Israel vs Hamas, Round 5,672,341,566,125

[iNow]

Sure, the Israeli army is trying not to kill any innocents, but it doesn't really matter as they are still destroying everything they own and ruining lives for the most part....

 

As I understand it, even many in leadership positions in the Arab world recognize that Hamas has brought this on themselves, and aren't showing support. What frightens me most is how this will play among the regular Arab people... the non-government crowd who truly wants to live to see the destruction of Israel.

[Reaper]

Can you help me understand the relevance of your point? ... What it is you're driving at? I am having a hard time figuring out "how badass their rockets are" really matters. They're the type of rockets that blow stuff up. What more do we really need to know?

 

It has everything to do with it. The type of weapons you possess determine what you can possibly do to the enemy, and thus your strategic options. For example, if your nation happens to possess a large army, nukes, and the most sophisticated weapons in the world then there is quite a bit you can do to the enemy to incapacitate them. Such as strike military targets, large formations, important installations, utilities, etc. If, on the other hand, you only have rocks and home-made bombs, your options are quite limited; all you can really do is strike at civilian sectors and perhaps spread misinformation.

 

 

You've given figures on the number of "rockets" that were fired, don't you find it strange that they haven't thought of concentrating their fire at strategic points/resources? Or military installations? Or how about at the Israeli army while they were standing outside? Clearly if their aim is to disrupt civilian life as much as possible they would have concentrated what small firepower they have towards powerplants, utilities, and so on. The fact that they haven't means that either they are idiots or are just simply not capable.

 

Think about it.

 

Otherwise the Palestinians are for the most part unarmed, all they can do is throw rocks.

 

While Israel's policy against the Palenstinians for the past 50 years has left much to be desired, this specific situation is a) they just wouldn't stop, and b) something had to be done.

 

 

It's a lot more complicated then just Palestinians "attacking" and Israel "retaliating". This conflict has been ongoing ever since 1948, when the Israelis kicked the lot of them right off their homes and into large refugee camps, and since then they have been at a state of war. It is not going to be resolved just by sending more troops, more invasions, and more artillery fire.

 

Besides which, when trying to subdue an enemy nation/organization, it is always a wise idea for the invading side to portray themselves as liberators, as people who will come to make everything better, rather than worse. You need the support of at least a significant fraction of the people in order to successfully subdue them. Israel, right from the very beginning, has done nothing to do that; they have constantly attacked the civilian sector, terrorized them, and deprived the lot of them of many rights. As well, many Jewish citizens have basically just went into their lands in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and settled right on top of them, all the while depriving the Palestinians of the same right and opportunity. Neither have they made much effort to control their media and portray themselves as the "good guys" (or if they did, they aren't doing a good job as Hamas is certainly getting to them). Only recently have they even bothered to make an alliance with one group (the Fatah).

 

Yes, both sides are at fault, and yes Hamas is bad news, but clearly the military planners at Israel are not well versed in Sun Tzu. And whether anybody wants to admit it or not, it is Israel who has the resources and ability to better resolve the issue than does either West Bank or Gaza Strip, and to be the one who should start seriously put more effort into diplomacy then they have been over the decades.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Reaper

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

If their aim is to disrupt civilian life, they would make the rocket attacks totally unpredictable. Put everyone in danger or being blown up, and everybody is afraid. That's what they want, and that's what they're achieving.

[Reaper]

If their aim is to disrupt civilian life, they would make the rocket attacks totally unpredictable. Put everyone in danger or being blown up, and everybody is afraid. That's what they want, and that's what they're achieving.

 

Yes, that is their aim, but I don't think it is working too well; if anything it's making them more angry and more willing to use force (as is evident right now). And it seems to be fueling patriotism and religious fervor on the side of the Israelis.

 

 

Terror tactics are usually employed in conjunction with guerrilla tactics (as in Afghanistan and Iraq) and/or for political gains. Not usually as their only means of attack; that only happens as a last resort (usually after their main forces have been decimated).

 

Otherwise, it is far more effective to strike at their utilities or their ability to meet their basic needs, which is what the Israeli army is doing right now in Gaza Strip.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Reaper

[CaptainPanic]

You certainly can't afford to let the terrorists win on their own terms, [...]

 

You know, this very much shows the main problem. Hamas was actually an elected government. The government of Palestine is being called a terrorist organization.

 

According to our "modern" definitions of terrorists, the only people with any authority in Palestine are in fact terrorists. In Palestine, there exist two types of people: terrorists and civilians.

