Harry’s Place

“I hope the tears they shed for the innocent are real and not crocodile tears.”

Err, no.

MattG

So, given that Hamas, the democratically elected and popularly mandated government of Gaza - as we are constantly reminded - is not seeking a ceasefire with Israel and, on the contrary, is threatening both to continue firing rockets and to seek other strategic targets, why should Israel call off it’s military campaign?

Surely the things he mentioned in the passage you quoted are their conditions for a cease fire.

I like this quote:

“We tell the Israelis… Gilad Shalit misses you and we promised to get some soldiers to keep him company.”

What fine ‘folk’.

MattG

“Surely the things he mentioned in the passage you quoted are their conditions for a cease fire.”

If you’re supposedly the victim of aggression, presumably your call for a ceasefire would be unconditional and with the aim of saving lives, and NOT with strategic political objectives attached?

What’s more, it seems clear by the Hamas spokesperson’s language that any ceasefire would be temporary and would be used to regroup and rearm.

Indeed Brett.

Perhaps ‘conditions for a ceasefire’ might say something wild and ludicrous such as….

‘and in return all rocket fire into israel will cease immediately and thereafter’

MattG

We are constantly told by one and all that Hamas was democratically elected by the people of Gaza. Well so was Hitler and look where that led!!!

What rubbish. The “peace movement” is for Israeli security. They have consistently opposed the rocket attacks, which achieve nothing, are immoral and acts of terrorism. They do not support Hamas or Israel - both of which commit terrorism, both of which have an equally poor record of keeping to the ceasefire (Hamas probably better than Israel). They support the civilians in Gaza, who are innocent victims, currently enjoying being showered in white phosporous. Anyway, if you think Israels actions are just, heres a question. If Hamas were hiding among Israeli civilians, rather than Palestinian civilians, in Israeli hospitals, schools and universities, would you support the same methods of “taking them out” - i.e. aerial bombing, destroying the infrastructure, and killing tens or hundreds of Israeli citizens? Would 100 dead Israeli children be an acceptable price for killing a couple of hundred Hamas fighters?

Prediction - no-one will dare answer that question.

“If Hamas were hiding among Israeli civilians, rather than Palestinian civilians…”

That’s absurd becuase firstly, Israeli citizens wouldn’t allow Hamas to hide there, and secondly - and more to the point - Israelis citizens didn’t vote for Hamas.

I am glad, however, that you concede that Hamas employ human shields. You also seem to imply that these people are actually hostages.

Brett also forgets to mention this passage from the same article he cited “Meanwhile, exiled Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk said Monday that Hamas is open to international initiatives for a truce in Gaza but insists any proposal must guarantee Israeli withdrawal and an end to the blockade on the besieged territory.”. This must be so confusing for you Brett - the world isn’t black and white.

Brett - a) you appear to be endorsing collective punishment in that last statement - something not even the IDF would advocate.

b) I posed a moral question - if the situation was as I described, would you still advocate killing civilians?

“What rubbish. The “peace movement” is for Israeli security. They have consistently opposed the rocket attacks, which achieve nothing, are immoral and acts of terrorism”

Post a link to one of those demonstrations.

Can’t find any?

TheIrie, what happened to your previous claims, regarding how the Hamas “thought” the ceasefire was still in effect (hell, only fired a couple dozen rockets and mortar shells, hard to understand why they’d think any different…) when Israel attacked? Don’t you feel you should learn a bit about the situation before commenting?

“This must be so confusing for you Brett - the world isn’t black and white.”

I refer you to my previous response with regard to Hamas’s ‘demands’.

I also note that the blockade itself is an effort to stop Hamas’s importation of weapons and rocket-making materials. So we’re back to square one.

See, it all comes back to the rockets.

Umar - that is the view of an UNRWA representative. I know, since that individual is Palestinian, you won’t accept that, so I’ll stick to sources that you will accept. Like, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, whose data unequivocally shows that during the ceasefire, before the Israeli shelling on 4th November, Hamas was extremely effective at stopping the rockets. Proof that Hamas could have been a partner for peace.

“If Hamas were hiding among Israeli civilians, rather than Palestinian civilians, in Israeli hospitals, schools and universities, would you support the same methods of “taking them out” - i.e. aerial bombing, destroying the infrastructure, and killing tens or hundreds of Israeli citizens? Would 100 dead Israeli children be an acceptable price for killing a couple of hundred Hamas fighters?

Prediction - no-one will dare answer that question.”

Let me try indirectly at first. I can think of two precedents here.

During the war it is now accepted by many - perhaps not all - that had the allies bombed Auschwitz and other concentration camps while it would undoubtedly have killed some Jews many would have been saved simply by putting the Nazi killing machine out of action. A second example - Israel itself risked the deaths of some of its civilians in order to save more (the Entebbe raid) is one example. So I suppose the direct answer to your question is that yes, I could see circumstances in which Israel might need to put its citizens including tragically, children at risk the better to protect a greater number of others.

Given that I have tried to deal seriously with the second and chillingly serious part of your question, I shall leave others of a more satirical frame of mind ( and there are many here) to deal with your lines one to six which I take it are a joke - to lighten the atmosphere in preparation perhaps?

“before the Israeli shelling on 4th November, Hamas was extremely effective at stopping the rockets. Proof that Hamas could have been a partner for peace.”

Riiiiight….

Those tunnels they were digging were for the new Indiana Jones movie.

Hamas is revelling in the death and destruction they have brought on gaza. It is a fulfillment of the words of Hamas MP Fathi Hammad: “For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry.” Their desire for death is being satisfied.

From a speech by Hamas MP Fathi Hammad, Al-Aqsa TV, 29 Feb 2008. http://www.memritv.org/newsletter/clip1710.htm

[The enemies of Allah] do not know that the Palestinian people has developed its [methods] of death and death-seeking. For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry, at which women excel, and so do all the people living on this land. The elderly excel at this, and so do the mujahideen and the children. This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children, the elderly, and the mujahideen, in order to challenge the Zionist bombing machine. It is as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: “We desire death like you desire life.”

Israel might well be the side that violated what had been a very successful truce with Hamas. A shame. Perhaps Israel has political and strategic goals that are more important than stopping all rocket fire?

http://middleeast.change.org/blog/view/an_argument_for_israels_guilt_jerusalem_broke_the_truce

There has been speculation - reasonable, in my view - that Hamas actually relish the death and destruction

Indeed. Their behaviour is quite psychotic, as Richard Landes explains.

Irie - “Hamas could have been a partner for peace”

You’ve seen the Hamas charter. Just out of interest, do you really think that Hamas would ever reject it, as they would have to in order to make peace?

Why, then, did rockets continue to fall in great numbers over Christmas, at precisely the same time Israel was warning of serious consequences?

It couldn’t possibly be that - instead of being a “partner for peace” - Hamas were actively seeking a conflict?

Proof that Hamas could have been a partner for peace.

In the same way turkey’s vote for xmas.

You are mentally ill if you believe such pap.

TheIrie thinks the Hamas Charter is just posturing.

Why would Hamas be building a tunnel towards the Israeli border, Irie?

I mean, that was what Israel destroyed when they (according to you) violated the ceasefire on November 4th.

Would you care to attempt an explanation?

like Mein Kampf?

Brett - then why block food and medicines? Here’s what others think:

Amnesty International: “It is utterly unacceptable for Israel to continue to purposefully deprive 1.5 million people of food and other basic necessities. Such a policy cannot be justified on any security or other grounds and must end immediately,” said Amnesty International. “Israel must allow international humanitarian and human rights workers immediate and safe access to Gaza.”

Oxfam: “International aid agency Oxfam said today that the crisis in Gaza was now critical, Besides the fighting, the dwindling supply of food and fuel was becoming the key humanitarian concern. [...] Nine months ago aid agencies warned the crisis in Gaza was the worst it has ever been since the 1967 ‘six-day war’. Months of a tightening blockade and the latest disproportionate attacks make it much worse,” said John Prideaux-Brune Oxfam’s Country Director in Jerusalem. “Food and fuel are in perilously short supply. Eighty percent of the people in Gaza were reliant on food aid.”

