst other rocket attacks during this period)? Gimme a break. At least be honest with your statements about breachs of cease-fire; Hamas certainly has breached it from the outset - ergo the Israeli's justifying their own continuance of the blockade. It's a two-way street.


----------



## Bo

*Robert Fisk: Why do they hate the West so much, we will ask*

So once again, Israel has opened the gates of hell to the Palestinians. Forty civilian refugees dead in a United Nations school, three more in another. Not bad for a night's work in Gaza by the army that believes in "purity of arms". But why should we be surprised?

*Have we forgotten the 17,500 dead – almost all civilians, most of them children and women – in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon; the 1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila massacre; the 1996 Qana massacre of 106 Lebanese civilian refugees, more than half of them children, at a UN base; the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew; the 1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians?*

What is amazing is that so many Western leaders, so many presidents and prime ministers and, I fear, so many editors and journalists, bought the old lie; that Israelis take such great care to avoid civilian casualties. "Israel makes every possible effort to avoid civilian casualties," yet another Israeli ambassador said only hours before the Gaza massacre. And every president and prime minister who repeated this mendacity as an excuse to avoid a ceasefire has the blood of last night's butchery on their hands. Had George Bush had the courage to demand an immediate ceasefire 48 hours earlier, those 40 civilians, the old and the women and children, would be alive.

What happened was not just shameful. It was a disgrace. Would war crime be too strong a description? For that is what we would call this atrocity if it had been committed by Hamas. So a war crime, I'm afraid, it was. After covering so many mass murders by the armies of the Middle East – by Syrian troops, by Iraqi troops, by Iranian troops, by Israeli troops – I suppose cynicism should be my reaction. But Israel claims it is fighting our war against "international terror". The Israelis claim they are fighting in Gaza for us, for our Western ideals, for our security, for our safety, by our standards. And so we are also complicit in the savagery now being visited upon Gaza.

I've reported the excuses the Israeli army has served up in the past for these outrages. Since they may well be reheated in the coming hours, here are some of them: that the Palestinians killed their own refugees, that the Palestinians dug up bodies from cemeteries and planted them in the ruins, that ultimately the Palestinians are to blame because they supported an armed faction, or because armed Palestinians deliberately used the innocent refugees as cover.

The Sabra and Chatila massacre was committed by Israel's right-wing Lebanese Phalangist allies while Israeli troops, as Israel's own commission of inquiry revealed, watched for 48 hours and did nothing. When Israel was blamed, Menachem Begin's government accused the world of a blood libel. After Israeli artillery had fired shells into the UN base at Qana in 1996, the Israelis claimed that Hizbollah gunmen were also sheltering in the base. It was a lie. The more than 1,000 dead of 2006 – a war started when Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers on the border – were simply dismissed as the responsibility of the Hizbollah. Israel claimed the bodies of children killed in a second Qana massacre may have been taken from a graveyard. It was another lie. The Marwahin massacre was never excused. The people of the village were ordered to flee, obeyed Israeli orders and were then attacked by an Israeli gunship. The refugees took their children and stood them around the truck in which they were travelling so that Israeli pilots would see they were innocents. Then the Israeli helicopter mowed them down at close range. Only two survived, by playing dead. Israel didn't even apologise.

Twelve years earlier, another Israeli helicopter attacked an ambulance carrying civilians from a neighbouring village – again after they were ordered to leave by Israel – and killed three children and two women. The Israelis claimed that a Hizbollah fighter was in the ambulance. It was untrue. I covered all these atrocities, I investigated them all, talked to the survivors. So did a number of my colleagues. Our fate, of course, was that most slanderous of libels: we were accused of being *anti-Semitic*.

And I write the following without the slightest doubt: *we'll hear all these scandalous fabrications again. We'll have the Hamas-to-blame lie – heaven knows, there is enough to blame them for without adding this crime – and we may well have the bodies-from-the-cemetery lie and we'll almost certainly have the Hamas-was-in-the-UN-school lie and we will very definitely have the anti-Semitism lie. And our leaders will huff and puff and remind the world that Hamas originally broke the ceasefire. It didn't. Israel broke it, first on 4 November when its bombardment killed six Palestinians in Gaza and again on 17 November when another bombardment killed four more Palestinians.

Yes, Israelis deserve security. Twenty Israelis dead in 10 years around Gaza is a grim figure indeed. But 600 Palestinians dead in just over a week, thousands over the years since 1948 – when the Israeli massacre at Deir Yassin helped to kick-start the flight of Palestinians from that part of Palestine that was to become Israel – is on a quite different scale. This recalls not a normal Middle East bloodletting but an atrocity on the level of the Balkan wars of the 1990s. And of course, when an Arab bestirs himself with unrestrained fury and takes out his incendiary, blind anger on the West, we will say it has nothing to do with us. Why do they hate us, we will ask? But let us not say we do not know the answer.*

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-why-do-they-hate-the-west-so-much-we-will-ask-1230046.html


----------



## armyvern

Interesting how Fisk uses numbers from all borders of Israel to denote dead caused by Israel, yet limits Israeli "dead" at the hands of "others" counts to a mere _"Twenty Israelis dead in 10 years around Gaza is a grim figure indeed." _ 

How about he adds in those totals from the Lebanese border, the Golani region, the Egyptian border, the West Bank, the Israeli towns not near borders where rockets have landed, the suicide bombers victim counts all over the country??

I guess, in his mind, all those _other_ Israeli dead are "excuseable" or "forgettable"? What a wonderful spin that is.


----------



## Bo

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I guess, in his mind, all those _other_ Israeli dead are "excuseable" or "forgettable"? What a wonderful spin that is.



No different than the spin put on by most Western media outlets regarding the past deaths of Palestinians/Lebanese.


----------



## armyvern

Bo said:
			
		

> No different than the spin put on by most Western media outlets regarding the past deaths of Palestinians/Lebanese.



Are you suggesting that they "ignored" them?

I recall (and quite often at that) the western MSM bringing Israel and their actions to task regarding Lebanon, Sabra et al on my television set; the MSM certainly hasn't "excused" them.


----------



## thunderchild

If Israel wanted to destroy the population of Gaza we all know that they have the power to do it and then some.  For that matter it would be easier to just starve them out right? , most of the acess over land is through Israel. Hamas has taken/shown very little intrest in precautions for Civil defence or in building much infrastructure of any kind for "their people".  Rather they dug tunnels and built rockets and prepare for the worst kind of urban fighting sense Stalingrad in WW-2, all while using the Palestinian people to shield and justify their actions, not very honourable.  The sad thing is that the Palistians are stuck between both sides.


----------



## 2 Cdo

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Wow. Never actually been there have you?
> 
> Try being a white red-headed, freckly-faced girl with a napsack that you sit down on a chair & then walk 5 feet to place your order in a MacDonalds leaving the bag "unattended" in Eilat (well outside the Golan, the West bank or the Gaza) ... you'll have IDF or other security all over you in 15.2 seconds flat. I can certainly assure you that security of their citizens *IS* so their prioirty despite the skin-colour of 'suspicious' person or package; but they've kind of been forced to react this way towards security haven't they? Every time they let it down, some other "martyr" joins the cause of exploding themselves amongst the innocents (that'd be women & kids of Israel enjoying a simple pizza lunch or an evening at the Disco) who happened to have chosen the wrong venue to try to live their lives that fateful day.
> 
> A different concept being that these martyrs "target" those populations and non-military targets - all with the aim of instilling "terror." That's the big difference between the two.
> 
> Gaza: Roughly 1.4 million people crammed into 151 square kilometeres ... civilian casualty ratio (700) (war _sucks_) seems to be a whole lot lower than it was during Western bombing campaigns over Germany circa the 40s no?



Further, he could fly El AL Air and have to endure the 4-5 hour early check-in time and the hand searching of ALL baggage, plus the added bonus of being taken aside for further "checks" because you haven't shaved or slept in a few days and smell like a distillery!


----------



## Shec

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Interesting how Fisk uses numbers from all borders of Israel to denote dead caused by Israel, yet limits Israeli "dead" at the hands of "others" counts to a mere _"Twenty Israelis dead in 10 years around Gaza is a grim figure indeed." _
> 
> How about he adds in those totals from the Lebanese border, the Golani region, the Egyptian border, the West Bank, the Israeli towns not near borders where rockets have landed, the suicide bombers victim counts all over the country??
> 
> I guess, in his mind, all those _other_ Israeli dead are "excuseable" or "forgettable"? What a wonderful spin that is.



Compliments on your sharp eyes and quick mind Vern !    If Fisk wants to keep, and skew, a Balance Sheet then here is the other side of the ledger to , well, balance it.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/osloterr.html


----------



## Kilo_302

Even including all those figures, the air strikes of the last few weeks are a disgrace, and I think that was Fisk's point. He also clearly stated that he has covered atrocities committed by the forces of many nations in the Middle East, and condemns them all. His slight transgression here is no where near the outright lies we get from the Israeli government and much of our media. Many of us who are critical of Israel DO NOT condone Hamas or any other group that targets civilians. I also do not forget that Israel has been the target of terrorism. When I say that Israel is not concerned over the safety of its citizens, I mean that rather than get to the root of the problem (the illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories) they "treat" the problem with security measures. All the Palestinians want is a return to the pre-1967 borders, or 22% of their original land. You can argue with the tactics that they have used, but when pushed into a corner, people do desperate and often evil things. Israel however, is not in a corner.


----------



## Kat Stevens

No, but they do have their backs to the sea, quite literally, and surrounded on all sides by people who wish their annihilation.


----------



## Bo

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> No, but they do have their backs to the sea, quite literally, and surrounded on all sides by people who wish their annihilation.



And right there you said it, Israel's most powerful weapon.

No I'm not talking about their F16's or F15's. I'm not talking about their nuclear weapons either. No, Israel's most powerful weapon is their propaganda machine spewing out claims that they are constantly at the risk of being "wiped off the map". 

It's laughable that Israel can be "annihilated" considering they have the most powerful military in the region (and one of the most powerful in the world). Not only that, but they are backed by the US.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> All the Palestinians want is a return to the pre-1967 borders, or 22% of their original land.



And how did those borders get created?  Let's see, first in 1948 (after the UN's ideas appear to have been rejected by Arab "neighbours"), then in 1967, when ISR, on being attacked, won the space, in many peoples' eyes, fair and square from nations which, as others have said, would be happy to not see ISR around anymore.


----------



## armyvern

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> Even including all those figures, the air strikes of the last few weeks are a disgrace, and I think that was Fisk's point. He also clearly stated that he has covered atrocities committed by the forces of many nations in the Middle East, and condemns them all. His slight transgression here is no where near the outright lies we get from the Israeli government and much of our media. Many of us who are critical of Israel DO NOT condone Hamas or any other group that targets civilians. I also do not forget that Israel has been the target of terrorism. *When I say that Israel is not concerned over the safety of its citizens, I mean that rather than get to the root of the problem (the illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories) they "treat" the problem with security measures. * All the Palestinians want is a return to the pre-1967 borders, or 22% of their original land. You can argue with the tactics that they have used, but when pushed into a corner, people do desperate and often evil things. Israel however, is not in a corner.



And that is _exactly_ the problem which brings us right back to history circa 1949 and the actions of western nations in bringing about "Israel". The Israeli's didn't do this ... we did it for them. And in the birth of their nation, we conveniently "neglected" those Palenstinians who would be displaced from their homeland while making it the Israeli's. A sanctionned event - internationally. "Occupied" goes back to '49 ... if you happen to be Palestinian.  

Until that is corrected - nothing will change.


----------



## tomahawk6

Interesting how the media reports all dead as civilians when the fact is most of the dead are Hamas. No question that women and children have died but thats why hamas launches their rockets from populated areas. Prior to bombing buildings the Israelis would call and tell everyone to get out. Hamas would then move the women and children to the roof. The Israelis have a non leathal bomb they drop that is designed to scare the civilians away and then they follow up with a bomb. Hamas wants civilian casualties. The Israelis cant stop this operation now that they are in Gaza,they must take full control and ferret out the concealed rockets/launchers - only then can the status of Gaza be decided. Anything less will allow Hamas to rebuild/rearm and they will be even more dangerous in the future.


----------



## George Wallace

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Interesting how the media reports all dead as civilians when the fact is most of the dead are Hamas. No question that women and children have died but thats why hamas launches their rockets from populated areas. Prior to bombing buildings the Israelis would call and tell everyone to get out. Hamas would then move the women and children to the roof. The Israelis have a non leathal bomb they drop that is designed to scare the civilians away and then they follow up with a bomb. Hamas wants civilian casualties. The Israelis cant stop this operation now that they are in Gaza,they must take full control and ferret out the concealed rockets/launchers - only then can the status of Gaza be decided. Anything less will allow Hamas to rebuild/rearm and they will be even more dangerous in the future.



Try telling that to the Press.  Even that LIVE.LEAK footage of the Armed Hamas fighters jumping into the back of a UN ambulance hasn`t been found to be incriminating by the MSM.


----------



## tomahawk6

The media are infested with leftists and pro-palestinian stringers. Remember the images from Lebanon ? Hizbollah supporters in the press faked photos of dead children and photo shopped damage to make Israel look bad. Look at our experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan the media dutifully reported every crazy accusation as fact. Every air strike kills "civilians". The MSM has no credibility.

CNN has pulled this video because it appears to be fake. Not even considering the cameraman was shooting his little brother. Post from Little Green Footballs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9pRu-sRPb0&eurl



> LGF reader “Last Mohican,” a doctor, makes a strong case that this is an obvious fake.
> 
> I’m no military expert, but I am a doctor, and this video is bullsh-t. The chest compressions that were being performed at the beginning of this video were absolutely, positively fake. The large man in the white coat was NOT performing CPR on that child. He was just sort of tapping on the child’s sternum a little bit with his fingers. You can’t make blood flow like that. Furthermore, there’s no point in doing chest compressions if you’re not also ventilating the patient somehow. In this video, I can’t tell for sure if the patient has an endotracheal tube in place, but you can see that there is nobody bag-ventilating him (a bag is actually hanging by the head of the bed), and there is no ventilator attached to the patient. In a hospital, during a code on a ventilated patient, somebody would probably be bagging the patient during the chest compressions. And they also would have moved the bed away from the wall, so that somebody could get back there to intubate the patient and/or bag him. In short, the “resuscitation scene” at the beginning is fake, and it’s a pretty lame fake at that.
> 
> So the question is, were they re-enacting the resuscitation scene by repeating their actions on a corpse, because the child had died earlier? It’s likely that the answer is no, that child is still alive, and is just an actor pretending to be a child who was killed. Why do I say that? Because the big guy in the white coat, if he’s really a doctor, nurse, nurse’s aid, EMT, or any sort of health care provider at all would be entirely aware that tickling the boy’s sternum doesn’t really look like actual chest compressions. If the boy was dead, the man would have done a more convincing job in compressing the chest. The taps on the chest that he’s doing are the sort of thing you see in bad TV dramas, when you don’t want to make the poor actor playing the victim uncomfortable by really pushing on his chest. I think the man in the white coat knows this child is actually alive, and is making the simulated chest compressions gentle so as not to hurt the child. My guess is that he assumed the videographer, like those on better TV shows, would have been smart enough not to film as far down as the man’s hands on the chest.


----------



## Kilo_302

You might be right (I'm not a doctor), but  no one here is saying that Hamas has not played civilian casualties to their advantage. I believe I mentioned this fact myself in an earlier post. What we ARE saying is that this level of civilian casualties is unacceptable by any measure, regardless of where Hamas is firing their rockets from. I am more concerned with the overall situation than with the optics of certain situations (faked or exploited or otherwise). The cynic in me realizes that all parties involved have political agendas that often trump moral or humanitarian issues. But the deaths remain. I just think that rather than blaming Hamas exclusively, we should realize that this is a complex issue in which both parties ( though I will admit I believe Israel's occupation is primarily to blame) are guilty of atrocities, and scale DOES matter.


----------



## tomahawk6

I would bet that 80% of the dead are in fact Hamas fighters.


----------



## Kilo_302

You can bet all you like, but most news organizations would say otherwise.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/960338.html

http://www.freep.com/article/20090106/NEWS07/901060337

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/03/casualty-figures-civilian-dead-gaza


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Why are there so few Israeli casualties in comparison with the Palestinian death toll?  It's because Israel's first priority is the safety of its citizens, which is why there are shelters and warning systems in Israeli towns.   If Hamas can dig tunnels, it can certainly build shelters. Instead, it prefers to use women and children as human shields while its leaders rush into hiding.



Shec, it could be the disparity in the type of weaponry each side is using, no? If Hamas had F-16's, self prop arty, Merkavas, etc., perhaps the death toll on the Israeli side would be higher. 

But that's not really the question to ask, rather: why should the Palestinians or the Israelis _need_ to build bomb shelters for their people? 

And, an evil man once said "repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth". Do you really believe that the Palestinians, Hamas, Hizballah, et. al. really don't love their children or women? Do you really believe that a man would shield himself with his child? Do we in the West, or Israel, have a monopoly on love for family? Do you have children, Shec...

Regards.


----------



## geo

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> I just think that rather than blaming Hamas exclusively, we should realize that this is a complex issue in which both parties ( though I will admit I believe Israel's occupation is primarily to blame) are guilty of atrocities, and scale DOES matter.


For there to be any talks of a ceasefire, there has to be a willingness to TALK.
Hamas has steadfastly refused to sit down & talk to Israel.  Hell, their view is that Israel has no right to exist and that the Jews should be pushed back into the sea.

Hamas fires rockets into Israel because of the occupied lands
Israel fires bombs, missiles AND rockets into Gaza because Hamas has been firing rockets...

Hamas' intransigence is the direct root cause of the current situation.
Israel's creeping settlement of Palestinian lands (aka their promissed land) is the indirect cause.

Both sides have contributed to the situation...
NOW
Who will contribute to resolving the situation.... ???

Hamas won't do it - of their own free will.


----------



## tourza

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Interesting how the media reports all dead as civilians when *the fact is most of the dead are Hamas*. No question that women and children have died but thats why hamas launches their rockets from populated areas. Prior to bombing buildings the Israelis would call and tell everyone to get out. *Hamas would then move the women and children to the roof*. The Israelis have a non leathal bomb they drop that is designed to scare the civilians away and then they follow up with a bomb. *Hamas wants civilian casualties*. The Israelis cant stop this operation now that they are in Gaza,they must take full control and ferret out the concealed rockets/launchers - only then can the status of Gaza be decided. Anything less will allow Hamas to rebuild/rearm and they will be even more dangerous in the future.



How could you possibly know this as fact? 

Regards.


----------



## tourza

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> I would bet that 80% of the dead are in fact Hamas fighters.



I would bet that 80% of the dead are in fact innocent Palestinian civis.

Regards.


----------



## Edward Campbell

tourza said:
			
		

> ...
> ... Do you really believe that the Palestinians, Hamas, Hizballah, et. al. really don't love their children or women? Do you really believe that a man would shield himself with his child?
> ...



Yes!

See here. There are many more like it but, not surprisingly, I couldn't find a similar one in which an Israeli uses a child for a human shield.

I have ranted on a whole lot about "Culture Matters!" and, in this case, I think you are seeing a cultural _difference_ regarding the relative 'value' of women and children.


----------



## Shec

Coincidentally enough the video referenced in E.R. Campbell's post is replicated in today's entry in my in situ buddy's e-diary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.N. spoke and so has HAMAS!
Last night the Security Council decided on the cease fire plan. 

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653258,00.html 

And HAMAS made their statement by firing over 20 rockets into Israel at the time of my writing this.

HAMAS makes their reply to the U.N:  http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653267,00.html 

This really makes one wonder what the F? I really mean it WTF?  Here we have a cease fire plan and the answer to it is to open fire. Hmmmmmmm? Am I brain dead here? I’m sure I’m not but then I come from a culture that doesn’t play “SANDBAG” as a child! 

“SANDBAG”? You ask! WTF is “SANDBAG”? I’ve never heard of this game before!

Oh yes you have.  You just don’t know it the way I know it. So I’ll explain it to you here.
The game of “SANDBAG” gets played in the Palestinian controlled areas, it is played mostly by children but often enough a few older folks join it either by choice, or as many refuse to admit, they are forced to join in on the game.   How the game is played:
1.  Don’t go to school or work.
2.  Hang out on the street because your mom and dad aren’t going to stop you.
3.  Find an armed terrorist.
4.  Hang out with him or her for a few hours
5.  At this terrorists command start throwing rocks, bottles and other nasty stuff at the police and or soldiers in the area.
6.  Keep a tight ring around the terrorist so he or she can’t be seen by the soldiers or cops.
7.  When he opens fire on the troops stay still don’t run.
8.  Get hit by bullets that are fired in return, don’t move cause the point of this game is to die protecting the terrorist, if the terrorist gets killed your team loses the game.
9.  Gain more points  for the most sandbags hit by the return fire and bonus points for the most press photographers on the scene as you get shot up for being a live sniper pit.

This game has been played for years, 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p6dWja_Q3g 

 While I worked in GAZA during the first INTAFADA I saw the makings of this game. I often asked the parents of the kids playing it “WTF?” and their answers were  “They refuse to go to school” or “HAMAS closed the school and demanded that I let the kids out to play with them”.

OK I ask all of you, if you heard “Hi Mrs. Smith, Can Jimmy come out to play?” from a terrorist what would you do?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## geo

.... there is the perception that women & children who are killed become martyrs to the cause.
All martyrs are praised - as they will be blessed by being admitted to paradise... 
Any kamikaze bomber who detonates a bomb that kills even one Israeli citzen is venerated as a martyr for his act.... and any Palestinian citzen who happens to be present when the bomb goes off.... becomes another martyr to the cause.

A little bit of sanity at this time would be really nice.... IMHO


----------



## tourza

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Yes!
> 
> See here. There are many more like it but, not surprisingly, I couldn't find a similar one in which an Israeli uses a child for a human shield.
> 
> I have ranted on a whole lot about "Culture Matters!" and, in this case, I think you are seeing a cultural _difference_ regarding the relative 'value' of women and children.



Mr. Campbell,

The first clip is of a fighter pushing a child _away_ from the 'front line', per se, not towards the fighting. Look at the direction all the other children standing against the wall are looking toward.

The second clip is of a fighter running _across_ the street, grabbing a child from the middle of the street. I've seen the entire clip somewhere else, and the child was sitting in the middle of the street exposed to the IDF down the road, and the fighter ran across the street, grabbed the child, and threw him with the rest of the children huddling against the wall. I can't remember off the top of my head where I've seen it, but I'm guessing it was at least a few years ago? 

I expected better from you.

Regards.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Coincidentally enough the video referenced in E.R. Campbell's post is replicated in today's entry in my in situ buddy's e-diary:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The U.N. spoke and so has HAMAS!
> Last night the Security Council decided on the cease fire plan.
> 
> http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653258,00.html
> 
> And HAMAS made their statement by firing over 20 rockets into Israel at the time of my writing this.
> 
> HAMAS makes their reply to the U.N:  http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653267,00.html
> 
> This really makes one wonder what the F? I really mean it WTF?  Here we have a cease fire plan and the answer to it is to open fire. Hmmmmmmm? Am I brain dead here? I’m sure I’m not but then I come from a culture that doesn’t play “SANDBAG” as a child!
> 
> “SANDBAG”? You ask! WTF is “SANDBAG”? I’ve never heard of this game before!
> 
> Oh yes you have.  You just don’t know it the way I know it. So I’ll explain it to you here.
> The game of “SANDBAG” gets played in the Palestinian controlled areas, it is played mostly by children but often enough a few older folks join it either by choice, or as many refuse to admit, they are forced to join in on the game.   How the game is played:
> 1.  Don’t go to school or work.
> 2.  Hang out on the street because your mom and dad aren’t going to stop you.
> 3.  Find an armed terrorist.
> 4.  Hang out with him or her for a few hours
> 5.  At this terrorists command start throwing rocks, bottles and other nasty stuff at the police and or soldiers in the area.
> 6.  Keep a tight ring around the terrorist so he or she can’t be seen by the soldiers or cops.
> 7.  When he opens fire on the troops stay still don’t run.
> 8.  Get hit by bullets that are fired in return, don’t move cause the point of this game is to die protecting the terrorist, if the terrorist gets killed your team loses the game.
> 9.  Gain more points  for the most sandbags hit by the return fire and bonus points for the most press photographers on the scene as you get shot up for being a live sniper pit.
> 
> This game has been played for years,
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2p6dWja_Q3g
> 
> While I worked in GAZA during the first INTAFADA I saw the makings of this game. I often asked the parents of the kids playing it “WTF?” and their answers were  “They refuse to go to school” or “HAMAS closed the school and demanded that I let the kids out to play with them”.
> 
> OK I ask all of you, if you heard “Hi Mrs. Smith, Can Jimmy come out to play?” from a terrorist what would you do?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Shec, please, stop. I'm beginning to feel embarrassed for you...

Regards.


----------



## tourza

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Yes!
> 
> See here. There are many more like it but, not surprisingly, I couldn't find a similar one in which an Israeli uses a child for a human shield.
> 
> I have ranted on a whole lot about "Culture Matters!" and, in this case, I think you are seeing a cultural _difference_ regarding the relative 'value' of women and children.



Mr. Campbell,

For your consideration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjEd4hJNVCE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV1scn536BU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjTxK9C2VYY&feature=related

Courtesy of the "lefties and Palestinian stringers" of the MSM (ok, maybe not so MSM). Interesting that this issue had to go to the Israeli Supreme Court for review...especially since it doesn't happen?

Regards.


----------



## The Bread Guy

tourza said:
			
		

> Do you really believe that the Palestinians, Hamas, Hizballah, et. al. really don't love their children or women? Do you really believe that a man would shield himself with his child?



Well, even though it's not this round, some might say firing rockets from a school isn't exactly showing regard for the safety of children (those in the school, anyway).  

Or are you saying a Hamas official is lying when he says this?


----------



## Edward Campbell

The operative word, tourza, is child - and I chose it and the video I cited for a reason.

The IDF is hardly blameless and I'm not trying to excuse it. I'm asserting that the Arab and Western _cultures_ differ in how they value lives - including their own.


----------



## Rifleman62

There are many references to the fact stated below. The proceedings have even been televised and played on Cdn TV.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002355

The Wall Street Journal, Sep 2002
 In any case, requiring a settlement of the Palestine question as a prerequisite to dealing with Saddam Hussein sends him a clear signal that he must at all costs prevent such a solution. Saddam Hussein has indeed already responded to that signal in various ways, both secret and open. The most notable of his open responses is the increase of the [size=10pt][size=10pt]*bounty he pays to the families of suicide bombers *  [/size] [/size] from $10,000 to $25,000. This is the most public but probably not the most important of his contributions to the conflict. To make the settlement of that conflict--which even in its present form is more than half a century old--a prerequisite for any action concerning Iraq is a sure formula for indefinite inaction.

tourza , if you feel so very, very strongly that Hamas et al are in the right, you should jump on a plane and go to the Gaza . You must follow your heart. You must folllow your beliefs. You have obviously searched your heart and honestly believe in the cause of the Palestinians. Go. Go. There is probably nothing better than fighting for a cause you truly believe is right and just. And when you come back you can inform all of us, from first hand experience, what is really happening. A bonus will be that now you will have some military experience that will allow you to interact with others here. Also you can then fill in your profile with a summary of your military experience.


----------



## Edward Campbell

If you would like to think a wee bit deeper on this matter then consider this article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Ottawa Citizen_ web site:
--------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/op-ed/duty+care/1156320/story.html

 The duty to care



BY PAUL ROBINSON , THE OTTAWA CIIZEN

JANUARY 8, 2009


Should states value the lives of their own citizens over those of other people? And if so, what are the limits to this preference?

In the light of Israel’s current military operations in Gaza, these questions have acquired special significance. Opponents of Israeli policy argue that the killing of hundreds of Palestinians is out of proportion to the handful of Israeli deaths caused by Hamas and Islamic Jihad rockets. Israel’s supporters, in contrast, argue that a state’s primary responsibility is to protect its own citizens, and that the Israeli government had no option but to act as it did. Both sides oversimplify what is actually a complex moral equation.

Philosophers call the concept that a state owes more to its citizens than to non-citizens “compatriot preference.” With some important qualifications, two very eminent Israelis, Professor Asa Kasher and General Amos Yadlin, embodied the idea in a theory of the ethics of fighting terrorism written in 2005.

According to Kasher and Yadlin, states considering the use of force and questions of proportionality should give priority first to citizens who are not engaged in combat, second to non-combatants who are not citizens but are under the effective control of the state, third to citizen combatants, fourth to non-combatants who are not under the effective control of the state, and fifth to non-citizens who are engaged in combat. The distinction the authors make between non-citizens who are under state control and those who are not is important for reasons I will further elaborate on below.

Although the idea of compatriot preference is emotionally appealing, it is not immediately clear why it should be valid. Clearly the lives of all human beings, citizens and non-citizens, are of equal value. State leaders are humans too, and as such they have moral obligations to the whole of humanity. It seems odd that people should consider it acceptable to kill one innocent person in order to save another, simply because the latter is a co-citizen and the former is not.

Compatriot preference rests on two primary arguments: the first is utilitarian; the second relates to the nature of a state.

The utilitarian position is that if states had an equal responsibility for everybody everywhere on the planet, they would be unlikely to fulfill well their specific responsibilities toward those over whom they have direct authority. The failure of socialist economics plainly demonstrated that when property is owned by everybody, nobody feels much responsibility toward it. The result was neglect and decay.

Compatriot preference is also an essential part of what makes a state a state. Countries acquire the right to regulate the lives of their citizens only because they provide those citizens with something in return, such as security and public services. They have no such social contract with strangers outside their borders.

But from this it also follows that there are some things which states may do to citizens that they may not rightfully do to non-citizens who are not part of the contract. They may, for instance, conscript the former but not the latter for military service. In some instances, therefore, a principle of non-compatriot preference applies.

This is especially true in cases where the state exerts effective control over persons while denying them the equal rights of citizenship. In such cases some special obligations rest on the state vis-à-vis those persons in order to justify this unequal status.

Feminist philosopher Annette Baier has noted that most ethical systems assume chosen relationships between equals, whereas in reality many relationships are unchosen and unequal, those between parents and children being an example. In these cases, those who stand in a position of authority over those who have not chosen to be subordinate have a duty to exercise an “ethic of care” toward them.

In the case of Israel and the Palestinians, the relationship is certainly unequal and unchosen. Israel has exercised control over the occupied territories for 40 years, and under the terms of the 4th Geneva Convention, and in accordance with the findings of the Israeli Supreme Court, the International Court of Justice, and previous legal precedent, Israel legally remains the occupying power in Gaza. The Palestinians have never willingly accepted their subordination, and yet, not being Israeli citizens, they have no say in the decisions of the government which rules over them. Because of this, one may argue that the Israeli state has the obligation to adopt an “ethic of care” toward the Palestinians, and that compatriot preference does not apply.