 

According to our "modern" way of handling terror, the only option would be a total defeat of Palestine... which obviously is not acceptable for Palestinians.

[mooeypoo]

Israel doesn't have the goal of totally defeating the Palestinians, CaptainPanic, just Hamas. While it's true that they were elected, it's not accurate to say they're the government -- the "Prime minister" is Abbas (who *IS* conducting talks with Israel, just like his predecessor Arafat).

They were elected *the largest part* of the parliament.

 

Then, there was a civil war a few months ago between Hamas and it's opposition party Fatah (Arafat's party), a *very* bloody one. Lots of civilians dead; Fatah COMPLETELY lost. Hamas increased its attacks on Israel after that, and made it more "official" (the rocket launchers now had official Hamas Police uniforms, they made arrests and terrorised the people themselves and stepped up their persecution of the opposition party and anyone that doesn't agree.

 

That's not democracy.

It's democracy gone bad.

 

The Palestinian authority receives *tens of millions of dollars* in foreign aid (plus quite a lot from Israel, you'd be surprised), and yet the people of Palestine has seen NOTHING of this money while Hamas is arming itself and its leaders are living in excessive comfort.

 

The Gaza Strip is very small. If Israel's goal was to fight the Palestinians (as opposed to fighting terrorists, which is much harder) it wouldn't have risked soldiers' lives in such a ground assault - all it had to do is carpet-bomb the entire strip, and within 24 hours there would BE NO palestinians. The fact Israel's putting such effort in targetted attacks and sending soldiers on foot to flush out terrorist cells, shows that the war is not about the general palestinian people - but the Terrorist organization that took over (Hamas).

 

... It's not about the Palestinians. It's about a terrorist organization taking advantage of *BOTH* sides. Israel's only goal is to stop the rocket attacks and return to a time where peace talks were possible.

 

Like here:

 

~moo

[doG]

Just wondering here....does anyone have an idea of how many ceasefires Israel has agreed to with the Palestinians over the years? Is there any sane reason for them to believe that one more is going to make a difference that leads to lasting peace?

[CaptainPanic]

So, we got a situation of one country wanting to completely destroy an institution (Hamas) that has the support of perhaps the majority of the neighbouring country. That institution has several wings, one of which tried to do politics, the other shoots rockets at civilians.

 

And we got a situation where both sides try to disrupt the lives of civilians of the other side (Palestinians throwing rockets, Israelis building walls to turn parts into prisons or ghettos).

 

The west is saying that they want a democracy, as long as it's not Hamas. We also say that the Israelis should stop attacking, but they're correct to defend themselves.

 

I don't agree with the current course of action of Israel. Also, I obviously think that throwing random rockets to the neighbours is not very constructive (euphemisms rule).

 

All in all... except the military intervention by both western countries and middle eastern countries, I see no way out.

 

My biggest fear is that it escalates. That some idiot in another neighbouring country will attack Israel.

[Pangloss]

Actually Israel has been quite clearly stating that their goal is not regime change. They also support a Palestinian state.

[iNow]

The Palestinian authority receives *tens of millions of dollars* in foreign aid (plus quite a lot from Israel, you'd be surprised), and yet the people of Palestine has seen NOTHING of this money while Hamas is arming itself and its leaders are living in excessive comfort.

 

The Gaza Strip is very small. If Israel's goal was to fight the Palestinians (as opposed to fighting terrorists, which is much harder) it wouldn't have risked soldiers' lives in such a ground assault - all it had to do is carpet-bomb the entire strip, and within 24 hours there would BE NO palestinians. The fact Israel's putting such effort in targetted attacks and sending soldiers on foot to flush out terrorist cells, shows that the war is not about the general palestinian people - but the Terrorist organization that took over (Hamas).

 

This is probably one of the best and most clarifying arguments yet made in this thread. <thumbsup>

 

 

Unfortunately, a democracy gone bad is nowhere near as good as a girl gone wild. </levity>

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Just wondering here....does anyone have an idea of how many ceasefires Israel has agreed to with the Palestinians over the years? Is there any sane reason for them to believe that one more is going to make a difference that leads to lasting peace?

 

The best I've been able to come up with so far is "many" and "long history of," but no exact numbers of ceasefire agreements. It's an interesting question which I think brings some much needed context.

Edited January 6, 2009 by iNow
Consecutive post/s merged.

[bombus]

Just remember, it is not the Israelis that are responsible for that response. A few soldiers killing a bunch of Palestinians, how is that Israel's problem? Remember, the Palestinians elected Hamas, which makes them about as responsible for their actions as the Israelis are for the actions of their government.