B’TSelem and other Israeli human rights organisations (last January when things were much less serious): “We, Israeli human rights organizations, publicly support the joint Palestinian-Israeli international campaign to end the siege on the Gaza Strip immediately.”

and finally, this explicit statement from Human Rights Watch: “Under international humanitarian law, Israel remains the occupying power in Gaza even though it withdrew its permanent military forces and settlers in 2005, because it continues to exercise effective day-to-day control over most aspects of Gaza life. As noted, in addition to its effective control over Gaza’s land, air, and sea borders, Israel controls most of the territory’s electricity, water, and sewage capacity, and its telecommunications networks and population registry. Israel’s continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic services, constitutes a form of collective punishment in violation of international humanitarian law.”

Landes also highlights some brutal treatment of the injured as they are “thrown” into ambulances. The implication is that Gazans are so used to faking such incidents for the benefit of the Western media that they have no idea how to treat people who really are injured.

One might expect some of our journalists to pick up on such behaviour, but or course they know that should such comment appear in print, they could be returned to their agency in small pieces and their agency blacklisted from the best news gold mine in the world. Exposure to such people (Hamas and the MSM) has a tendency to make on a tad cynical.

Hamas were definitely trying to provoke a conflict, in my view. They seem to relish Palestinian suffering if they can blame it on Israel - which for them is often not coded with talk of Zionists but is open attributed to the hated Jews.

This is why I’ve not been on any ‘peace’ demonstration here in the UK in response to this conflict. The people running them, and doing the propaganda to promote them, seem too keen to defend these murderous clerical fascists. They may make passing reference to their dislike for Hamas’ tactics, but quickly turn back to blaming Israel’s ‘bloodlust’ or Imperialism. I cannot march with those people - I’m leftwing and anti-racist, so I just can’t.

But the call for peace fundamentally is right. Israel will not get a solution through military means. Palestinians and Israeli’s will die, Hamas will survive, regroup, and recruit a new generation of murderous right-wing paramilitaries from the fertile ground of a hopeless, bombed, and grieving hell-hole. The fact that Hamas make matters worse is easy to see from here. It’s clearly not that easy to see amongst enough young people in Palestine.

I guarantee that no matter how far Israel takes this current conflict, Hamas/Islamic Jihad or some variant of clerical fascism will commit atrocities against it’s citizens again.

The only solution is political - draining the swamp of Hamas support by actually rewarding the Fatah movement’s attempts to negotiate land for peace. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza humiliated Fatah. The continued settlement building and security wall in the West Bank makes their approach look fruitless and irrelevant.

There will remain a hardcore of violent anti-semites regardless of the political process. But a successful and demonstrably effective pro-peace group in Palestine would be a partner in tackling them. The current situation makes too many Palestinians sympathise with the far right - who as we have seen through history, always seem most attractice when things are at their bleakest.

So I’m very much pro-peace here - for Israel and it’s people as much as for ordinary Palestinians. It feels no compensation sitting here knowing that Hamas are fundamentally to blame. Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians will still die

The equation is simple.

The agressor either offers a ceasefire or decides that their action is what they want and so continue.

Hamas started it and they clearly don’t want to stop.

Israel’s response so far hasn’t stopped the rocket fire because of their cautious approach designed to do it methodically rather than by carpet bombing.

All Israel needs is probably another week.

Mark - thanks for answering my question. Actually you didn’t, you talking about a different situation. I’m talking about this situation. Do you think in this case that Israel bombing and killing 100 Israeli civilians would be acceptable to achieve the aims of the current war? Especially given that the rocket attacks they claim to be trying to combat have killed about 20 people in 8 years?

TheIrie, where were you while Hamas was shooting rockets at Israel? Did you demonstrate against that? Seems a bit silly, when in the name of “peace”, you neglect to make any demands on the aggressor.

TheIrie - in the 1948 war, Ben Gurion ordered the IDF to shell the Altalena, an Irgun arms’ ship, with Begin on board at the time.

Re your view that “Hamas could have been a partner for peace”, do you really think that Hamas would ever reject its charter, as it would have to in order to make peace?

Umar - tiresome. Tell me, what were you doing about it?

tevya - I think Hamas, after the election, could have gone either way. I think that it could pursued ceasefires and negotiations. There have been numerous statements by senior Hamas people saying that a two state solution is acceptable. Israel undermined this from day one, and ensured that it went the other way. Anyway, the charter is small fry. Actions, not words, are what count, and if you or I lived next door to Israel, suffering occupation, humilitation, starvation, assassination, imprisonment and bombardment I’m sure I would hate them too.

Hamas has spent the last week and a half killing ‘collaborators’, sometimes in hospital beds.

Collaborators in this context means the surviving Fatah activists. The ones who were not among those thrown from the top of office blocks last year.

This is a political movement that cannot even reach a compromise with an arab nationalist movement with broadly similar aims to their own.

Umar - tiresome. Tell me, what were you doing about it?

Tiresome? Screw you Andrew.

You went to demonstrate in support of a clerical fascist organization that started a war on Israel, and you pretend to be some kind of peace activist?

(What was I doing? Hoping my government would finally get moving and stop Hamas.)

“I think Hamas, after the election, could have gone either way. I think that it could pursued ceasefires and negotiations.”

And this is based on what, other than naive wishful thinking?

“and if you or I lived next door to Israel, suffering occupation, humilitation, starvation, assassination, imprisonment and bombardment I’m sure I would hate them too.”

Yes, if I was a Palestinian in Gaza I would hate Hamas for causing all that, definitely I would.

The question is - why don’t the Palestinians do something to stop their own suffering ?

given that Hamas, the democratically elected and popularly mandated government of Gaza - as we are constantly reminded - is not seeking a ceasefire with Israel

That is a demonstrable lie. Jeremy al-Bowen has told us on his always … err … truthful BBC web page that Hamas has a clear policy of a long-term truce with Israel. Bowen always tells the truth about Israel and Hamas.

Irie, you are not comparing like with like.

Supposing that, in spite of the scenario you paint, there were no dead Israeli children? That would be more realistic because Israel makes sure to do what Hamas does not - it keeps its children safely out of harm’s way. Why do you think that Hamas, with all its expertise in constructing tunnels to rent out, for smuggling weapons, oil to sell back to its people and occasionally food, cannot construct even one air raid or bomb shelter for its people in Gaza city?

This is not a difficult question, but it needs asking. Could it be that Hamas actually wants its civilians to die in large numbers so that their suffering - which it has brought about and deliberately exacerbated - in front of the world’s media? Along those lines, you may be interested in the following attempt to make Pallywood stars of injured and shocked Palestinian people:

http://blog.camera.org/archives/2008/12/gaza_mourners_exploited.html

TheIrie - “There have been numerous statements by senior Hamas people saying that a two state solution is acceptable.” - please could you give some links on this.

A hudna, or truce, doesn’t count as peace by the way - Huddabiyah wasn’t much of a long-term peace, just a pause to re-arm.

You also say that “the charter is small fry”. Please answer whether you think Hamas would ever reject the charter as part of a permanent peace agreement.

David T - what’s your source for that? Since there are no media or foreign human rights monitors being allowed into Gaza (another crime on Israels slate), I have to wonder where that information came from, assuming you didn’t fabricate it?

Especially given that the rocket attacks they claim to be trying to combat have killed about 20 people in 8 years?

I would love to know what Irie would do if terrorists kept bombing his neighbourhood and killed only 20 people in 8 years. I bet this great hero who has seen action in 3 world wars and countless minor conflicts wouldn’t run whining and whimpering to his government and demand that something be done about it.
What odds am I being offered?

Israeli civilians are but pawns of the zionists. Imported from world over, and placed as strategic bait in the Israeli south, the zionists intended for them to be rocketed so as to use that as an excuse to start another war and steal more Palestinian land.

Since there are no media or foreign human rights monitors being allowed into Gaza (another crime on Israels slate)

LOL. Mental. With great bells on.

Irene, love, do give up the glue sniffing. It makes you post ignorant drivel and you end up looking like a moron.