This is in accord with the view expressed by Prof. Kasher and Gen. Yadlin that the lives of people who are not citizens but are under the effective control of the state and are not engaged in terrorist activity should take priority over the lives of citizens fighting in the armed forces of the state. In assessing whether to strike a target, this principle would dictate that the harm which may be done to Palestinian civilians should be considered more highly than the harm which may result for soldiers of the Israel Defence Forces if the target is left untouched.

But is this enough? Given the unequal and unchosen nature of the Israel-Palestinian relationship and the control which Israel has for decades exercised over the Palestinians, the argument for preferring Israeli non-combatant citizens over Palestinian non-combatant non-citizens is not as strong as is often supposed. The Israeli state has an important moral duty to protect its own citizens, but it also has a duty to care for others over whom it exercises control. The latter obligation may in fact be even stronger than the former precisely because these others are not citizens.

Rather than debating the permissible proportion of dead Palestinian civilians to dead Israeli civilians, both opponents and supporters of Israel’s actions need to take a closer look at Israel’s obligations toward those who have no voice in its government and the extent to which these are compatible with taking military action against them.

_Paul Robinson is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa, and the author of numerous works on military history and military ethics. He is a former army officer._

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
--------------------

One of the keys to Paul Robinson’s case is: *does Israel still have de facto and de jure ‘control’ over Gaza?* If it does then the people of Gaza are ‘higher’ up the _duty to care_ list than if it (Israel) does not 'control' Gaza.

But, regardless of that, if Israel is exercising all *reasonably possible* care to avoid civilian casualties then the proportionality debate is meaningless.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> While I have my own views about the writers of the articles at least they are able to express their opinions in a paper of record in a *democratic state*.    I wonder to what extent that would be tolerated in the Gaza Daily Tribune?



Shec,

Land confiscation, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, home demolitions (I haven't seen the cement trucks for years though - ask Shec, he knows what I mean), collective punishment, extrajudicial assassinations, settlements, roadblocks, Qana 1996, Qana 2006, Sabra and Chatilla, the SLA, Colonel Gaby and the south gate at Khiam prison (again, ask Shec, he knows what I mean), water diversion, the friend or family method, the Arabist units in South Lebanon in the 90's (ask Shec), Flotilla 13, should I go on?

Democratic alright.

Regards.


----------



## tomahawk6

The terrorists that Israel and us are fighting dont care a wit about civilian casualties and in fact invite casualties by operating in civilian areas. They use schools,mosques and hospitals as arms depots and wont hesitate to fire on their enemy from those locations because they know we are hesitant to return fire. Its a violation of the rules of war of course but they arent a party to Geneva. In the case of Gaza the news coming out of that place are from palestinian stringers for AP and other western outlets, in effect the enemy have a built in propaganda arm.


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> Shec,
> 
> Land confiscation, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, home demolitions (I haven't seen the cement trucks for years though - ask Shec, he knows what I mean), collective punishment, extrajudicial assassinations, settlements, roadblocks, Qana 1996, Qana 2006, Sabra and Chatilla, the SLA, Colonel Gaby and the south gate at Khiam prison (again, ask Shec, he knows what I mean), water diversion, the friend or family method, the Arabist units in South Lebanon in the 90's (ask Shec), Flotilla 13, should I go on?
> 
> Democratic alright.
> 
> Regards.



Nice try pal but in quoting that paticular comment it appears that the point of it , namely the existence a free and critical press is a fundamental characteristic of a democracy, obviously went over your head like a Qassam. Tell you what I'm prepared to do though.  Make a convincing case and I'll get you a  Flotilla 13 wannabe t-shirt.

Regards to you too.


----------



## Rifleman62

And, most if not all of the UN employees are locals. So why wouldn't they smuggle pallets of uniforms  or whatever amongst humanitarian supplies, or put armed Hamas in the back of an ambulance.
Ever notice the number of photographers in the background when there are casualties? The same tactic was used in Lebanon.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Nice try pal but in quoting that paticular comment it appears that the point of it , namely the existence a free and critical press is a fundamental characteristic of a democracy, obviously went over your head like a Qassam. Tell you what I'm prepared to do though.  Make a convincing case and I'll get you a  Flotilla 13 wannabe t-shirt.
> 
> Regards to you too.



Nice try Shec..but the existence of a free and critical press is _not_ the only fundamental characteristic of a democracy. That fact obviously went over your head like a Katyusha rocket (sorry - I couldn't resist). If everything else remained the same and the KSA, HKJ, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, et. al. were to have a free and critical press, would that make them democracies? Hardly.

I'll tell you what I'm prepared to do though, make me a good case for how Israel can be, and do, all those things I mentioned and still be a democracy (via PM if you want), and I'll send you a Canada bumper sticker for your car.

I eagerly await your response.

Regards.


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> Nice try Shec..but the existence of a free and critical press is _not_ the only fundamental characteristic of a democracy. That fact obviously went over your head like a Katyusha rocket (sorry - I couldn't resist). If everything else remained the same and the KSA, HKJ, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, et. al. were to have a free and critical press, would that make them democracies? Hardly.
> 
> I'll tell you what I'm prepared to do though, make me a good case for how Israel can be, and do, all those things I mentioned and still be a democracy (via PM if you want), and I'll send you a Canada bumper sticker for your car.
> 
> I eagerly await your response.
> 
> Regards.



Got one already thanks, just to the right of my Ontario plate, which BTW is flanked on the other side by a Support Our Troops decal (Canadian).   But that is not the issue.  Where did I say it was the "only" fundamental characteristic - don't put words in my mouth.   

What colour do you want that Tee in - green, white, red, or black?   Do feel free to flip the details, especially the size, along with my lesson in Canadian values.

Hugs


----------



## tourza

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> There are many references to the fact stated below. The proceedings have even been televised and played on Cdn TV.
> http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002355
> 
> The Wall Street Journal, Sep 2002
> In any case, requiring a settlement of the Palestine question as a prerequisite to dealing with Saddam Hussein sends him a clear signal that he must at all costs prevent such a solution. Saddam Hussein has indeed already responded to that signal in various ways, both secret and open. The most notable of his open responses is the increase of the [size=10pt][size=10pt]*bounty he pays to the families of suicide bombers *  [/size] [/size] from $10,000 to $25,000. This is the most public but probably not the most important of his contributions to the conflict. To make the settlement of that conflict--which even in its present form is more than half a century old--a prerequisite for any action concerning Iraq is a sure formula for indefinite inaction.
> 
> tourza , if you feel so very, very strongly that Hamas et al are in the right, you should jump on a plane and go to the Gaza . You must follow your heart. You must folllow your beliefs. You have obviously searched your heart and honestly believe in the cause of the Palestinians. Go. Go. There is probably nothing better than fighting for a cause you truly believe is right and just. And when you come back you can inform all of us, from first hand experience, what is really happening. A bonus will be that now you will have some military experience that will allow you to interact with others here. Also you can then fill in your profile with a summary of your military experience.



Rifleman62,

It's common knowledge that Saddam Hussein would send the family of every martyr (not only suicide bomber) about $10 000US. And I'm using the word martyr in the Arabic sense of the word in that it would encompass everyone who dies during the course of a struggle, even if they were not actively participating in the struggle. Did this encourage more martyrs, I don't know. Would I encourage my son or daughter to explode themselves for $10 000...I'd be no better than an animal if I did. Did Palestinian parents encourage their children to explode themselves for $10 000? I don't know. But I'm pretty certain that the Palestinians (and Israelis) love their children as much as I love mine (or you love yours).

As for the rest of your post...I'm tempted to extend to you the same disrespect and ignorance you have shown me, but civility dictates I must refrain. This post reflects poorly on your character (or lack of it). 

Regards.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Got one already thanks, just to the right of my Ontario plate, which BTW is flanked on the other side by a Support Our Troops decal (Canadian).   But that is not the issue.  Where did I say it was the "only" fundamental characteristic - don't put words in my mouth.
> 
> What colour do you want that Tee in - green, white, red, or black?   Do feel free to flip the details, especially the size, along with my lesson in Canadian values.
> 
> Hugs



Shec,

I admire your tenacity. As much as I have enjoyed sparring with you, I'm afraid that the mods are going to censure us for hijacking this thread. Let's get this thread back on track...

What do you think the long term implications of this attack on Gaza by the IDF will be for the Israeli people, the Palestinian people, and Hamas?

Regards.


----------



## tourza

Big surprise here:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054009.html

Regards.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ is what I believe is a (roughly) fair and balanced, Western (as in Western culture), *opinion* about the Israel/Palestine mess:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090108.wcogee09/BNStory/specialComment/home

 A setback for Israel, a calamity for the Palestinians

MARCUS GEE

From Friday's Globe and Mail
January 9, 2009 at 12:00 AM EST

It is often said of the Palestinians that they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. The events in Gaza are a tragic vindication of that aphorism.

In 2005, after much agonizing, Israel withdrew unilaterally from the Gaza Strip, dismantling its military bases, pulling out its soldiers and evicting all Israeli settlers after 38 years of occupation. It was a historic moment in more ways than one.

Israel was surrendering land captured in the 1967 Six-Day War, and it was doing so without any prior peace accord such as the land-for-peace deal with Egypt over the surrender of the Sinai Peninsula.

The pullout signalled a sea change in Israeli attitudes. After decades of conflict with their immediate neighbours, the Palestinians, Israelis were eager for an end to it all. Even the hardest of hard-liners, Ariel Sharon, had come around to the view that it was time to extricate Israel from the quagmire in the occupied territories, pull back to defensible borders and leave the Palestinians to fend for themselves, even if that meant the emergence of a Palestinian state that the Israeli right had resisted for so long.

The opportunity for the Palestinians was clear. If their leaders could maintain a minimum of order in Gaza and prevent it from becoming a base for attacks on the Jewish state, Israel would gain the confidence to take the next step: withdrawal from the West Bank, home to the majority of Palestinians. As Mr. Sharon said at the time, "it is the Palestinians' turn." Gaza was to be the proving ground for the future Palestinian state. The withdrawal was a trial of their willingness and ability to become responsible neighbours.

They have failed with flying colours. Rockets from Gaza have been raining on Israel from the start. Almost as soon as the Israelis pulled out, Palestinian clans and political factions fell to fighting among themselves. A civil war broke out pitting Fatah, the traditional leadership group, against the more militant Hamas. After winning Palestinian legislative elections in 2006, Hamas seized control of Gaza in June of 2007.

This was what Israeli rightists and settlers had warned would happen: Handed over to the Palestinians, a pistol-shaped Gaza would become a deadly weapon pointed straight at the heart of Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu stalked out of the cabinet over the Gaza pullout, predicting that it would become a "huge base for terror." And so it has become. In 2005, not even the most wild-eyed zealot could have penned a scenario for Gaza as grim as what has actually taken place.

As much as that is a setback for Israel, it is a calamity for the Palestinians. If their leaders had behaved with more wisdom, they could have had their state by now, in both the West Bank and Gaza. When Israel pulled out three years ago, international donors and Palestinian exiles were queuing up to finance new roads, ports and factories. There was talk of railway lines, a rebuilt international airport and a thriving agriculture industry. Instead, Gaza remains what it's been for years: a miserable ghetto, producing nothing but extremism and hopelessness.

Much as Israelis (still) want the conflict to be over, they have lost whatever small confidence they had that the Palestinians might be tolerable neighbours. The idea of pulling out of the West Bank, only to see it become another, bigger base for terror, now seems unthinkable. Mr. Netanyahu, head of the Likud party, could return to office in next month's election on a tough program.

Israel began its current operation against militants in Gaza not with any relish, but out of despair at Palestinian failure. It knew full well that such an assault would cause angry protests in the Arab world, harsh words at the United Nations and civilian casualties that would make it look brutish in the eyes of the world. What's worse, it knew it might take all this abuse without, in the end, achieving its main goal of stopping rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. But the transformation of Gaza into a militant launching pad left it no choice but to react firmly, or face losing power to deter attacks against the Israeli homeland.

With separate Palestinian factions in charge in the West Bank and Gaza, one weak, the other shot through with hate, what is the alternative? The idea of talks leading to a Palestinian state living in peace beside Israel now seems as far fetched as at any time in years.

There is one remaining hope: that Palestinians see the disaster their leaders have wrought in Gaza and choose another course. That seems unlikely now that they are under attack, and the natural reaction is to rally around the green flag of Hamas. But maybe, just maybe, after the current violence is over, they will think again. The only way for Palestinians to get a state is to build one. The place to start is Gaza.
--------------------

It appears to me that Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular have painted themselves into a corner. They have branded the establishment of Israel as a disaster for the Arabs and the Muslims. It, and the results of the subsequent 1948 war, was, certainly, a disaster for Palestinians – many, many millions of whom still exist (live would be too strong a word) in poverty and despair and in filthy hovels in dilapidated refugee camps in rich, prosperous Arab countries – hostages to a giant but cruel public relations exercise. These Palestinians are ‘educated’ with a deep and abiding hatred for Israel (and Jews) because they ‘stole’ their homes and drove them from their gardens into these dark, dirty hell-holes.

(No one ever suggests that these hell-holes could be, at very modest costs, made into safe, clean, modern communities with good schools, hospitals, shops and gardens. To do so would be to deny the ‘catastrophe’ and to do so would lessen the ‘price’ that Palestinians, generation after generation, must pay for _Zionist aggression_.)

The plight of the Palestinians serves to harden the resolve of all Arabs, indeed of all Muslims and of good people everywhere. We all say: “The Palestinians need and deserve a safe home of their own.” That’s what we all said, _circa_ 1945/48, about the displaced Jews of Europe.

There are imaginative proposals to expand Gaza and create Egyptian controlled corridors to connect the West Bank and Gaza and, thereby, create (a) coherent Palestinian state(s). But I’m afraid a short ‘corridor’ connecting Gaza to Hebron in the West Bank through populated Israel North of Beersheba is a non-starter for another couple of generations. These can come to nothing so long as the Arabs put revenge ahead of development – *as it must appear to most reasonable people that they do*.

The fate of the Palestinians has, over the decades, taken second place to a bigger struggle to _cleanse_ the _ummah_ and, more, the ‘holy places’ of the ‘stain’ of the Zionists. Thus, driving the Jews into the sea has replaced any desire to seek accommodation of the Palestinians’ legitimate grievances as the _cause célèbre_ for most Arabs.

The Israelis, understandably, don’t want to be driven into the sea – even though, as a _*culturally* Western_ ‘people’ they remain _strangers in a strange land_.

Despite its great military strength, I have no doubt that eventually the Arabs must win; but I am 99% certain it will, truly, be a pyrrhic victory. The Arabs will be decimated, the region will be a wasteland for centuries, Islam will be shattered, despised around the world as a religion of murder and calamity. In places like _peaceful_ Canada mosques will be shuttered and people will abandon any thoughts of Palestinian _rights_; Canadian Muslims will abandon their faith, become apostates, shocked and appalled at the actions and outcomes in the Middle East – but it will all be worth it, I guess.

The Jews will disperse again – to Australia, Brazil and Canada and, and, and … and all those countries will be the richer for it.


----------



## GAP

As you said ER, Israel may go, but it will not go quietly.....


----------



## armyvern

tourza said:
			
		

> Would I encourage my son or daughter to explode themselves for $10 000...I'd be no better than an animal if I did. Did Palestinian parents encourage their children to explode themselves for $10 000? I don't know. But I'm pretty certain that the Palestinians (and Israelis) love their children as much as I love mine (or you love yours).



 :-[

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2071561.stm

Google "Umm Nidal"  



> ▪ "I'm prepared to sacrifice my six children," said Mahmoud Sumara's mother, Halima. "I'm serious. I don't mind if I lose them if that brings back al-Aqsa..." (NBC News)
> 
> ▪ "I pray that G-d will choose them (to be martyrs)," says the father of a 13-year-old. (New York Times)
> 
> ▪ "I am happy that he [my 13-year-old son] has been martyred. I will sacrifice all my sons and daughters (12 in all) to Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem." (London Times)
> 
> ▪ "If I had 20 children I would send them all down (to fight), I wouldn't spare any of them. We're not scared of death." (Associated Press)
> 
> ▪ Mother on PA TV, November 2004





> "We encourage them to Shahada [martyrdom] for the homeland, for Allah... We don't say to the mothers of the Shahids, 'We have come to comfort you', but 'We have come to bless you on the wedding of your son, on the Shahada of your son. Congratulations to you on the Shahada...' For us, the mourning is joyous. We give out drinks, we give out sweets. Praise to God ― the mourning is joyous occasion."
> 
> ▪ Mother on PA TV, December 2002





> "Before I made my pilgrimage [to Mecca], Naji [my son] put his hand on my head and said: 'Pray for me that I will be a Shahid, or it will be your sin, and I will not forgive you until the Judgment Day…' I said: "Praise Allah, my children asked for Shahada," and it is better than the way we will die."
> 
> ▪ Mother on PA TV, January 2003





> "We encourage them to Shahada [martyrdom] for the homeland, for Allah... We don't say to the mothers of the Shahids, 'We have come to comfort you', but 'We have come to bless you on the wedding of your son, on the Shahada of your son. Congratulations to you on the Shahada...' For us, the mourning is joyous. We give out drinks, we give out sweets. Praise to God ― the mourning is joyous occasion."
> 
> ▪ Mother on PA TV, December 2002





> "He would always dream of Shahada [martyrdom]. It was his first and last goal in life. I told him: 'Dear, we all want to be Shahids.' He said: 'In this entire world, I can't think of anyone to marry. I don't think of any girls of this world to marry. I want to marry the Dark Eyed (Virgins of Paradise).' I said: 'If these are his thoughts, I wish him Shahada.' "Praise to Allah, I hold my head high. The honor is mine, I have a son who is a Shahid [martyr]. And not only is my son a Shahid, but all the Shahids are my children, Praise Allah. The honor is mine; the pride is mine."
> 
> ▪ Mother on PA TV, November 2003



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAHHjfUxERY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEcaI7zQG3E

Want more??  :-\

Yes indeed "love" has some truley complex spins to it doesn't it?


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> Shec,
> 
> ...I'm afraid that the mods are going to censure us for hijacking this thread...What do you think the long term implications of this attack on Gaza by the IDF will be for the Israeli people, the Palestinian people, and Hamas?
> 
> Regards.



The former is at least one thing we can agree upon.  

Now to the latter.  Sadly, the long term implication is the continuation of the on-going war that Hamas & Hezbollah's Mukawama Doctine, whether real or perceived, perpetuates with it's principles that include:

1.   peace agreements are not an option because they require the recognition of Israel's right to exist; and, 
2.   cease-fires are but temporary respites to replenish.

Does that reflect the Realpolitik from my side?  I think so.  What do you think?


----------



## tourza

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> :-[
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2071561.stm
> 
> Google "Umm Nidal"
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAHHjfUxERY
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEcaI7zQG3E
> 
> Want more??  :-\
> 
> Yes indeed "love" has some truley complex spins to it doesn't it?



ArmyVern,

You can always find crazies in ones and twos on either side of the fence. Any parent who would wish martyrdom on their children is a parent in name only. 

Is Umm Nidal a typical Palestinian parent? Most definitely not. 
Was Baruch Goldstein, Rabbi Meir Kahane, or the JDL representative of the majority of the Israeli populace? Most definitely not. 

Thankfully, crazies like that are the minority on both sides. We do both the Israelis and the Palestinians a disservice when we look at individuals such as Baruch Goldstein or Umm Nidal as typical of both peoples.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/25/newsid_4167000/4167929.stm

Regards.


----------



## armyvern

tourza said:
			
		

> ArmyVern,
> 
> You can always find crazies in ones and twos on either side of the fence. Any parent who would wish martyrdom on their children is a parent in name only.
> 
> Is Umm Nidal a typical Palestinian parent? Most definitely not.
> Was Baruch Goldstein, Rabbi Meir Kahane, or the JDL representative of the majority of the Israeli populace? Most definitely not.
> 
> Thankfully, crazies like that are the minority on both sides. We do both the Israelis and the Palestinians a disservice when we look at individuals such as Baruch Goldstein or Umm Nidal as typical of both peoples.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/25/newsid_4167000/4167929.stm
> 
> Regards.



Curiously enough, I see none of those you've listed above (aside from the mention of Umm Nidal  ) santioning or encouraging _children_ (especially their own) to carry out targetted bombings of women and children. Eerliy enough, when was the last time some leader from Hamas (who do encourage these "targetted" - that being an operative word here - murders of women and kids) blew himself up vice the poor kids & young adults they recruit only for such suicide missions?

They certainly don't put their money (ie their own bodies) on the line for this; they simply encourage others to do so; and it's quite sad that this is taken as gospel by Palestinian children as the "right" (Allah willing) thing to do with their lives. When acts like this are praised, encouraged, and glamorized and deemed "moral" as being the way to a rich afterlife with virgins waiting for you - so much so that's it's akin to a "lifestyle" ... any other society would call it brainwashing.


----------



## 1feral1

tourza said:
			
		

> Rifleman62,
> 
> Did Palestinian parents encourage their children to explode themselves for $10 000? I don't know. But I'm pretty certain that the Palestinians (and Israelis) love their children as much as I love mine (or you love yours).



Tourza,

So all those video interviews with 'proud' Palestinian mothers with their kids dressed up in toy bomb vests and toy AKs, wishing/wanting their kids (hopefully when they are older) to blow up Jews is not real, and just Israeli propanda then?  

I beleive the use of children as weapons is wider than Palestine, its cultural. The carnage we had in Iraq was simply sickening, but became routine. The use of kids as bombs, mentally handicaped people as bombs, and even families as bombs, and thats to kill each other (sunni-shiite) muslims.  Life as we know it does not exist there, for theirs is an entirely different world. Look what the Taliban are doing also. I beleive that many do not have the same core values as us. Violence is a way of life in that neck of the woods, just as the sport of hockey is to us is routine in the winter. That violence was present long before 9-11, and will be there centuries from now, that is if they have not killed each other by then.  If they can't fight with a neighbouring nation, they'll fight amoung themselves. All IMHO anyways.

We all have opinions on here, but the way you think scares me, and I would not want you (or anyone with such thoughts living next to me). If you value the Hamas way of life, perhaps you are living in the wrong country.

You appear brainwashed. To say that 80% of those killed are civilians is just BS. If a combatant is in civilian clothes, with  chest  webbing filled with AK mags and a few frags, and his trusty Kalashnikov in his hands, once he is killed, his kit is passed on to another, and he now becomes a cilivian murdered by the Israelis.  The 'Hamas' use of UN ambulances as battlefield taxis etc, and the use of schools and other community buildings is cowardly, gutless, and a crime, but they will continue to commit such crimes, all for propaganda to feed more hatred to arab/muslim world.

I will not deny that innocents are caught up in this, and thats unfortunate, but thats war. Look at what happened to Caen, and that was us (Allies) that did that to the French!   That city was flattened.

Regards,

Wes

EDITed for spelling and clarity


----------



## tourza

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Tourza,
> 
> So all those video interviews with 'proud' Palestinian mothers with their kids dressed up in toy bomb vests and toy AKs, wishing/wanting their kids (hopefully when they are older) to blow up Jews is not real, and just Israeli propanda then?
> 
> I beleive the use of children as weapons is wider than Palestine, its cultural. The carnage we had in Iraq was simply sickening, but became routine. The use of kids as bombs, mentally handicaped people as bombs, and even families as bombs, and thats to kill each other (sunni-shiite) muslims.  Life as we know it does not exist there, for theirs is an entirely different world. Look what the Taliban are doing also. I beleive that many do not have the same core values as us. Violence is a way of life in that neck of the woods, just as the sport of hockey is to us is routine in the winter. That violence was present long before 9-11, and will be there centuries from now, that is if they have not killed each other by then.  If they can't fight with a neighbouring nation, they'll fight amoung themselves. All IMHO anyways.
> 
> We all have opinions on here, but the way you think scares me, and I would not want you (or anyone with such thoughts living next to me). If you value the Hamas way of life, perhaps you are living in the wrong country.
> 
> You appear brainwashed. To say that 80% of those killed are civilians is just BS. If a combatant is in civilian clothes, with  chest  webbing filled with AK mags and a few frags, and his trusty Kalashnikov in his hands, once he is killed, his kit is passed on to another, and he now becomes a cilivian murdered by the Israelis.  The 'Hamas' use of UN ambulances as battlefield taxis etc, and the use of schools and other community buildings is cowardly, gutless, and a crime, but they will continue to commit such crimes, all for propaganda to feed more hatred to arab/muslim world.
> 
> I will not deny that innocents are caught up in this, and thats unfortunate, but thats war. Look at what happened to Caen, and that was us (Allies) that did that to the French!   That city was flattened.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Wes
> 
> EDITed for spelling and clarity



Wes,

I won't dignify much of what you have written in your post with a response. However, I have never said that I 'value the Hamas way of life'.

My apologies if my posts have scared you, and your sensibilities have been offended. Please rest assured that I entertain no thoughts whatsoever of relocating to Australia.

Regards.


----------



## a_majoor

Some historical background: back in the day when the *real* Evil Empiretm stirred up trouble all over the world

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_01_04-2009_01_10.shtml#1231474494



> [David Bernstein, January 8, 2009 at 11:14pm] Trackbacks
> *The USSR's Role in the Middle East Goes Down the Memory Hole:*
> 
> One thing I find interesting in reading various authors who discuss the history of the Arab-Israeli or Israeli-Palestinian conflict is how the role of the USSR in exacerbating the conflict, and the role of its demise in providing an opportunity for a potential settlement of the conflict, is generally completely, or almost completely, ignored. [A few sentences only tangentially on point deleted, perhaps a subject for a separate post.]
> 
> Consider, first, that Israel could have bought itself quite a bit of security if the U.S. had allowed it, France, and the UK to triumph in the Sinai War in 1956. But Eisenhower and Dulles were afraid this would drive Arab public opinion into the pro-Soviet camp.
> 
> Then consider that the East bloc secret services recruited, trained, and financed Yasser Arafat to create the violent Palestinian nationalist movement that became the PLO, starting around 1964.
> 
> After Israel emerged victorious beyond its wildest dreams in 1967, the influence of the USSR was apparent in several ways. First, the Soviet bloc led an international campaign of boycott and defamation, larded with anti-Semitism, against Israel, creating a siege mentality that has stayed with Israel ever since, and made it that much more difficult to persuade Israel, already traumatized by the Holocaust and the expulsion of Jews from Arab lands, that the "international community" is to be trusted.
> 
> Second, Israel's performance against Soviet-supplied enemies Syria and Egypt persuaded the U.S. that Israel was a regional superpower that needed to be engaged, both to further U.S. interests, and to try to keep the (nuclear-armed) country stable and secure so that it didn't inadvertantly start WWIII.
> 
> And finally, while religious fanatics were among the most zealous settlers of the West Bank, a certain level of settlment was supported virtually across Zionist party lines, due to the perceived threat of a renewed Soviet-backed war of destruction against Israel. (In part, this was due to Lyndon Johnson reneging in 1967 on American security guarantees provided by Eisenhower in 1956--Israel saw that the U.S. could not be trusted to guarantee its security.) Israeli military and political leaders believed that holding at least some parts of the West Bank gave Israel the strategic depth to ward off, or even entirely discourage, an attack from the West, which proved prescient when Jordan declined to involve itself in the Yom Kippur War.
> 
> In 1973, by the end of the Yom Kippur War, Israel had crossed the Suez canal, had a huge segment of the Egyptian military surrounded, and was prepared, if necessary, to march on Cairo (Juan Cole, displaying his usual penchant for accuracy, calls this a "draw-to-slight victory" for Egypt). Damascus was also within range. The U.S. insisted on a cease-fire, because the Soviets threatened to intervene on behalf of Egypt and Syria.
> 
> In 1977, Anwar Sadat had tired of the Soviets and had thrown them out of Egypt. When Jimmy Carter naively sought to invite the Soviets to a regional "peace conference," Sadat hastily decided to make his famous visit to Jerusalem. While Sadat and Menachem Begin had little in common, they did by this point share a loathing of the USSR--Begin had been deported from Poland and imprisoned in the Gulag by the Soviets during WWII.
> 
> Throughout the 70s and 80s, the Soviets funded every rejectionist and terrorist movement willing to take money from it. Dovish arguments in Israel were met with skepticism because of the continued role of one of the two superpowers in financing those who called for, and acted for, Israel's destruction. Meanwhile, U.S.-Israeli ties grew closer as the old socialist ethos in Israel gave way to strong anti-Soviet sentiment under Likud rule, and a generation of Israelis came of age--including a few hundred thousand Soviet Jewish refugees--with a Soviet Union sworn to their country's annihilation.
> 
> By contrast, the fall of the USSR was one of the major factors that allowed the Oslo negotiations and agreements to move forward. *Without the backing of a superpower, Yasser Arafat seemed less like a potential destroyer of Israel and a lot more like a has-been terorist who would be willing to settle for what he could plausibly get. Strategic depth became less important when the Soviet's last major ally bordering on Israel, Syria, virtually collapsed militarily in the absence of Soviet aid.
> 
> This story, indeed, would likely have a happy ending, but for the rise of new ideological movement, replacing Communism, even more implacably hostile to Israel--Islamic fundamentalism. But that's another story.*
> 
> In any event, ignoring the role of the USSR in the Arab-Israeli conflict vastly impoverishes our understanding of Israel's motivations over the decades. To emphasize one point above, while commenters today often assert that Israel's settlement activity on the West Bank, beyond perhaps a few locations right near Jerusalem, was either obviously foolish or a reflection of an inherently colonialist ideology, a major rationale for it at the time was to provide strategic depth against a threat ultimately emanating from the Soviets. Similarly, while many question why Israel was unwilling to try to negotiate earlier with the PLO, this becomes more understandable when one considers that the PLO was a creation of, and financed by, the Soviet Bloc, which was overtly hostile to the very existence of Israel. Similarly, Israel was reluctant to give back all or much of the West Bank to Jordan when it had the chance for fear that a Soviet-backed Palestinian coup could topple King Hussein--as almost occured in September 1970. One could surely not imagine the ideological evolution of many right-wing Israelis into the implicit acceptance of a Palestinian state if the USSR was still around to be the primary sponsor of the Palestinian cause.


