Israel-Gaza Strip conflict - who is to blame?

[Ten oz]

This conflict is very unique. There is war, murder, civil unrest, and government oppression all over the world yet when it come to this issue people seem to internalize the conflict very personally. I understand that "Israel has the right to defend itself" and I can empathize with "rockets exploding in your nieghborhood" but feel many of the feeling expressed here are hyperbole. There has been more murders in Chicago this year than there has been Israelis killed during this conflict. Israel has a population 3 times larger than Chicago. Yet somehow in Chicago residents are finding a way to love normal lives. Local government officials are able to manage without a military response. Views and opinions over who is to blame for all those deaths in Chicago isn't nearly the toxic black and white debate Israel vs Hamas is either. Why is that?

 

A few months back Cliven Bundy, rancher in Neveda, had an armed standoff vs the Federal government of land rights/fees. People who had been associated with the happenings at Bundy's ranch later went into the city of Las Vegas and killed two police officers. Had the Federal, State, or local country government responded by blowing up Bundy's ranch and killing 30 or more people including women and children I think everyone would consider that an over reaction. That isn't to say Bundy is a good guy or that his militia supporters aren't dangerous. Extrapolate that out to Bundy hidding is bedroom communities in Las Vegas amongst sympathic but not different involved families and there is no way a violent military style government response would be tolerated.

[dimreepr]

If Hamas put as much effort into peaceful protest, of their predicament, as they do into firing rockets and fighting Israel, then enough people of the world, let alone, peace loving Israelis would soon bring enough pressure on Israel for them to be forced into an amicable settlement.

 

If nothing else, surely, history teaches us that they only have to follow the example set by India and South Africa, in our recent past to see the truth of that.

 

 

Edit/ conflict is never unique, different maybe, but ultimately the same.

Edited August 4, 2014 by dimreepr

[Ten oz]

If Hamas put as much effort into peaceful protest, of their predicament, as they do into firing rockets and fighting Israel, then enough people of the world, let alone, peace loving Israelis would soon bring enough pressure on Israel for them to be forced into an amicable settlement.

 

If nothing else, surely, history teaches us that they only have to follow the example set by India and South Africa, in our recent past to see the truth of that.

 

 

Edit/ conflict is never unique, different maybe, but ultimately the same.

 

When I posted "unique" I was referencing the way people who are completely sitting on the outside looking in view it. People are dying all over the world. In many areas at a considerable higher rate than in this conflict yet it is this conflict which stirs the most passion from many. Many whom as previously stated are on the sideline.

 

Peace throughout history has seldom been achieved through the sympathy of the more powerful country's peace loving individuals bringing pressure. Ninty nine times out of a hundred the more powerful country decides internally what they want done then sets about looking to ensure it gets done. The methodical approach tends to be a luxury of the more powerful.

 

No I don't not think Israel started this and I believe Hamas are terrorist. Calling Hamas evil and pointing out there failings does not and will not settle anything. Israel is more capable of a messured approach than is Hamas. No one leader or counsel controls Hamas. Looking to a group of loosely aligned terrorist to end a conflict is like looking to the fast food industry to end childhood obesity.

[Acme]

As long as mistrust and revenge informs the thinking of either side then war is the inevitable consequence; trusting and forgiveness is the ONLY way to break the cycle.

Mmmmm... did trusting and forgiveness break the cycle of war for WWII? ANY major war? While trusting and forgiveness may come after defeat, they do not always come and they are not responsible for the cessation of hostilities.

 

As to the OP, placing blame strikes me as useless.

[John Cuthber]

If Hamas put as much effort into peaceful protest, of their predicament, as they do into firing rockets and fighting Israel, then enough people of the world, let alone, peace loving Israelis would soon bring enough pressure on Israel for them to be forced into an amicable settlement.

 

 

That goes both ways. Have you seen Israel's military budget?

[DimaMazin]

That goes both ways. Have you seen Israel's military budget?

An exact weapon has a high price.

[dimreepr]

Mmmmm... did trusting and forgiveness break the cycle of war for WWII? ANY major war? While trusting and forgiveness may come after defeat, they do not always come and they are not responsible for the cessation of hostilities.