Amnesty Self-Appointed Pompous Jerks International: “It is utterly unacceptable yadda yadda”

Get it through your thick skulls: you are not an elected body. You have nil sovereign powers in the region. It is not for you to huff and puff about what’s ‘acceptable’. Israel doesn’t ask your permission. Joos don’t need your blessing to defend themselves. And furthermore, your delusional nonsense gives idiots like Irie the further delusion that he can dictate to Israel how to defend herself.

This Irene thing is getting silly now - I think someone needs to find out if its a jape, or if not whether it is aligned with any organisation. If so they should be told.

News reports today say that anti-semitic attacks on jews in the UK have increased 20-fold in the last 10 days.

Experts and statesmen the world over have been warning Israel about the consequences of its actions. As usual, the zionists have no regard for the lives of ordinary jews around the world.

They do not support Hamas or Israel - both of which commit terrorism, both of which have an equally poor record of keeping to the ceasefire (Hamas probably better than Israel).

This clown can spout this lie until he is blue in the face. It is still a lie, born out of his pathological and obsessive Jew-hatred.

Irene, didn’t I ask you to give up the glue?

Of course the attacks have increased. That’s because the world is full of Jew-haters like you.

I have news for you: Jews will continue to defend themselves, precisely because sick people like you exist.

above report is by Community Security Trust which monitors anti-semitism.

slogans have been painted on houses, a synagoogue was attemptedly burned down, and jewish restaurants in golders green raided

Say what you like about Hamas, but they’re not the ‘taqqiah merchants’ that anti Muslim bigots claim they are. They basically never lie. Everything they say and do is based on scripture. That is why they never say - for example - ‘we are working for a permanent future settlement with a Jewish and Palestinian Muslim state, co existing side by side.

They never say that, because such an outcome is a theological impossibility.

The Muslim Brotherhood last year published its own constitutional blueprint. This document was produced at a time that it is imperative for MBers and other opposition factions to come together to oppose Mubarak. And what did they come up with! A plan described by Egyptian liberals as an ‘assassination’ of democracy, an Iranian style theocracy, with non-Muslims constitutionally barred from the highest offices of state.

Was that ’small fry’ too? What was the excuse this time - they actually fucked up an alliance because they just couldn’t lie about what they stand for

Hamas/MB are very very honest. They will spin, but they won’t lie. That is because they think they’re God’s messengers on earth, heralds of a bright new tomorrow. They’re desperate to share their shiny new truth with you. Can you hear them calling?

To fail to understand this, is to fail to ‘get’ this organisation.

tevya: this for one. It (peace) was a path that could have been pursued, but wasn’t from day one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/24/AR2006022402317.html

Nearly Oxfordion, you are another typical zionist who responds to all facts and evidence and criticism of israel with allegations of anti-semitism and jew bashing

Zionists always reveal when they lose an argument by resorting to such tactics, and accusing people like me as “mad” or “sick”. You cant deal with the overwhelming power of my arguments so you resort to abuse.

If you’re supposedly the victim of aggression, presumably your call for a ceasefire would be unconditional and with the aim of saving lives, and NOT with strategic political objectives attached?

Not neccessarily. As long as they are able to fire the rockets they have some leverage - I don’t find it surprising they would want to use it to try to secure longer term gains.

What’s more, it seems clear by the Hamas spokesperson’s language that any ceasefire would be temporary and would be used to regroup and rearm.

Well I don’t think it’s neccessarily as clear as you say but it is certainly a possibility. I can’t see any deal lasting that relies solely on the supposed good intentions of either side - it is quite likely that another cease fire on the lines of the last one would break down again after a few months. ISTM there would be a need for some independent monitoring body.

Matt G

Perhaps ‘conditions for a ceasefire’ might say something wild and ludicrous such as….

‘and in return all rocket fire into israel will cease immediately and thereafter’

Well surely that is the idea of a “cease fire”. What do you think he meant when he talked about the “equation”?

TheIrie - where???

“I find it astounding then that people who claim to have the best interests of the people of Gaza at heart simultaneously defend and promote Hamas.”

Brett, I was commenting on pretty much the same time on my blog today:
http://seismicshock.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/liberation-theology-and-terrorism-part-3-hamas-sabeel-and-the-children-of-gaza/

There’s no hope for the Gazans unless Hamas are removed. They teach their children to become suicide bombers, it’s so depressing.

I don’t see how anyone can claim to be pro-Palestinian and at the same time stay silent as Hamas abuse the Palestinian people and churn out suicide bombers.

This is a political movement that cannot even reach a compromise with an arab nationalist movement with broadly similar aims to their own.

Which reminds me of the Stern Gang when they killed Jews who were loyal not only to the British, but also to the Haganah.

Or of Open Season, a Jew-on-Jew orgy of betrayal in which the Haganah handed over Irgun fighters to the British.

From a speech by Hamas MP Fathi Hammad, Al-Aqsa TV, 29 Feb 2008. http://www.memritv.org/newsletter/clip1710.htm

From a speech by Ariel Sharon, then Foreign Minister of Israel, to the Jewish settlers in 1998:

In comments broadcast on Israeli radio, Sharon urged Jewish settlers to grab West Bank hilltops before a permanent agreement is reached on the area where Palestinians hope to build an independent homeland.

“Everyone there should move, should run, should grab more hills, expand the territory,” exhorted Sharon. “Everything that’s grabbed, will be in our hands. Everything we don’t grab will be in their hands.”

I don’t care much for the sabre-rattling of lunatics who don’t have the slightest notion of political correctness. I’m much more concerned about people who have the power to implement a hateful agenda and, in fact, carry it out.

Who is worse: a guy who says “I’ll kill you” but has absolutely no chance of killing you, or a guy who says “I’ll take over your house” and the following day comes with an AK-47, his wife and his children and throws you out of your home?

The actual results of incitement do have to be considered.

What agreements will you honor?

The ones that will guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital with 1967 borders — as well as agreements that would release prisoners.

Would Hamas recognize Israel if it were to withdraw to the ‘67 borders?

If Israel withdraws to the ‘67 borders, then we will establish a peace in stages.

What does that mean?

(Haniyeh, Right, Addressing Supporters Last Week In Gaza/by Alexander Zemlianichenko — Associated Press)
Outlook
The Post’s opinion and commentary section runs every Sunday.
• Image of This Week’s Outlook Front

Who’s Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.

* the cynic librarian
* OxBlog

Full List of Blogs (12 links) »

Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web

Save & Share

* Tag This Article

Saving options
1. Save to description:
Headline (required)
2. Save to notes (255 character max):
Blurb
3. Tag This Article

Number one: We will establish a situation of stability and calm which will bring safety for our people — what Sheikh [Ahmed] Yassin [a Hamas founder] called a long-term hudna .

Does a peace in stages means the ultimate obliteration of the Jewish people?

We do not have any feelings of animosity toward Jews. We do not wish to throw them into the sea. All we seek is to be given our land back, not to harm anybody.

Do you recognize Israel’s right to exist?

The answer is to let Israel say it will recognize a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders, release the prisoners and recognize the rights of the refugees to return to Israel. Hamas will have a position if this occurs.

opps - that went wrong.

Israel blockades the whole of Gaza by land, sea and air. Now they are destroying the tunnells, so even the components for rockets will not get through.

What will the desperate people of Palestine be forced to resort to? Yes, thats right, MORE SUICIDE BOMBERS.

Experts and statesmen the world over have been warning Israel about the consequences of its crimnal actions. As usual, the zionists have no regard for the lives of ordinary jews around the world and continue the gaza holocaust.

Anyway, the Hamas - Fatah civil war was very conciously engineered by Israel and the US, to great effect.

He avoids the question at every turn over four pages of the interview.

The answer is that Hamas cannot ever recognise Israel because that would be against their view of Shari’a.

Will you answer the question: would Hamas ever reject its charter? Would Hamas ever change its view of Shari’a?

Irene, you act as if the Palestinians are destined to become suicide bombers. I’m sure many Palestinians would be offended by your apparent suggestion that their only way to solve the war is by blowing themselves up.