----------



## a_majoor

And "non partisanship" has a strange way of showing itself:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/09/john-turley-ewart-on-gaza-the-canadian-arab-federation-treats-canadians-are-fools.aspx



> *John Turley-Ewart: Gaza exposes the Canadian Arab Federation for what it now is*
> Posted: January 09, 2009, 10:48 AM by John Turley-Ewart
> John Turley-Ewart
> 
> For those interested in not only geo-politics but Canadian politics as well — especially how Canadian leaders respond to crises around the world — the conflict between Israel and Hamas has been instructive. It has revealed, for instance, that there is now a consensus between the Conservative government and the Liberal opposition on Gaza. Both agree that the culprit in this war is Hamas and that the end of the war depends not on Israel, but on Hamas, a terrorist group that refuses to recognize Israel and has pledged to continue firing rockets into Israeli civilian areas regardless of how many Palestinian innocents die as a result of Israel trying to stop them.
> 
> Curiously, it has also revealed that the once moderate Canadian Arab Federation is now an organization not only out of step with Canadian values, but also a body unable to come to terms with Canadian civil society and live up to its non-partisan mandate.
> 
> *Consider this: the CAF is calling on the Conservative government to dismiss Peter Kent, the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, because Mr. Kent stated Hamas is to blame for the conflict and that the terrorist group uses the civilian population in Gaza as human shields. A CAF representative has said this is ``beyond ridiculous.'' Yet the CAF is not protesting in any way the position staked out by the leader of the Liberal party, Michael Ignatieff.*
> 
> Mr. Ignatieff has been refreshingly blunt in stating his and his party's position on Israel. Speaking to reporters recently, the Liberal leader stated his support for Israel and that "Canada has to support the right of a democratic country to defend itself." But he did not stop there. "Israel has been attacked from Gaza, not just last year, but for almost 10 years," said Mr. Ignatieff. Moreover, he cast aside as utter nonsense Hamas's justification for it's war against Israel (and the CAF's) with a clarity that has not been evident in a Liberal leader for years: Israel "evacuated from Gaza so there is no occupation in Gaza."
> 
> Is Mr. Ignatieff's position any different from Mr. Kent's? Consider these final comments Mr. Ignatieff left with reporters when asked about the Gaza conflict:
> 
> "Hamas is a terrorist organization and Canada can't touch Hamas with a 10-foot pole."
> 
> "Hamas is to blame for organizing and instigating these rocket attacks and then for sheltering among civilian populations."
> 
> The answer is clearly no, yet the CAF's condemnation of Mr. Kent and indeed the Conservative government would lead Canadians to believe it is only Conservatives who support Israel's right of self-defence.
> 
> Could the CAF's reluctance to criticize the Liberals in fact be a partisan decision, one that stems from the fact that a former president of the CAF is now a sitting Liberal MP? Who knows? Maybe the CAF thinks it can persuade Liberals to sympathize with Hamas?
> 
> But on its Web site the CAF claims that it is "a national, non-partisan, non profit and membership-based organization which represents Canadian Arabs on issues relating to public policy. Through education, public awareness, media relations and non-partisan government relations, CAF raises awareness of domestic issues that affect our community."
> 
> The CAF's criticism of the Conservative government's position on Israel and its silence on the Liberals very same stand puts the lie to the CAF's claim to be non-partisan. It also, perhaps, reflects the CAF's inability to come to terms with the fact that civil society in Canada puts the blame for the conflict in Gaza squarely on the shoulders of Hamas, a terrorist organization that the CAF has referred to as a "legitimate" political party "resisting Israeli occupation."
> 
> What is certain in the wake of the Gaza conflict is that the CAF of old — the non-partisan organization that focussed on domestic issues rather than international ones —  is now being led by people who sympathize with a terrorist organization bent on the destruction of Israel more than the civilian victims that Hamas uses as political fodder.
> 
> Perhaps a more apt name for this group today would be the Canadian Hamas Federation.
> 
> John Turley-Ewart is the Associate Editor of the Financial Post
> jturley-ewart@nationalpost.com


----------



## zipperhead_cop

It is far more important for Palestine (and Lebanon in the south) to keep doing idiotic things like firing mindless rockets into Israel in order to keep the cycle of hatred going.  If they actually sat down and tried to work things out (which Israel seems to try over and over with no success) then their people might look around and say "hey, these idiots couldn't organize a good f$ck in a whorehouse!" and kick them out.  Better to keep people miserable, scared and looking at the mud than give them some hope and looking around.  Hamas could have the world clamoring around to pump millions of dollars into that country if they would just act like normal politicians.  But they are thugs, murderers, hypocrites and degenerates.  I really don't believe that even at the top of the food chain they even care about the existence of Israel.  It is just a rallying point to keep people looking outwards, instead of in. 
Bottom line, IMO?  Let them fight it out.  All these half measures are useless.  Hey, Joe Palestinian!  I see you have a rocket launcher in your garden.  Think you might want to go on a bit of a vacation?  Take the wife and kids out for a wee stroll?  Not rocket science.  
And what is also pretty apparent is that once Israel retakes the Gaza strip completely and they get past all of the petty time wasting terrorism that will of course ensue, the life of all of the Palestinians will be better.  Sorry dudes.  They tried it your way. Didn't work so great.  And whether anyone agrees with that or not, Israel is strong enough to do it and seems to not be too concerned with world opinion.  Of course, there is no world opinion when the rockets land in Israel.  Hell, that doesn't even make the news.  
With any luck this post won't be worthy of reply and won't be dignified with a response  :


----------



## zipperhead_cop

1885.tnias said:
			
		

> As politically incorrect as it may be to have such musings here the fact remains that about 14 Israeli civilians have been killed by Hamas firecrackers, and something on the order of 600+ Palestinians by highly sophisticated US weaponry. Doesn't seem fair does it?



It may come as a surprise, but wars don't tend to be fought along the lines of "fair".  And your "Hamas firecrackers" didn't make they Israeli's any less dead.  Here is a crazy thought?  Don't shoot your "firecrackers" at any one and be dazzled at how many people _don't_ die.  And it would be a rectal/cranial inversion of the highest magnitude to think that if Hamas could get some Gucci missiles that they wouldn't be using them.  Please.  



			
				1885.tnias said:
			
		

> Did anyone notice there is a UN investigation into the bombing of a school that had zero Hamas gunmen?



So how does an investigation start?  With an allegation?  And where would such an allegation stem from?  Hamas perhaps?  And zero gunmen does not mean that there was zero equipment or zero involvement.  And at such time as locations like schools get used for military bases, they become free game.  If the kids are made to stay there (and I don't even know if that wsa the case) then whose fault is the deaths?  "When HAMAS sets up a missile battery near the swing set, you and your chums must duck and cover.  See little Ahmad?  That's the way son".  



			
				1885.tnias said:
			
		

> I think an important aspect being left out, the elephant in the room as it were, is that Israel is just the middle man. They don't take action without first getting approval from the US Government. Why not just skip the middle man here and admit that it is the US that is comitting these atrocities through its proxy, Israel.



Oh!  So it is the _United States _ that is sneaking into Palestine and Lebanon, planting missiles and firing them at Israel?  Darn that war monger George Bush!!  I bet he is the one that has been shooting the rockets into KAF as well.  Sneaky bugger.  <shakes fist at the sky> BUUUUUUUUSH!!!!

 :


----------



## Edward Campbell

Yesterday I posted a _Globe and Mail_ column that I described as a _”fair and balanced, Western (as in Western culture), opinion”__ on the Gaza mess. Here reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail is a less fair, less balanced but much more popular in the ‘liberal’ West opinion:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090109.wcosimp10/BNStory/specialComment/home

 A touch of wisdom from a washed-up Israeli PM

JEFFREY SIMPSON

From Saturday's Globe and Mail
January 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM EST

Ehud Olmert is a lame political duck in every sense of the phrase.

He's a caretaker prime minister of Israel until next month's election because, although he had tendered his resignation, no one else could form a government. So he had to stay on for a while. A growing corruption scandal and very low public opinion ratings forced that resignation.

Perhaps because Mr. Olmert is a spent force in Israeli politics, he can speak a truth those still in politics cannot or will not.

With Israeli warplanes, tanks and soldiers conducting a campaign of variously defined and often contradictory objectives in Gaza, it seems an odd moment to recall Mr. Olmert's words about peace.

But late last year, Mr. Olmert gave an interview to an Israeli newspaper in which he wanted to do some "soul-searching on behalf of the nation of Israel."

Throughout his entire career, Mr. Olmert admitted, he had been wrong. He and his fellow citizens, he argued, had "spent 40 years refusing to look with our eyes open."

Peace with the Palestinians is the only hope for Israel's long-term security. And that can only come through a negotiated agreement with the Palestinian Authority to create a viable state for Palestinians, at least on the West Bank territory occupied by Israel since the 1967 war.

That would mean dismantling most of the settlements that Israeli governments have sanctioned on occupied land — and many of the roads that connect the settlements to metropolitan Israel, creating ribbons of asphalt that make the West Bank into a series of Bantustans for the Palestinians. It also would mean abandoning the dream of never yielding any part of Jerusalem to Palestinian control.

Israel sent its forces into Gaza (from which it had unilaterally withdrawn in 2005) to stop rocket attacks on its citizens that had restarted after a fragile ceasefire had ended. Very quickly, military objectives changed - from curtailing Hamas's ability to launch rockets to inflicting the maximum damage possible on Hamas and its infrastructure.

As before, the death and destruction wrought by the Israelis far exceeds that which Israel itself had suffered. The result, inevitably, is even more militancy than before among those who suffer from that disproportionate destruction, and among those who watch developments outside Gaza, where Hamas won an election and then won a military victory against the somewhat more moderate forces of Fatah that now control the West Bank Palestinian areas.

As the Gaza campaign unfolded, Mr. Olmert's words from that interview took on additional meaning: "I read the reports of our generals, and I say, 'How have they not learned a single thing?' " He continued: "With them, it is all about tanks, about controlling territories or controlled territories, holding this or that hill. But these things are worthless."

Mr. Olmert, it will be said, is a discredited, washed-up figure, but the essential wisdom of his departing remarks remains. "In the absence of peace, the probability of war is always much greater."

Peace, and therefore a diminished probability of war (to say nothing of somewhat eased tensions throughout the broader Middle East), can only come through acceptance of a viable Palestinian state. Without that state, there will be no peace and, therefore, no fundamental improvement in the endemic tensions that beset the region.

The auspices for such a development are not promising. The Palestinians, as usual, are divided, fiercely and violently this time between Hamas and Fatah. Hamas's defiance and suffering, however, might well dilute Fatah's appeal in the West Bank as a weak-kneed political organization favoured by the United States and Israel.

The mood in Israel is one of understandable reluctance to trust any Palestinian leader, and to cheer any military pounding of Hamas. The next Israeli prime minister probably will be Benjamin Netanyahu, who has never shown much enthusiasm for negotiating with the Palestinians.

Fatah looks too weak to make a deal; Israel, post-Gaza, will feel too strong to need one. And Hamas, of course, remains wedded to the eventual destruction of Israel.

President-elect Barack Obama will be encouraged to invest political capital in the search for a settlement. It's easy to understand why. It's not easy to remember that past agreements only happened when the protagonists, not the Americans, wanted them.
--------------------

Ehud Olmert, as selectively quoted by Jeffrey Simpson, was partially right:

•	“Peace with the Palestinians is the only hope for Israel's long-term security. And that can only come through a negotiated agreement with the Palestinian Authority to create a viable state for Palestinians, at least on the West Bank territory occupied by Israel since the 1967 war.” That’s pretty much correct; but

•	“Hamas, of course, remains wedded to the eventual destruction of Israel.” And so, according to its published manifestos, etc, does Fatah – see Ch. 1/Art. 12 of the Fatah Constitution so ‘peace,’ on any reasonable, civilized terms is impossible because it always takes two to make peace and there is NO desire for peace amongst the Palestinians – just revenge.

 But, let’s suppose, as so many commentators do, that Fatah is not serious about the “*eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence*” and the Constitution is just a sop for a few militants. In That case Simpson says, peace can come only through “dismantling most of the settlements that Israeli governments have sanctioned on occupied land — and many of the roads that connect the settlements to metropolitan Israel, creating ribbons of asphalt that make the West Bank into a series of Bantustans for the Palestinians. It also would mean abandoning the dream of never yielding any part of Jerusalem to Palestinian control.” I agree with most of that but, as always, the devil is in the details:

1.	Israel would be morally and strategically wrong not to dismantle those settlements that are not contiguous to Israel. There must be one wall – ‘containing’ all of Israel. The cost of securing and maintaining remote enclaves in ‘enemy’ territory is too high;

2.	Looking at this (three year old) map you can see that Israel can absorb a long ‘teat’ stretching all the way down the  Jordan River from Brisan to Ein Gedi (half way down the Dead Sea). The same map shows that some settlements e.g. those around Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron are unsustainable and, sooner rather than later must be abandoned; and

3.	For Israel, anything less than the current/planned wall route than encloses all of Jerusalem is, probably, out of the question – politically impossible.

These three “facts on the ground” are the only sane starting point, assuming that the Palestinians can bring themselves to accept that Israel has a right to exist, pretty much where it is now:

Fact 1: Palestinians must have a contiguous territory – devoid of Israeli enclaves, even those ‘connected by tunnels – with a ‘corridor’ (probably controlled by Egypt) connecting the two parts (West Bank and Gaza);

Fact 2: Palestinians lose even more land than was lost to Israel in 1948; and

Fact 3: Jerusalem is Israeli – and that includes the Dome of the Rock.

But, I believe that it’s all a pipe dream. There is NO “partner for peace” anywhere in the Arab world and one is very, very unlikely to emerge anything within the lifetime of my grandchildren. The ‘final solution,’ therefore is war, actually a series of wars that, inevitably the Arabs must manage to win. But, I repeat, it will be a pyrrhic victory that will reduce the Arabs to bands of savages and render Islam as a sad, bitter footnote to history.

_


----------



## Edward Campbell

And, further to my last, here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_ is a historian’s analysis that makes perfect sense to me and explains why ‘peace’ is impossible so long as Israel exists:
--------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/terrible+shame/1161957/story.html

 A terrible shame

BY LEONARD STERN, THE OTTAWA CITIZEN

JANUARY 10, 2009 4:02 AM
  
The reason for the latest fighting in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is, so we're told, easy enough to understand: Palestinians in the Gaza strip have been firing rockets across the border into Israel, and Israel has gone in to stop them.

But what really is this about? Israel evacuated Gaza three years ago, so that Gaza could eventually become part of a new Palestinian state. Israel didn't want anything to do with Gaza; couldn't wait to leave the place. Why would Palestinian Arabs engage in a national suicide project and start raining crude rockets on Israel, bringing grief to themselves and delaying the emergence of their independent state?

Richard Landes could have the answer. A professor at Boston University, Mr. Landes last year published a provocative take on the Israeli-Arab conflict. He argues that Palestinian behaviour toward Israel makes little sense until we understand the role of "honour and shame in Arabic culture."

Mr. Landes notes that to westerners, Arab rejectionism -- the refusal to acknowledge or accept Israel's existence -- seems both irrational and self-destructive. But that's because we in the West believe that conflict between Israelis and Palestinians derives "from a calculus of rights and wrongs" that can be negotiated -- for example, swapping land for peace.

What if the conflict is something else entirely from the Palestinian point of view? What if it derives "from a calculus of honour and shame" and thus is not amenable to negotiation but instead can be resolved only "in victory over the humiliating enemy"?

A historian, Mr. Landes argues that outsiders do not appreciate just what a profound symbol of humiliation Israel is to its Arab-Muslim neighbours. For 13 centuries, "Islam had only known the Jews as a subject people ... living in exile, forced to live by the laws and at the whim of foreign rulers and kings." To be confronted in the 20th century with an independent Jewish state in the Muslim Middle East was unbearable.

It was bad enough that over the generations Islam had already lost ground at the frontiers of its dominion, in Spain, the Balkans and India. But the Middle East, too? As Mr. Landes puts it, what could be more humiliating than "to lose territory at the heart of Islam, not to a great and worthy foe (the Christian West, hundreds of millions of Hindus), but to a tiny people without honour" -- the dispossessed Jews.

It doesn't matter that the modern state of Israel occupies barely a sliver of the Middle East or that its Jewish inhabitants claim ancestral, indeed indigenous rights. In 1948 the Arab armies attacked anyway, but were repulsed. Same thing in 1967. The repeated Arab defeats compounded the humiliation.

This humiliation expresses itself in the dysfunctional behaviours of Arab leaders, such as denial (refusing to recognize or even speak the name "Israel") and the emergence of ingrained conspiracy theories to explain Israel's military victories.

"Not recognizing Israel is a fundamental, one might even say dogmatic form of denial, denial that the Arabs were defeated by a tiny subject people, denial of a catastrophic loss of face," writes Mr. Landes.

"As long as the Arab world does not recognize Israel ... honour can still be salvaged. The war continues, the defeat goes unregistered, and the hope of restoring face by wiping out the humiliation can still dominate public discussion."

If Mr. Landes is right about the Arabic culture of honour and shame, it's hard to see how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will resolve. As a western society, Israel has always expected that peace will be achieved through negotiation and compromise. But shame cultures operate on a zero-sum principle. "Any victory for Israel is a defeat for the Arab and Muslim nation," writes Mr. Landes.

A compromise that accepts Israel will make permanent the humiliation of its Arab neighbours.

The Palestinian decision to fire rockets into Israel, while insane from our western perspective, takes on a certain logic. Every homemade Qassam rocket is a symbol of Arab honour. As long as one single rocket launcher remains operational, the Palestinians get to pretend that Israel is but a temporary blight on the Muslim Middle East.

Mr. Landes essay was written before the current troubles in Gaza but it couldn't be more timely. Interested readers can find it in the valuable new book Postcolonial Theory and the Arab-Israel Conflict, one of whose editors is McGill University anthropologist Philip Carl Salzman.

A final point: Analyzing the Middle East through an anthropological lens is a sensitive business. Mr. Landes warns that in some academic quarters it is taboo to discuss the role of Arab honour and shame, and doing so invites accusations of "cultural racism."

That's unfortunate. For six decades Israel has been under siege. If this conflict were an ordinary geo-political one it would have been fixed a long time ago -- but it isn't and it hasn't, and it's important to ask why.

_LEONARD STERN is the Citizen's editorial pages editor._

E-mail: lstern@thecitizen.canwest.com

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
--------------------

I think Prof Landes has nailed it. “Peace,” by any sane, sensible “Western’ definition of the words, is not just impossible, it is undesirable because it would mean enduring humiliation in a ‘culture’ that highly values pride. Arab pride demands the absolute and utter destruction of Israel. There has to be another ‘final solution to the Jewish question.’


----------



## geo

Intersting article Edward.....  though this is, to a certain train of thought.... another nail in Israel's coffin.


----------



## Shec

Many thanks Edward for your last 2 posts.  Your assessment of the Simpson editorial is further supported by the following which make the case that  the real reason for holding territory in the West Bank which is the militarily strategic one of holding the high ground rather than the economic  "land grab" that is a popular view in many circles:

http://www.defensibleborders.org/apx1.htm

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/jt.html

This is further reinforced by the sociological reality of the Stern editorial which draws upon Prof. Landes work.  And such a theory, while as pointed out may be considered "taboo",  it nevertheless has an undeniable basis in history over the centuries.


----------



## geo

Dildo...
The UN to a certain extent contributed to the mess when they "created" the state of Israel.
This "problem" has been with us ever since...
However, the use of the term "refuge camp" is a misnomer.  Although people have been living in buildings (VS tents) for an awful long time, the perpetual use & recognition of these "refugee camps" entitles the Palestinian authorities to food aid... not saying they aren't entitled to it.... not saying they are.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _National Post_, is an editorial that, I’m afraid, will not find universal acceptance here on Army.ca:
--------------------
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/10/national-post-editorial-board-moral-clarity-on-the-middle-east.aspx

 National Post editorial board:
Moral clarity on the Middle East

Posted: January 10, 2009, 8:02 AM 

This week, Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario section of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), compared Israel’s actions in Gaza to Nazi crimes during the Second World War, and called for a boycott of Israeli academics who do not renounce their government’s actions. (Mr. Ryan has since apologized for the Nazi comparison, but the boycott effort persists.)

The remarks caused an uproar, and Mr. Ryan rightly has been excoriated. Unfortunately, the resultant furore overshadowed more sensible remarks from two men who actually seem to know a thing or two about the Middle East.

One of those men is Michael Ignatieff. We must confess that we worried about the former Harvard professor on this file: In 2006, during Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah, he spuriously declared to a Quebec audience that Israel had perpetrated a “war crime” in the Lebanese town of Qana. He subsequently recanted — sort of — but the impression lingered that the man was willing to smear Israel if that’s what it took to ingratiate himself to Quebec leftists. 

But this time, Mr. Ignatieff is supporting Israel four-square. On Thursday, he told reporters that Israel is justified in its campaign to defend itself from Hamas rocket attacks. “Canada has to support the right of a democratic country to defend itself,” he said. “Hamas is to blame for organizing and instigating these rocket attacks and then for sheltering among civilian populations.”

On the government side, Peter Kent, the minister of state for foreign affairs, echoes these sentiments. “The position of the government of Canada is that Hamas bears the burden of responsibility for the deepening humanitarian tragedy,” he said. “Until they commit to a permanent cease-fire … the fighting will go on.” 

The war in Gaza is not a morally complicated event. On one side is a terrorist group that provoked the conflict with rocket fire, uses civilians as human shields and has gone on record with its desire to exterminate its enemy wholesale. On the other side is a democratic Canadian ally that is seeking to minimize civilian casualties as it fights back against ruthless killers. We’re gratified to see that these facts have not escaped the notice of our country’s leaders.

National Post
--------------------

Please note that the _National Post_ picks its words with care. “The war in Gaza,” it says, “is not a morally complicated event.” And that, I think is true – the rest of the situation – including settlements and a whole host of other issues – is a quagmire within which there is plenty of blame for all, but the Gaza situation is pretty much cut and dried. Israel is the _victim_; Hamas is the *aggressor* and the party which, because it hides behind women and children, etc, is guilty of crimes against humanity.

There is an issue of *proportionality* but it is between Palestinian civilians and the Hamas terrorists who use them as human shields. If the Palestinians really want peace they need only rise up and attack the murdering thugs in Hamas and Fatah and the tyrants in Saudi Arabia and Syria – it’s really very simple. But that’s not going to happen and the consequences will be bloody and horrible – for everyone involved, especially the long suffering Arabs.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ web site is an update on the situation in (and about) Gaza:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090110.wisrael0110/BNStory/International/home

Israel warns Gazans to brace for escalation of offensive

Reuters

January 10, 2009 at 10:41 AM EST

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Israeli tanks advanced on Gaza and Hamas militants fired rockets at Israel on Saturday, as both sides ignored international calls to stop the conflict and Israel warned it would escalate its assault.

An Israeli tank shell killed eight Palestinians in Jabalya, a refugee camp in the north of the Gaza Strip, and an air strike killed a woman in nearby Beit Lahiya, Palestinian medics said.

All of those killed in Jabalya were believed to be men from the same family. The Israeli army denied carrying out any attacks in the area.

The deaths, including those of several Palestinian gunmen, raised the Palestinian toll to at least 821, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry in Gaza. Thirteen Israelis have been killed: 10 soldiers and three civilians hit in rocket fire.

The fighting continued even during a three-hour ceasefire window Israel has established in recent days to allow aid into Gaza to sustain the 1.5 million people living there.

As Israeli tanks advanced in northern Gaza and aircraft hit targets across the coastal strip, Hamas rockets hit Ashkelon, 20 kilometres north of Gaza, wounding three Israelis.

The Israeli military also dropped leaflets on southern Gaza, around the town of Rafah, warning residents to stay away from militants, weapons storage facilities and tunnels as it was about to escalate its bombing throughout the coastal territory.

“In the coming period, the Israeli army will continue to attack tunnels, weapons caches, and terrorists with escalating force all over the Gaza Strip,” the leaflets read.

Concerned about the deepening humanitarian impact of the war, with more than half Gaza's population dependent on UN food assistance, the United Nations said it hoped to resume full aid distribution after receiving Israeli assurances that its staff would not be harmed. A UN driver was killed on Thursday.

Israel has pressed on with its offensive despite a UN Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire and Egyptian-European efforts at mediation, saying it is intent on stopping Hamas rocket fire. Hamas, too, has ignored calls for a halt to hostilities, firing eight rockets at Israel on Saturday.

A phalanx of Israeli tanks advanced from the north towards the city of Gaza, creeping in on the large refugee camp of Jabalya, home to around 100,000 people.

In an attempt to breathe life into a faltering Egyptian-led mediation effort, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Fatah party is a political foe of Hamas, met Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for talks in Cairo.

They discussed the possible deployment of international forces along the Gaza-Egypt border under any ceasefire deal, but Mr. Abbas said they should be in Gaza itself, not along the border.

Privately, diplomats believe the Egyptian initiative, also sponsored by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, is in trouble, even if Israel has said talks about the proposal will continue and Hamas has sent representatives to Cairo.

“There is a growing sense that the Egyptian-French plan is not going to work,” a senior European diplomat told Reuters.

Following talks with Mr. Abbas, Egypt said it would not accept foreign troops on its side of the 15-km border with Gaza to prevent arms smuggling.

But Germany, whose foreign minister also met with Egyptian officials, said it would send experts to help assess Egypt's police training needs to bolster anti-smuggling efforts.

Israel says the Egyptians have failed in the past to prevent Hamas building up an arsenal of Soviet-designed missiles.

As with the Egyptian initiative, the UN Security Council resolution late on Thursday calling for an immediate ceasefire appears to have little traction with Israel or Hamas.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert dismissed it as “unworkable” and Hamas officials in the Gaza Strip said they objected because they had not been consulted.

The United States, which abstained in the UN vote, offered further public support for Israel's military goals.

“This situation will not improve until Hamas stops lobbing rockets into Israel,” White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said.

He said President George W. Bush had expressed concern to Mr. Olmert about the humanitarian situation and the loss of civilian lives during the Israeli assault on the Gaza Strip.

With the Palestinian civilian death toll already in the hundreds, Israeli actions have drawn denunciations from the Red Cross, UN agencies and Arab and European governments. U.N. sources said Israel also was stepping up operations in the West Bank, detaining Palestinian suspects in rising numbers.

Hamas wants any ceasefire deal to include the ending of Israel's crippling economic blockade of the Gaza Strip and the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the territory, from which Israel withdrew in 2005 after a 38-year occupation.

Israel's key demands are for a complete halt to Hamas rocket fire and for international guarantees to stop the group rearming via smuggling tunnels under the border with Egypt.
-------------------

In essence: “nothing to report, over.”


----------



## tomahawk6

Those of you who are apologists for Hamas/Fatah/Hizbollah need to realize one reality. War is caused by their proclaimed goal of destroying Israel. Peace could come tomorrow if they recognize the right of Israel to exist just as Egypt and Jordan have done.They dont want peace and the blood of the populace is on their hands.

Israel learned from their last war that a multi-front war isnt in their strategic interest and they stopped too soon. I dont expect thias operation to end until Israel controls Gaza and Hamas has been defanged. Dont get worked up by the casualty figures because there is no independent media in Gaza. They think that by playing on the heart strings of the world, the pressure will force Israel to withdraw. Not happening this time.

The palestinians cannot be trusted to run their own affairs as long as they insist on Israel's destruction. The West Bank needs to be returned to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt. The sad truth is they dont want the hassle because the population has become so radicalized by their leaders. Also note the lack of outrage from the arab capitols. Why is that ? Hamas is an Iranian proxy and a threat to every Sunni leader. The destruction of Hamas is a defeat for Iran thus making the Saudi,Egyptian and Jordanian leaders alot more comfortable.


----------



## tomahawk6

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3653796,00.html



> A senior IDF officer estimated Saturday that roughly 300 Hamas men have been killed since the army launched its ground incursion in the Gaza Strip. The military official said IDF troops were able to wipe out whole battalions belonging to the Gaza terror group.
> 
> "Hundreds of people were killed in the various combat sectors," the officer said. "Some Hamas companies and battalions were simply wiped out. We also see cases of desertions and unauthorized leaves, while some terror activists are scared to undertake moves that would jeopardize them vis-à-vis IDF troops."
> 
> Earlier Saturday, the IDF killed Hamas' rocket chief in the Gaza City area, Amir Mansi. The senior officer said that shortly before his death Mansi clashed with his subordinates, who refused to come out of their hideouts. The rocket chief was left with no choice but to launch mortar shells himself, and was killed after being identified by the army.


----------



## Edward Campbell

According to the article below, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _CBC_ web site, Hamas either:

•	Wants to go down fighting; or

•	Believes the West will pressure Israel into giving Hamas, in defeat, what it could not win at the ‘table’ – the one at which it refused to sit.
--------------------
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/10/gaza.html

 No truce until Israel ends Gaza assault, opens border crossings: Hamas leader
*Israel warns of escalation in offensive in Palestinian territory*

Last Updated: Saturday, January 10, 2009 | 4:53 PM ET 

CBC News

Israeli planes dropped leaflets into the Gaza Strip on Saturday, warning residents of an escalation in attacks, while the exiled leader of Hamas said his group won't consider a ceasefire until Israel ends its offensive and opens the Palestinian territory's border crossings.

In a fiery speech broadcast on the Arabic news channel Al-Jazeera, Khaled Mashaal labelled Israel's military offensive in Gaza a "holocaust," saying it has killed the last chance for settlement and negotiations with Israel.

“Let Israel pull out first, let the aggression stop first, let the crossings open and then people can look into the issue of calm," Mashaal said during the broadcast from the Syrian capital, Damascus.

Mashaal's comments came as Hamas teams were in Cairo to negotiate over an Egyptian-proposed ceasefire.

On the 15th day of the offensive against Hamas targets, the Israeli military launched dozens of air strikes aimed at rocket-launching sites and smuggling tunnels.

The attacks came after more than 15 militants were killed in overnight fighting, the Israeli military said earlier in the day.

The Israeli leaflets urged Gaza residents not to help Hamas, the Islamist militant group that rules Gaza, and to stay away from its members.

"The IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) will escalate the operation in the Gaza Strip," the leaflets said in Arabic. "The IDF is not working against the people of Gaza but against Hamas and the terrorists only. Stay safe by following our orders."

It is widely believed that the next phase of the operation calls for Israeli troops to move closer to or enter Gaza's cities and refugee camps, which could lead to higher casualties on both sides.

The Israeli military also promised to hold fire for three hours Saturday to allow humanitarian aid through.

The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza said 821 Palestinians have died in the offensive. Thirteen Israelis, including 10 soldiers and three civilians, have been killed, Israeli officials say.

At least 10 Hamas rockets landed in Israel on Saturday, the army said. One rocket hit an apartment building in the southern city of Ashkelon, lightly wounding two people and causing extensive damage.

Neither side in the conflict has accepted the UN Security Council resolution, adopted Thursday, that called for a ceasefire.

The United Nations suspended relief deliveries in Gaza on the same day, citing Israeli attacks on its facilities and personnel. On Friday, the UN Relief and Works Agency said its aid would flow again only after a ceasefire comes into effect.