 

Err... Hamas took control by way of a coup - they were not elected. And anyway, while the ceasefire was working missile attacks from Gaza plummeted. Hamas does not have control of every militant - just like the IRA has no control over the 'Real IRA' or 'Continuity IRA'.

 

Isreal started this and hope to finish it before Barak Obama gets in. But Israel has him and his administration by the balls anyway. Israel does whatever it likes and breaches any international law it likes and no-one does a thing.

 

Israel is an out of control rogue state and should be consigned to the pages of history.

Edited January 6, 2009 by bombus

[ecoli]

Isreal started this and hope to finish it before Barak Obama gets in. But Israel has him and his administration by the balls anyway.

eh... maybe AIPAC does, but not the Israeli government.

[bombus]

Honestly, if a handful of Palestinians managed to carry out attacks on Israel that were on scale with the 9/11 attacks in the US, including death tolls, I would consider that a less valid reason to invade Gaza than these missile attacks - if the 9/11 style attack was condemned by Hamas and general populous of the Palestinian civilians.

 

The problem I see, is that (unless I see evidence to the contrary) these missile attacks are sanctioned, if not carried out by Hamas which holds popular support of the civilian population.

 

If the Georgian government decided to suddenly launch missiles into Russia and basically declare war - that's their prerogative, but they'd be fooling themselves if they think they are not inviting a world of hurt down on their people, including civilians.

 

No degree of effectiveness or ineffectiveness of an act of war, changes the fact it's an act of war. If you try to use biological weapons to wipe out as many people as you can, but end up only killing a few cattle, does that mean you are only on the hook for minor property damage?

 

Maybe the Palestinians are justified in starting their war - maybe, as I don't have all the details. That being said though, you cannot start a war with a much, much stronger enemy and not expect your own people (including civilians) to suffer. That is just madness.

 

The people I really feel sorry for are those who appear to be a minority of Palestinians that do not like Hamas and do not support Hamas (at least privately) who, because their elected officials believe they should attack Israel even if their whole world burns - have been hijacked by this insanity.

 

This is not a WAR! Israel have not declared war on Gaza. This is punishment inflicted on all Palestinians in Gaza for the acts of an extremely small minority.

It will only work to make Palestinians even more anti Israel. Maybe that's what Isael wants - it would give them an excuse for their own Final Solution for the Palestinians.

 

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

eh... maybe AIPAC does, but not the Israeli government.

 

Same thing really.

Edited January 6, 2009 by bombus
Consecutive post/s merged.

[Pangloss]

Remember, the Palestinians elected Hamas, which makes them about as responsible for their actions as the Israelis are for the actions of their government. [/quote']Err... Hamas took control by way of a coup - they were not elected.

 

Both of these statements are correct, actually. Hamas has enjoyed wide popular electoral support, and it seized power from Fatah in violation of a joint-rule agreement (after Fatah performed some pretty dubious coup-like moves of its own).

 

 

And anyway, while the ceasefire was working missile attacks from Gaza plummeted. Hamas does not have control of every militant - just like the IRA has no control over the 'Real IRA' or 'Continuity IRA'.

 

Plummeted is not stopped, and I think the question of control is a debatable one. (And ultimately I don't think you know whether they can exert that control any more than I do.)

 

 

Isreal started this and hope to finish it before Barak Obama gets in. But Israel has him and his administration by the balls anyway. Isael does whatever it likes and breaches any international law it likes and no-one does a thing.

 

Israel is an out of control rogue state and should be consigned to the pages of history.

 

When you leverage questionable reasoning to draw wild and extravagant claims like this, you undermine your own arguments by revealing your predisposition to judgment. Why even bother to post the rest of your argument? Just issue the fatwah and move on.

[ecoli]

This is not a WAR! Israel have not declared war on Gaza. This is punishment inflicted on all Palestinians in Gaza for the acts of an extremely small minority.

So you're claiming that Hamas represents a minority of Palestinian opinion?

 

Even if that is true, Hamas is hiding its members and weapons among the population of Palestinians in the Gaza strip. Assuming it knows Israel will eventually retaliate against rocket attacks, why wouldn't Hamas seek to reduce as many civilian casualties as possible by, you know, staying away from civilian infrastructure.

 

It will only work to make Palestinians even more anti Israel. Maybe that's what Isael wants

It's definitely what Hamas wants. It wants the support of the UN against Israel which it can easily do by provoking an attack and maximizing civilian casualties.