“As usual, the zionists have no regard for the lives of ordinary jews around the world”

Care to elaborate?

Mordechai, the entire population is being denied food, water, fuel and medicines. their electric and waste is controlled by its occupying enemy, and their children / fathers / mothers / sisters are murdered daily by Israeli occupation soldiers.

What do they have left to live for?

Even Cherie Blair, wife of Tony Blair, formed this view when she visited (before having to quickly hide underground after the zionist lobby jumped on her like a tone of bricks for speaking the truth)

“As usual, the zionists have no regard for the lives of ordinary jews around the world”

Care to elaborate?

Perhaps this, reported on the Guardian’s front page today:

The Hamas leader, Mahmoud Zahar, hinted today that the group may be planning to attack Israeli targets overseas. Speaking on Hamas’s al-Aqsa TV, he said Israel had “legitimised the killing of their people all over the world when they killed our people”.

“As long as young people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up, you are never going to make progress.” Cherie Blair.

TheIrie
“If Hamas were hiding among Israeli civilians, rather than Palestinian civilians, in Israeli hospitals, schools and universities, would you support the same methods of “taking them out” - i.e. aerial bombing, destroying the infrastructure, and killing tens or hundreds of Israeli citizens?”

The methods used by Israel in this strike are not meant to “take out” Hamas members, but to stop the rockets. Unless Hamas will fire rockets on israeli citizens from israeli territory, there will be no need for the israeli government to consider bombing his own citizens. That’s sick.

Another gem:
“Israel’s continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic services, constitutes a form of collective punishment in violation of international humanitarian law.”

Really? I posted this on another thread, but since TheIrie asks for it, here it is again - daily life in Gaza before the strike:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4g1-HTJYEk&eurl=http://www.israellycool.com/page/2/

Dokter Were, why do zionists find it so unacceptable that Israeli foreign interests should be targeted, when Israel itself routinely assasinates political opponents in other countries and its supporters seek prosecution and imprisonment of academics researching holocaust statistics?

tevya - we’ll agree to disagree then. I think that there are the seeds of peace in his words.

Now, no-one has answered by moral dilemma. Of course, that is because its very obvious that if the “collateral damage” in this operation were innocent Israelis rather than innocent Palestinians, no-one would consider doing it for a minute. There is, behind the logic of this war, a deeply racist, tribal mentality. This isn’t restricted to HP, unfortunately - its pretty much permeated through all the media coverage. And the word, the single word, that surpresses this moral dilemma, that forces it out of peoples conciousness - “Hamas”. Its OK to kill Hamas policemen. Its OK to kill Palestinian civilians because they voted for Hamas.

But what about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion Irene ? Tell us about how they are true because Jews run the world again - that was a good one.

BTW for those who didn’t see here is Irene yesterday :

“MoreMediaNonsense,

I dont know whether jews turned up to the twin towers on 9/11 or not.

However, I do know about the 3 dancing men with binoculars congratulating and hugging each other on a nearby rooftop to the Twin Towers sa the planes hit, as reported by an independent female witness, and who were later traced and found to have flown to Israel.”

http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/01/03/from-the-london-demo/

MoreMediaNonsense, where have you been all day? Busy photoshopping your photos of the protest in Trafalgar Square with all thew jewish groups protesting against Israeli terrorism including Jews for Justice for Palestine and the Naturei Karte?

They were there in their hundreds amongst the 75,000 crowd.

“Now, no-one has answered by moral dilemma. “

Excuse me, I answered it as soon as you asked it.

Pisa - I think I’ll take Amnesty International, B’TSelem, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam, over a youtube clip entitled “Daily life in Gaza”.

No Irene actuallly I’ve been reading the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Very interesting as well.

Where did you learn all this good stuff ?

“You can toss the Protocols out the window if you want, but you can’t deny the fact that everything they plotted, planned and predicted has either already happened, or is happening now.”

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-references-protocols-folder.html

Irene, speaking of sisters and Cherie Blair, have you seen this photo?

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/82642843/AFP?axd=DetailPaging.Search|1&axs=0|82657010%2c82656984%2c82648275%2c82648054%2c82648029%2c82648016%2c82647958%2c82643582%2c82643558%2c82643534%2c82643518%2c82643496%2c82643454%2c82643432%2c82643423%2c82643407%2c82643402%2c82643351%2c82643281%2c82643237%2c82642989%2c82642964%2c82642949%2c82642843%2c82642768%2c82640552%2c82584749%2c82583642%2c82583600%2c82583114%2c82553996%2c82536357%2c82527618%2c82527323%2c82510424%2c82475453%2c82475440%2c79725207%2c76524470%2c75362598%2c73950691%2c73950689%2c73950681%2c76708716%2c71977084%2c71976447%2c71976427%2c71976173%2c71976134%2c71755381%2c71755377%2c71718268%2c71718264%2c71718262%2c71718258%2c71718240%2c76708801%2c71050330%2c56804189%2c56751544|0

Brett - you didn’t - you said it would never happen. That is not answering the dilemma.

Sorry, I mean here:
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/02uy2JZ8Uw445/610x.jpg

A comment re Irene on the other post :

“Edelweiss Pirate
5 January 2009, 4:52 pm

Fuck off Irene. That wasn’t particuarly hard for me to say, to be honest with you. (I do look forward with bated breath to Gene posting an expose of Harry’s support for Stalin, mind. Confronting the haters in your own ranks and that).

Actually, I’ll go further. Irene needs, if she/he is involved, to be driven completely out of the Palestinian solidarity movement. To do that, his/her real identity needs to be figured out.

I can think of a good place to start.

What IP address is Irene posting from Gene?”

You don’t seriously take your opinions from Jew Watch???

“I think that there are the seeds of peace in his words”

If only, TheIrie.

Now, do you agree that Hamas would never change its charter, which declares that the whole land is Islamic wakf until judgment day, blames the Jews for all the wars and revolutions of the 20th century, and calls for the death of all Jews?

Or if “there are seeds of peace in his words”, do you think they would?

And re your question, read about the Altalena

All right, fun’s over. Introducing “Jew Watch” as a source is too much. You’re banned, Irene.

It appears that zionist posters on HP only support Israel and incite Israeli terrorism so they can indulge in their love of abusing StW RR and SWP.

How sick!

when Israel itself routinely assasinates political opponents in other countries

I think you’ll find that’s Syria.

They were there in their hundreds amongst the 75,000 crowd.

75 million, shurely?

Irene is a CIA double-agent who travels cyberspace with the sole objective of making liberal interventionists look good.

“Brett - you didn’t - you said it would never happen. That is not answering the dilemma.”

If it would never happen then it is hardly a dilemma.

What will the desperate people of Palestine be forced to resort to?

PEACE

“abusing StW RR and SWP.”

Hmm - are you a member of any of those Irene ?

Irene
“As long as young people feel they have got no hope but to blow themselves up, you are never going to make progress.”

Ask yourself why do they feel this way:
http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict/Education.pps#31
(power point presentation)

Speaking of children, this is Golda Meir’s view of the subject:
“We can forgive the arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”

You say you belong to the Great British Public. Is this what you mean?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=The%20Great%20British%20Public

Please just ignore this Irene lunatic. Answering trolls just encourages them,

Come on Brett. Do you understand what a moral dilemma is? I pose a hypothetical situation, and you say what should happen in that hypothetical situation, not whether or not it is possible.

Now, no-one has answered by moral dilemma. Of course, that is because its very obvious that if the “collateral damage” in this operation were innocent Israelis rather than innocent Palestinians, no-one would consider doing it for a minute.

Leaving aside the fact that there has been Israeli collateral damage and will no doubt be more in the form of suicide attacks somewhere sometime soon, what exactly is your point? Nation states don’t often embark on military campaigns knowing that they will result in more collateral damage on their own side than their enemy’s.

This or any other campaign may be morally repugnant, but it isn’t rendered so by the fact that side X is enduring more collateral damage than side Y.

anyway, I pinched that dilemma from here:

http://themagneszionist.blogspot.com/2009/01/philosophical-elaboration-of-bombing.html

Cheers MMN.