Aid groups have said the short lulls in fighting over the past four days haven't given them enough time to do their work.

The Israeli military, meanwhile, denied Saturday that Israeli soldiers had shot at a UN aid truck in a convoy headed to a Gaza crossing two days ago.

Truck drivers at the scene told UNRWA that they saw an Israeli tank nearby after they were fired upon. However, an Israeli military source told the Reuters news agency that Israel suspects Hamas was behind the shooting.

Israel launched an air offensive Dec. 27 to halt Palestinian rocket attacks on southern Israel. A week later, troops and tanks moved in. They remain on the periphery of Gaza City.

_With files from the Associated Press_
--------------------

And so it goes, and goes and goes …


----------



## tourza

For your consideration, from Gideon Levy of Haaretz:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054158.html

Regards.


----------



## Shec

And here's the skinny on Gideon Levy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gideon_Levy

Who has no counterpart in the Palestinian press because such a dissenter would not be long tolerated by his readership.


----------



## belka

1885.tnias said:
			
		

> The Palestinians have no other defense do they?
> 
> I'm sure if they had brand new F-16's with bunker busting bombs they'd be happy to launch a few of those at military targets in Israel. As it stands their weaponry is so juvenile that they can't target anything. All they're doing with their tiny homemade devices is trying to send a message to the rest of the world, at the cost of one or two israeli lives per month, that they are being starved, minimalized and ghettoized by israel. You'd think a Country like Israel, with their history, would think twice at the implications of marginalizing a people, de-humanizing them, and locking them in camps.



If the Palestinians or Hamas had modern weapons they wouldn't be hesitant to use them against Israel. Just imagine if one of them got their hands on a nuclear weapon, Israel would cease to exist. The Palestinians have already wasted 50 years of their lives, unless they want another generation flushed down the toilet they better get their heads out of their asses and elect someone who isn't bent on destroying Israel. If they want to be treated like human beings, they better soon start acting like it.


----------



## tomahawk6

Here are some of the protests against Israel. You would think these protests were on the streets of an arab city.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd18ok27eYc&e

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo&eurl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_1PFbhAKI&eurl


----------



## tourza

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Here are some of the protests against Israel. You would think these protests were on the streets of an arab city.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd18ok27eYc&e
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo&eurl
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_1PFbhAKI&eurl



The second video was done by Tom Trento. Here's the 411 on this guy:

https://watchobsession.org/

http://citizenwarriors.com/2008/10/tom-trento.html

Regards.


----------



## tourza

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Tread lightly lad.....this is your warning.
> Bruce



Bruce, 

Respectfully, I'm not really sure why you took offence to this statement and not to other similar statements made in other posts regarding the Hamas-Iran or the Hizballah-Iran relationships. A previous poster even suggested that Israel/US bomb Iran as punishment for supporting Hamas/Hizballah. It's fairly common knowledge that Israel is the single largest recipient of US foreign aid, both economic and military. I'm not sure proxy is the word I would have used though, but I think that the writer's intent got through to the reader.

Regards.


----------



## Drag

In my mind, the solution to Mideast Cris is very simple...  The IDF roots out Hamas followed by Egypt annexing Gaza, Jordan annexing the West Bank ...


----------



## Kirkhill

D3 said:
			
		

> In my mind, the solution to Mideast Cris is very simple...  The IDF roots out Hamas followed by Egypt annexing Gaza, Jordan annexing the West Bank ...



I think that might be a hard sell D3.  

Egypt isn't on the best of terms with Hamas and Iran these days.   And the Jordanians already had the West Bank..... and an outfit called Black September.


----------



## zipperhead_cop

tourza said:
			
		

> I'm not sure proxy is the word I would have used though, but I think that the writer's intent got through to the reader.



If his intent was to come across as a closed minded zealot, then he succeeded.  

Okay Tourza, help me out with one thing (I agree with the previous comment that you seem reasonable and educated).  I agree that both sides have behaved poorly over the years, and at this point there is really no reason to get into any of that.  Something has to change and the violence needs to stop.  
So what purpose does it serve to shoot rockets into Israel? Even if they want a shooting war, why the rockets.  There are heaps of sabotage/terrorist acts that could be carried out against the IDF in Israel if they really wanted to fight a military target.  And we all know the rockets they shoot can't be aimed worth a damn, so it becomes a completely random act directed at a civilian population.  What is the point? Other than to provoke Israel into a predictable reaction what can possibly be served by mindlessly sending ordinance into a civilian area?  



> In my mind, the solution to Mideast Cris is very simple...  The IDF roots out Hamas followed by Egypt annexing Gaza, Jordan annexing the West Bank ...



That would work, but do you really think that Jordan and Egypt want to inherit that Gong Show?  I'm sure they are quite content to make it an Israel problem.  There is quite a bit more most of the Arab countries could do to be helping Palestine, but it is more fun to watch Israel look bad in the world opinion and wash their hands of them.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Highlights from an interesting _NY Times_ piece about tactics on both sides (.pdf attached in case link doesn't work).....



> ....Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership’s war room is a bunker beneath Gaza’s largest hospital, Israeli intelligence officials say.
> 
> Unwilling to take Israel’s bait and come into the open, Hamas militants are fighting in civilian clothes; even the police have been ordered to take off their uniforms. The militants emerge from tunnels to shoot automatic weapons or antitank missiles, then disappear back inside, hoping to lure the Israeli soldiers with their fire.
> 
> In one apartment building in Zeitoun, in northern Gaza, Hamas set an inventive, deadly trap. According to an Israeli journalist embedded with Israeli troops, the militants placed a mannequin in a hallway off the building’s main entrance. They hoped to draw fire from Israeli soldiers who might, through the blur of night vision goggles and split-second decisions, mistake the figure for a fighter. The mannequin was rigged to explode and bring down the building....





> .... Israeli intelligence officers are telephoning Gazans and, in good Arabic, pretending to be sympathetic Egyptians, Saudis, Jordanians or Libyans, Gazans say and Israel has confirmed. After expressing horror at the Israeli war and asking about the family, the callers ask about local conditions, whether the family supports Hamas and if there are fighters in the building or the neighborhood.
> 
> Karim Abu Shaban, 21, of Gaza City said he and his neighbors all had gotten such calls. His first caller had an Egyptian accent. “Oh, God help you, God be with you,” the caller began.
> 
> “It started very supportive,” Mr. Shaban said, then the questions started. The next call came in five minutes later. That caller had an Algerian accent and asked if he had reached Gaza. Mr. Shaban said he answered, “No, Tel Aviv,” and hung up....


----------



## geo

> Ron Ben-Yishai, a senior military correspondent for the newspaper Yediot Aharanot, said soldiers found a pile of weapons with a grenade launcher on top. *When they moved the launcher, “they saw a detonator light up, but somehow it didn’t go off.” *
> 
> The Israeli army has come prepared for a battle both sides knew was inevitable. Every soldier, Israeli officials say, is outfitted with a ceramic vest and helmet. Every unit has dogs trained to sniff out explosive charges and people hidden in tunnels, as well as combat engineers trained to defuse hidden bombs.
> 
> To avoid booby traps, the Israelis say, they enter buildings by breaking through side walls, rather than going in the front.



A real "blast" from the past.... booby traps left by the Germans in Ortona - for unsuspecting Canadians to take...

http://digital.montrealgazette.com/epaper/viewer.aspx


----------



## Kilo_302

> Here are some of the protests against Israel. You would think these protests were on the streets of an arab city.



What does that mean? Are you suggesting that people who are critical of Israeli policy in this situation are Arab? or act like Arabs? Are you suggesting then that only Arabs oppose Israeli policy regarding Palestine? Or are you suggesting that the unruly (at times) nature of the protests is the hallmark of protests in Arab cities?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

tourza said:
			
		

> Bruce,
> 
> Respectfully, I'm not really sure why you took offence to this statement and not to other similar statements made in other posts regarding the Hamas-Iran or the Hizballah-Iran relationships. A previous poster even suggested that Israel/US bomb Iran as punishment for supporting Hamas/Hizballah. It's fairly common knowledge that Israel is the single largest recipient of US foreign aid, both economic and military. I'm not sure proxy is the word I would have used though, but I think that the writer's intent got through to the reader.
> 
> Regards.



Tourza, its very simple.  This is a military themed website, full stop. 
The offense taken was the gratuitous insult to the USA.
No matter what the small policy differences the two countries may have politically, there is no better friend militarily than our neighbors to the south and we expect, no we demand, especially from brand new anonymous posters, that proper decorum is afforded.

Don't like it?, Don't visit.
Hope that clears it up.
Bruce


----------



## tomahawk6

The pro-terrorist demonstrators are intolerant racist thugs.
A protest in Germany.The police enter an apartment to take down the Israeli flag.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiQxfRaXPVE&eurl



> [Today, 10.000 people demonstrated against Israel here in my hometown Duisburg (Germany) and to express their solidarity with Hamas. So, my girlfriend and me put two Israel flags out of the windows of our flat in the 3rd floor. During the demonstration which went through our street the police broke into our flat and removed the flag of Israel. The statement of the police was to de-escalate the situation, because many youth demonstrators were on the brink of breaking into our apartment house. Before this they threw snowballs, knifes and stones against our windows and the complete building. We both were standing on the other side of the street and were shocked by seeing a police officer standing in our bedroom and opening the window to get the flag. The picture illustrate this situation. The police acquiesced in the demands of the mob.
> /quote]


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _CTV News_ web site, is another SITREP:
--------------------
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090111/israel_gaza_090111/20090111?hub=TopStories

Israel sends reserve troops into Gaza strip

Updated Sun. Jan. 11 2009 1:57 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Israel has begun sending reserve units into the Gaza Strip, a move that could signal another escalated phase of its military offensive.

Israeli Brig. Gen. Avi Benayahu declined to confirm that a new phase had begun, but confirmed Sunday that reserve units were now in the area.

Israel's ground operation into Gaza began on Jan. 3, with troops surrounding key locations. Israel says the next part of its operation will involve taking over even more areas, which will require the use of thousands of reserve forces.

Reserve troops headed to the area as Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants waged a fierce battle in a Gaza City suburb. The Israeli military has been slowly moving toward Gaza's more heavily populated regions.

Soldiers and militants clashed in the Sheikh Ajleen neighbourhood just before dawn, after Hamas and the smaller Islamic Jihad fought Israeli troops as they made their way toward the city.

At least 14 people were killed in the fighting, according to Palestinian health officials.

Fighting continued throughout the morning before Israeli soldiers took control of a number of buildings in the town's outlying areas.

Throughout Gaza, battles killed at least 20 Palestinians, according to local health officials, including four family members who died when a tank shell hit their home near Gaza City.

In the border village of Khouza, local witnesses said Israeli forces fired phosphorous shells at a row of houses, setting them on fire. One woman died and at least 100 others were injured in that attack, health officials said.

The Israeli military denied the attack took place.

The widening ground offensive is the second phase of Israel's operation in the Gaza Strip aimed at halting rocket fire from Gaza into settlements in southern Israel. Since the operation began on Dec. 27, an estimated 820 Palestinians have been killed, and local Gaza health officials say at least half of those are civilians.

According to the Israeli military, soldiers have killed 300 militants since the ground offensive began one week ago.

Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians, have also died.

"Israel is nearing the goals, which it set itself, but more patience, determination and effort is still demanded," Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Sunday before his government's weekly meeting.

Despite calls from the international community for an immediate ceasefire, including a UN Security Council resolution calling for an end to the fighting, Olmert said Israel would continue to defend itself from rocket fire.

Hamas has also ignored the UN resolution, complaining that it has not been consulted during diplomatic talks.

Israel has sent signals that it is preparing for a third phase of its offensive against Hamas.

Despite the violence, high schools in southern Israel re-opened on Sunday after two weeks, while there was indication elementary schools might re-open on Monday.

"The indication from these communities is that the rocket attacks from Gaza are not as bad as they've been," CTV's Tom Kennedy told Newsnet on Sunday morning.

Many of the regions in northern Gaza from which militants launch rockets are now controlled by the Israeli military.

Israeli's air force also continued its air bombardment Sunday, hitting the town of Rafah along the Egypt-Gaza border. Repeated air strikes have targeted the tunnels that run underneath the region, which are used to smuggle weapons and supplies into Gaza.

More diplomatic talks aimed at stopping the fighting were planned for Sunday. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier was scheduled to meet with Israeli leaders in Egypt to push the Security Council ceasefire resolution.

_With files from The Associated Press_
--------------------

This bit: _"Israel is nearing the goals, which it set itself, but more patience, determination and effort is still demanded," Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Sunday_, is new, I think.

This bit: _Despite the violence, high schools in southern Israel re-opened on Sunday after two weeks, while there was indication elementary schools might re-open on Monday,_ would seem to indicate that Israel is confident that it has badly damaged Hamas’ rocket firing capability and that operations will not end soon.


----------



## geo

If the Israelis are sending in their reserves - must mean that they are keeping some regular troops on the westbank & golan fronts..... Just in case something happens from Hamas sympathysers


----------



## tomahawk6

The purpose I think of the reserves is to hold ground that the armor-infantry have already taken. The Israelis are using very elite units at the tip of this spear including the Golani Brigade.


----------



## wannabe SF member

/slight highjack/

The reserves and conscripts are a different thing in the IDF right?


----------



## Nfld Sapper

Regular service

National military service is mandatory for Jewish and Druze men and Jewish women over the age of 18, although exceptions may be made on religious, physical or psychological grounds 

Men serve three years in the IDF, while women serve two. The IDF allowed women who volunteer for several combat positions to serve for three years because combat soldiers must undergo a lengthy period of training. Women in other positions, such as programmers, who require lengthy training time may also serve three years. Women in most combat positions are also required to serve as reserve for several years after their dismissal from regular service.

Reserve service
Following regular service, men may be called for reserve service of up to one month annually, until the age of 43-45 (reservists may volunteer after this age), and may be called for active duty immediately in times of crisis. In most cases, the reserve duty is carried out in the same unit for years, in many cases the same unit as the active service and by the same people. Many soldiers who have served together in active service continue to meet in reserve duty for years after their discharge, causing reserve duty to become a strong male bonding experience in Israeli society.

Although still available to be called up in times of crisis, most Israeli men, and virtually all women, do not actually perform reserve service in any given year. Units do not always call up all of their reservists every year, and a variety of exemptions are available if called for regular reserve service. Virtually no exemptions exist for reservists called up in a time of crisis, but experience has shown that in such cases (most recently, Second Lebanon War in 2006) exemptions are rarely requested or exercised; units generally achieve recruitment rates above those considered fully-manned.

Recently, legislation has been proposed for reform in the reserve service, lowering the maximum service age to 40, designating it as a purely emergency force, as well as many other changes to the current structure (although the Defence Minister can suspend any portion of it at any time for security reasons). The age threshold for many reservists whose positions are not listed, though, will be fixed at 49. The legislation is set out to take effect by 13 March, 2008.


----------



## tomahawk6

A conscript after his/her active duty of 3 years becomes part of the reserve where he will serve 45 days annually until he is in his early 40's. Women serve 2 years and serve until 24,marroed pr pregnant.


----------



## tomahawk6

This UAV grab shows two Israeli soldiers attacked from concealment by Hamas fighters. The bad guys throw a grenade and one soldier grabs the body of a tango and shields himself from the blast. Pretty cool.

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/01/literal-human-shield.html


----------



## geo

Does anyone know anything about the alleged use of Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME) weapons in Gaza ???
From what I've heard on the news wire, I get mixed feelings on it.  Blast effect & shrapnel dispersal is kept to a very restricted zone BUT those who are caught in it's blast radius are facing horrendous injuries.


----------



## OldSolduer

I have a question:

Why is when a war breaks out, a whack of Canadians demand evacuation from that war torn area. It seems to me that many of them hold dual citizenship or are naturalized Canadians who opt to live in their former homeland.

Am I the only one who sees this or are we too politically correct to point that out?


----------



## George Wallace

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> I have a question:
> 
> Why is when a war breaks out, a whack of Canadians demand evacuation from that war torn area. It seems to me that many of them hold dual citizenship or are naturalized Canadians who opt to live in their former homeland.
> 
> Am I the only one who sees this or are we too politically correct to point that out?



Good Question.  One that has been asked, not just by you, but many others have asked the same thing of this case, as well as the case last year with Lebanon.


----------



## thunderchild

If I was planning to go someplace and something like this(GAZA) was going on, why after the first airstrike did I not get the hell out of there.  Or go there to begin with, it makes no sense and is irresponsible.  

   Enough with this crap either you are Canadian whole heartily or you are not!  The other thing that really P***** me off is not being able to go to the ROM because Palestinians and Israeli protesters are yelling at each other across Bloor st.  I don't want my kid scared or possable hurt she wouldn't understand what was happening. If they feel so strongly go back! Don't hide safe and sound in our country and bring your fights here.  I'm all for free speech, and learning about other cultures in the world but not having them fight their wars in my streets.


----------



## George Wallace

thunderchild said:
			
		

> ........... Don't hide safe and sound in our country and bring your fights here.  I'm all for free speech, and learning about other cultures in the world but not having them fight their wars in my streets.




Well.  I must say I am surprised.  I agree with you.  Come to my country.  Live in Peace.  Enjoy the good life.  DON'T BRING YOUR WARS AND HATRED WITH YOU.


----------



## PanaEng

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> This UAV grab shows two Israeli soldiers attacked from concealment by Hamas fighters. The bad guys throw a grenade and one soldier grabs the body of a tango and shields himself from the blast. Pretty cool.
> 
> http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/01/literal-human-shield.html


Now that is some cool and collected and quick thinking!


----------



## zipperhead_cop

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Okay Tourza, help me out with one thing...



Name:  tourza 
Posts:  33 (0.037 per day) 
Position:  New Member 
Date Registered:  July 26, 2006, 17:01:12 
Last Active:  January 11, 2009, 00:11:44   

Funny how the questions that are simply put but difficult to answer get put on ignore by some people.  Nothing new, and ultimately predictable.


----------



## GAP

Another "defensive" tunnel found  
Article Link


Last week, Jimmy Carter called the tunnel that Israel bombed in November at the Gaza border, meant to kidnap Israeli soldiers, a "defensive tunnel."

Well, today they found another one, where the poor defenseless Hamas activists must have been digging a tunnel in order to purchase some cigarettes from Israelis.

How long before Jimmy starts calling Qassams "resistance rockets?"
More on link


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ is an opinion by (law) Prof. Michael Byers:
--------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090112.wcoisrael13/BNStory/specialComment/home

 In the case of Israel v. Hamas, two wrongs don't make a right

MICHAEL BYERS

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
January 13, 2009 at 12:00 AM EST

"Canada continues to fully support Israel's right to defend itself," junior foreign minister Peter Kent said after an Israeli air strike on a United Nations school in Gaza killed 42 Palestinians last week.

"Canada has to support the right of a democratic country to defend itself," said Liberal Party Leader Michael Ignatieff.

I agree. But I also agree with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who called the attack on the school "totally unacceptable." And I agree with Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who called for "credible, independent and transparent" investigations into possible war crimes. I can agree with all these comments because they concern different strands of international law.

*Self-defence*: Messrs. Kent and Ignatieff are focused on the right of self-defence, which governs the recourse to force. Self-defence is a recognized exception to the UN Charter's general prohibition on taking up arms. Historically, it was available only in response to an attack by another state's armed forces. After 9/11 and the intervention in Afghanistan, self-defence now extends, in some circumstances, to the use of force against terrorism.

But self-defence is always limited by requirements of necessity and proportionality. It's not sufficient to say Israel has a right to defend itself. We must consider whether the Israel Defence Forces are acting in a necessary and proportionate way.

After a six-month ceasefire, Hamas launched rockets at Israel before the Israeli military began its air campaign. Two weeks into the conflict, more than a dozen Israelis have died, three of them civilians. All of this is serious, but Israel's existence is not at risk from Hamas.

According to Palestinian reports, more than 900 Palestinians have been killed, nearly half of them civilians, including many children. Israeli F-16s have bombed crowded neighbourhoods, and hundreds of homes have been destroyed along with scores of government buildings. The viability of Gaza has been severely compromised.

*International humanitarian law*: Messrs. Ban and Pillay are focused on "international humanitarian law," which constrains how force may be applied once a conflict is under way. These rules are set out in the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which Israel ratified in 1951. For the most part, they apply to Hamas as customary international law.

The direct targeting of civilians is prohibited, as are indiscriminate attacks. The Israeli military's use of white phosphorous shells is almost certainly illegal in a densely populated area such as Gaza. Individual targets may only be selected if the direct military advantage anticipated from the strike exceeds the expected harm to civilians. Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli towns rather than specific military targets are illegal. So, too, is the use of powerful bombs in crowded neighbourhoods.

The Israeli government points to the fact that Hamas is using civilians as human shields. Hiding behind civilians is illegal, but two wrongs do not make a right. The relevant question is, again, whether the direct military advantage of a particular target exceeds the risk to civilians. Is destroying a mortar position next to a school worth 42 innocent lives?

It is also illegal to target aid workers. Last week, a UN driver was killed when his clearly marked truck was struck by an Israeli shell. The incident forced John Ging, the director of UN aid in Gaza, to suspend operations. The decision was "heartbreaking," he said, but the organization had "lost confidence" in verbal assurances from the Israeli military.

*War crimes*: Violations of all these rules constitute war crimes, which are subject to universal jurisdiction in the sense that the perpetrators may be prosecuted in any country's domestic courts. This raises the possibility of trials if they are foolish enough to travel abroad and the local authorities are brave enough to arrest them. (In 2005, a former head of Israeli forces in Gaza said he was warned by diplomats not to leave an aircraft that had landed in London after a tip-off that British police were waiting to arrest him on war-crimes charges.) There is no possibility of prosecutions in the International Criminal Court, since Israel has not ratified the court's statute. Hamas, as a non-state actor, cannot do so.

The absence of a reliable mechanism for prosecuting Hamas and Israeli perpetrators is unfortunate. But so, too, is the support that some Canadian politicians have given to apparent violations of international law. The long-term viability of these rules depends on our willingness to speak out in defence of them - against all perpetrators.

_Michael Byers is Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia. He was a visiting professor of law at the University of Tel Aviv in April of 2004._
--------------------

I’m not going to disagree with anything specific Prof. Byers has said; I will, however, take issue with the things he did not say:

*Self Defence* – so long as Israel is attacking, continues to attack the Hamas offensive. Rocket launching sites, supporting infrastructure and C2 apparatus (including people) it continues in a legitimate campaign of self defence. In this case _proportionality_ is not an issue. The immediate threat against which Israel is defending itself is from the _Qassam_ rockets that, as of yesterday, were still being fired at Israeli civilian targets. When the rockets stop then, but only then, so will Israel’s *right* to defend itself by taking military action – after some militarily necessary consolidation and mopping up is done.

*International Humanitarian Law* – Prof. Byers is very careful to not say that Israel is directly targeting civilians and he is equally careful to qualify is allegation that using white phosphorous in populated areas *may* be illegal – under some circumstances, and so on and so forth.

Prof. Byers asks an important and heartbreaking question: _“Is destroying a mortar position next to a school worth 42 innocent lives?”_ Who gets to answer that question: the Israeli commander who must expose his/her soldiers to deadly mortar fire or a professor in a quiet, book lined study far from the madness of battle? But there’s another question: If, as Prof. Byers suggests is the case, Hamas is, indeed, hiding behind civilian human shields then why is the mortar’s site not a crime against international humanitarian law?

*War Crimes* – with respect, this is a red herring. Yes, indeed, some overzealous prosecutors with _political_ agendas – people like Profs Byers and Attaran will try to discomfit a few Israeli politicians and generals and will, no doubt, disrupt a few travel plans – heaven forbid anyone would even think of doing such a thing to a Hamas or Hezbollah _official_, they might find their children slaughtered in their homes by end of day – but that’s about it. 

Prof. Byers last sentence is important: _”The long-term viability of these rules depends on our willingness to speak out in defence of them - against all perpetrators.”_ In fairness, he has pointed a finger at Hamas but his main argument is against Israel and it rests, almost exclusively, on the issue of proportionality. There are some thoughts on proportionality here and here. Clearly the issue matters – to almost everyone, including Israeli judges and generals but, broadly, excluding Arabs. It must start mattering and being applied, equally, to all.


----------



## tomahawk6

Israel has established that Hamas was firing on Israeli troops from the school both inside and on the grounds.This wouldnt be the first time that a terror group being in close proximity to a UN facility to fire on Israeli troops.I would speculate that there are plenty of facilitors working for the UN in Gaza and Lebanon.


----------



## Rifleman62

I would assume that most, if not all, of the UN workers are locals with the possible exception of some of the supervisors/managers. Even the UN would not import thousands of Norwegians as truck divers, clerks etc.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_, is another SITREP from Gaza:
-------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090113.wgaza0113/BNStory/International/home

 Israeli forces enter Gaza City neighbourhood

IBRAHIM BARZAK AND JOSEF FEDERMAN
Associated Press

January 13, 2009 at 5:52 AM EST

GAZA CITY, GAZA STRIP — Israeli ground troops battled Palestinian militants in the streets of a densely populated Gaza City neighbourhood early Tuesday, destroying dozens of homes and sending terrified residents running for cover as gunfire and explosions echoed in the distance.

Israel's push into Tel Hawwa neighbourhood was the farthest it has moved into Gaza City during its 18-day offensive against Hamas militants, and brought Israel's ground forces within two kilometres of the crowded city centre. Palestinian hospital officials say more than 900 Palestinians, half of them civilians, have been killed.

Israel launched the offensive on Dec. 27 to end years of Palestinian rocket attacks on its southern towns, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has vowed to press forward with an "iron fist," despite growing international calls for an end to the fighting. UN chief Ban Ki-moon was headed to the region Tuesday to press for a ceasefire.

Palestinian witnesses said the Israeli forces moved overnight about 300 metres into Tel Hawwa, a neighbourhood of high-rise buildings on the southeastern edge of Gaza City. Palestinian medical officials reported at least 16 people killed in fighting, though the Israeli army suggested the number could be much higher.

One resident, Khader Mussa, said he fled his house while waving a white flag as the Israeli forces advanced. He spent the night huddling in the basement of a relative with 25 other people, including his pregnant wife and his parents.

"Thank God we survived this time and got out alive from here. But we don't know how long we'll be safe in my brother's home," Mr. Mussa, 35, told The Associated Press by telephone.

Several buildings were on fire, witnesses said, including a lumberyard. Sounds of the battle could be heard clearly around the city of 400,000 as the Israeli forces, backed by artillery and attack helicopters, moved into neighbourhoods east and south of Gaza City. Israeli gunboats shelled the coast from the west.

The Israeli military said it carried out some 60 air strikes overnight, hitting groups of Hamas militants holed up in a hotel, a house and a mosque. It said it also struck 15 squads of gunmen, rocket launching sites and 15 smuggling tunnels along the Egyptian border.

The army said it had killed or wounded about 30 militants, and that three soldiers were wounded in overnight fighting. Among them was an officer who was seriously wounded when a bomb exploded in a northern Gaza house that he was searching. Weapons, including a machine gun, were later found in the house, the military said.

Dr. Moaiya Hassanain, a Palestinian Health Ministry official said dozens of calls for ambulances had been received, but they could not be dispatched because of the fighting.

The Gaza fighting has raised tensions around the region and galvanized anger toward Israel throughout the Arab world. On Tuesday, at least one gunman opened fire at an Israeli army patrol along the desert border between Israel and Jordan, the military said. There were no casualties, and Jordan said the claim was "baseless."

There was a similar shooting incident on the Israel-Syria border on Sunday, and last week militants in Lebanon fired rockets into an Israeli town in an apparent attempt to draw Israel into a second front.

The Israeli military has tightly controlled information from the battlefield, but indications have been that Hamas has not put up a serious fight. Of the nine Israeli soldiers killed during the offensive, four were killed in "friendly fire incidents," a military inquiry concluded. Repeated Hamas claims of spectacular attacks on the Israelis have turned out to be false.

Speaking in parliament on Tuesday, Israel's military chief said his troops have achieved a lot but "still have work to do" in fighting Hamas in Gaza.

"The soldiers are doing exceptional work, with many achievements in inflicting damage on Hamas, its infrastructure, its government and military wing," he said.

Palestinian rocket fire has been greatly reduced, but not halted altogether, since the offensive was launched.

As diplomats struggled with the truce efforts, Mr. Olmert said Israel would end the military operations only when Hamas stops rocketing Israel and halts weapons smuggling across the porous border.

"Anything else will be met with the Israeli people's iron fist," Mr. Olmert said, "We will continue to strike with full strength, with full force until there is quiet and rearmament stops."

He spoke Monday in the town of Ashkelon, where life has largely been paralyzed by rocket fire from Gaza.

Later, he tempered his tough talk, saying: "I really hope that the efforts we are making with the Egyptians these days will ripen to a result that will enable us to end the fighting." Egypt, which often mediates between Israel and Hamas, and international diplomats have been furiously working toward a solution that would stop the fighting.

In a speech broadcast on the group's Al Aqsa TV station, Hamas' prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh, claimed his group would continue fighting, but said it was pursuing diplomacy to end the conflict. He said any truce would require an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the opening of the territory's blockaded borders.

"As we are in the middle of this crisis, we tell our people we, God willing, are closer to victory. All the blood that is being shed will not go to waste," Mr. Haniyeh said.

Like other Hamas leaders, Mr. Haniyeh is in hiding, and it was not clear from where he was speaking.

Inside Gaza on Monday, an Israeli battalion commander identified only as Lt. Col. Yehuda said troops had not met significant resistance. He said troops found several houses booby-trapped either with regular explosives, or by sealing the windows and doors and opening cooking gas valves.

"A couple of days ago, an armed squad popped up from a tunnel that was concealed by a nearby building. We took them out with tank fire and a bulldozer," he said.

The officer's comment was approved by Israeli military censors. He spoke to a small group of reporters who accompanied Israeli units inside Gaza. Israeli forces have not allowed journalists to enter Gaza to cover the war.

Much of the diplomacy focuses on an area of southern Gaza just across the Egyptian border that serves as a weapons smuggling route, making Egypt critical to both sides in any deal.

Israel wants smuggling tunnels along the border sealed and monitored as part of any peace deal, and has been bombing the tunnels throughout the campaign.

The UN Security Council has already passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire. Mr. Ban was headed to the Mideast on Tuesday to enforce the measure.

Speaking at UN headquarters in New York on Monday, Mr. Ban said he has been on the phone constantly with top officials in the Middle East, Europe and the United States promoting the ceasefire. But he said phone calls are not a substitute for direct talks with leaders who have influence on the parties.

"To both sides, I say: Just stop, now," the UN chief said. "Too many people have died. There has been too much civilian suffering. Too many people, Israelis and Palestinians, live in daily fear of their lives."