 

- it would give them an excuse for their own Final Solution for the Palestinians.

oh please... you claim a minority of palestinians support Hamas but suddenly the entire nation of Israel wants to exterminate all the Palestinians?

 

I repeat Pangloss's emphasis about extravagant claims...

[Sayonara]

So you're claiming that Hamas represents a minority of Palestinian opinion?

Hamas may share their opinions with a large number of civilians, but they are the ones acting on it. I think that is the distinction Bombus draws there.

[ecoli]

Hamas may share their opinions with a large number of civilians, but they are the ones acting on it. I think that is the distinction Bombus draws there.

 

And I'm trying to draw a distinction between tacit approval and indirect but active support (harboring terrorists, etc.)

[bombus]

When you leverage questionable reasoning to draw wild and extravagant claims like this, you undermine your own arguments by revealing your predisposition to judgment. Why even bother to post the rest of your argument? Just issue the fatwah and move on.

 

Well you make a fair point re my judgement, but I would argue that my claims are not particularly wild or extravagant, and such claims have been mentioned on the BBC and elsewhere by well educated commentators. (Not the bit about the Israeli state wishing to exterminate the Palestinians mind you. That's my own conjecture).

 

That said, I think the two state solution will never work, because the Palestinians will still end up having lost their homeland. I think the only solution is to have a single secular state where jews and palestinians have equal rights under the law. I fear otherwise it will be a war without end, and could ignite bigger, far worse wars.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

oh please... you claim a minority of palestinians support Hamas but suddenly the entire nation of Israel wants to exterminate all the Palestinians?

 

I repeat Pangloss's emphasis about extravagant claims...

 

It matters not what side the majority of Palestinians are on. What matters is whether they are legitimate military targets - which the vast majority are not! Are the victims of 911 legitimate targets because they supported the USA hegemony?

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Plummeted is not stopped, and I think the question of control is a debatable one. (And ultimately I don't think you know whether they can exert that control any more than I do.)

 

True, but as good as in this region. Hamas have a pretty loose control over 'militants' compared to the Israeli state's control of its soldiers. Holding Hamas responsible for every rocket is a sure fire way of never having to admit a ceasefire is working. Why, if one wanted to start a conflict you just pay someone to shoot a missile and blame it on Hamas.

 

The UK Government was wise not to blame every terrorist attack on the IRA once the ceasefire was agreed for just such a reason.

Edited January 6, 2009 by bombus
Consecutive post/s merged.

[ecoli]

I think the only solution is to have a single secular state where jews and palestinians have equal rights under the law. I fear otherwise it will be a war without end, and could ignite bigger, far worse wars.

Let me state, for the record, that I completely agree with this.

 

 

It matters not what side the majority of Palestinians are on. What matters is whether they are legitimate military targets - which the vast majority are not! Are the victims of 911 legitimate targets because they supported the USA hegemony?

I think there's an important distinction though. If Hamas militants are hiding amoung their own population, should Israel not retaliate from rocket attacks because it knows civilians are there? Keeping in mind that, meanwhile, Hamas rockets are deliberately targeting civilians.

 

The issue becomes: Israel can't retaliate from purposeful attacks against it's citizens because Hamas is purposefully using Palestinians as human (and media) sheilds. Hamas is allowed to target citizens but no Palestinian citizens are allowed to pay for the actions of their own 'government'?

 

 

True, but as good as in this region. Hamas have a pretty loose control over 'militants' compared to the Israeli state's control of its soldiers...

The UK Government was wise not to blame every terrorist attack on the IRA once the ceasefire was agreed for just such a reason.

 

That's a fair point, but this still ignores my contention that Hamas is drawing Israeli firepower to it's own citizens deliberately. Obviously this is still a humanitarian crises from the Palestinian perspective, but what's the better solution? Should Israel simply ignore the rocket attacks? The government would never stay in power that way and, a more radical one, would probably get elected.

[bombus]

That's a fair point, but this still ignores my contention that Hamas is drawing Israeli firepower to it's own citizens deliberately. Obviously this is still a humanitarian crises from the Palestinian perspective, but what's the better solution? Should Israel simply ignore the rocket attacks? The government would never stay in power that way and, a more radical one, would probably get elected.

 

Well, in shooting the rule is that if you aint got a clear view of your target, dont shoot! Yes those darn terrorists are sneaky, but of course they are! That doesn't mean that civilians should pay the price for the sneakiness of terrorists. One can't kill innocent civilians just because they are in the way. That is unethical and makes one as bad as the terrorists.