Yeah, so an IP address.

I can understand normal privacy concerns, but they hardly apply to gibbering antisemite scum.

“You’re banned, Irene.”

Why do those who profes to support free spech love to stifle alternative views and counter opinions? The hypocrisy.

This blog should be renamed Hypocrisy’s Place - you can still refer to it as HP!

Gene - ban Irene by all means, but don’t delete her posts. They have value as a compendium of crazed anti-Semitism.

TheIrie. The situation wouldn’t happen. What’s more it couldn’t happen because for Hamas to be able to base itself among Israeli civilians those civilians would have to be hostages. Are you arguing that the civilians of Gaza are being held hostage by Hamas?

Gene, liberty if it means anything …

Yes, Irene is a revolting anti-semite. But we can’t complain that he/she’s isn’t honest about his/her prejudices.

And why is Jew Watch worse than so many other sites … it’s not very different to the Hamas charter.

Did you see this by the way?http://pajamasmedia.com/ronrosenbaum/2009/01/04/some-differences-between-hamas-and-the-nazi-party-2/

“What will the desperate people of Palestine be forced to resort to?
PEACE”

Your definition of peace means “let them steal all your land, let them kill your children, let them deny you human rights, food, medicine, fuel and electricity.”

TheIrie -

Of course Israel would think more carefully about harming its own citizens. That is what nation states do.

Why you think this constitutes some kind of decisive argument, I don’t know.

I would, however, argue that Israel is willing to sacrifice the lives of its own citizens in order to reduce Palestinian casualties in ways few other countries would contemplate.

Brett - I could try to refashion the question into a situation that you could imagine hypothetically feasible, but since I am trying to establish a principle by reference to a hypothetical example, it is not relevant whether or not the situation is realistic. If you can’t understand this, I’m at a loss.

Brownie - my point is a moral one, hence surely unwise to raise here where pragmatic arguments of the variety “it won’t work” are bound to get me further. Anyway, the point is, if you are Israel, and take at face value the claim that the objective is to stop the rockets by taking out terrorists, but know that there will be civilian casualties, would you still go ahead if you knew those casualties, in the tens or hundreds, would be Israeli rather than Palestinian?

Irie, do you think the following, by Hamas’ (now dead, sob, sob and boo hoo, sniff sniff) very big cheese, and Islamic “scholar” because he could memorise the hadith, is indicative of the peaceful intent of Hamas?

http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/nizar_rayyan_of_hamas_on_gods.php

‘There was no flexibility with Rayyan. This is what he said when I asked him if he could envision a 50-year hudna (or cease-fire) with Israel: “The only reason to have a hudna is to prepare yourself for the final battle. We don’t need 50 years to prepare ourselves for the final battle with Israel.” There is no chance, he said, that true Islam would ever allow a Jewish state to survive in the Muslim Middle East. “Israel is an impossibility. It is an offense against God.”

‘I asked him if he believed, as some Hamas theologians do (and certainly as many Hezbollah leaders do) that Jews are the “sons of pigs and apes.” He gave me an interesting answer that reflects a myopic reading of the Koran. “Allah changed disobedient Jews into apes and pigs, it is true, but he specifically said these apes and pigs did not have the ability to reproduce. So it is not literally true that Jews today are descended from pigs and apes, but it is true that some of the ancestors of Jews were transformed into pigs and apes, and it is true that Allah continually makes the Jews pay for their crimes in many different ways. They are a cursed people.”

‘What are our crimes? I asked Rayyan. “You are murderers of the prophets and you have closed your ears to the Messenger of Allah,” he said. “Jews tried to kill the Prophet, peace be unto him. All throughout history, you have stood in opposition to the word of God.”‘

Now if this sh*t was typical of the genre then you’d have to be as crazy as he was to believe that there was peace in his words. And you obviously believe it, so what does that make you?

TheIrie
“Pisa - I think I’ll take Amnesty International, B’TSelem, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam, over a youtube clip entitled “Daily life in Gaza”.”

And
“Since there are no media or foreign human rights monitors being allowed into Gaza (another crime on Israels slate)”

Please explain how exactly have all the above organizations got their data if nobody’s allowed in Gaza?

MArk - “Of course Israel would think more carefully about harming its own citizens. ” OK - but would the aims of this war justify the deaths of 100 Israeli civilians through aerial bombing by the IDF?

Fox reports:-

100 dead Hamas fighters

60 Hamas captured and sent to Israel for interrogation

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475664,00.html

If any of you cwy I will only take pleasure in your discomfort.

“Irie, do you think the following, by Hamas’ (now dead, sob, sob and boo hoo, sniff sniff) very big cheese, and Islamic “scholar” because he could memorise the hadith, is indicative of the peaceful intent of Hamas?”

No. I said there are different views within Hamas. Rayyan gave Israel exactly what they wanted. Haniyeh, the elected prime minister, was on the other end of the spectrum, and could have worked for peace.

Irene
“Zionists always reveal when they lose an argument by resorting to such tactics, and accusing people like me as “mad” or “sick”.”

We’re not accusing you of anything. We’re merely pointing the obvious truth.

What do you mean by “people like me”? Are there more like you…OMG!

OK - but would the aims of this war justify the deaths of 100 Israeli civilians through aerial bombing by the IDF?

Probably not.

But they do justify have Palestinian civilians die when used as human shields by the government they elected.

De-lurking just to add a link:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/documents/middle_east___north_africa/arab_israeli_conflict/b26_ending_the_war_in_gaza.pdf

This above paper is an excellent summary and analysis of the events leading up to the invasion along with further confirmation of some sketchy details (e.g. HAMAS using this as an excuse to kill Fatah supporters). It also includes some interesting analysis of the reactions of various parties and suggestions on how this may affect future relations.

Whilst I expect the more excitable people on either side of the fence will quickly pick faults with it I think it presents a fairly accurate view of this lead in to this current phase of the I-P conflict.

Which reminds me of the Stern Gang

So named because they banned any music or jokes amongst themselves. They were almost Opus Dei!

You give me a preview button and still the gremlins get in! :(

TheIrie -

Given it is now clear that Hamas has amassed an arsenal of much more effective weaponry, I guess your question is effectively -

“Would Israel kill 100 of its own civilians, in order to prevent the likely deaths of 100 or so civilians in the future?”

What kind of a nation state would carry out such an act?

meh - that is a pretty good report. It advocates exactly what I’ve been saying since the start - ceasefire and negotiate. I could criticise certain bits, but on the whole 8/10.

Brett
“The call for “peace” - it seems to me - is just another cynical tool used by people who actually have little committment to it”

That pretty much concludes the situation. When people start shouting “peace” it often means “die Israel/America”. Wonderful post, Brett, thank you.

Mark - so, in conclusion, it would not be a moral act, if the collateral damage were Israelis. But you do support the war, so presumably you do think its a moral act, as the collateral damage is Palestinian. Is that correct?

Anyway, the point is, if you are Israel, and take at face value the claim that the objective is to stop the rockets by taking out terrorists, but know that there will be civilian casualties, would you still go ahead if you knew those casualties, in the tens or hundreds, would be Israeli rather than Palestinian?

Irie, if you thought about it for a second, you’d understand why this supposed moral conundrum is nonsensical. When any party embarks on a military campaign, it does so with only vague guesses about the likely mortality rate, both for combatants and non-combatants. The Geneva Conventions are clear that for every act of war, the stated military objective has to be balanced against the likely loss of civilian life. So you can’t take out a tower block housing 300 non-combatants just to take out one soldier.

As it happens, I don’t think Israel’s stated military aims in Gaza are achievable. If Hamas can muster one rocket attack whenever it is the IDF head back over the border, the war will have been rather pointless, in my view. As such, I don’t think any of the loss of life will have been ‘worth it’, as such, but this has nothing to do with your illogical ‘dilemma’.

TheIrie -

While you are here - perhaps you could explain the purpose of the tunnel that Hamas was building into Israel. The tunnel that Israel destroyed on November 4th.

And perhaps you could also explain why - if Hamas were so convinced that they were engaged in an unofficial 48 hour truce on Friday 26th December - 13 rockets were fired at southern Israel that day alone.