The secretary-general said he plans to meet senior officials in Egypt and Jordan on Wednesday, then head to Israel, the West Bank, Turkey, Lebanon, Syria and Kuwait.

Israel's point man in the cease-fire efforts, Defence Ministry official Amos Gilad, planned to travel Tuesday to Egypt for talks.
--------------------

Referring to Prof. Byers’ point, above, Israel is still in the self defence mode according to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who “said Israel would end the military operations only when Hamas stops rocketing Israel and halts weapons smuggling across the porous border.”


----------



## Edward Campbell

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I would assume that most, if not all, of the UN workers are locals with the possible exception of some of the supervisors/managers. Even the UN would not import thousands of Norwegians as truck divers, labours, clerks etc.




You would be quite correct. It (hiring locals to create local jobs) is part of the mandate.


----------



## a_majoor

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> You would be quite correct. It (hiring *locals* to create local jobs) is part of the mandate.



That in itself would be a huge problem for either side to accept, and the importation of thousands of Egyptian or Jordanian workers would be equally problematic. Maybe in this case we really would need to consider hiring thousands of Norwegians or Icelandic citizens as workers for any putative UN force.

Of course, the rather blatant bias of the UN really makes this a non starter for Israel anyway. The only consensual democratic governments in the region besides Israel are Turkey and Iraq, so perhaps a large part of the solution needs to come from these nations.


----------



## Shec

Given the friendly and cooperative state of relations between Turkey and Israel this could be unacceptable in some cirdes.


----------



## CougarKing

_A female Israeli Army soldier is seen in a staging area near Israel's border with Gaza, Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2009. Israeli troops advanced into Gaza suburbs for the first time early Tuesday, residents said, hours after Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned Islamic militants that they face an 'iron fist' unless they agree to Israeli terms for an end to war in the Gaza Strip. (AP Photo/Anja Niedringhaus) _






_In this photo released by the Israeli army, Israeli soldiers walk towards the northern Gaza Strip as seen from the Israeli border with Gaza, Monday, Jan. 12, 2009. Israeli ground troops battled Palestinian militants in the streets of a densely populated Gaza City neighborhood early Tuesday, destroying dozens of homes and sending terrified residents running for cover as gunfire and explosions echoed in the distance. (AP Photo/IDF, Neil Cohen, HO) _






_(AP Photo/IDF, Neil Cohen, HO) _






_Israeli reservists are reflected on a visor mounted on a weapon before crossing into the northern Gaza Strip January 12, 2009. (Jerry Lampen/Reuters)_






_An Israeli tank moves across the border with the northern Gaza Strip January 11, 2009. (Amir Cohen/Reuters)_






_An Israeli tank rolls outside the northern Gaza Strip January 13, 2009. Israeli forces tightened their hold on the outskirts of the city of Gaza on Tuesday and Israel's top general said "there is still work" ahead against Hamas in an 18-day-old offensive that has killed more than 900 Palestinians.
REUTERS/Amir Cohen (ISRAEL)_






_Israeli soldiers hold up a national flag atop an armoured personnel carrier (APC) after crossing into Israel at the border with the Gaza Strip January 13, 2009. Israeli forces tightened their hold around the city of Gaza on Tuesday and Israel's top general said "there is still work" ahead against Hamas in an 18-day-old offensive that has killed more than 900 Palestinians. REUTERS/Amir Cohen (ISRAEL)_


----------



## Kilo_302

Earlier on this thread I  had asked about the use of WP arty rounds and was accused of trolling. It was also explained that there are a variety of legitimate military uses for WP (such as smoke screens). The Globe and Mail article Mr. Campbell posted mentioned the use of WP, stating that it was illegal in urban areas. So are the photos we are seeing of WP evidence of war crimes? Or are they photos of a legitimate use of WP?


----------



## Edward Campbell

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> Earlier on this thread I  had asked about the use of WP arty rounds and was accused of trolling. It was also explained that there are a variety of legitimate military uses for WP (such as smoke screens). The Globe and Mail article Mr. Campbell posted mentioned the use of WP, stating that it was illegal in urban areas. So are the photos we are seeing of WP evidence of war crimes? Or are they photos of a legitimate use of WP?



Please read that again, Kilo_302. Prof. Byers, being a good lawyer, hedged his words. He asserted that the _"use of white phosphorous shells is *almost certainly* illegal in a densely populated area such as Gaza."_ There's sufficient intellectual wiggle room there through which to manoeuvre a Leopard II tank because there remain a whole hockey sock full of applications for which WP is quite acceptable - even when civilians are lollygagging in the area of operations.


----------



## Kilo_302

> even when civilians are lollygagging in the area of operations



Interesting choice of words. Where do you suggest the Gazans should go?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008621030_gaza13.html

Note the bit about lack of effective shelter. People are using office buildings and schools, which are clearly no longer safe.

So what are some examples of legit military applications considering that it is an urban area? Assuming the WP was being used for concealment, does the IDF still not have an obligation under int'l law to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction? Would this reality not rule out the use of WP in urban areas where civilians are no doubt present?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

NO


----------



## 1feral1

Kilo, with the whole world watching, I am sure the IDF are treading carefully as it is. They are goin out of their way to win this war.

Smk has many purposes, from target indication to providing cover.

I can't see them willfully selecting innocent civilians and showering them with WP simply to terrorise them.

Limp wristers, bleeding hearts, lefties and supporters of Hamas and other similar terrorist organistions will always try to find a cheap excuse, and continually point the finger at Israel as the evil in this war, when it is in fact Hamas and their supporters themselves.

[Edit:  Off the wall comment removed by Mod]

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Bo

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> NO



YES

"Israel's violation of specific provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention

a) Humane treatment

Article 27: 'Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected *especially against all acts of violence* or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity"


http://www.jfjfp.org/factsheets/geneva4.htm


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

What??

civilians who find themselves in enemy hands as a result of a conflict or an occupation. 


Oh, missed that part??......yea, sure ya did.


----------



## Bo

Kilo said "does the IDF still not have an obligation under int'l law to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction?"

To which Bruce said: "NO"

That's why I posted the 4th Geneva Convention to show that the IDF does in fact have an obligation to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction.

Oh wait, my bad, I just realized something. *Israel ratified the Fourth Geneva Convention with effect from 6 July 1951*


----------



## Edward Campbell

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> ...
> So what are some examples of legit military applications considering that it is an urban area? Assuming the WP was being used for concealment, does the IDF still not have an obligation under int'l law to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction? Would this reality not rule out the use of WP in urban areas where civilians are no doubt present?




Those are, essentially, technical questions, Kilo_302, and we have technically qualified people here on Army.ca who can and, I hope, will answer them for you.

I'm not ducking the issue but I've always had some problems with selective prohibitions of certain weapons. I know that the effects of WP can be very, very painful, but so can the effects of almost anything, including the club. WP is no more indiscriminate than any other mortar/artillery round and it is, I believe a very effective smoke round - better than the others. Yes it has some nasty side effects but, at the risk of being though _insensitive_ to the suffering of others, I have never found that a sound justification for prohibiting restricting its use.

Here, for some 'light' reading is an article about the use of WP in combat. I gather that WP is grouped with incendiaries is the problem as is the 'superfluous' injury rule.



> The problem with viewing the use of WP munitions ... as violations of this prohibition is that use of such munitions for marking, illuminating, screening, and (in certain circumstances) incendiary weapons against enemy targets *has long been recognized as legitimate with full knowledge of its potential effects on the human body*. The prohibition against using a weapon in a manner that produced superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering might more directly apply if WP munitions were used for the specific purpose of killing or injuring enemy combatants.


----------



## 1feral1

Bo said:
			
		

> That's why I posted the 4th Geneva Convention to show that the IDF does in fact have an obligation to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction.



What about firing HE rockets into populated areas, or bombers with suicide vests entering shops? This has all gone on in the past.

VBIEDs?

Israel did not start this war, but they will finish it.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Bo said:
			
		

> ...
> ... the IDF does in fact have an obligation to avoid indiscriminate death and destruction.
> ...




I think the IDF has an obligation to avoid *intentionally* causing indiscriminate death or destruction. That prohibition is one of the reasons, I believe, the term "collateral damage" entered the lexicon. When a legitimate military target is attacked, using as much 'discrimination' as technology and the situation permit, and death and injury to innocent civilians, including women, children and 'protected' persons (like UN aid workers) the question must be asked: "Was all appropriate - for the situation - and available 'discrimination' used? If the answer is yes then the issue ought to be closed as the unavoidable consequences of battle. If one does not wish to close the issue then, it seems to me, one should ask: "Who put the innocent civilians in harm's way?" That person has a lot to answer for, to his gods if not to a war crimes tribunal.


----------



## Bo

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> What about firing HE rockets into populated areas, or bombers with suicide vests entering shops? This has all gone on in the past.
> 
> VBIEDs?



I'm not excusing Hamas's attacks on Israeli citizen's. Those are also war crimes.



			
				Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Israel did not start this war, but they will finish it.



Actually, Israel did start this war.



> But on June 19, 2008, Hamas and Israel commenced a six-month truce. Neither side complied perfectly. Israel refused to substantially ease the suffocating siege of Gaza imposed in June 2007. Hamas permitted sporadic rocket fire -- typically after Israel killed or seized Hamas members in the West Bank, where the truce did not apply. Either one or no Israelis were killed (reports differ) by rockets in the half year leading up to the current attack.
> 
> *Israel then broke the truce on Nov. 4*, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still no Israelis died. Israel cannot claim self-defense against this escalation, because it was provoked by Israel's own violation.



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123154826952369919.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

That was so slanted I'm amazed my screen stayed upright.

Listen, both sides suck huge and I really don't give a rats ass about any of them but this is what happen when you poke a bear with a stick....ask Georgia.


----------



## 1feral1

Bo said:
			
		

> I'm not excusing Hamas's attacks on Israeli citizen's. Those are also war crimes.
> 
> Actually, Israel did start this war.
> 
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123154826952369919.html?mod=googlenews_wsj



Says who? Look what source wote the article. It might be the WSJ, but came from an 'opinion' column.

Hence he is biased.

Bo, please do have a read.

Here is a blurb on your source. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2095

George Bisharat is an American of Palestinian descent and a Professor at Hastings Law School, who speaks frequently around California to peace groups and liberal Jewish groups and is featured at pro-Palestinian events. He is disarming. His tone is moderate and conciliatory, quite different from the bombast of the late Edward Said or of Hanan Ashrawi. He speaks with an academic objectivity in keeping with his impressive academic credentials. And he is polished. He avoids inflammatory assertions. Instead, he quotes Zionist and Israeli leaders, using fragments of their statements to make his case. He builds his argument by piling on facts. 

But Bisharat is not a moderate. He presents a wholly one-sided, simplistic view of the conflict, despite his academic pedigree. He recycles Arab propaganda and arguments that date from the 1930s, though he cloaks them in modern human rights jargon. And he calmly reiterates extreme Palestinian positions --powerful Zionists "stole Palestine" from helpless Palestinians; the Palestinian "right of return" is enshrined in law and morality; a one-state solution is the just and moral resolution to the conflict. He buttresses his arguments by citing Israel's "new historians." And, despite his posture of objectivity, he regularly stoops to emotion-laden examples and comparisons -- how Israelis "stole" his "ancestral" home in Jerusalem; how the Palestinians' plight resembles that of the Native Americans; and how Californians would feel if foreigners came, took over their land, and forced them at gunpoint, in the dead of night, to leave their homes and flee into the Nevada desert with only the clothes on their backs (this, he claims, is what happened to the Palestinians in 1948.

Bisharat's main focus is on the right of return. He rejects any peace plan that does not include it. He even objected to the liberal, failed, Geneva Accords because they did not call for a right of return. Bisharat's unique contribution to the Palestinian argument fits his deceptively conciliatory tone. He argues that Israel should apologize to the Palestinians and frequently entitles his talks "The Power of Apology and the Palestinian Right of Return," arguing that "A sincere Israeli apology would be a milestone toward reconciliation that no Palestinian could ignore."

But Bisharat's seemingly benign recommendation is insidious. It assumes that Zionists and then Israel committed all the wrongs in the conflict  and that Palestinians have simply been helpless, blameless victims.

Beleive what you wish Bo. The last bit in RED sums it up.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## MARS

Has anybody talking about indiscriminate death and destruction actually looked at the definition?

To wit:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/f6c8b9fee14a77fdc125641e0052b079

Art 51. - Protection of the civilian population

1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.

2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.

3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
(a) those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
(b) those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
(c) those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
(a) an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects;

and

(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
----------------------------
I am a naval officer, so I have no experience using WP.  However, I think the operative word in the Article is “attack”.  I don't see the words “indiscriminate death and destruction” anywhere, only “indiscriminate attacks”.  So, if you want to talk about that, then you have to define the use of WP as an attack.  Perhaps someone in green could enlighten me if it is used in an offensive role – I honestly have no idea.

And if you can define the use of WP as an attack, then you need to apply that to para 5(b), specifically whether it is deemed “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”.  

And someone called out Mr. Campbell on his choice of words, specifically “lollygagging”, well; I don't know where the civilians are supposed to go.  In all wars, certainly wars in built up areas, civilians have little place to go.  But my read of para 7 seems to indicate that the IDF doesn't necessarily have to refrain from engagement where they are present.

Perhaps I am confusing the issue or have missed some critical aspect of the arguments.  If so, apologies.  If not, can anyone clarify this for me? 

MARS


----------



## Shec

"The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations."    

So, who is the war criminal now?

The IDF which,  by the way, has a code of ethics:   

1.Devotion to the Mission
2.Responsibility
3.Reliability
4.Personal Example
5.Human Life
6.The Purity of Arms
7.Professionalism
8.Discipline
9.Loyalty
10.Worthiness to Represent the State of Israel
11.Comradeship

with Purity of Arms being defined as:
"The soldier will use his arms and his power to subdue the enemy in the necessary degree, and will restrain himself in order to prevent unnecessary harm to human life, limb, honor and property."

"The Purity of Arms of the IDF soldier is the restrained use he makes of his weapons and strength in the performance of his mission in the required degree only, without causing unnecessary harm to human life, limb, honor and property, of soldiers, of civilians, and especially the helpless, in times of war and during regular security operations, during periods of quiet and in time of peace."

And #5. "Human Life" :

"The soldier will protect human life to the utmost, out of awareness of its highest importance, and will only place himself or another at risk to the degree required to carry out the mission."

"The sanctity of life for the IDF soldier will be expressed in everything he does: in careful and meticulous planning, in considered training and in correct performance which correspond to the mission, the necessary level of danger, and the suitable level of caution, in a professional manner, and with the constant effort to keep loss of life to the minimum required by the mission."   This doesn't refer only to the lives of soldiers, but to any loss of life.

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/about/doctrine/ethics.htm.

Or, 

 Hamas who take cover in schools and in bunkers under hospitals?   I'd just love to see their code of ethics.


----------



## George Wallace

Bo said:
			
		

> YES
> 
> "Israel's violation of specific provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention
> 
> a) Humane treatment
> 
> Article 27: 'Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected *especially against all acts of violence* or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity"
> 
> 
> http://www.jfjfp.org/factsheets/geneva4.htm



I wouldn't rely on a biased Blog factsheet for this information, but rather go to the actual articles.  They would hold a lot more credibility.


For instance this point that your Blog site left out:



> Art. 4. Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.
> 
> Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.







For your info; the REAL Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.


----------



## Bo

Ok Wes, how's this source:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/1230/1230581467173.html


> From the point of view of protecting Israeli citizens, the ceasefire was a success. If the Israeli government had the protection of Israeli civilians as its first priority, it would have done its best to have the ceasefire continued indefinitely.
> 
> But it didn't. On the contrary, it broke the ceasefire by killing six Palestinians in Gaza on the night of November 4th, while the world was watching the election of Barack Obama.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> The former is at least one thing we can agree upon.
> 
> Now to the latter.  Sadly, the long term implication is the continuation of the on-going war that Hamas & Hezbollah's Mukawama Doctine, whether real or perceived, perpetuates with it's principles that include:
> 
> 1.   peace agreements are not an option because they require the recognition of Israel's right to exist; and,
> 2.   cease-fires are but temporary respites to replenish.
> 
> Does that reflect the Realpolitik from my side?  I think so.  What do you think?



Shec,

My apology for the delay in my response.

I believe that the geographic and demographic realities that Israel faces today have conspired together to do to Israel what the PLO, Hamas, Hizballah, et. al. couldn't. It appears that you have lived in Israel, so you'll understand better than most the realities to which I refer. Academics and semantics aside, every occupation eventually comes to an end. It ends either to the benefit or detriment of the occupier or occupied. The Israeli gov't has difficult decisions to make, and every day that passes, every day that the Israeli gov't and its people foolishly believe that it's possible to maintain the status quo, through Merkavas, or settlements, or F16's, or collective punishment, or dead Palestinian children, the balance of power shifts. Ignoring the sabre rattling coming from the Arab camps, I think that the single most difficult issue the Israeli gov't has to confront is settlements. 

Shec, what do you think?

Regards.


----------



## Bo

Shec, your argument is almost laughable. You're trying to defend the IDF's clear human rights violations by quoting their code of ethics?? Is this a joke?




> The UN's senior human rights body approved a resolution yesterday condemning the Israeli offensive for "massive violations of human rights". A senior UN source said the body's humanitarian agencies were compiling evidence of war crimes and passing it on to the "highest levels" to be used as seen fit.






> The Israeli military are accused of:
> 
> • Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
> 
> • Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
> 
> • *Holding Palestinian families as human shields;*
> 
> • Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
> 
> • Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.






> *Israel's most prominent human rights organisation, B'Tselem*, has written to the attorney general in Jerusalem, Meni Mazuz, asking him to investigate suspected crimes including how the military selects its targets and the killing of scores of policemen at a passing out parade.
> 
> "Many of the targets seem not to have been legitimate military targets as specified by international humanitarian law," said Sarit Michaeli of B'Tselem.
> 
> Rovera has also collected evidence that *the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields*. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.
> 
> "*It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now*," she said.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes


----------



## Shec

Tourza,

If you'll flip back to reply #282 you'll find a couple of links I posted which address the militarily defensive rationale for holding the high ground.  On this ground settlements are necessary, in fact consistent with the stockade and tower settlements held by the farmer-soldiers of Nahal of the early 20th century,  While this would apply to Golan the Arabs can have the all rest in their own state.


----------



## Shec

Bo said:
			
		

> Shec, your argument is almost laughable. You're trying to defend the IDF's clear human rights violations by quoting their code of ethics?? Is this a joke?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/13/gaza-israel-war-crimes



Actually it's your source, The Guardian,  a consistently anti-Israel paper, that's the joke.  And again, show me a Hamas code of ethics.


----------



## George Wallace

Bo

I find your use of less than credible sources interesting, but not very supportive of your points.  This is especially true when you ignore the actual documents ( Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
  ) that disprove some of your statements.


----------



## tourza

Shec said:
			
		

> Tourza,
> 
> If you'll flip back to reply #282 you'll find a couple of links I posted which address the militarily defensive rationale for holding the high ground.  On this ground settlements are necessary, in fact consistent with the stockade and tower settlements held by the farmer-soldiers of Nahal of the early 20th century,  While this would apply to Golan the Arabs can have the all rest in their own state.



Shec, 

So you are agreeing to the evacuation of all the settlements in the West Bank (and Israel keeps the Golan)? How's that going to go over with the settlers? How's that going to go over with the Syrians?

Regards.


----------



## tourza

tourza said:
			
		

> Shec,
> 
> My apology for the delay in my response.
> 
> I believe that the geographic and demographic realities that Israel faces today have conspired together to do to Israel what the PLO, Hamas, Hizballah, et. al. couldn't. It appears that you have lived in Israel, so you'll understand better than most the realities to which I refer. Academics and semantics aside, every occupation eventually comes to an end. It ends either to the benefit or detriment of the occupier or occupied. The Israeli gov't has difficult decisions to make, and every day that passes, every day that the Israeli gov't and its people foolishly believe that it's possible to maintain the status quo, through Merkavas, or settlements, or F16's, or collective punishment, or dead Palestinian children, the balance of power shifts. Ignoring the sabre rattling coming from the Arab camps, I think that the single most difficult issue the Israeli gov't has to confront is settlements.
> 
> Shec, what do you think?
> 
> Regards.



Shec,

I'd like your opinion on the main body of my post (the white elephant in the room, as it were), sans the settlements issue.

Regards.


----------



## Shec

You yourself said the settlement issue is the "most difficult" so why are you ducking it?    Furthermore, you have ducked any reponse to the Mukawama doctrine.  That is one twin iin the pair of white elephants in the room.  The other is Jerusalem.  And, other than the observation that occupations, like almost everything else in this world , come to an end & the assertion that Israelis' "foolishly" believe in the status quo you have ducked answering the questions posed to you in a substantive way.


----------



## Bo

George,

I find it interesting that when members on this forum cite less-than-credible sources to support Israel, not one moderator pipes up. Here are some sources that have been used thus far in this thread:

http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2008/12/29/the-battle-of-gaza-and-the-real-war/

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230456505080&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/12/palestinian-girl-loses-family-in.html#linksGatewayPundit

http://icga.blogspot.com/2008/04/rubin-against-holocaust-denial-against.html

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/the_Front/09/01/0301.htm


However, when I cite "Jews for Justice in Palestine" (find me a Palestinians-for-justice-in-Israel website lol), whose facts are accurate regarding Israel's breaches of the Geneva conventions (confirmed by Amnesty International, I can quote them to if you like) , I am told that my source is less than credible.

I am also surprised that members find the Guardian to be Anti-Israeli. Yes, it's left-leaning but the information it presents is accurate. Maybe it just seems anti-Israeli since it lists ALL the facts regarding the current conflict and most people find it impossible to accept that Israel could be *gasp* guilty of war crimes.


----------



## George Wallace

Bo said:
			
		

> George,
> 
> I find it interesting that when members on this forum cite less-than-credible sources to support Israel, not one moderator pipes up.



Bo

I am sorry that you would prefer to pass off a Blog site as the actual Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.


That smacks of lazy research at the very least, if not outright fraudulent posting of missinformation as fact.


----------



## Greymatters

Bo said:
			
		

> However, when I cite "Jews for Justice in Palestine" (find me a Palestinians-for-justice-in-Israel website lol), whose facts are accurate regarding Israel's breaches of the Geneva conventions (confirmed by Amnesty International, I can quote them to if you like) , I am told that my source is less than credible.



There are many orgs out there from whom quoting credible facts would be a good thing - Amnesty International isnt one of them as they are neither consistently impartial nor unbiased...


----------



## The Bread Guy

Bo said:
			
		

> Ok Wes, how's this source:
> 
> http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/1230/1230581467173.html



Hate to butt in, but I guess you missed that word just after the author's name:

*OPINION*

Is this a credible enough source for you:


> ....The rockets fired by Palestinian armed groups violate the international humanitarian law prohibition on indiscriminate attacks because they are highly inaccurate and cannot be directed at a specific military target....


or this:


> "Firing rockets into civilian areas with the intent to harm and terrorize Israelis has no justification whatsoever, regardless of Israel's actions in Gaza," said Joe Stork, deputy director of Human Rights Watch's Middle East and North Africa division. "


or do you only believe groups who only attack Israeli actions?


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Bo said:
			
		

> YES
> 
> "Israel's violation of specific provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention
> 
> a) Humane treatment
> 
> Article 27: 'Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected *especially against all acts of violence* or threats thereof and against insults and public curiosity"
> 
> 
> http://www.jfjfp.org/factsheets/geneva4.htm



Just a minor point but at the top of the webpage you quote from there is this little item:

"_Text posted 7th December 2004. Addition to section C posted on 22nd August 2005."_

In other words the info on the webpage concerns events that took place four years ago. *It does not deal with current events in Gaza!*!


----------



## Bo

George,

I will try my best to cite better sources regarding this matter. The fact that others cite blogs is no reason for me to be lazy and do the same.

Grey Matters,

Amnesty International is a non-governmental organization that is funded solely by fees and donations. Amnesty also won the Nobel prize in 1977. Their job is "to conduct research and generate action to prevent and end grave abuses of human rights and to demand justice for those whose rights have been violated." 

http://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/about-amnesty-international

I don't see how they are biased except towards those that have incurred human rights violations. Maybe you could fill me in?


milnews,

Human Rights Watch is a credible source and I don't deny that firing rockets indiscriminately at Israel is a war crime.

However, the point of my post was to show that Israel was the first to break the ceasefire. That's all. You'll see that almost every western media outlet omitted that fact. Surprisingly CNN recently started questioning who really started the fight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4


----------



## 1feral1

Bo,

I am still patiently awaiting a response to my post WRT the right winged Palestinian who claims Israel started this current war. I was polite in responding to your post, and I would appreciate a similar response.

Fair enough?

Wes


----------



## Shec

tourza said:
			
		

> Shec,
> 
> So you are agreeing to the evacuation of all the settlements in the West Bank (and Israel keeps the Golan)? How's that going to go over with the settlers? How's that going to go over with the Syrians?
> 
> Regards.



Tourza, my turn to apologize, I missed the above-quoted post and saw only the subsequent one.  

 Military strategy dictates that those settlements on the high ground of the described ridge line be retained.  As for any others Israel has stated time and time again it is willing to trade land for peace and demonstrated that when they pulled out of Gaza a couple of years back notwithstanding the objections of the settlers there who were evicted & relocated.  As Israel did the in rest of Sinai so that  peace with Egypt could be realized.

Syria used Golan to shell Israel in the years leading up to the 6 Day War. Furthermore in '73 they would have most certainly broke through had they retained Golan after '67.  I relate this to demonstrate the strategic imperative of holding high ground.  As far as how that  will go over with the Syrians,  I'm sure you're better positioned to get a read on that than I am.  I'm sure too that you know that Syrians are the most vicious of all the Arab enemies  Point of fact: any foreign-born IDF troop who fell into, or falls into,  Syrian hands was or is neither heard of nor seen again.


----------



## twistedcables

I can't believe that we now justify killing over 400 women and children by the IDF.  Seriously folks - just call a spade a spade.  If a criminal broke into a school and shot at police - would the police be justified in killing the children in it to get him?  IF you started a fight - and the opponent beat you up - your 
wife, kids, your dog --- would that be justified too?

Seriously folks - how many Israeli's have been killed or injured by those cheeseball rockets of Hamas? TWENTY at most?  Now you compare that to THOUSANDS injured, and easily 400 women and children killed and you STILL can't even say that is disproportionate?

God save us from this attitude of letting innocents just die! Amen


----------



## Bo

Sure Wes,

Here's the man's statement:



> Israel then broke the truce on Nov. 4, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still no Israelis died. Israel cannot claim self-defense against this escalation, because it was provoked by Israel's own violation.



These are the facts. He's not lying. Check the link I provided on the previous page. Even CNN confirmed that Israel is in question for breaking the ceasefire.

Now, as for the man's beliefs regarding Right Of Return, well that's another debate that will hijack this thread.

Also, the site you provided (Discover The Networks, A Guide to The Political Left) is clearly a right-winged, conservative website. The founder and current-editor-in-chief is David Horowitz, a Jewish-American conservative writer and activist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Horowitz_Freedom_Center


----------



## George Wallace

:

Bo      Bo      Bo

I can't believe that you just posted this:




			
				Bo said:
			
		

> Sure Wes,
> 
> Here's the man's statement:
> 
> These are the facts. He's not lying. Check the link I provided on the previous page. Even CNN confirmed that Israel is in question for breaking the ceasefire.
> 
> Now, as for the man's beliefs regarding Right Of Return, well that's another debate that will hijack this thread.
> 
> Also, the site you provided (Discover The Networks, A Guide to The Political Left) is clearly a right-winged, conservative website. The founder and current-editor-in-chief is David Horowitz, a Jewish-American conservative writer and activist.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Horowitz_Freedom_Center





You are using Wikipedia as a SOURCE to back up your statements?

Credibility man; credibility.

Did you check the history of that page?  Who made those statements?  What is their affiliation?  What legitimate sources did they list?


----------



## 1feral1

Twistedcables,

Any genuine civillian death is regretable. Innocent people die in EVERY war (children, women, the edlerly etc), sad, very sad, but a fact. However, not all civillians are innocent though. Just because you are wearing Levi's does not make you a non-combatant.

As a professional soldier amoung other professionals on this site, you will find none which say otherwise. Do not insult us. We are not a bunch of blood thirsty heathans as you seem to present us to be. Shame on you for making such a stupid assumption.

Now, define civillian? The bad guys these days don't wear uniforms, but carry wpns and eqpt. Take those away and what do you have? I am talking about military aged males, say 16-55, adn some maybe a bit younger. Females too have been know to be fighters for their cause, or aid in support roles. These cowardly 'fighter's have been known to deliberatly shield themselves with families and in built up areas where people live, using their homes as strong points and fortifiations for storing ordnance and other essential kit for fighting. Such is life, thats how these cowards do business all across the entire region.

Secondly, those rockets are NOT cheeseball rockets ( I have said this before, so before you make your political statement, how about having the courtesy to read previous poats). They are HE rockets, and up to over 3 metres long and 122mm in diameter, some longer and over 230mm in diameter. They inflict the most horrendous wounds on people, and kill more than mame. They pack quite a punch, and more than a HE artillery rd.

I endured many of these during my tour. Seen there results literally in the front of my face, LITERALLY, so be careful what you talk about.

So, stop the attitude! It is uncalled for, dn does nothing for your own credibility.


------------------------------

Bo, that is still a pi$$ weak source, and is valueless, as no matter what, that author's view is tainted, in his world the sky is purple and always will be, and the Jew is the enemy as far as he is concerned. Nothing will change his mind.

However, thanks for responding.

Regards,

OWDU

EDITed for spelling and clarity


----------



## Bo

George, I just used wikipedia to describe a website that Wes used. There's not much else out there. CNN and BBC don't exactly report on blogs like the one that Wes provided. I understand your point though.


----------



## George Wallace

twistedcables said:
			
		

> I can't believe that we now justify killing over 400 women and children by the IDF.  Seriously folks - just call a spade a spade.  If a criminal broke into a school and shot at police - would the police be justified in killing the children in it to get him?  IF you started a fight - and the opponent beat you up - your
> wife, kids, your dog --- would that be justified too?
> 
> Seriously folks - how many Israeli's have been killed or injured by those cheeseball rockets of Hamas? TWENTY at most?  Now you compare that to THOUSANDS injured, and easily 400 women and children killed and you STILL can't even say that is disproportionate?




I wouldn't say that we are justifying "killing over 400 women and children by the IDF".  I would think that we are trying not to be biased towards one side over the other.  In a war, if one side has poor marksmen and don't kill as many of their enemy, who have very good marksmen and kill many times more of them; we do not call it unjustified.  Your spade being a spade is too overly simplistic and not rationally looking at the situation.    