 

As to the OP, placing blame strikes me as useless.

 

 

 

Maybe ‘only’ wasn’t really the right word to use especially with such emphasis, given the complex nature of politics; however given the topic and the cyclical nature of the violence, I stand by my opinion in this case.

That goes both ways. Have you seen Israel's military budget?

 

 

 

Having cogitated further on this I think maybe Hamas were correct to provoke Israel with violence. But having done so, and brought focus on the fact that they are being persecuted and imprisoned within their own country.

Now would be the time to switch to a peaceful protest, with the world looking on I think Israel would be forced into a corner.

 

 

 

Edit/ Just to be clear by now, I meant, just after Israel invaded.

Edited August 5, 2014 by dimreepr

[Airbrush]

It is all about the blockaide. Attention should be focused on the blockaide and making it more reasonable. Palestinians feel it is unreasonable, and glad the rockets are fired into Israel because of that.

 

What is so hard about a FAIR blockaide against weapons and building materials for tunnels and bunkers?

[dimreepr]

When I posted "unique" I was referencing the way people who are completely sitting on the outside looking in view it. People are dying all over the world. In many areas at a considerable higher rate than in this conflict yet it is this conflict which stirs the most passion from many. Many whom as previously stated are on the sideline.

 

Peace throughout history has seldom been achieved through the sympathy of the more powerful country's peace loving individuals bringing pressure. Ninty nine times out of a hundred the more powerful country decides internally what they want done then sets about looking to ensure it gets done. The methodical approach tends to be a luxury of the more powerful.

 

No I don't not think Israel started this and I believe Hamas are terrorist. Calling Hamas evil and pointing out there failings does not and will not settle anything. Israel is more capable of a messured approach than is Hamas. No one leader or counsel controls Hamas. Looking to a group of loosely aligned terrorist to end a conflict is like looking to the fast food industry to end childhood obesity.

 

 

 

One persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter.

[Ten oz]

 

 

 

One persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter.

No disagreements there.

[dimreepr]

It is all about the blockaide. Attention should be focused on the blockaide and making it more reasonable. Palestinians feel it is unreasonable, and glad the rockets are fired into Israel because of that.

 

What is so hard about a FAIR blockaide against weapons and building materials for tunnels and bunkers?

 

 

Indeed one action leads to another when revenge is involved, which just adds further weight to my post #125.

[DimaMazin]

No disagreements there.

And no problem for start of war.

Edited August 5, 2014 by DimaMazin

[dimreepr]

And no problem for war.

 

 

 

Anyone desperate enough to attack an overwhelming force wouldn’t do so without an overwhelming reason.

[DimaMazin]

 

 

 

Anyone desperate enough to attack an overwhelming force wouldn’t do so without an overwhelming reason.

Anyone can use any reason to attack overwhelming force

[dimreepr]

Anyone can use any reason to attack overwhelming force

 

 

 

You think they jumped for an underwhelming reason?

 

 

[DimaMazin]

 

 

 

 

You think they jumped for an underwhelming reason?

 

 

 

I think Osama bin Laden was free and didn't need any work in USA. However he organized the attack.

Edited August 5, 2014 by DimaMazin

[Acme]

 

04 Aug 2014 - 4:53 PM

Mmmmm... did trusting and forgiveness break the cycle of war for WWII? ANY major war? While trusting and forgiveness may come after defeat, they do not always come and they are not responsible for the cessation of hostilities.

As to the OP, placing blame strikes me as useless.

Maybe ‘only’ wasn’t really the right word to use especially with such emphasis, given the complex nature of politics; however given the topic and the cyclical nature of the violence, I stand by my opinion in this case.

 

That's fine but it doesn't really inform us of anything. You are in essence saying when people trust and forgive there is no war. Even then it is hardly true because many opposing groups don't trust or forgive each other and yet they aren't engaged in war or necessarily destined to break out in war. For example many in the US [deep] South neither trust 'Northerners' or forgive them for the Civil War, but no one seriously believes war is going to break out.

[MigL]

Didn't think I'd actually have to explain this one to persons of some intelligence...