Answers on a postcard please.

TheIrie - Well that is the inevitable conclusion really isn’t it. I don’t think anyone seriously thinks that this military operation is going to be without end. At some point people will start talking again. The more interesting debate is who will be negotiated with and under what circumstances. Also there is a lot to discern about the scope and strategic goals of the Israeli military operation.

FWIW I support the removal of HAMAS, a two-state solution and am against some but not all of the target selection choices made by the Israelis. I do also believe that military response by Israel to the rocket attacks was justified.

TheIrie -

Let me put it this way.

If Palestinians were being subjected to unprovoked random Israeli rocket fire, deliberately aimed at their civilian populations - and such rocket fire did not cease despite clear Palestinian warnings that military action would result - I would support a Palestinian military campaign that sought to halt that rocket fire, with as few Israeli civilian casualties as possible.

Well, Brownie, it seems to me that you have given a moral answer - that it is not morally justified to kill 300 non-combatants just to take out one solider - with no reference to the nationality or race of those non-combatants.

At some point, you have to get into the calculus of what ratio is acceptable. If you accept the premise that all men are equal, then an innocent Palestinian life is equal to an innocent Israeli life. Therefore, it seems to me the way to decide on what is proportional, is to assume that the non-combatants are your own citizens. In this case, Israelis. How many innocent Israelis is it worth killing in order to stop Hamas et al from firing rockets at Israelis? I think this is absolutely pertinent to the case in hand. On a moral level, anyway.

RE: if you or I lived next door to Israel, suffering occupation, humilitation, starvation, assassination, imprisonment and bombardment I’m sure I would hate them too.

Uhh, you hate them already.

“If Palestinians were being subjected to unprovoked random Israeli rocket fire, deliberately aimed at their civilian populations - and such rocket fire did not cease despite clear Palestinian warnings that military action would result - I would support a Palestinian military campaign that sought to halt that rocket fire, with as few Israeli civilian casualties as possible.”

TheIrie, so would I. But would you?

And would Hamas ever reject its charter?

meh - I wish you were right, but I don’t think the objective is to eventually negotiate with Hamas - I think the objective is to kill them.

FWIW I support the Palestinian’s right to elect their own leaders, a two-state solution and am against a military approach by Israel, which won’t work, and is immoral. I do believe that whilst Israel may have had a narrowly defined “right” to a military response to the rocket attacks, they also had an obligation to Israeli citizens to only take actions whose consequences would improve, not inflame, the situation in the short and long term. But, its good to discuss these things in a civil manner, despite disagreements.

TheIrie. Can you name a single conflict in which civilians have not been caught up? Come on, there are dozens raging around the world as we speak. And thousands to choose from historically. Or is it only Israel that you hold to this high standard - even when fighting an elected government which on a daily basis deliberately tries to kill Israeli civilians?

The people of Gaza elected a government which took them to war with its neighbour. It is tragic that innocent people get caught up in conflicts, but they do. That is the way the world it. But an electoral choice was made and the consequences are being played out.

The question you clearly wish to avoid, repeatedly, is whether the civilians of Gaza are volunteering to be human shields or whether they are being held hostage by Hamas.

TheIrie
“Mark - so, in conclusion, it would not be a moral act, if the collateral damage were Israelis.”

Would it be a moral act for any government to bomb its own citizens? Why are you so obsessed with it? Is your point that, for human rights sake, a government should bomb its own citizens just to avoid civil casualties on the enemy’s side? Or is that moral only when it comes to arab vs. israeli jew? It must be a mess inside your mind!

Look at the comments beneath the article below. I’ve made a complaint. I doubt it will make much difference.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/andrew-grice/andrew-grice-milibands-are-brothers-on-top-1222858.html

TheIrie - Thank you for agreeing that Israel has the right to take military action against Hamas.

I know we also agree that Hamas should change its charter for peace - but do you think they would?

Hasbara ‘I’m a proven liar’ Buster,

“I don’t care much for the sabre-rattling of lunatics who don’t have the slightest notion of political correctness.”

Posters here don’t care much for proven liars. BTW, what a cop-out in your above sentence, just to avoid condemning the hamas brutes who, by their own words, admit to have turned death into an industry.

RE: Would the aims of this war justify the deaths of 100 Israeli civilians through aerial bombing by the IDF?

can you ask a question that makes even a teeny weeny bit of sense, or is that asking too much.

“Can you name a single conflict in which civilians have not been caught up?” as I said before, no. But I fail to see the relevance. In war, as Brownie points out, it is necessary to ensure the casualties, or the anticipated casualties, are in proportion with the military aim. This is not the case here. For those who can’t see this, I proposed the above thought experiment. You also consistently ignore the fact that the elected government of Gaza and Israel have an equally bad record of sticking to ceasefires, and Israel, before, during and after the ceasefire killed many more Palestinians than the other way around.

“The question you clearly wish to avoid, repeatedly, is whether the civilians of Gaza are volunteering to be human shields or whether they are being held hostage by Hamas.” Where exactly, Brett, do you think the civilians should go? Have you noticed that the borders are all closed. The entire Gaza strip is 5×25 km. Its winter. The population has a median age of 17. There are 1.5 million people. They have no electricity, water or food. What, wise Brett, do you think these people should do? Starve, freeze, or risk being bombed?

TheIrie -

I’ll ask again.

Perhaps you could explain the purpose of the tunnel that Hamas was building into Israel. The tunnel that Israel destroyed on November 4th.

And perhaps you could also explain why - if Hamas were so convinced that they were engaged in an unofficial 48 hour truce on Friday 26th December - 13 rockets were fired at southern Israel that day alone.

Answers on a postcard please.

“. There are 1.5 million people. They have no electricity, water or food. What, wise Brett, do you think these people should do? Starve, freeze, or risk being bombed?”

So arms caches are stored in civilian areas and the weather is the reason no one objects? Remind me why this group were democratically elected to lead.

10:29 pm: ‘meh’ posts detailed 28 page policy briefing titled Ending the War in Gaza

10:42 pm: TheIrie pronounces the detailed 28 page policy briefing “pretty good”; he “could criticise certain bits” but feels on reflection that it deserves 8/10.

Do you ever wonder, TheIrie, why noone takes you seriously, you superficial, pompous bloviater?

Seriously Brett, don’t be flippant. They are innocent, half of them children. I’m sure as someone who thinks of himself as a progressive, you want them to be OK. What is your advice to them? What should they do right now?

While you mull it over, watch this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7812547.stm

TheIrie: The people with a duty of care towards the children of Gaza are their parents in the first instance and their government in the second. The government of Gaza, democratically elected despite their stated aims, bu a majority of the parents in Gaza decided to persue this conflict with Israel despite repeated warnings.

It is absurd to ask me on blogs in the UK what they think should be done to protect these children, particularly so when the point of my post is to aks those who supported Hamas but failed to warn them of this likely outcome if they feel at all responsible.

You’re very quick, as are others, to argue that Israel’s actions won’t achieve their desired outcome. But where was teh pasion and committment earlier when someone, a friend perhaps, needed to tell Hamas that their chosen course was futile and could only end in tragedy fro ordinary Palestinians?

The point is - some people only seem to want ‘peace’ when Israel shoots back. When the thousands of rockets were fired at Sderot and other Israeli targets, none of these people - including you TheIrie, gave a flying fuck about ‘peace’.

28 pages in fifteen minutes the Irie, you’re a quick reader. You’ve been had off, mate.

Irie,

You ask only question, when of course there are many. How many rocket attacks should Israeli citizens endure before their government steps in to defend them? The population of Sderot is half what it was 8 years ago. How many more have to leave before the terrorisation of that town’s citiznes is ended? Two-thirds; three-quarters?

The difference between us is that whilst I think Israel’s war is misguided, I don’t need persuading that they are being asked to tolerate the intolerable.

You’re quite wrong, Brett. I’ve always opposed the rockets. I’ve got exactly as much influence over the firers as you have - i.e. none.