I really don't care when this all started or by whom the first stone was thrown.  I saw the Israelis, in good faith pull out of Gaza.  I saw them evict all the Israeli Settlers.  I saw the Palestinians go at each others throats, rather than create a peaceful society with their own Police Force that the Israeli Government allowed to be formed.  I saw Palestinians throw rocks, detonate bombs, fire rockets, and use UN Ambulances as APCs.  (See Reply # 152.)  Do I think the Israelis may have justification to cross the border?  Yes, I do think they have justification.

I also think that just because one side is better at aiming its weapons, there is no cause for concern.  There is, however, cause for concern when you see Palestinians breeding their children to be suicide bombers and martyrs, or using them as "Cover".


----------



## Bo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

Probably one of the best articles I've read to date regarding the current situation in Gaza. The author is Avi Shlaim, an Oxford professor who is of Israeli descent and served in the IDF. I hope everyone can agree that he is a credible source.

Here are some excerpts:



> I*n August 2005 a Likud government headed by Ariel Sharon staged a unilateral Israeli pullout from Gaza, withdrawing all 8,000 settlers and destroying the houses and farms they had left behind*. Hamas, the Islamic resistance movement, conducted an effective campaign to drive the Israelis out of Gaza. The withdrawal was a humiliation for the Israeli Defence Forces. To the world, Sharon presented the withdrawal from Gaza as a contribution to peace based on a two-state solution. *But in the year after, another 12,000 Israelis settled on the West Bank, further reducing the scope for an independent Palestinian state*. Land-grabbing and peace-making are simply incompatible. Israel had a choice and it chose land over peace.
> 
> The real purpose behind the move was to redraw unilaterally the borders of Greater Israel by incorporating the main settlement blocs on the West Bank to the state of Israel. Withdrawal from Gaza was thus not a prelude to a peace deal with the Palestinian Authority but a prelude to further Zionist expansion on the West Bank. It was a unilateral Israeli move undertaken in what was seen, mistakenly in my view, as an Israeli national interest. Anchored in a fundamental rejection of the Palestinian national identity, the withdrawal from Gaza was part of a long-term effort to deny the Palestinian people any independent political existence on their land.
> 
> *Israel's settlers were withdrawn but Israeli soldiers continued to control all access to the Gaza Strip by land, sea and air. Gaza was converted overnight into an open-air prison*. From this point on, the Israeli air force enjoyed unrestricted freedom to drop bombs, to make sonic booms by flying low and breaking the sound barrier, and to terrorise the hapless inhabitants of this prison.
> 
> Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet Israel has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy on the Arab side and has done a great deal to undermine it. Israel has a long history of secret collaboration with reactionary Arab regimes to suppress Palestinian nationalism. Despite all the handicaps, the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon. In January 2006, free and fair elections for the Legislative Council of the Palestinian Authority brought to power a Hamas-led government. Israel, however, refused to recognise the democratically elected government, claiming that Hamas is purely and simply a terrorist organisation.
> 
> America and the EU shamelessly joined Israel in ostracising and demonising the Hamas government and in trying to bring it down by withholding tax revenues and foreign aid. *A surreal situation thus developed with a significant part of the international community imposing economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor but against the oppressed*.
> 
> As so often in the tragic history of Palestine, the victims were blamed for their own misfortunes. Israel's propaganda machine persistently purveyed the notion that the Palestinians are terrorists, that they reject coexistence with the Jewish state, that their nationalism is little more than antisemitism, that Hamas is just a bunch of religious fanatics and that Islam is incompatible with democracy. But the simple truth is that the Palestinian people are a normal people with normal aspirations. They are no better but they are no worse than any other national group. What they aspire to, above all, is a piece of land to call their own on which to live in freedom and dignity.


----------



## Yrys

Well, 

I'll take the bite and try a shoot in the dark :

Mayhaps it is to proof to theirs lenders/supporters that they are
doing something against what may be seems by them like the
"Great Evil" . And to hell with the consequence for their compatriots,
because they're passionate about it ?


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Bo said:
			
		

> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine
> 
> Probably one of the best articles I've read to date regarding the current situation in Gaza. The author is Avi Shlaim, an Oxford professor who is of Israeli descent and served in the IDF. I hope everyone can agree that he is a credible source.
> 
> Here are some excerpts:



The problem is that back in 1947 the population of the area both Arab and Jewish was small enough to allow for 2 states to exist. With the population expansion on both sides, 2 states side by side and viable is highly unlikely. In 48 the Arabs gambled and lost. The world is going to have to choose either a Palestinian state or an Israeli one. Even a independent West bank will be highly dependent on both Jordon and Israel to survive and function. The world of course does not want to accept the reality of situation and the Arab states ensure the "refugees" have little options other than to remain as an open sore to ensure the situation does not fade from the headlines. Israel is a full functioning democracy with varied opinions and the ability to express them(An option not open to Palestinians thanks to their own kind) . Israel has given up huge tracts of land that it has won by it's own blood, do I blame them for trying to build a viable and sustainable nation for themselves, the answer is no. I also look around and count the number of Muslim and Arab states and compare them to Jewish states, that number says it all. The Arabs could give up land to make a Palestinian state (besides Jordon which is already one) I don't see them sacrificing anything.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_, is another _Associated Press_ SITREP from Gaza:
 -------------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090113.wgazamain14/BNStory/International/home

 Rockets from Lebanon hit Israel as UN urges ceasefire
*Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon renews call for 'immediate and durable' end to hostilities in Gaza*

IBRAHIM BARZAK AND AMY TEIBEL
Associated Press

January 14, 2009 at 8:17 AM EST

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Guerrillas in Lebanon rocketed northern Israel on Wednesday for the second time in a week, drawing Israeli artillery fire and threatening to drag the Jewish state into a second front as it battled Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The violence defied a new call from the U.N. chief to immediately end fighting in Gaza.

Israel showed no signs of slowing its bruising 19-day-old offensive against Gaza's Hamas rulers, striking some 60 targets in the strip bordering southern Israel. One airstrike hit an overcrowded cemetery, spreading body parts and rotting flesh over a wide area. The army said the airstrike targeted a weapons cache hidden near the graveyard.

The rocket fire in the north caused no injuries, but sent residents scurrying to bomb shelters. There was no immediate claim of responsibility. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed guerrilla group that fought a monthlong war with Israel in 2006, denied involvement in last week's attack, and speculation focused on small Palestinian groups.

Lebanese security officials said the Israeli army fired at least eight artillery shells on south Lebanon in response. The Israeli military said it targeted the source of fire, and that it regarded the Lebanese government and military responsible for preventing attacks on Israel. The government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora condemned the attack.

Israel repeatedly has said it does not seek renewed fighting with Lebanon, but is prepared for hostilities along the northern border. The Muslim world has expressed outrage over Israel's Gaza offensive, and in a new condemnation Wednesday, al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden urged Muslims to launch a holy war against Israel.

Iran's top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a religious opinion, or fatwa, declaring the purchase of any Israeli goods or trade with Israeli companies to be forbidden.

Israel launched the onslaught in Gaza on Dec. 27, seeking to punish the ruling Hamas militant group for years of rocket attacks on southern Israel. The offensive has killed more than 940 Palestinians, half of them civilians, according to Palestinian hospital officials. The toll included 11 Palestinians killed Wednesday, medical officials said.

Thirteen Israelis have also been killed since the offensive began, four by rocket fire from Gaza.

Desperately trying to end the fighting, U.N. secretary-general Ban Ki-moon opened a visit to the Mideast on Wednesday urging an immediate halt to the violence.

"My call is (for) an immediate end to violence in Gaza," he said in Cairo after meeting Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

"It is intolerable that civilians bear the brunt of this conflict," he said, adding that the "negotiations need to be intensified to provide arrangements and guarantees in order to sustain an endurable cease-fire and calm." Ban is scheduled to arrive in Israel on Thursday.

Palestinian rocket fire has dropped off dramatically since the offensive began. Twelve rockets were fired at Israel on Wednesday, down from as many as 80 a day early in the operation.

Israel is trying to keep up the pressure on Hamas to accept Israel's truce terms: A complete cessation of violence from Gaza and international guarantees of a halt in the smuggling of weapons into Gaza through the porous Egyptian border.

Hamas, which is backed by Iran, cannot hope to score a battlefield victory over the powerful Israeli military, but mere survival could earn it political capital in the Arab world as a symbol of resistance to the Jewish state. Lebanon's Hezbollah, another Iran-backed group, largely achieved that goal in its 2006 war with Israel.

Overnight, Israeli warplanes and helicopter gunships pounded a police court in Gaza City, rocket-launching sites, gunmen, weapons-production and storage facilities and about 35 weapons smuggling tunnels, the military said. Later in the day, witnesses in southern Gaza reported air strikes on the house of a rocket squad leader and a militant's car.

Aircraft also struck the Sheikh Radwan cemetery in Gaza City, destroying about 30 graves — some just recently dug — and scattering bits of flesh and body parts for yards (meters), residents said. The stench of scorched and rotting flesh hung over the area.

Maj. Avital Leibovich, a military spokeswoman, said the army targeted a weapons cache next to the cemetery and a nearby rocket-launching site. She said the heavy damage was the result of secondary explosions.

Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas of using mosques, schools and other civilian areas to stage attacks or store weapons.

Witnesses described a gruesome scene of strewn body parts and the stench of charred and rotting flesh.

"There was flesh on the roofs, there was small bits of intestines. My neighbor found a hand of a woman who died a long time ago, we put it all into a plastic bag," said resident Ahmad Abu Jarbou.

"One man who buried his cousin yesterday couldn't find the body at all."

In other fighting, artillery units fired shells that spread white smoke above the city center, witnesses said. Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of using phosphorous shells — a weapon that can burn anything it touches. The Israeli military has not confirmed reports that it has improperly used white phosphorous shells, saying only that it uses munitions is in accordance with international law.

The International Committee of the Red Cross urged Israel to exercise "extreme caution" in using the incendiary agent, which is used to illuminate targets at night or create a smoke screen for day attacks, said Peter Herby, the head of the organization's mines-arms unit. The ICRC said it had no evidence to suggest white phosphorous was being used improperly or illegally.

Fireballs and smoke plumes from Israeli bombing have become a common sight in the territory of 1.4 million people, who are trapped because Israel and Egypt have blockaded border crossings ever since the Islamic Hamas overran Gaza in June 2007.

Humanitarian concerns have increased amid the onslaught although some aid is getting through to Gaza during daily three-hour lulls Israel has allowed to let in supplies. A total of 111 truckloads of food and medical supplies were to pass through on Wednesday, the military said.

Hamas has said it would only observe a cease-fire if Israel were to withdraw from Gaza.

Israeli military officials have said talks in Cairo will determine whether Israel moves closer to a truce with Hamas or widens its offensive to send thousands of reservists into crowded, urban areas where casualties on both sides would likely mount.

Israel had planned to send its lead negotiator, Amos Gilad, to Cairo on Thursday, but his trip was postponed, defense officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the date of his departure has not been set.
-------------------------

With regard to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s plea for a crease fire: the civilian  casualties are anything but _intolerable_.

Israel _tolerates_ them because it is confident that it can prove to itself – as it likely be called upon to do, in its own courts – that it is taking all reasonable measures to avoid attacking civilians. Israel insists that it is not attacking civilians at all; it is, it asserts, attacking legitimate military targets that are, unfortunately, collocated with civilians and civilian facilities.

The Arabs not only _tolerate_ the civilian casualties they *welcome*, indeed *celebrate* each one because each is an invaluable tool in the propaganda war – being waged by PR firms in Athens, Beirut, Copenhagen, Damascus, London, New York, Paris, Rome, Sydney, Toronto and Washington and everywhere in between, and being won, decisively, by the Arabs.


----------



## twistedcables

"Do not insult us. We are not a bunch of blood thirsty heathans as you seem to present us to be. Shame on you for making such a stupid assumption."

HOW did you make the leap to bloodthirsty heathens?  I never implied that at all and just because you don't like the reality of what I said, there is no need to label it a "stupid assumption".

I have read all the posts and the overwhelming majority can't even seem to state the obvious: as of a few minutes ago, the Israeli death toll was TEN. The Pal's 1 THOUSAND.  There have been over 500 (as of a few minutes ago) women and children killed.  Perhaps instead of blindly supporting Israel, you are better off maintaining moral high ground by acknowledging what MEDICAL sources (from NORWAC) have observed in the hospitals: possible use of phosphorous weapons etc.  All you have to say is that it is WRONG - which you seem unable to do.  

As for your standard "human shield" argument - the Gaza strip is a REFUGEE centre - civilians are packed into small areas, left without proper food, water, fuel since the blockade YEARS ago - it seems you are unable to look past the headlines.  There is NOWHERE for those people to go.

As for the Hamas rockets - the point I am making is in COMPARISON to Israeli weapons --- I hope you are not trying to say there is even a NEAR similarity, as if to suggest this is a proportional response.


----------



## tourza

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> Hey BO!
> 
> I've read your posts. Not impressed.
> 
> You think Amnesty International is unbiased? Get real. Can you tell me who provides their funding? And why do they not call Saudi Arabia, Syria etc on human rights violations? Why do they only target the US, Canada or Great Britain?




Sir,

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/syria

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/saudi-arabia

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/lebanon

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/egypt

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/jordan

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran


From the AI - USA web site:

*Who finances Amnesty International's work?*

Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. It does not support or oppose any government or political system, nor does it necessarily support the views of the victims whose rights it seeks to protect. To ensure its independence, it does not seek or accept money from governments or political parties for its work in documenting and campaigning against human rights abuses. Its funding depends on the contributions of its worldwide membership and fundraising activities.

Amnesty International is a democratic, self governing movement. It answers only to its own worldwide membership. All policy decisions are taken by elected bodies. Major policy decisions are taken by an International Council made up of representatives from all the countries where Amnesty International members are organized into groups and national sections. They elect an International Executive Committee of volunteers which carries out their decisions and appoints the movement's Secretary General, who is also head of the International Secretariat, the professional heart of Amnesty International.


I'm a member of AI (always made for a great conversation starter in the officers' mess). If you have any further questions, please feel free to PM me.

Regards.


----------



## a_majoor

Canada stands tall:

http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/569872



> *Canada votes alone for Israel  TheStar.com - Canada - Canada votes alone for Israel*
> We're the only one of 47 nations on UN rights panel to refuse to condemn military offensive in Gaza
> January 13, 2009
> Bruce Campion-Smith
> Les Whittington
> OTTAWA BUREAU
> 
> OTTAWA–Canada stood alone before a United Nations human rights council yesterday, the only one among 47 nations to oppose a motion condemning the Israeli military offensive in Gaza.
> 
> The vote before the Geneva-based body shows the Stephen Harper government has abandoned a more even-handed approach to the Middle East in favour of unalloyed support of Israel, according to some long-time observers.
> 
> Thirty-three countries voted for the strongly worded motion, which called for an investigation into "grave" human rights violations by Israeli forces, while 13 nations, mostly European, abstained. (_interpolation: where is the call for investigations into the "grave" human rights violations of using civilians as human shields, appropriating ambulances to transport armed men and equipment, using protected places as firing points and arms dumps, firing unguided weapons at civilian targets etc?_)
> 
> The United States, regarded as Israel's greatest ally, is not a member of the council.
> 
> Marius Grinius, Canada's representative on the council, said the language of the motion, which accused Israel of sparking a humanitarian crisis, was "unnecessary, unhelpful and inflammatory."
> 
> He said the text failed to "clearly recognize" that Hamas rocket attacks on Israel triggered the crisis.
> 
> But observers say Ottawa's unwavering support of Israel in the current conflict – highlighted by yesterday's vote – is a break from more neutral positions of the past.
> 
> Paul Heinbecker, a former Canadian ambassador to the UN, said that, although Canada was always considered "a friend of Israel," until recently Ottawa's representatives at the UN voted on Middle East issues on the basis of "principle" and "fair-mindedness."
> 
> Of Canada's current approach, he said, "It's not a middle-of-the-road position. It is a frankly supportive position of Israel."
> 
> He said internationally Canada is increasingly seen as being on the American-Israeli side on these issues. But assessing yesterday's vote at the UN's human rights council, Heinbecker pointed out "the resolution is unbalanced" in its repeated condemnations of Israel.
> 
> Along with Arab states, countries backing the resolution included Russia, China and Brazil. Among those abstaining were Britain, France, Japan and South Korea.
> 
> The council itself has faced accusations it is biased against Israel. The U.S., arguing the council's credibility has been undermined, has declined to be a member.
> 
> However, in this conflict, Heinbecker said the Canadian government has "not tried itself to introduce a lot of balance into its position" on the fighting in Gaza.
> 
> "There are now 900-plus (Palestinian) deaths, a large number of whom are civilian, who are the predictable victims of a military campaign in a densely populated space where the people can't flee because the borders are closed," he said. Thirteen Israelis have been killed.
> 
> Given Canada's past actions to expand protection of civilians in conflict zones, he would have expected Ottawa to put more stress on the "urgent" need for a ceasefire and a demand that both sides in Gaza respect international protections for non-combatants, Heinbecker said.
> 
> Harper made clear his strong support for Israel just months after he took office in 2006. That summer, he defended Israel's military incursion into Lebanon with a controversial comment that it was a "measured" response.
> 
> NDP MP Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre) criticized Ottawa's "muted" reaction to this latest offensive. He said Canada should be taking a "robust" role to deliver aid to civilians and monitor any ceasefire.
> 
> Instead, he said Canada is sitting on the "sideline," suggesting a pro-Israel viewpoint by the Conservative government was the reason for lack of outcry from Ottawa.
> 
> The Canadian Islamic Congress yesterday called on the federal government to act as a peace broker and "lead the world as it used to.
> 
> "It's not time that we speak on who is right and who is wrong. I think it is time that innocent people in Gaza and Israel be protected," Zijad Delic, the congress's national executive director of the congress said.
> 
> "I worry that Canada did not take a fair approach," he said.
> 
> The government's vote won praise from B'nai Brith Canada, which commended Harper for Ottawa's "principled stand."
> 
> Frank Dimant, the group's executive vice-president, called the motion "perverse" for failing to mention Hamas and its "pivotal" role in provoking the conflict.
> 
> Last night, the foreign affairs department said Canada had opposed a "deeply flawed" resolution.
> 
> *"The resolution wholly failed to acknowledge Hamas's continual rocket attacks on Israel that brought about the current crisis, and ignored a state's legitimate right to self-defence,"* a spokesperson said in an email.
> 
> *"Canada remains deeply concerned about the ongoing hostilities ... and encourages all diplomatic efforts to achieve an immediate, sustainable and durable ceasefire. But first and foremost, Hamas's rocket attacks must stop so that a ceasefire can be realized."*


----------



## Rifleman62

Years and years ago, I railed against P.E. Trudeau. I detested him and his whole bag of tricks from ‘fuddle duddle”, pirouetting behind the Queens back, the spending, the finger to Canadian farmers, etc and multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism to me was immigrate to Canada, bring all your hates and prejudices, and taxpayers will subsidize it.
No melting pot for Canada.

Well, I believe we are paying now for that policy. Great Britain is certainly paying for it.

Are some of the posts here by purported members of the Canadian Forces the future of e.g. the Canadian Forces, Canadian Police services? As a CF member or a policeperson, are you going to have to keep looking behind your back?  Will someone with you not believe in the enforcement of the government’s policy/law because that is not the way they were brought up in their multicultural home?


----------



## Kilo_302

> Well, since Tourza appears to be unable (unwilling?) to answer this simple question for me, could one of the other anti-Israel posters take a shot at it?  Bo?  Kilo?  Gee, where is Tamouh when you need him?



I am not "anti-Israel", I am anti-Israeli GOVERNMENT POLICY in this regard. One does not have to be anti-Semitic (a term that refers to Semitic tribes, including Arabs anyways) or believe that Israel does not have a right to exist to question a policy that has killed hundreds of innocent civilians. If I were to criticize UK or Chinese policy would that make me anti-British or anti-Chinese? Of course not. The fact that critics of Israeli policy often receive such a harsh reaction suggests to me that there is indeed a reason to be critical in the first place. If you have read some of my earlier posts, I am not beyond accepting that Hamas would not see an Israeli over-reaction as a bad thing. We are talking politics here, and politics is an incredibly cynical pursuit. But as you say, even if Hamas knew that it's actions might result in a "predictable reaction," maybe the Israeli government should be aware of this fact? It then follows that Israel would want to avoid a PR victory for Hamas by NOT killing hundreds of civilians.

Here is a link that has been posted before, but you may have missed it.  It explains that the Israeli government's choice of the timing of the offensive is quite unrelated to the rocket attacks.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine


----------



## 1feral1

twistedcables said:
			
		

> "Do not insult us. We are not a bunch of blood thirsty heathans as you seem to present us to be. Shame on you for making such a stupid assumption."
> 
> HOW did you make the leap to bloodthirsty heathens?  I never implied that at all and just because you don't like the reality of what I said, there is no need to label it a "stupid assumption".
> 
> I have read all the posts and the overwhelming majority can't even seem to state the obvious: as of a few minutes ago, the Israeli death toll was TEN. The Pal's 1 THOUSAND.  There have been over 500 (as of a few minutes ago) women and children killed.  Perhaps instead of blindly supporting Israel, you are better off maintaining moral high ground by acknowledging what MEDICAL sources (from NORWAC) have observed in the hospitals: possible use of phosphorous weapons etc.  All you have to say is that it is WRONG - which you seem unable to do.
> 
> As for your standard "human shield" argument - the Gaza strip is a REFUGEE centre - civilians are packed into small areas, left without proper food, water, fuel since the blockade YEARS ago - it seems you are unable to look past the headlines.  There is NOWHERE for those people to go.
> 
> As for the Hamas rockets - the point I am making is in COMPARISON to Israeli weapons --- I hope you are not trying to say there is even a NEAR similarity, as if to suggest this is a proportional response.



Twistesdcables,

With your tone and attitude, that drew up my conclusions, and hence I responded with my reply as clearly as I could. So no silly assumptions from me, as I act on your words, the subject matter and politcal message your posts carry.

This is a war to destroy an active terrorist group who has constantly attacked Israel, Hamas wants only to see Israel simply to be non-existant.

This war should be continued to be prosicuted until Hamas is wiped out, setting an example by force. Strangle Hamas in any way

As for casualties, these would all cease if Hamas stopped fighting, and Hamas is to blame for every Palestinian 'innocent' death. In short no rockets fired would mean that 1000+ people would be alive right now. Half of the entire body count innocent women and children? I view this as pure enemy propaganda, the majority killed have been enemy combatants. However that said, I am sure there has been many dozens of genuine innocent people killed, again a fact of war.

Israel is ridding the world of vermin, sadly the innocent get caught up in any war. We know the tactics of the enemy. Israel does all it can do to prevent innocent casualties. You just cannot seem to fathom the reality of the situation at hand.

Hamas is fighting back on the ground, and I am sure when they do, its often with great tenacity and defiance, as they are finatics. There is more going on than we will know due to an overall solid media blackout. 

To give you a brief example during my time in Baghdad, the city lost 16,476 citizens (noted from my deployment diary this total was brought up from our INT boys not long before we left, and these are just the reported cases) in the sectarian violence from Sep 06 - Mar 07, so I know first hand about mindless violence and trauma (it surrounded me for 207 long days), even spending time at 28 CSH, seeing the wounded, and the choppers coming and going all the time.

As for the ME overall, I know current affairs well, I am 49 yrs old, and lived through times which many have only read or seen video of, plus the fact that I have been to five islamic countries, one of them for 7 months alone.

At times I find it hard to fathom some of the stuff we did. Ever pointed a loaded assault rifle at a 12 yr old with the safety off? I have, numerous times. I guess maybe to actually understand the nature of the beast, you got to ber put between a rock and a hard place, not just read something electronically in a news article as you have your tea and bickies.  

As for the 155 WP rds in this conflict, I support its use, along with the other natures. WP has many uses, some have been addressed on here. I look at it this way, if covering Smk saves one soldiers life, its worth it. If a WP rd can mark an enemy strongpoint, its worth it. The IDF is not using it willy nilly as a terror weapon. Perhaps if you had any military service, you could comprehend what the uses for specific ordnance are for, seeing things from a tactical prospective instead of the way you are looking at it.

Israel is doing nothing wrong in this war. How else can anything be done? We can't win with being kind to cancer, can we. What do you suggest Israel do?

One thing we can agree on is we have different opinions. I see things from the military side, and you see it from a political side tainted with emotions.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

*Alright folks, I just spent 2 hours deleting crap from this thread.

If you lost a post, too bad, I lost a few also.

I think its fair to say that no one here is going to be convinced that they are on the wrong side of this dispute because of posts on an internet website. I doubly think that insulting those on the other side of the argument while on an internet forum will just convince one side that they hold the moral high ground so, just because if it causes me more work I will bin this whole thing later today, lets keep it civil.*

If you are here just to blow off steam may I suggest you find an outlaw biker and kick him in the shins.......


----------



## Greymatters

twistedcables said:
			
		

> As for your standard "human shield" argument - the Gaza strip is a REFUGEE centre - civilians are packed into small areas, left without proper food, water, fuel since the blockade YEARS ago - it seems you are unable to look past the headlines.  There is NOWHERE for those people to go.



Focusing just on the points in your statement, I will comment on the presumed innocence of persons in the Gaza strip.  

I would point out that while the Gaza strip is an acknowledged refugee center, it is also an acknowledged center for regional terrorist and extremist activity, and a node for a variety of illegal and black market activities.  

You may also have noticed that there are a number of persons living there with dual citizenships related to Canada.  Im sure there are significant numbers of others with dual citizenships in other countries.  Many of these people do have a place to go, but choose not to, and it is a stretch of credibility to suggest that they are all living there oblivious to the activities of the many violent groups that have resided in Gaza for the the last few decades.  Especially since these groups are fond of holding many commemorative parades with members wearing paramilitary uniforms with suicide vests and the like.  These are the same people who stood by while Hamas, a globally known terrorist group, was elected  to power in 2005 and without a doubt many of them are directly involved in supporting that group's activities.   

Reference your points about refugees lacking food, water and fuel, this is because the local government makes no effort to support them, a common practice in many countries around the world outside of Europe and North America.  Which is very odd considering how much money is donated and/or granted to this region by other countries.  Also very odd considering the same local government leaders are somehow managing to squirrel away millions of dollars in skimmed funds, but cant seem to provide the camps/refugees with the means to improve their livelihood.  Also of note, based on known terrorist, extremist, and criminal modus operandi, many of the camps are deliberately kept in operation as a cover for illegal and terrorist activities.  This is part of what they dont tell you in the evening news.  

In summary, my points aren't targetted at whether Israel is right or wrong, but makes the point that the entire Gaza population is not as innocent as they claim to be in this situation.


----------



## zipperhead_cop

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Okay Tourza, help me out with one thing (I agree with the previous comment that you seem reasonable and educated).  I agree that both sides have behaved poorly over the years, and at this point there is really no reason to get into any of that.  Something has to change and the violence needs to stop.
> So what purpose does it serve to shoot rockets into Israel? Even if they want a shooting war, why the rockets.  There are heaps of sabotage/terrorist acts that could be carried out against the IDF in Israel if they really wanted to fight a military target.  And we all know the rockets they shoot can't be aimed worth a damn, so it becomes a completely random act directed at a civilian population.  What is the point? Other than to provoke Israel into a predictable reaction what can possibly be served by mindlessly sending ordinance into a civilian area?



Albeit the thread got cleaned up, I am hoping one of our friends can answer my question.  I am legitimately interested in the Israel condemners/pro-Hamas angle on this.


----------



## Greymatters

I think that the question being asked required an answer that explains their motivation.  Unfortunately, unless you actually get one of their active members to explain it all (and somehow prove the explanation to be true and credible) you can never truely be satisfied by the answer. 

From an analysis point of view, launching of rockets into Israeli terrirory (regardless of results) has the following appealing characteristics:

- Let's them look like they are actually doing something in their stand against Israel
- Let's them feel like they are actually doing something in their stand against Israel
- Comparatively easy-to-make weapons and delivery systems
- Can be hidden from aerial observation during production
- Comparatively easy to transport and setup weapons and delivery systems
- In manpower terms, easier to replace rocket weapons than it is to recruit and task loyal troops who would be lost in frontal/suicide attacks
- Require limited training for a fire-and-forget weapon system
- Requires limited technology for a manual aiming delivery system
- Very difficult to prove who specifically launched the weapons unless you actually capture someone in the act
- Constant nuisance factor is a thorn in Israeli security efforts
- Constant threat of future damage/injury, even if minor, is a psychological blow to Israeli population's confidence/sense of superiority
- Inability to stop their use is portrayed as a worldwide demonstration of Israeli ineffectiveness, thus lowering Israeli morale but increasing Palestinian morale.
- Weapon effects are minor enough that severe reprisals are hard to jusitfy
- Constant visible actions incite popular support and continued influx of recruits and money for operations. 

There are likely a few more that I havent thought of off-hand, but that should cover most of them...


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ is another SITREP:
-------------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090115.wgaza0115/BNStory/International/home

 United Nations chief condemns Israeli shelling of UN compound

Associated Press

January 15, 2009 at 6:21 AM EST

JERUSALEM — The United Nations chief says he has expressed "strong protest and outrage" to Israel over the shelling of a UN compound in Gaza City.

Ban Ki-moon is demanding an investigation into Thursday's shelling.

He says Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak has told him it was a "grave mistake."

Israeli shells damaged the international organization's headquarters in Gaza City, according to witnesses and UN officials.

UN spokesman Chris Gunness says at least three people were wounded.

The compound has been serving as a shelter for hundreds of people fleeing Israel's devastating offensive in Gaza. The entire area was engulfed in smoke and it's not clear whether anyone is still inside the compound.

The compound includes the headquarters of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, a school and other offices. Mr. Gunness says large amounts of aid supplies, as well as fuel trucks, could soon be destroyed.

The Israeli army had no immediate comment on Thursday's incident.

Earlier on Thursday, Israeli tanks shelled downtown Gaza City and ground troops thrust deep into a crowded neighbourhood for the first time, sending terrified residents fleeing for cover and increasing pressure on Hamas rulers to accept a proposed ceasefire to end Israel's devastating offensive.

The Israeli military would not discuss its operations and it was not clear whether the intensified assault on Gaza City signalled a new phase in the three-week-old Israeli campaign that Gaza health officials say has already killed more than 1,000 Palestinians. Thirteen Israelis have been killed since the offensive began, according to the military.

Israel has balked at all-out urban warfare in the narrow alleyways of Gaza's big cities, where Hamas militants are more familiar with the lay of the land and Israeli casualties would be liable to spiral. But Palestinian witnesses said Israeli tanks fired shells at least three high-rise buildings in the downtown area as ground troops advanced into a crowded residential area on the outskirts of the city.