The reason Israel spends so much on defense and its military is because it isn't only Hamas that wants them destroyed. It is EVERY other nation in the middle east.

If Israel really wanted to destroy the Palestinians, they are the only nation in the area with tactical nuclear weapons ( so far ), yet they don't use them. Does anyone doubt for a minute that if Hamas had nuclear weapons they wouldn't use them ? And why is Israel and the rest of the world scared to death of the Iranian nuclear weapon program ? Is it because of their stated intent to use them on Israel ?

 

As for the blockade...

It also exists on the Egyptian side of Gaza. Why are no rockets raining down on Egypt ?

Palestinians cannot go there either, yet there is no international outcry. Hamas would rather fire at Israel, a country that provided employment for 110,000 of their people ( I did not know that ), until Hamas fired rockets and mortars previously and forced the construction of the blockade. Kind of ironic !

 

And if this blockade is so stifling to the Palestinians how are these thousands of rockets coming into Gaza ? Noone has yet addressed that issue.

Maybe if Israel didn't have to worry about those missiles they could lift the blockade and thousands of Palestinians could have gainful employment and a future again !

Edited August 5, 2014 by MigL

[CharonY]

 

Palestinians cannot go there either, yet there is no international outcry.

 

The difference is that the Palestinians lived in the area now held by Israel. Yet they are only allowed movement in a part of the country. One of the original demands was the right to return to their original settlements/property prior to the 1948 (and 1967) exodus. No similar situation exists with Egypt.

[dimreepr]

That's fine but it doesn't really inform us of anything. You are in essence saying when people trust and forgive there is no war. Even then it is hardly true because many opposing groups don't trust or forgive each other and yet they aren't engaged in war or necessarily destined to break out in war. For example many in the US [deep] South neither trust 'Northerners' or forgive them for the Civil War, but no one seriously believes war is going to break out.

 

 

They trusted enough to lay down their arms and forgave enough to not seek revenge.

[Acme]

 

That's fine but it doesn't really inform us of anything. You are in essence saying when people trust and forgive there is no war. Even then it is hardly true because many opposing groups don't trust or forgive each other and yet they aren't engaged in war or necessarily destined to break out in war. For example many in the US [deep] South neither trust 'Northerners' or forgive them for the Civil War, but no one seriously believes war is going to break out.

They trusted enough to lay down their arms and forgave enough to not seek revenge.

 

No; they were beat into submission and surrendered to avoid being killed. (Arguably those in the American South continue to exact political revenge.)

 

As of last night's new that I saw, the newest Israeli/Palestinian truce was holding because Hamas was beat into submission [for now]. Their tunnels are largely destroyed and their supply of rockets more-or-less exhausted.

[dimreepr]

No; they were beat into submission and surrendered to avoid being killed. (Arguably those in the American South continue to exact political revenge.)

 

As of last night's new that I saw, the newest Israeli/Palestinian truce was holding because Hamas was beat into submission [for now]. Their tunnels are largely destroyed and their supply of rockets more-or-less exhausted.

 

 

 

Maybe, but they trusted that surrender didn’t mean their deaths and still they forgave enough to not seek physical revenge; neither trust nor forgiveness need be an absolute to maintain or inspire peace.

[Acme]

Maybe, but they trusted that surrender didn’t mean their deaths and still they forgave enough to not seek physical revenge; neither trust nor forgiveness need be an absolute to maintain or inspire peace.

No, 'they' did not 'forgive enough to not seek physical revenge'. They did not seek physical revenge because they feared being killed, i.e. the war would still be on. I agree on your last independent clause and note it is pretty much the opposite of the claim you earlier made that prompted me to reply here. My phrasing would be 'trust and forgiveness are sufficient for peace, but not necessary'.

[dimreepr]

My phrasing would be 'trust and forgiveness are sufficient for peace, but not necessary'.

 

 

That’s only true when there’s no victim or persecuted prisoners.

[Acme]

That’s only true when there’s no victim or persecuted prisoners.

I suggest that you don't understand sufficient and necessary regards logical conditions. No need to respond further however as there's nothing to be gained by it.