You said “The question you clearly wish to avoid, repeatedly, is whether the civilians of Gaza are volunteering to be human shields or whether they are being held hostage by Hamas.” In light of this statement, I’m asking you what should those civilians now do, to avoid being “human shields”, assuming you’re right and its all Hamas’s fault?

“I’m asking you what should those civilians now do, to avoid being “human shields”, assuming “

It is obviously, tragically, too late to do anything now. The action should have been taken against Hamas when they embarked upon the strategy of basing themselves among civilians. A first step towards resisting them might have been NOT VOTING THEM INTO GOVERNMENT!

I think its intolerable too, Brownie. But I also think living in Gaza under Israeli occupation (HRW’s description of post 2005 pull out Gaza - i.e. under occupation), and all that comes with it is intolerable. Orwellian is the best description. Imagine living being constantly monitored by overhead drones filming you. Can you imagine what it must be like. The faults are on both sides, and the solution is to come through negotiations with mutual concessions.

The people with a duty of care towards the children of Gaza are their parents in the first instance and their government in the second.

Indeed. If Irie really does know his/her Geneva Conventions, he/she will know that it is a war crime to hide armaments amongst civilians.

BTW, did anyone else see the BBC report that showed a live Israeli missile attack? The target building was hit first by what the journo desribed as a “warning rocket”, causing minimal damage. The locals evacuated and all moved to the opposite side of the street to wait for the inevitable strike. The missile hit - watched yards away by the assembled crowd (some of whom took slight injuries from flying debris) - at which point residents moved to quell the fires and search for anyone who may have - for whatever reason - failed to vacate the building before it was struck.

Does anyone know how typical/atypical this is? I’m not trying to understate the impact aerial bombing has on a civilian population, but Dresden it wasn’t.

Imagine living being constantly monitored by overhead drones filming you. Can you imagine what it must be like.

Is it a bit like walking around London with some 400 security cameras watching you over the course of an average day? Not much of a hardship, really, I would think.

Incidentally, Hamas imposed shari’a law on December 23rd, including the punishment of crucifixion. See if your vivid imagination can handle that, Irie, then get back to us.

Brett - I think that says it all. When Joseph Rotblat won the noble peace prize, he ended his speech with the most fundamental, and important sentence in the English language: “Above all, remember your humanity”. I’m afraid you have lost yours, if you ever had it.

“including the punishment of crucifixion”
Is that the one with the dripping water that drives you round the bend?

I think its intolerable too, Brownie. But I also think living in Gaza under Israeli occupation (HRW’s description of post 2005 pull out Gaza - i.e. under occupation), and all that comes with it is intolerable.

Thanks, but HRW’s views on the humanitarian situation carry more weight than anything they have to say about the political environment. And the last time I checked, Gaza had two borders, although Hamas are, according to the Egyptians, not allowing any injured Gazans seeking medical aid in Egypt to cross it.

Imagine living being constantly monitored by overhead drones filming you. Can you imagine what it must be like. The faults are on both sides, and the solution is to come through negotiations with mutual concessions.

If I were living in Belgium and those drones were from Holland, I’d be mighty pissed. As it is, those drones are from the country that the people who run Gaza don’t believe has a right to exist. What would you have Israel do? Pretend their southern border is shared by a liberal democracy run by those with no religiously-informed hatred of them, with no self-avowed commitment to Israel’s destruction?

Irie, ask yourself honestly whether you think Israel has any long-term designs on Gaza? Do you really supposed this 25 mile strip of land is part of their plans for a greater Israel? Do you believe that a regime in Gaza that cracked down on terrorism, eschewed anti-Semitism instead of putting it at the heart of the education curriculum, and offered Israel a genuine partner in peace, would still be bombed?

TheIrie

You’re a regular Lady Justice, aren’t you, weighing Brett’s humanity in your scales, judging it insufficient, and with one swift swipe of the sword of Reason (for thou art so very Reasonable) dispensing moral justice.

You pompous, pompous, pompous fool.

Overuse of the word pompous demonstrates lack of creativity.Please leave the classroom.

Every single time real peace negotiations started to get somewhere, such as the last time when Sharon, Abas, Bush and Blair sat down, Hamas have blown up a bus. The truth is, it’s likely the Israelis would have been forced into allowing a proper two state solution years ago if Hamas hadn’t sabotaged every stage of the peace process. Those who support a one state solution, as many of the marchers do, and thus support Hamas’ rocket fire until they achieve this totally unrealist goal, also have blood on their hands.

However we can’t ignore that the scale of Israel’s assault is totally unwarranted and is causing death and misery for too many innocent civilians, plus is wholly counterproductive in the long term. Bombing the Palestinian Authority’s infrastructure is what in large part shifted Palestinian opinion to the right in the first place and caused the chaos in the Gaza strip where militias now run the show that even Hamas has little control of. Only by conducting such huge military operations every year will Israel be able to keep a lid on things, but that is laying the ground work for never ending war and bloodshed. In short, there must be a ceasefire soon.

As someone who is looking out for British interests here, I can tell you this operation is most unhelpful to moderate British Muslims.

“(for thou art so very Reasonable)”

Shall I compare thee to a Dobermans arsehole?
Thou art more wizened and malodorous.

Brownie - You appear incapable of any kind of empathy with the civilian population of Gaza, again since they are governed by Hamas. Well, regardless of who their government is, they are suffering badly, before this war even started. Much much more than the population of Sderot, who have your sympathy.

Anyway, What would I have Israel do? Implement a two-state solution, end the occupation of Gaza (and the WB), give them sovereignty over their borders, whilst retaining sovereignty over Israels borders, give them back autonomy over their economy. In short, allow them to live as human beings. Dry up the well of hatred that fuels this conflict. Its not that complicated. In fact, it was working between June and November. If you’re unaware of the proposed and widely accepted solutions, look at the Geneva Accords website.

Thanks for that, blahlblahblah, though I must say I may choose to ignore the advice of someone who fails to write “blah blah blah”.

Oh, and by the way in rhetoric it’s called epizeuxis.

I think the arguments of Brett, David T, Edmund Standing, Gene and other similar ones are the more convincing. It’s clear that TheIrie and Co are grabbing at straws. It’s so fucking obvious who started this latest round of shit and what needs to happen before it stops.

“Dobermans arsehole” - apostrophe missing. Come on, man, at least try, why don’t you.

It is your democratic right,in a liberal democracy, to choose to ignore who you like.I am going to look up “epizeuxis” on wikipedia to see if it means repeating a word three times.
Do you teach rhetoric then?

“apostrophe missing.” I am not falling for that one.Besides,the apostrophe key is broken.

Er… no. Sorry for being a bit grumpy, bedtime for me, I reckon. We’ve derailed the thread enough. Enjoy Wikipedia but careful though, you’ll be up all flippin’ night once you start.

I was quoting Shakespeare.The apostrophe was not invented until 1870,to celebrate the birth of a new european nation,Germany.

You appear incapable of any kind of empathy with the civilian population of Gaza, again since they are governed by Hamas.

Then you apepar incapable of reading.

What would I have Israel do? Implement a two-state solution…

Let me stop you there. Do you see any problems with this? You know, given Israel’s oppoennts in this current conflict aren’t that keen on anything other than a single, Islamic state? Tell me, how does Israel go about implementing a two-state solution on her own?

I’ll ask you again: what do you think Israel’s long-term designs are on Gaza? Do you think she wants the strip as part of a greater Israel? I don’t hear even the most severe critic of Israel seriously suggest this. So why would you suppose that Israel would fail to do any of the things you would have her do in the event Hamas stopped trying to kill Israelis and recognised her right to exist? Or maybe you think Israelis bomb Palestinians just for kicks?

“We can forgive the arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”

Golda Meir could have begun by loving Arab children herself. In fact it was her obligation, since she had quite a few of them inside Israel.

But unfortunately, she allocated to Arab children one-tenth (1/10) of the per capita education budget she allocated to Jewish children.

Also, it somehow didn’t occur to her that the Absentee Property Act, which confiscated the property of the Arabs who had been expelled from Israel (adding injury to injury), could have anything to do with the Arabs hating her.