Israel launched the offensive on Dec. 27 in an effort to stop militant rocket fire from Gaza that has terrorized hundreds of thousands of Israelis. It says it will press ahead until it receives guarantees of a complete halt to rocket fire and an end to weapons smuggling into Gaza from neighbouring Egypt.

Rocket fire has fallen off dramatically but not ceased, and on Thursday the military reported 14 firings.

Thousands of Tel Hawwa residents fled their homes Thursday, many clad only in their pyjamas, and some wheeling elderly parents in wheelchairs, one of them with an oxygen tank. Others stopped journalists' armoured cars and ambulances pleading for someone to take them to a UN compound or to relatives' homes.

The crackle and boom of explosions from machine gun fire, tank shells and missiles split the air, already clouded with plumes of white and black smoke from Israeli gunfire. Tanks and bulldozers rolled into a neighbourhood park, apparently seizing it as a kind of command centre, witnesses said.

Masked gunmen ran toward the areas under fire carrying bags containing unidentified objects.

Rasha Hassam, a 25-year-old engineer, ran out of her apartment building carrying her screaming, crying, 6-year-old daughter, Dunia.

"God help us, God help us, where can we flee?" she cried. "All I want is to get my poor child away from here. We want to survive."

Thousands of others were trapped in Tel Hawwa's high-rise buildings by the fire, too afraid to even attempt to flee.

Israeli aircraft struck some 70 targets overnight, including weapons positions, rocket squads and a mosque in southern Gaza that the military said served as an arsenal. One target was the Islamic University in Gaza City, a Hamas stronghold.

Clouds of white smoke covered the eastern section of the city while a pillar of black smoke towered over the western portion following air, tank and naval fire that set houses and farmlands ablaze.

Human rights groups have accused Israel of unlawfully using white phosphorous shells against populated areas. The weapon can burn anything it touches and is used to illuminate targets at night or create a smoke screen for day attacks.

The Israeli military has said only that it uses munitions in accordance with international law. The International Committee for the Red Cross has said it has no evidence that Israel has improperly used the shells.

Mr. Ban launched a weeklong trip to the region on Wednesday, hoping his heft will help to pursue the case for a truce a week after the UN Security Council passed a ceasefire resolution.

Mr. Ban will also meet with Palestinian leaders in the West Bank, where Western-backed president Mahmoud Abbas governs. He will not visit Gaza, which has been ruled by Hamas since it expelled forces loyal to Mr. Abbas in June, 2007. The international community does not recognize Hamas' government.

In a sign of progress, Israel's chief negotiator, Amos Gilad, planned to fly to Egypt on Thursday to present Israel's stance at ceasefire talks, a senior defence official said. Mr. Gilad had put off the trip in recent days, saying the time was not yet right.

Israel also sent a senior diplomat to Washington to discuss international guarantees that Hamas will not rearm — a key Israeli demand.

World pressure on Israel to halt its offensive has increased because hundreds of civilians have been killed in the relentless pounding that has reduced landmarks, apartment buildings and some mosques to rubble.

The war has killed more than 1,000 Palestinians, about half of them civilians, including 300 children and teenagers, said Dr. Moaiya Hassanain of the Gaza Health Ministry. More than 4,500 Palestinians have been wounded, medical officials said.
-------------------------

Israeli Prime Minister Omert has, previously, set down two conditions for ending this crisis:

1.	Stop the influx of arms through the Gaza<>Egypt tunnels near Rafah;

2.	Stop the rocket attacks.

The fact that 14 rockets were fired from Gaza yesterday indicates that he still has a way to go.


----------



## Edward Campbell

And, see this for another point of view - one which suggests that Israel<>Palestine is not the main flash point in the Middle East.


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Could an international _peacekeeping_ force work in Gaza (and maybe in the West Bank, too)?
> 
> Yes, but:
> 
> •	To be broadly acceptable it probably must be under the ‘direction’ of the UNSC;
> 
> •	To be acceptable to the Muslims it must, probably, have some Muslim contingents – from, say, Malaysia and Turkey – and no direct US participation;
> 
> •	To be acceptable to the Israelis it must have a large, strong, *dominant* Western component based on, say, Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Netherland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and the United Kingdom.
> 
> I think, also, that Russia and America need some sort of _remote supervisory_ role (beyond their UNSC membership) in order to reassure both the Arabs and the Israelis but I’m not sure how that might work – possibly the mission’s _political managers_ could be drawn from America, China and Russia.
> 
> I would suggest that, initially, command and the C2 system would have to come from the ABC countries (Australia, Britain and Canada) and intelligence would have to be fed from Israel and then _filtered_ through the USA to the ABC organization and then into the UN Force HQ. Later, after a coherent ‘system’ is in place and working, command can rotate amongst troop contributing nations.
> 
> I would *guess*, based on my memories of the geography, that four _brigades_ would be needed:
> 
> 1.	Gaza City – a motorized and dismounted force;
> 
> 2.	Central Area/Salaheddin Road/Netzarim – a motorized and (light) armoured force;
> 
> 3.	Rafah/Khan Yunis – a motorized and dismounted ; and
> 
> 4.	Mobile/Reserve – rapid reaction air mobile and (light) armoured forces .
> 
> Additionally, a fairly robust flotilla of fast naval vessels will be needed as will extensive air assets: aircraft, UAVs, etc.
> 
> Let’s say, just for the sake of argument, 10± battle groups (2 X Turkey, 1 X Malayasia, 1 X Germany, 1 X Italy, 1 X UK, 1 X Europe (Less Germany, Italy and UK), 1 X Australia/Canada/New Zealand, 1 X Japan, 1 X Korea) plus supporting troops; 10± X warships and an ‘allied’ air wing.
> 
> Could the UN cobble something like that together? Maybe.
> 
> Would it work? Well, as Bill Clinton might have said, it all depends on what you mean by ‘work?’
> 
> What’s the aim? If Lew MacKenzie is right – and I think he’s close – the sole aim of the force is to prevent attacks on Israel; nothing else. That will, of course, deprive Israel of any reason to attack Gaza. Making Gaza ‘work’ is a whole other issue.
> 
> How long? How does forever sound? Hamas _et al_ are not going away and they will not change their aims and objectives so they will find other ways to attack Israel – probably by using longer range rockets fired from other Middle Eastern bases and/or by killing Jews in Australia, Europe and North America. For practical purposes I would say that two human generations (35 to 50 years) ought to do it – think Cyprus.



Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_, is a thoughtful letter on a _potential_ role for Canada in some future UN mission in Gaza:
-------------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/letters/peacemakers+solution+Gaza/1178301/story.html

 We can be peacemakers in UN solution for Gaza



THE OTTAWA CITIZEN

JANUARY 15, 2009


Re: Canada supports 'durable' ceasefire: Harper, Jan. 10.

For weeks now Canadians and people around the world have witnessed the tragic mix of politics, fanatical ideologies, hatred, fear and war resulting in death and destruction.

It is easy to play the blame game, but it is more challenging to keep the voice of reason and spirit of peace alive at a time when 1.5 Million Palestinians in Gaza and 300,000 Israelis are living in fear, dying, or facing death due to human failings and political agendas of their leaderships, while the rest of the world stands still, agonizing over the carnage of the innocent.

This is a violent fight between two rights: On one hand is the right of Palestinians for freedom to live in a Palestinian state. On the other, the undeniable right of Israelis to live free from the fear of rockets and suicide bombings. During the last 60 years neither Israel could be eliminated nor the Palestinians be forced to accept the continuation of occupation, collective punishment, and unjust peace. This war will invoke a cycle of fear, hatred and violence in the next generations when hope of peace and dialogue was just taking root.

There is no doubt now, on their own, the Palestinians and Israelis cannot resolve this conflict. The Palestinian leadership has lost all credibility and respect. It is time for Palestinians to get rid of their tormentors -- their own leadership and the Israeli occupation.

To ensure the security of the Palestinians, those in the West Bank, Gaza and on refugee status in the Arab countries, should be made the wards of the United Nations with the UN taking over their direct overall governance. There is a wide secular, educated Palestinian intelligentsia in the diaspora, who can provide the management of their institutions on the ground.

Canada can provide, as a peacemaker, military and political leadership under United Nations mandate. Former foreign minister, Lloyd Axworthy, and Gen. John de Chastelaine, Canada's former chief of the defence staff, come to mind. They both understand the conflict and are well respected by both sides.

Canada has the credibility and the ability of leading such a critical and Herculean task. This short-term solution will allow for peace to prevail in the region, until a political solution is found to permanently settle the Palestinian-Israeli problem peacefully.

_*Yasmeen S. Loubani*_
,Ottawa

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
-------------------------


I suspect that Ms. Loubani expresses a view that is, broadly, mainstream – even if it has some pro-Palestinian ‘markers’ (_ occupation, collective punishment, and unjust peace_, etc).

A UN trusteeship over all refuges is a non starter – that would deprive too many Arab leaders of too many wonderful _’victims’_ – third generation refugees struggling in dark, dirty refugee camps – victims of the hated Zionists. Plus the UN has no hope of assembling the resources such a task would require.

But: a UN _trusteeship_ in Gaza? Maybe.

I can pretty well guarantee that, in world capital from Algiers, Brussels and Canberra through to Washington, Yaounde and Zagreb, legions of bureaucrats, diplomats and military officers are telling their political leaders that such a mission is a fool’s errand, but still the *hope* lingers and hope can be a powerful political force.


----------



## OldSolduer

First of all I would like to apologize for my rants. I fired outside my arcs and was out of line.

Has anyone talked to Hamas to see how they'd like to see the Gaza Strip under UN control?

I can predict the outcome of the Gaza strip under UN control.


----------



## CougarKing

_10 January: Israeli artillery fires into northern Gaza. Photograph: Jerry Lampen/Reuters_






_Israeli soldiers prepare their tanks at their position on the Israeli side of the Israel-Gaza border. Photograph: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images_






_ Israeli soldiers link arms and cheer before their unit rolls on towards the Gaza Strip
Photograph: Menahem Kahana/AFP/Getty Images_






_An Israeli soldier prepares a machine gun on a tank. Photograph: Jim Hollander/EPA_






_ Smoke above the city after an Israeli air strike. Photograph: Yoav Lemmer/AFP/Getty Images_






_An Israeli missile strike in the east of Gaza City. Photograph: Mohammed Saber/EPA_






_A ball of fire after an Israeli air strike in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah
Photograph: Said Khatib/AFP/Getty Images_






_ Israeli tanks fire into Gaza. Photograph: Olivier Hoslet/EPA_


----------



## Bo

Interesting article by Uri Avnery regarding media bias and propaganda related to the current crisis. Here's an excerpt:



> Nearly 70 ago, in the course of World War II, a heinous crime was committed in the city of Leningrad. For more than 1000 days, a gang of extremists called “the Red Army” held the millions of the town’s inhabitants hostage and provoked retaliation from the German Wehrmacht from inside the population centres. The Germans had no alternative but to bomb and shell the population and to impose a total blockade, which caused the death of hundreds of thousands.
> 
> Some time before that, a similar crime was committed in England. The Churchill gang hid among the population of London, misusing the millions of citizens as a human shield. The Germans were compelled to send their Luftwaffe and reluctantly reduce the city to ruins. They called it the Blitz.
> 
> This is the description that would now appear in the history books – if the Germans had won the war.
> 
> Absurd? No more than the daily descriptions in our media, which are being repeated ad nauseam: the Hamas terrorists use the inhabitants of Gaza as “hostages” and exploit the women and children as “human shields”, they leave us no alternative but to carry out massive bombardments, in which, to our deep sorrow, thousands of women, children and unarmed men are killed and injured.




http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2009/01/11/the-moral-insanity-behind-the-lies-and-c


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_ is another letter on the Gaza war that gives me an opportunity to comment further:
-------------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/letters/Polarized+thinking/1178303/story.html

 Polarized our thinking



THE OTTAWA CITIZEN

JANUARY 15, 2009


It has been very disquieting listening to and reading about Israel's Gaza war, in the Canadian and American media. The Canadian government's unwavering support of Israel falls directly in step with American policies. How different from the more balanced British and European views. Unfortunately, this war has polarized Canadian thinking, and one is afraid to approach friends or family, who may hold a steadfast view, that brooks no debate. We have to ask ourselves, "Are we not humans first, or are we simply Canadians, Jews, Arabs, Zionists, Israelis or Americans?" It's time to put aside self-serving nationalistic fervour. While we are debating the why, where or how of the conflict, innocent people are dying, and infrastructures are being obliterated. This war has to stop, and it has to stop now.

*Grace Ahrens*,
Ottawa

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
-------------------------


I’ll work from the bottom and then  the top to get to the main point:

•	The war “has to stop” when the two combatants agree and neither has accomplished its aims or _cried “uncle!”_, yet;

•	The ‘balance’ Ms. Ahrens seeks lies in, essentially, blaming Israel for almost everything; and

•	Her question - _"Are we not humans first, or are we simply Canadians, Jews, Arabs, Zionists, Israelis or Americans?"_ – deserves an answer. We may all be humans but, for centuries, even millennia, we have not recognized one another as such. For example: We have enslaved one another and we do so today, in part in the belief that some people, based on e.g. skin colour, are not quite as human as the rest of us and *may*, therefore, be enslaved without violating one of the great, human, moral codes. We are a complex mix of race, creed, nationalism, humanism and, above all, culture.

Jews pose a special problem. I am a child of the _None is too many_ generation. When I was a child anti-Semitism (prejudice against Jews, specifically) was rife; the _image_ of the Jew was still Shylock while the Arab was, if anything, romanticized as a noble ”knight” of the desert.

But we learned about the holocaust and even if old habits died hard we – those for whom the horror was a real, current event – decided that, finally, the Jews had earned the *right* to a safe haven of their own. Israel is it. There are plenty of flaws in the planning and execution of a safe haven for the Jews but at least a couple of generations of people (including Canadians) are committed to the idea that one must exist, no matter what. More important, the people of Israel have agreed on “never again” and they are acquiring the means to make that statement into a fact.

There is a moral dilemma: amongst the greatest of all *crimes against humanity* have been perpetrated against the Jews – just because they were Jews. But now the Jews have a modern, vibrant and militarily powerful state and they are, relatively, unconcerned about using their power to secure their national aim: never again. And we, the liberal, democratic West carry two huge burdens of collective guilt that makes it impossible to ‘let nature take its course in region’:

First, we retain, *as we must*, a great burden of guilt for the whole “none is too many” attitude that actually helped along the “final solution” by convincing the Germans that there was no alternative way to be ‘rid of the Jews’ since no one else wanted them, either; and

Second, we have a new burden of guilt because we helped the Israelis ‘displace’ the _Palestinians_.

Our thinking is not polarized; *we are polarized* because we are not, simply, humans, we are complex mixes of race, creed and culture – and the latter, in many respects, colours our politics more than either skin colour or religious preference. I, for example, am _culturally_ predisposed – partially by *cultural guilt* - to side with the Israelis, imagining them as the beleaguered defenders of the Jew’s last, best hope. I can rationalize the facts – and I think they are facts that:

•	There is no ‘peace’ so long as Israel exists where it is now, and the Arabs will not surrender, they will not quit until they get their ‘peace;’ and

•	Sooner or later the Arabs have to win once – but one, only one, single Arab victory is one more than Israel can ever tolerate. 

But all my rationalization will not overcome my *belief* that the Jews *deserve* this one, last, best hope and that they are right to fight for it and we – a bigger ‘we’ than just the American led West – have to find a way to give the Palestinians redress for their very real, very legitimate grievances, without forcing Israel to surrender its core _raison d’être_.

Maybe I, maybe we all are polarized. I suggest we cannot help it and trying for a false sense of moral 'balance' is pointless.


Edit: typo - _and_ where I meant to say _an_


----------



## Bo

Great post.


----------



## Shec

Bo, for once you & I agree upon something.  It is indeed a *great* post.   Mr. Campbell,  I  salute you Sir.


----------



## Bo

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Albeit the thread got cleaned up, I am hoping one of our friends can answer my question.  I am legitimately interested in the Israel condemners/pro-Hamas angle on this.



Why the rockets? Why not military targets in Israel? I'll give this one a shot.

My guess is that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for any Palestinian to have access to any military targets in Israel. For one, Israel has an extremely tight blockade on Gaza. Land, air, and sea are all controlled by Israel i.e. nothing goes in or out of Gaza without Israel's approval. Palestinian students aren't even allowed to study abroad. I can't imagine that checkpoints leading from Gaza into Israel would be lax at all. 

Also, assuming a Palestinian were to get through the checkpoint with the intentions of attacking a military facility. How much harm could he/she do? In one of the most (if not the most) secure countries in the world, how could they plan an attack? Where could they get weapons? How well armed are the military facilities? 

I don't have the answer to these questions, but my guess is that a select FEW Palestinians decided that employing terrorist tactics would have a greater impact in achieving their goals. Now we have to ask, why terrorism? To answer that, you have to understand the situation under which the Palestinians live. Does it justify their use of terrorist actions? No. Is it understandable though? 



> [...] Palestinians have used terrorism against their Israeli occupiers, and their willingness to attack innocent civilians is wrong. This behavior is not surprising, however, because the Palestinians believe they have no other way to force Israeli concessions.* As former Prime Minister Barak once admitted, had he been born a Palestinian, he "would have joined a terrorist organization*."
> 
> Finally, we should not forget that the Zionists used terrorism when they were in a similarly weak position and trying to obtain their own state. Between 1944 and 1947, several Zionist organizations used terrorist bombings to drive the British from Palestine, and took the lives of many innocent civilians along the way. Israeli terrorists also murdered U.N. mediator Count Folke Bernadotte in 1948, because they opposed his proposal to internationalize Jerusalem. Nor were the perpetrators of these acts isolated extremists: the leaders of the murder plot were eventually granted amnesty by the Israeli government and one of them was elected to the Knesset. Another terrorist leader, who approved the murder but was not tried, was future Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir. Indeed, Shamir openly argued that *"neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat." Rather, terrorism had "a great part to play … in our war against the occupier [Britain]."* If the Palestinians’ use of terrorism is morally reprehensible today, so was Israel’s reliance upon it in the past [...]




As Ben-Gurion (Israel's first Prime Minister) once said:



> "If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. . . . We come from Israel, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"




http://www.antiwar.com/orig/mearwalt.php?articleid=9573


----------



## zipperhead_cop

Thanks to Grey and Bo for taking the time.  Good answers both.
And I tend to agree with the tactical reasons for the rockets.  Easy, cheap and low risk.  But it seems to be so utterly lacking in the strategic sense.  Like here in Afghanistan. Any idiot can blow up a road and kill people, but what is the point?  I know what it is here, but how is trying to kill innocent Israelis ever going to get anyone in that country interested in helping the Palestinians?  Are the Israelis moving very quickly when there is a cease fire?  No.  Why would they?  Once something resembling progress occurs somebody blows up something in an Israeli suburb.  It's just so bloody mindless.  
IMO Hamas, and the PLO before them, couldn't care less about their people.  They are power drunk thugs who enjoy their positions and see their own people as mindless cattle to be slaughtered and displayed on television.  All of these recent military actions are Israel _reacting_ to Palestine.  We can argue about the reaction and it's magnitude, but it is what it is.  Bottom line; they wouldn't have gone in if they weren't getting peppered with rockets.  As mentioned, poke the bear enough and then gaze in wide eyed wonderment at the reaction.  But in all likelihood, if there was actually peace then the people in Palestine might look around and say "WTF?  These guys are idiots! They gotta go".  
And if Israel isn't moving fast enough on economic issues or development (or whatever the overarching issues are) then _THAT_ is what should be focused on.  But peace isn't what Hamas is looking for.  That wouldn't be good for business.


----------



## Greymatters

Bo said:
			
		

> Why the rockets? Why not military targets in Israel? I'll give this one a shot.
> 
> My guess is that it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for any Palestinian to have access to any military targets in Israel. For one, Israel has an extremely tight blockade on Gaza. Land, air, and sea are all controlled by Israel i.e. nothing goes in or out of Gaza without Israel's approval. Palestinian students aren't even allowed to study abroad. I can't imagine that checkpoints leading from Gaza into Israel would be lax at all.
> 
> Also, assuming a Palestinian were to get through the checkpoint with the intentions of attacking a military facility. How much harm could he/she do? In one of the most (if not the most) secure countries in the world, how could they plan an attack? Where could they get weapons? How well armed are the military facilities?
> 
> I don't have the answer to these questions, but my guess is that a select FEW Palestinians decided that employing terrorist tactics would have a greater impact in achieving their goals. Now we have to ask, why terrorism? To answer that, you have to understand the situation under which the Palestinians live. Does it justify their use of terrorist actions? No. Is it understandable though?
> 
> As Ben-Gurion (Israel's first Prime Minister) once said:



I would add the following to your comments: 

_Why not military targets in Israel?_ - Because its hard to brag about killing Israelis if you're dead, which is what happens to you if you try to attack a hard target like an Israeli military base.  It is also difficult for Palestinians to access military targets because Israelis are very good at security and dont worry about being non-PC in the media.  In contrast, rocket attacks against civilian targets that dont shoot back are a pretty safe bet. 
_Nothing goes in or out of Gaza without Israel's approval _ - yet Hamas and other groups seem to somehow get their hands on a lot of weapons, explosives, and ammo.  I dont think the Israelis gave it to them, so who did? 
_Palestinian students aren't even allowed to study abroad _ - I could be wrong, but I am of the impression that hundreds of them manage to attend our fine universities each year.
_With the intentions of attacking a military facility _ - part of why they fail is not just because of security but because Israel has one the best and most proactive intelligence agencies in the world, their leaders listen when they are told a threat exists, and forces are allowed to act to negate that threat.  
_How much harm can he/she do? _ - Previous examples exist to show that a group of 19 could take out over 3,000 people given the right training, support, and equipment. 
_a select FEW Palestinians decided that employing terrorist tactics_ - delete few, replace with thousands.  Not just the hundreds who are active fighters, but also the thousands who voted for the groups using terrorist tactics.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ is an insightful editorial:
-------------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090116.EISRAEL16/TPStory/Opinion/editorials

 Hard lesson for Hamas

January 16, 2009

Israel's military operations in Gaza have failed to stop rocket and mortar attacks, which only intensified yesterday, but they at least serve to remind Hamas and other belligerents that Israel's political will and military prowess have not faltered, contrary to any impression of vulnerability they may have inferred from the mixed results in the last Lebanon campaign.

It is an important message for Hamas fighters, their hardline leadership and the terrorist states that back them, one that was being pounded home again yesterday. Said Siam, the so-called "strongman of Hamas" who served as interior minister in Gaza and controlled paramilitary forces there, was killed by an Israeli air strike. Israeli tanks moved deep into Gaza City, taking the fight with militants into their living rooms. Such warfare is fraught, and Israeli forces did strike the United Nations headquarters and several hospitals. In close fighting, mistakes and even excesses are regrettably likely to occur.

The message, though, is immutable. Islamists in Gaza cannot gain anything from fighting against Israel. The only way ahead for Gazans is through a cessation of rocket attacks on Israel, and through diplomacy. Hamas reportedly offered a ceasefire yesterday, with a spokesman for the militant group admitting it had "no other choice." The tragedy is that with the understanding of the need for a truce there is still no illumination.

In fact, Hamas did have a choice.

The organization could have reined in its thugs. It could have ended the practice of firing rockets and mortars indiscriminately into Israeli towns. It could have sought to improve the lives of the Gazan people instead of committing atrocities against the Israeli people.

Just as after Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, Israel's opponents have again displayed their habit of missing opportunities for progress.

It is a tragedy for Gaza's impoverished and downtrodden population that it has taken so much death and destruction for Hamas to come to understand that a ceasefire is preferable to what has been experienced in Gaza in recent days. Hamas is defeated, or is in the process of being defeated. Its own leaders and fighters, and its own people, have died and been injured in numbers greatly disproportionate to the soldiers and people of Israel. It is time that Hamas, and the battered people they represent, understand not just the inevitability of defeat but also the other lessons of this new year. They must absorb the truth that harassment and provocation are not the way forward.
-------------------------

The _Good Grey Globe_ is right: _*”Hamas did have a choice* … [Hamas] could have reined in its thugs … could have ended the practice of firing rockets and mortars indiscriminately into Israeli towns … could have sought to improve the lives of the Gazan people instead of committing atrocities against the Israeli people.”_

Hamas made the wrong choice and like every choice the Palestinians, Arabs and Persians have made over the past 60± years it seems to fulfill Abba Eban’s message about Arabs never missing an opportunity to miss and opportunity.

Can we even imagine what Gaza might look like today if Hamas had, even for a brief time, put the needs of the people of Gaza ahead of the radicals’ all consuming *hatred* of Israel?

The evidence (in Egypt and Jordan) suggests that Israel can be a ‘good neighbour,’ and fair and trustworthy trading partner and, consequently, a source of prosperity. But not for Gaza and not for the West Bank where blood soaked political agendas far outweigh the needs of the people.


----------



## Shec

Now might be a good time to review the Hamas Charter which I post as in information item and will refrain from editiorializing.   It's rather lengthy so I will not reproduce it in it's entirety, just the link so as to economize on site bandwidth:

http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm

In an attempt to minimize the propaganda factor I have extracted it from a relatively bi-partisan site.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is another editorial, this one is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_:
-------------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/editorials/Hate+comes+town/1182873/story.html

 Hate comes to town

THE OTTAWA CITIZEN

JANUARY 16, 2009 7:07 AM

The killing continues, as the Israeli military intensifies its search and destroy mission in Gaza, hunting down Hamas fighters and the weapons depots where they store their rockets. As expected, Palestinian civilians, among whom Hamas fighters embed themselves, are paying the greatest price.

The Arab-Israel conflict has always provoked global interest, and Canadians too have passionate opinions about it. People are even taking to the streets to express those opinions, as they are entitled to do. What they aren't allowed to do is incite hatred and violence against those who hold a different view.

Some scary things have been happening at pro-Palestinian rallies. These are not so much rallies in support of Palestinians, or even rallies against Israel, as they are rallies against Jews, no matter where they live.

On Wednesday the Canadian Jewish Congress released a video of scenes from recent anti-Israel demonstrations in Canadian cities. Some protesters are heard repeating the medieval anti-Semitic libel that Jews drink blood. One woman is seen yelling, "Jewish child, you're going to f***ing die, Hamas is coming for you." At a rally in Calgary, men were photographed giving the Nazi salute.

And yet at pro-Israel rallies across Canada, speakers consistently express not just support for Israel but sorrow for Palestinian suffering. At an event in Ottawa last week, organized by the local Jewish community, Rabbi Zischa Shaps made sure to include innocent Palestinians in his prayer for all those caught in the conflict.

Meanwhile, back at a pro-Palestinian rally on Jan. 10 in Montreal, people chanted, in Arabic, "Palestine is ours, the Jews are our dogs."

We can only hope that the hatemongers represent the fringe and not the mainstream of pro-Palestinian activists.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen
-------------------------

It is natural that new immigrants will have strong feelings about the goings-on in the _old country_; it is, after all, their ‘real’ home, it’s where they have kith and kin and memories and, yes, even loyalties. It is also natural that 2nd and even 3rd generation immigrants will be biased about events where ‘grandma’ and ‘auntie’ still live.

But we, Canadians, from everywhere, must try to make the ‘old country’ (all 200± _old countries_) increasingly *foreign*.

We *should* be able to protest events and policies in foreign lands without resort to hate filled racial epithets. Apparently we aren’t.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_ is another SITEP on the Gaza situation:
-------------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090116.wgaza0116/BNStory/International/home

 Gaza fighting slows as Israel counters Hamas offer

NIDAL AL-MUGHRABI
Reuters

January 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM EST

GAZA, Gaza Strip — Israel said its Gaza offensive could be “in the final act” on Friday and sent envoys to discuss truce terms after Hamas made a ceasefire offer to end three weeks of fighting that has killed more than 1,100 Palestinians.

However, Israel rebuffed at least two major elements of the ceasefire terms outlined by the Islamist movement, and fighting continued, albeit with less intensity than on Thursday.

And in Doha, Hamas's exiled leader Khaled Meshaal told Arab leaders his group would not accept Israeli conditions for the ceasefire and would fight on until Israel ended hostilities.

He urged participants at an emergency Arab meeting on Gaza to cut all ties with the Jewish state.

The inauguration of new U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday is seen by some as the time by which Israel will bow to mounting international pressure and call off its attacks.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, touring the region, again said he expected a ceasefire deal within days but urged Israel to stop firing immediately. “It is time now to even think about a unilateral ceasefire,” he said in Ramallah.

At least 13 rockets landed in Israel from Gaza, the army said, slightly wounding one person. Hamas rocket fire has dwindled during the war — which Israel launched on Dec. 27 with the declared aim of crippling Hamas's rocket-firing capacity.

Israeli air strikes killed 10 Palestinians. Among them were guerrillas and civilians, including two children.

“Hopefully we're in the final act,” Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's spokesman Mark Regev said, adding that briefings by the envoys working in Washington and Cairo on Friday could be followed by swift decisions by the security cabinet.

Gazans savoured a relative lull a day after intense combat that some saw as a final Israeli push before a ceasefire.

“The conditions have not come to fruition yet,” security cabinet member Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said. “But this could well happen late on Saturday and we can put this story behind us.”

Israeli planes struck 40 targets in Gaza overnight, but then fighting eased, to the relief of Palestinians stunned by seeing Israeli tanks advancing deep inside Gaza city on Thursday.

Medics taking advantage of a four-hour “humanitarian pause“ said they had recovered 23 bodies on Friday from the previous day's fighting in the Tel al-Hawa neighbourhood in the city's southwest, scene of some of the most intense clashes.

Chanting crowds attended the funeral of a top Hamas leader, Saeed Seyyam, killed in an Israeli air strike along with nine other people. Mr. Seyyam was the interior minister in Gaza's unrecognized government and leader of 13,000 armed security men.

Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, whose prospects in a Feb. 10 election may have been improved by a war that has so far cost 13 Israeli lives, flew overnight to Washington to sign a security agreement with the outgoing administration of George W. Bush that Israel sees underpinning any truce.

Israeli officials said the agreement would commit the United States to lead a campaign with its NATO allies to track and interdict weapons shipments bound for Gaza from Iran and elsewhere. Preventing Hamas from rearming is Israel's main condition for any truce.

Senior Israeli official Amos Gilad arrived in Cairo again on Friday, this time accompanied by Shalom Turgeman, Mr. Olmert's top diplomatic adviser — a possible sign a deal may be near.

“When we are briefed by Gilad and Livni, there may be a full security cabinet meeting and decisions will stem from that,” Mr. Regev said.