[ecoli]

Well, in shooting the rule is that if you aint got a clear view of your target, dont shoot! Yes those darn terrorists are sneaky, but of course they are! That doesn't mean that civilians should pay the price for the sneakiness of terrorists. One can't kill innocent civilians just because they are in the way. That is unethical and makes one as bad as the terrorists.

You realize that gives Hamas a clear pass to do whatever the hell it wants... like launching rockets from civilian infrastructure and claiming the moral high ground when Israel retaliates.

 

I wonder if your tune would be different if the Hamas rockets were being launched into your town, threatening your family. The situation isn't as black and white as you describe. If I punch a guy in the face, and then hide behind some other nerd. Is it not my fault that the nerd and I both get beat up? (consider, for the moment that it would be impossible for the guy to retaliate without the collateral damage). How many punches would I have to throw before retaliation becomes acceptable and at what cost?

 

This is not, afterall, 'conventional' warfare. Hamas is trying to win a 'spiritual' war and therefore would accept the collateral damage as part of the 'greater good.'

[padren]

I have to try to ask a few key questions that seem to have very ambiguous answers as far as what people in this thread believe are the facts.... I'd like to see if we can come to some consensus on them:

 

 

1) The Hamas in power (is/is not) the same Hamas firing the missiles.

 

From what I can tell, the leadership in Hamas supports the firing of these missiles, if not facilitates it. I've heard people state the contrary, and I think it's an important point.

 

 

2) Hamas is intentionally avoiding military targets.

 

I read these missiles have no real guidance systems, they are just 'dumb fire' missiles that cannot be honed in on specific targets, and as such they have been fired at the largest general areas they can, in order to try to hit anything they can.

 

3) Palestinians are being held hostage by Hamas.

 

I thought the majority of Palestinians have supported Hamas, and have not called for any international help to be "freed" from them. We have heard no cries for "please stop them from using us as human shields" and the like.

To me, this implies the majority are not opposed to being used as human shields.

 

 

4) Hamas is attacking Israel in retaliation for denying Palestinians key, basic human rights that Israelis enjoy.

 

From what I've been able to gather, Hamas wants the destruction of Israel, and has not asked for any economic/political concessions. I also get the impression that border controls and such do make life hard on Palestinians, but Israel is at a loss as to how to alleviate this issue when it has been the only way to stop terrorists from conducting terrorist acts inside Israel.

 

 

 

I think if we can come to some consensus on these issues, we may be able to debate the finer points of the conflict easier. As it stands now, it's like we are arguing about Bush policies without knowing where we agree/disagree on what he has actually done.

[mooeypoo]

Hamas terrorists shoot the rockets into the air without much aim, with only the intention of hitting *SOMEONE*.

 

They can't see where they're firing.

Under your logic, they should stop, too.

 

Israel is TARGETTING the terrorists (otherwise, there would be much more than 95% terrorists among the dead in such a densly populated place such as Gaza).

The problem is that the terrorists are shooting indiscriminantly ANYWHERE and FROM CIVILIAN locations. The IDF has *called* the places to warn them before attacks -- called the HOUSE of the terrorist to warn him that an attack is coming, so the family will run off... Hamas has used these calls to *call other people into the house* and eitehr increase the death/casualty toll or use them as human shields.

 

Hamas themselves boast about their dead leader who initiated the "human shield" method to PREVENT the Israeli military from warning people before attacks..

http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/en/ArticlePrintPage.aspx?xyz=QrrxVt3TvzXUUXrd2E%2bKdQBAlgyb55%2fynOLl7gNPIB7kdQan1PIPbi4Yz4qDnQsmI5mw%2fZLBPwEI9e0cRV7YbMLBOBX9eObjj3nPt6F9Ns4%2fYdQr7pN2Vg%3d%3d (sorry, I couldn't find a non-print page.. be warned that this page opens a printer dialog).

 

It's not as simple as rules of shooting, really.

 

Check this out:

Storing weapons in a bathroom:

http://www.israelpolitik.org/2009/01/06/where-does-hamas-keep-its-weapons/

[Pangloss]

One can't kill innocent civilians just because they are in the way.

 

Of course you can.

 

Accepting civilian losses to get to the bad guys when they're being deliberately placed in the way is a political choice, not an ethical dilemma.

[mooeypoo]

Specifically when the "bad guys" are about to pull a trigger against your own civilians.