Hamas and diplomatic sources said on Thursday that Hamas had offered a one-year, renewable truce on condition that all Israeli forces withdrew within five to seven days and that all the border crossings with Israel and Egypt would be opened.

Israel wants an open-ended truce and the reinstatement of forces loyal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at crossing points into the Gaza Strip, Israeli and Western sources said.

Except for limited humanitarian supplies, the crossings have been all but closed under an Israeli-led blockade since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from Mr. Abbas's forces. Hamas had won a Palestinian parliamentary election the previous year.

Asked about the Israeli demands, Hamas official Ayman Taha told Reuters by telephone from Cairo that they had not been presented to Hamas negotiators, who would meet the Egyptians on Saturday to discuss the Israeli response.

Hamas and Fatah are bitterly at odds, adding to Mr. Abbas's many difficulties in negotiating a peace settlement with Israel that would give Palestinians a state in Gaza and the West Bank.

Fearing that the Gaza crisis would spark violence in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, Israel imposed sweeping additional controls on movement and flooded Jerusalem's Old City with armed security personnel during Muslim weekly prayers.

Protests erupted in the West Bank city of Hebron, a Hamas stronghold, where Israeli soldiers killed a 17-year-old Palestinian demonstrator and wounded three others, medics said.

Israeli forces have killed some 1,138 people and wounded 5,100 during the Gaza war, the Hamas-run Health Ministry said.
-------------------------

A unilateral Israeli withdrawal, starting early Tuesday morning, would be a nice inauguration gift to Barack Obama; it would take one big problem off his plate – for a while.

The Israelis can, I think withdraw with near absolute certainty that Hamas (and the Arabs, in general) will fail to exploit the situation. Hamas will not make a ‘peacebuilding’ counter-move – rather it will bluster and fire more rockets, proving to President Obama that Hamas is not, cannot be and does not even want to try to be a ‘partner for peace.’


----------



## Rifleman62

Posted by E.R. Campbell  

Here is another editorial, this one is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Ottawa Citizen:
-------------------------
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/editorials/Hate+comes+town/1182873/story.html

*Hate comes to town* 

"But we, Canadians, from everywhere, must try to make the ‘old country’ (all 200± old countries) increasingly foreign".

"We should be able to protest events and policies in foreign lands without resort to hate filled racial epithets. Apparently we aren’t".

Absolutely right, but, years of multiculturalism, which to me is immigrate to Canada, bring all your hates and prejudices, and taxpayers will subsidize it; no melting pot for Canada has created several generations of hate in Canada's citizens.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> l
> Absolutely right, but, years of multiculturalism, which to me is immigrate to Canada, bring all your hates and prejudices, and taxpayers will subsidize it; no melting pot for Canada has created several generations of hate in Canada's citizens.



I disagree.  The number of moronic protesters at these events are just a tiny fraction of those whom have immigrated here. Its just the same old, same old story,.....................ten protesters will get more media coverage, and thereby, seem more important than the ten thousand who just wish both sides would work it out peacefully.

If only the media would stop sticking these morons in our face, cause, IMO, it ain't news.


----------



## The Bread Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> A unilateral Israeli withdrawal, starting early Tuesday morning, would be a nice inauguration gift to Barack Obama; it would take one big problem off his plate – for a while.
> 
> The Israelis can, I think withdraw with near absolute certainty that Hamas (and the Arabs, in general) will fail to exploit the situation. Hamas will not make a ‘peacebuilding’ counter-move – rather it will bluster and fire more rockets, *proving to President Obama that Hamas is not, cannot be and does not even want to try to be a ‘partner for peace.’*



TWO gifts, really, since I agree with your assessment of Hamas' reaction (in addition to telling all and sundry about their "victory")....


----------



## Kirkhill

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Its just the same old, same old story,.....................ten protesters will get more media coverage, and thereby, seem more important than the ten thousand who just wish both sides would work it out peacefully.
> 
> If only the media would stop sticking these morons in our face, cause, IMO, it ain't news.



And along the lines of "How long is a piece of string?".....How many protesters does it take to make a crowd?  As many as it takes to fill a camera lens - 3 or 3.000,000: it doesn't matter as long as the screen is full.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Quite right!

Last Spring (Apr/May, I guess), during the ramp-up of the pre-Olympics Pro-Tibet/Anti-China _campaign_ I walked up to Parliament Hill to see how the Pro-China demonstration (on a Sat or Sun) would turn out.

My guess was that there were 3,500 people there – a police officer guesstimated 5,000 ; but it was more than just a few, anyway. There were plenty of flags (Canadian and PRC) and signs, banners and T shirts – professionally made with the “One world/one China” theme and lots of songs and cute kids and a couple of terminally boring speeches). All in all it was a happy-go-lucky sort of event. No one even bothered the ever present _Falun Gong_ demonstrators.

But a little (maybe 10 people, maybe fewer), ragtag band of Caucasian kids (late teens/early 20s) showed up with anti-China/pro-Tibet signs and Tibetan flags. No problem, because the police confined them to the public sidewalk and the Chinese people were happy to obey their marshals and stay on the other side of the fence that separates the ‘Hill’ from the ‘town.’ They chanted and shouted for a bit but, after about 10 minutes, the police escorted them down towards the Chateau Laurier, well away from the Chinese demonstration, and that was last anyone saw of them – until the evening news when they got *at least equal time* on at least two of the Ottawa TV News broadcasts and where their _image_ did, indeed fill a TV screen an give the impression that it _might_ have been a large, organized ‘counter demonstration.’ One of those local TV ‘_news_’ spots made it to the national news but further edited so that it _seemed_ that there was pro-Tibet demonstration in Ottawa that might have been countered by a few Chinese up on the ‘Hill.’


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Yes Edward,.....I do seem to recall you showing me the "markings" where the press and the "protesters" get together to make sure the backdrop/ sizing/signage is juuuuuuust right.

Damn, someday we will have to make that walk unhungover. ;D


----------



## The Bread Guy

Highlights of a few ideas on how to deal with the tunnels....

*Holey War*
How to close the Gaza tunnels
William Saletan, Slate, 16 Jan 09
Article link


> ....Gaza is riddled with tunnels. Some are for smuggling; others are for transporting weapons; others are for hiding or ambushing Israeli troops. The crucial passageways—400 to 600, by recent estimates—run from Gaza to Egypt, circumventing the closed border. That's how Hamas gets parts and material for the missiles it fires into Israel. Any deal to end the current fighting has to include "an effective blockading" of that border, "with supervision and follow-ups," according to Israel's prime minister. To stop the war—and to keep it stopped—you have to figure out how to stop the tunnels.
> 
> But how? Here are some of the options....
> 
> *1. Buffer zone....
> 2. Wall....
> 3. Moat....
> 4. Trench....
> 5. Ground-penetrating radar....
> 6. Electromagnetic gradiometry....
> 7. Drone-operated gradiometry....
> 8. Automatic sensors....
> 9. Statistical bombing....*



_More details on link_


----------



## The Bread Guy

And what happens when ISR declares a unilateral ceasefire? (.pdf of statement attached in case link doesn't work or takes too long to load)

This, this and this....

_- edited to include better ceasefire link, add attachment -_


----------



## leroi

tourza said:
			
		

> Mr. Campbell,
> 
> For your consideration:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjEd4hJNVCE&feature=related
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV1scn536BU&feature=related
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjTxK9C2VYY&feature=related
> 
> Courtesy of the "lefties and Palestinian stringers" of the MSM (ok, maybe not so MSM). Interesting that this issue had to go to the Israeli Supreme Court for review...especially since it doesn't happen?
> 
> Regards.



Tourza,

Youtube is being used to stage lots of propaganda wars. However, I'm not saying the particular clips you provided are not legit. I haven't reasearched them so I can't say one way or the other. On the other hand, I would say they are questionable.  But here's a clip from Jihad Watch titled "Whitewashing History Before Our Eyes" that _is_ in the Palestinian's own words. The video is a direct claim that they do indeed use children, women and the elderly as human shields. You'll note that it disappeared shortly after it's release (sometime in December 2008). Fortunately, people saw fit to save it.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024431.php

(Edit: Sorry for entering the discussion so late folks but this thread is a good, long read.)

BTW, you have to scroll down the page to actually see the saved video.


----------



## PMedMoe

*Israel pulling out of Gaza*
Article Link Canoe News

JERUSALEM - Israel plans to pull all of its troops out of the Gaza Strip by the time President-elect Barack Obama is inaugurated Tuesday, but only if Hamas militants hold their fire, Israeli officials said. 

Thousands of troops have left Gaza since Israel declared Saturday its intention to unilaterally halt fire after a devastating, three-week Israeli onslaught. Gaza's Hamas rulers ceased fire 12 hours later. Large contingents of Israeli soldiers have kept close to the border, prepared to re-enter the territory if violence re-ignites. 

More on link

*Israel plans quick pullout from Gaza Strip*
Article Link CBC News

Israeli officials indicated Monday that troops will rapidly pull out of the Gaza Strip after declaring a ceasefire in the three-week-long offensive.

Unnamed sources told the Associated Press that soldiers will leave the Hamas-run territory before the Tuesday morning inauguration of U.S. president-elect Barack Obama.

Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev wouldn't confirm the timetable, but said that if the coastal strip of land remains quiet then Israel's departure will be "almost immediate."

Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire on Saturday in its 22-day-old assault on Hamas, saying the objective of disabling Hamas's military capabilities had been achieved.

On Sunday Hamas leadership announced a one-week ceasefire and called for Israel to use that time to withdraw its forces and open all border crossings in the territory.

The conflict killed more than 1,200 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.

More on link


----------



## PanaEng

Fresh from the G & M:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090129.wgazaschool29/BNStory/International/home

Interesting how the story evolved and how quick some were to condemn Israel (on this particular issue).

cheers,
Frank


----------



## Kirkhill

PanaEng said:
			
		

> Fresh from the G & M:
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090129.wgazaschool29/BNStory/International/home
> 
> Interesting how the story evolved and how quick some were to condemn Israel (on this particular issue).
> 
> cheers,
> Frank



I'm reminded of Kosovo.

I remember hearing the interview, on CBC, where some poor gent was being questioned about the dead and dying.  He said that "hundreds, uh, thousands are being killed".  Next thing I know CBC and everybody else is reporting that "hundreds of thousands are being killed".   Although the tape was clear, the record was never corrected.

In this case though, it doesn't look as if the Israelis did themselves any favours.  It sounds as if their PAFFOs panicked.


----------



## geo

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> In this case though, it doesn't look as if the Israelis did themselves any favours.  It sounds as if their PAFFOs panicked.



Works a lot better when you say... I don't know - I will check & get back to you....yada, yada, yada.


----------



## leroi

Placed here in memory of Daniel Pearl :hearts:

Daniel Pearl and the Normalization of Evil: When Will Our Luminaries Stop Making Excuses For Terror  

The Wall Street Journal (Reproduced in accordance with the _Fair Dealing _ Provision of the _Copyright Act_.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123362422088941893.html

By JUDEA PEARL

This week marks the seventh anniversary of the murder of our son, former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. My wife Ruth and I wonder: Would Danny have believed that today's world emerged after his tragedy?

The answer does not come easily. Danny was an optimist, a true believer in the goodness of mankind. Yet he was also a realist, and would not let idealism bend the harshness of facts.

Neither he, nor the millions who were shocked by his murder, could have possibly predicted that seven years later his abductor, Omar Saeed Sheikh, according to several South Asian reports, would be planning terror acts from the safety of a Pakistani jail. Or that his murderer, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now in Guantanamo, would proudly boast of his murder in a military tribunal in March 2007 to the cheers of sympathetic jihadi supporters. Or that this ideology of barbarism would be celebrated in European and American universities, fueling rally after rally for Hamas, Hezbollah and other heroes of "the resistance." Or that another kidnapped young man, Israeli Gilad Shalit, would spend his 950th day of captivity with no Red Cross visitation while world leaders seriously debate whether his kidnappers deserve international recognition.

No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era.

But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.

I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism -- the ideological license to elevate one's grievances above the norms of civilized society -- was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable "tactical" considerations.

This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone.

But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices.

Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped.

The media have played a major role in handing terrorism this victory of acceptability. Qatari-based Al Jazeera television, for example, is still providing Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi hours of free air time each week to spew his hateful interpretation of the Koran, authorize suicide bombing, and call for jihad against Jews and Americans.

Then came the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, the unrepentant killer who, in 1979, smashed the head of a four-year-old Israeli girl with his rifle after killing her father before her eyes. Al Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society's role model. No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al Jazeera's management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.

Some American pundits and TV anchors didn't seem much different from Al Jazeera in their analysis of the recent war in Gaza. Bill Moyers was quick to lend Hamas legitimacy as a "resistance" movement, together with honorary membership in PBS's imaginary "cycle of violence." In his Jan. 9 TV show, Mr. Moyers explained to his viewers that "each [side] greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression." He then stated -- without blushing -- that for readers of the Hebrew Bible "God-soaked violence became genetically coded." The "cycle of violence" platitude allows analysts to empower terror with the guise of reciprocity, and, amazingly, indict terror's victims for violence as immutable as DNA.


When we ask ourselves what it is about the American psyche that enables genocidal organizations like Hamas -- the charter of which would offend every neuron in our brains -- to become tolerated in public discourse, we should take a hard look at our universities and the way they are currently being manipulated by terrorist sympathizers.

At my own university, UCLA, a symposium last week on human rights turned into a Hamas recruitment rally by a clever academic gimmick. The director of the Center for Near East Studies carefully selected only Israel bashers for the panel, each of whom concluded that the Jewish state is the greatest criminal in human history.

The primary purpose of the event was evident the morning after, when unsuspecting, uninvolved students read an article in the campus newspaper titled, "Scholars say: Israel is in violation of human rights in Gaza," to which the good name of the University of California was attached. This is where Hamas scored its main triumph -- another inch of academic respectability, another inroad into Western minds.

Danny's picture is hanging just in front of me, his warm smile as reassuring as ever. But I find it hard to look him straight in the eyes and say: You did not die in vain.

Mr. Pearl, a professor of computer science at UCLA, is president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, founded in memory of his son to promote cross-cultural understanding.

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A15 
Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved


----------



## PanaEng

Thanks leroi, great article.


----------



## a_majoor

real facts and figures are now emerging. The intent to form some sort of rapid response information team to counter propaganda is interesting, but getting these reports published in a hostile of indifferent MSM is the real challenge:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304788684&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull



> IDF: World duped by Hamas's false civilian death toll figures
> By YAAKOV KATZ
> 
> Four weeks after the cessation of Operation Cast Lead, the IDF finally opened its dossier on Palestinian fatalities on Sunday for the first time, and presented to The Jerusalem Post an overview utterly at odds with the Palestinian figures that have hitherto formed the basis for assessing the conflict.
> 
> While the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, whose death toll figures have been widely cited, reports that 895 Gaza civilians were killed in the fighting, amounting to more than two-thirds of all fatalities, the IDF figures shown to the Post on Sunday put the civilian death toll at no higher than a third of the total.
> 
> The international community had been given a vastly distorted impression of the death toll because of "false reporting" by Hamas, said Col. Moshe Levi, the head of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), which compiled the IDF figures.
> 
> As an example of such distortion, he cited the incident near a UN school in Jabalya on January 6, in which initial Palestinian reports falsely claimed IDF shells had hit the school and killed 40 or more people, many of them civilians.
> 
> In fact, he said, 12 Palestinians were killed in the incident - nine Hamas operatives and three noncombatants. Furthermore, as had since been acknowledged by the UN, the IDF was returning fire after coming under attack, and its shells did not hit the school compound.
> 
> "From the beginning, Hamas claimed that 42 people were killed, but we could see from our surveillance that only a few stretchers were brought in to evacuate people," said Levi, adding that the CLA contacted the PA Health Ministry and asked for the names of the dead. "We were told that Hamas was hiding the number of dead."
> 
> *As a consequence of the false information, he added, the IDF was considering setting up a "response team" for future conflicts whose job would be to collect information, analyze it and issue reports as rapidly as possible that refuted Hamas fabrications.*
> 
> Basing its work on the official Palestinian death toll of 1,338, Levi said the CLA had now identified more than 1,200 of the Palestinian fatalities. Its 200-page report lists their names, their official Palestinian Authority identity numbers, the circumstances in which they were killed and, where appropriate, the terrorist group with which they were affiliated.
> 
> The CLA said 580 of these 1,200 had been conclusively "incriminated" as members of Hamas and other terrorist groups.
> 
> Another 300 of the 1,200 - women, children aged 15 and younger and men over the age of 65 - had been categorized as noncombatants, the CLA said.
> 
> Counted among the women, however, were female terrorists, including at least two women who tried to blow themselves up next to forces from the Givati and Paratroopers' Brigades. Also classed as noncombatants were the wives and children of Nizar Rayyan, a Hamas military commander who refused to allow his family to leave his home even after he was warned by Israel that it would be bombed.
> 
> The 320 names yet to be classified are all men; the IDF has yet complete its identification work in these cases, but estimates that two-thirds of them were terror operatives.
> 
> The CLA gave the Post the names of several fatalities who it said had been classified by the Palestinians as "medics," but who it stated were Hamas fighters, including Anas Naim, the nephew of Hamas Health Minister Bassem Naim, who was killed during clashes with the IDF on January 4 in the Sheikh Ajlin neighborhood of Gaza City.
> 
> Following the clashes, the Palestinian press reported that Naim was killed and that he was a medic with the Palestinian Red Crescent. The Gaza CLA, however, produced photographs of Naim posing holding a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and a Kalashnikov assault rifle that had been posted on a Hamas Web site.
> 
> Levi stressed that on no occasion were civilians deliberately targeted, and that every effort was made to minimize civilian casualties.
> 
> Work on the death toll list was started during Operation Cast Lead under Levi's direction. A special team was set up and led by an officer in the CLA who coordinated efforts with the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and worked from statistics and information on the dead from the Hamas Health Ministry, the media in Gaza, and other Palestinian and Israeli intelligence sources.
> 
> Much controversy and confusion has surrounded the number of Palestinian noncombatants killed during Israel's three-week campaign against Hamas, with the IDF and the Shin Bet refusing to release official numbers to refute Hamas allegations. Israeli estimates were intermittently leaked to the press but not published in official press statements.


----------



## geo

When you are working at winning the fight to capture the hearts & minds of International public opinion, it will always be a case of "here are my numbers" and "prove to me that I am wrong".

A valliant effort by the IDF & their CLA but, I am not certain that the world's MsM will do anything with it...


----------



## a_majoor

At last, at least one war criminal has been aprehended and will be prosecuted:

http://www.thesurlybeaver.ca/index.php?itemid=667



> *When is a war crime not a war crime?*
> 02/18/09
> 
> When it wasn't committed by a Israeli soldier. Whilst the Times, the Beeb and most other western media worked themselves into a lather over alleged Israeli war crimes, here's a clear contravention of Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions, arising from that conflict which they all somehow missed:
> 
> *As Operation Cast Lead approached, members of Amazi's unit received uniforms similar in appearance to those worn by soldiers in the IDF's Givati brigades. Their plan was to confuse soldiers in order to draw close and carry out a kidnapping or suicide bombing.*
> 
> Kidnapping a soldier was seen as “the most important thing, in order to stop the operation,” Amazi said.
> 
> Amazi and his companions ultimately failed in their mission. As he and a fellow Hamas terrorist fled from a Jabalia home after firing on soldiers, they came under fire, and Amazi was wounded while his companion was killed. Amazi took shelter in a local family's home and pretended to be a civilian engaged to the family's daughter, but was apprehended by soldiers despite the ruse.
> 
> *Specifically he violated Article 37 of the Protocol which forbids perfidy. He is being put on trial in Israel.*
> 
> *Amazi admitted that he and other members of Hamas used civilian homes during the operation, even when the homeowners objected.*
> 
> State prosecutors have filed an indictment against Amazi for murder, attempted murder and membership in a terrorist organization.
> 
> So far this is the only story I have found relating to this trial. A real bonafide war crimes trial arising from the Gaza conflict and all we hear from the MSM is crickets chirping. Why am I not surprised?
> 
> However, we here at the Surly Beaver like to give credit where credit is due. Time is rightly asking questions about the number of civilian casualties from last months conflict in Gaza. Pity is close to two months since the conflict started and several weeks since it's end.
> 
> Journalists. What would we do without them?


----------



## a_majoor

New ways to deal with the threats:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/can-israels-iron-dome-blunt-hamas-rockets/?singlepage=true



> *Can Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ Blunt Hamas Rockets?*
> 
> Posted By Allison Kaplan Sommer On March 31, 2011 @ 12:00 am In Israel,Middle East,World News | 7 Comments
> 
> For many weeks, it seemed as if Israel was successful at staying out of the turmoil rocking the Middle East. First Tunisia, then Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Syria, and Jordan: as anti-regime demonstrations caught fire across the Middle East, Israel’s supporters were able to argue convincingly for the first time in decades that the presence of the Jewish state is not necessarily the source of all instability in the region.
> 
> But suddenly, it seemed as if Hamas leaders in Gaza, like angry toddlers realizing they weren’t getting enough attention, decided they needed to make some noise and grab some headlines. Perhaps they were worried that there was too much bashing of Arab dictators going on — and not enough bashing of Israel.
> 
> Whatever the reason, they began to attempt to provoke Israel into action. After months of disturbing but essentially harmless launches, the rocket attacks escalated dramatically. On March 19, without warning, 50 rockets fell in one day [1] in the area surrounding Sderot.
> 
> The attack was the biggest barrage of rockets fired in the two years following Operation Cast Lead, and it was only the beginning. In an act of deliberate provocation, not only did the number of rockets missiles fired at Israel increase, they began to be aimed clearly at the most populated areas in the south. On March 23, Grad rockets landed square in the middle of Beersheva, Israel’s fourth-largest city, which was also a target two years ago during Operation Cast Lead [2].
> 
> In what was unlikely to have been a coincidence, on the same day, a bomb exploded at the central Jerusalem bus station, killing one woman and wounding tens.
> 
> And as the week wore on, rockets hit the city of Ashdod. Schools across the south were canceled, daily life in the south of the country was utterly disrupted, and suddenly, Libya and Japan were off of Israeli television screens as people wondered whether war in southern Israel was imminent, even as the allied bombs were dropping in Libya from NATO planes.
> 
> The Israeli Air Force was making attacks of their own — consistent, but relatively restrained — with bombing targeted at the launch sites [3] in response to each wave of rocket fire on Israeli cities.
> 
> Under tremendous political pressure to do something more substantial, the government of Binyamin Netanyahu indicated that [4] a real solution with an impressive name was on its way: a counter-rocket defense system called “Iron Dome.”
> 
> The Israeli Defense Forces are billing the Iron Dome system as a comprehensive solution to the threat of short-range rockets and mortar shells fired across Israel’s borders. They promise that it will be able to identify, intercept, and destroy the weapons before — not after — they land in Israel’s civilian population. It has been under development since 2007, when Hezbollah rockets threatened northern Israel. It is one part of a three-pronged defense: systems are also being developed against mid-range and long-range missiles.
> The counter-rocket defense system was tested and declared ready to operate back in February, but had yet to be deployed until now. As rockets pelted Beersheva and Ashdod, the government and the military were attacked by commentators like Yossi Melman of Ha’aretz, who asked why it hadn’t yet been rolled out [5] to protect their civilians under fire:
> 
> There can only be three explanations for this despicable conduct. One, IDF commanders and senior officials in the defense establishment — first and foremost among them Defense Minister Ehud Barak — are indifferent to the distress of the people in the south, who have suffered repeatedly from mortar and rocket attacks. Two, the IDF is afraid of a failure in intercepting a missile, which would publicly reveal the inadequacy of Iron Dome. On the back of remarkable success in testing, developers have boasted repeatedly it is the best system of its kind in the world.
> 
> The third, even more cynical, possibility is that Iron Dome has not been deployed because of the fear that it will be shown to have limited capabilities, which would not allow it to be sold abroad. According to reports in foreign publications over the past year, Israel is negotiating to sell the Iron Dome to Brazil, Singapore, and India.
> 
> The military, obviously, had its own explanations. One general questioned the wisdom of deploying the system before enough batteries are available to protect the entire southern region. The worry is that if only some cities are protected, Hamas will bear down and target other cities, causing more intensive damage. Indeed, when it was announced that the first battery would be set up next to Beersheva, residents of Ashdod and Ashkelon asked, “Why them and not us?”
> 
> With the knowledge that the system is still unproven, the government has taken care to lower expectations. As Iron Dome was finally deployed Sunday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu made an effort to lower expectations, cautioning that it [6] “will not give a full or comprehensive solution to the missile threat.”
> 
> Even if it isn’t full or comprehensive, real evidence that the expensive system with the reassuring name represents any form of solution will offer a much-needed boost of confidence to the jittery population of southern Israel.
> 
> Article printed from Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com
> 
> URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/can-israels-iron-dome-blunt-hamas-rockets/
> 
> URLs in this post:
> 
> [1] 50 rockets fell in one day: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-03-19-hamas-israel_N.htm
> 
> [2] Operation Cast Lead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_War
> 
> [3] at the launch sites: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-strikes-arms-depot-in-gaza-following-palestinian-rocket-fire-1.351632
> 
> [4] indicated that: http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=213741
> 
> [5] asked why it hadn’t yet been rolled out: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/what-about-the-iron-dome-1.351460
> 
> [6] cautioning that it: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4048254,00.html


----------



## Edward Campbell

This, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the _Washington Post_ got little (if any) attention here in Canada where admitting that Israel might be right is something the media finds very, very hard to do:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html
Emphasis in the original.


> Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and war crimes
> 
> We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.
> 1113
> The final report by the U.N. committee of independent experts — chaired by former New York judge Mary McGowan Davis — that followed up on the recommendations of the Goldstone Report has found that “Israel has dedicated significant resources to investigate over 400 allegations of operational misconduct in Gaza” while “the de facto authorities (i.e., Hamas) have not conducted any investigations into the launching of rocket and mortar attacks against Israel.”
> 
> Our report found evidence of potential war crimes and “possibly crimes against humanity” by both Israel and Hamas. That the crimes allegedly committed by Hamas were intentional goes without saying — its rockets were purposefully and indiscriminately aimed at civilian targets.
> 
> The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.
> 
> For example, the most serious attack the Goldstone Report focused on was the killing of some 29 members of the al-Simouni family in their home. The shelling of the home was apparently the consequence of an Israeli commander’s erroneous interpretation of a drone image, and an Israeli officer is under investigation for having ordered the attack. While the length of this investigation is frustrating, it appears that an appropriate process is underway, and I am confident that if the officer is found to have been negligent, Israel will respond accordingly. The purpose of these investigations, as I have always said, is to ensure accountability for improper actions, not to second-guess, with the benefit of hindsight, commanders making difficult battlefield decisions.
> 
> While I welcome Israel’s investigations into allegations, I share the concerns reflected in the McGowan Davis report that few of Israel’s inquiries have been concluded and believe that the proceedings should have been held in a public forum. Although the Israeli evidence that has emerged since publication of our report doesn’t negate the tragic loss of civilian life, I regret that our fact-finding mission did not have such evidence explaining the circumstances in which we said civilians in Gaza were targeted, because it probably would have influenced our findings about intentionality and war crimes.
> 
> Israel’s lack of cooperation with our investigation meant that we were not able to corroborate how many Gazans killed were civilians and how many were combatants. The Israeli military’s numbers have turned out to be similar to those recently furnished by Hamas (although Hamas may have reason to inflate the number of its combatants).
> 
> As I indicated from the very beginning, I would have welcomed Israel’s cooperation. The purpose of the Goldstone Report was never to prove a foregone conclusion against Israel. I insisted on changing the original mandate adopted by the Human Rights Council, which was skewed against Israel. I have always been clear that Israel, like any other sovereign nation, has the right and obligation to defend itself and its citizens against attacks from abroad and within. Something that has not been recognized often enough is the fact that our report marked the first time illegal acts of terrorism from Hamas were being investigated and condemned by the United Nations. I had hoped that our inquiry into all aspects of the Gaza conflict would begin a new era of evenhandedness at the U.N. Human Rights Council, whose history of bias against Israel cannot be doubted.
> 
> Some have charged that the process we followed did not live up to judicial standards. To be clear: Our mission was in no way a judicial or even quasi-judicial proceeding. We did not investigate criminal conduct on the part of any individual in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank. We made our recommendations based on the record before us, which unfortunately did not include any evidence provided by the Israeli government. Indeed, our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report. McGowan Davis has found that Israel has done this to a significant degree; Hamas has done nothing.
> 
> Some have suggested that it was absurd to expect Hamas, an organization that has a policy to destroy the state of Israel, to investigate what we said were serious war crimes. It was my hope, even if unrealistic, that Hamas would do so, especially if Israel conducted its own investigations. At minimum I hoped that in the face of a clear finding that its members were committing serious war crimes, Hamas would curtail its attacks. Sadly, that has not been the case. Hundreds more rockets and mortar rounds have been directed at civilian targets in southern Israel. That comparatively few Israelis have been killed by the unlawful rocket and mortar attacks from Gaza in no way minimizes the criminality. The U.N. Human Rights Council should condemn these heinous acts in the strongest terms.
> 
> In the end, asking Hamas to investigate may have been a mistaken enterprise. So, too, the Human Rights Council should condemn the inexcusable and cold-blooded recent slaughter of a young Israeli couple and three of their small children in their beds.
> 
> I continue to believe in the cause of establishing and applying international law to protracted and deadly conflicts. Our report has led to numerous “lessons learned” and policy changes, including the adoption of new Israel Defense Forces procedures for protecting civilians in cases of urban warfare and limiting the use of white phosphorus in civilian areas. The Palestinian Authority established an independent inquiry into our allegations of human rights abuses — assassinations, torture and illegal detentions — perpetrated by Fatah in the West Bank, especially against members of Hamas. Most of those allegations were confirmed by this inquiry. Regrettably, there has been no effort by Hamas in Gaza to investigate the allegations of its war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.
> 
> Simply put, the laws of armed conflict apply no less to non-state actors such as Hamas than they do to national armies. Ensuring that non-state actors respect these principles, and are investigated when they fail to do so, is one of the most significant challenges facing the law of armed conflict. Only if all parties to armed conflicts are held to these standards will we be able to protect civilians who, through no choice of their own, are caught up in war.
> 
> The writer, a retired justice of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and former chief prosecutor of the U.N. International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, chaired the U.N. fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict.




Good for Mister Justice Goldstone, he says: _”… our main recommendation was for each party to investigate, transparently and in good faith, the incidents referred to in our report …. Israel has done this … Hamas has done nothing.”_ I’m sure he will be invited to a few less trendy cocktail parties after this.


----------



## Sapplicant

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/143334

Just one example of many, many articles on the subject. This is gonna f*****g suck, assuming it's true.

Hopefully may 15 comes and goes with nothing noteworthy happening.


----------