Also, who forced the Jews to kill Arab children in Deir Yassin, Dawayma, Kibya, the Semiramis hotel in Jerusalem, the Jaffa Gate, the Damascus Gate, Balad-al-Sheik…?

Can one of the post-colonial leftists on this board explain to me why when Hamas is controlling the southern border (Rafah), that it claims to be under siege - and why that is Israel’s problem and justification for attacking Israeli civilians?

Hasbara ‘I am a proven liar’ Buster, you insult everyone here by posting stats which cannot be believed. Nothing you say will be believed, ever again.

But lying is not enough any more - you’ve added a blood libel for good measure.

So, given that Hamas, the democratically elected and popularly mandated government of Gaza - as we are constantly reminded - is not seeking a ceasefire with Israel and, on the contrary, is threatening both to continue firing rockets and to seek other strategic targets, why should Israel call off it’s military campaign?

Well, its a good question and I shall answer it. Osama Hamdan was noting the fact that Israel cannot destroy a large faction of the Palestinian political establishment by force, because that would essentially mean destroying Gaza. Rocket attacks are, in a crude sense, a sign that Hamas is alive. Israel has not stopped the rocket attacks, and if it did it would likely be only be for a short period.

The rocket attacks are terroristic in the sense they cause mainly psychological distress (as noted by the Israeli Defence Ministry), but I would add they are symbolic too. They are symbol of resistance. You can agree or disagree with that resistance, or the notion that it should be even be labeled as such, but that how they are seen by many Palestinians and other folks around the world. The more Israel attacks, the greater that resistance grows, and the greater Hamas is legitimised in some eyes, or indeed secures its own power in Gaza.

So, how to reduce the rockets attacks to almost zero? Establish another ceasefire. Israel foreign ministry has already recorded the success of the last one, which ended only last November: rockets attacks were reduced from an average 179 per month to just 3, for a four month period, representing considerable security gains for folk living in the border areas.

On the contrary, they are taunting the Israelis towards greater violence.

Well, “taunting” is one way, I suppose, of describing ineffectual and rudimentary rocket attacks that have a kill rate of about 20 per 8,500 rockets. Hamas fire rockets at Israel as a sign of resistance, and they are not going to voluntarily stop as Israel flattens buildings, mosques, attacks Hamas members, and kills numerous women and children. We agree, do we not, that Israel is the only one of these parties capable of inflicting “greater violence” anyway, because it is the only one with the weaponry to carry that out.

We always talk about the intent of Hamas, but we always seem to be faced with much more of the spilled blood and guts reality with this wretched, limping, and confused Israeli government.

However, as has been proven and acknowledged by the Israelis (although not in a press statement today, obviously) is that Hamas can implement a pretty effective ceasefire. That was what happened for four months last year up to November: rockets attacks were reduced from an average 179 per month to just 3.

As regards the security of border folk (the justification for this war from the kinder, gentler Tzipi Livni, as opposed to Netanyahu who is rather more belligerent), this ceasefire represented a greater success than the current carnage in Gaza.

Carnage which is apparently the “price”, we are told, by the immaculately dressed Livni. However, it’s the price not of success - but of failure. The stupid, easy use of force - and indeed, most importantly, the ability to carry it out doubled in spades - is Israel’s problem, now. It’s sad, because during my childhood I vaguely Israel as having a reputation as some sort of ‘progressive’ state, the land of the Kibbutzim and social democracy. Those days are long gone now, never to return, and we need not necessarily mourn them. However, we may wish to consider what that has been replaced by. The country has, at the very least, got a severe image problem.

TheIrie: Imagine living being constantly monitored by overhead drones filming you. Can you imagine what it must be like.

It must feel like being a celebrity LOL.

I am sure that the drones will not pass any personally identifiable information in their constant filming!

All they need to do is cover the toilet’s skylight and all would have been fine.

But no, their “democratically elected representatives, Hamas (c Benji the liar)” decided to shoot rockets, and now they will pay for that.

Funny how Hamas insists that Israel must open its borders to commerce with Gazans (so that Hamas can take their cut, just like pedophile Prophet Mohammad the slave owner and the assassin used to do as a bandit before he became a warlord duping his own people with fantastic stories of Gabriel and whatnot, in order to rule).

Imagine that you have to make commerce under the threat of the gun. This has another name - a protection racket, which is what Islam is. Islam means submission to the thug. The thug wants to rule and leech off your production. That is what the Palestinians have been reduced to, a people of the leech, thanks to Hamas.

“There has been speculation - reasonable, in my view - that Hamas actually relish the death and destruction. They perceive this a victory in a propaganda war fought in the arena of public opinion.” – Brett.

Beyond doubt I would say.

But no, their “democratically elected representatives, Hamas (c Benji the liar)” decided to shoot rockets, and now they will pay for that.

Yes, Hamas began shooting their rudimentary rockets again in November, after massively reducing rockets attacks to an average of 3 per month for four months (down from a previous average of 179), under an agreed ceasefire with Israel. Hamas started firing larger numbers of rockets again in November after Israel killed six people in Gaza as they dealt with an alleged tunnel to Israel.

Now then. That’s all true, but it wouldn’t sound so good as war propaganda coming out of the mouths of Israeli spokespeople would it? It sounds a bit conflicted and muddy doesn’t it - which it is.

So get back to the agreed script that Hamas are all crazies showering hundreds of rockets non-stop “onto the heads” of Israelis, forcing them to cower in fear and play a “lottery of death”. Ah yes, that’s better.

Blimey, this damned war has made me write my roughly annual post to my blog. Enjoy.

And why did Hamas terminate the truce in the first place?

Because it wanted to force its commerce on the Israelis and get a cut of the proceeds so it could finance its police operations against the Palestinian opposition and continue its undemocratic rule.

Do you have a link to the “alleged” tunnel, or is it like your linkless “Israel targets hospitals” nonsense?

As its commonly and wisely said, produce the link, or STFU.

Obama needs to extend the war right into Pakistan, Israel needs to attack Hamas in Damascus and Hezzbolah in Tehran!

Brownie - “Tell me, how does Israel go about implementing a two-state solution on her own?” This is nonsense. Do you know that, judging by the best polling data we have, there are a roughly equivalent sized minority of people in both Israel and Palestine who believe in a “greater Israel”/”greater Palestine” respectively. In Israel, this includes Ariel Sharon’s party, Likud*, which may well win power in the the form of Netanyahu - a complete nightmare prospect. If this happens, would it be just to wage a war against Israeli civilians for voting the wrong way? You can’t chose your neighbours. You can’t justify not fulfilling your obligations to the two-state-solution because of the “character” of the opponent. Regardless of the opponent, you negotiate, you set out his obligations your own, you measure progress against these, and you move forward, step by step. Hamas showed every sign of being willing to participate in this process.

Furthermore, Israel has had decades to make peace with Palestine, long before Hamas came along, and it did nothing. Last year, 2008, saw a massive acceleration in settlement building, including the opening of a new settlement in the WB. The fact is, if you believe in the 2ss (which, when you scratch the surface, many of Israel’s supporters on this blog do not), then you have to regard any breach of the basic conditions, land grabs and so on, as a breach of the peace, everybit as grave as the rocket attacks on Sderot.

* See here for the Likud “charter” as it were, including this: “The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.”

Benji lies again — what is with these Israel hating Islam loving leftists that they have to lie?

(Hamas) after massively reducing rockets attacks to an average of 3 per month for four months

The detailed tally here shows only 2 months of relative peace, and 4 months of massive rocket/mortar attacks.

So Hamas Truce means 2 out of 6 months you only get 3 rockets.

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2008/12/rocket-calendars.html

Benji, in all wisdom, you call that a Truce? What have you been inhaling?

Well, “taunting” is one way, I suppose, of describing ineffectual and rudimentary rocket attacks that have a kill rate of about 20 per 8,500 rockets.

You’re the parents of young children. You don’t revile your neighbours across the border. You don’t deny their right to exist. You don’t send your children to a school that preaches hatred of your neighbours simply because of who and what they are. Nevertheless, your children are taught what they must do when the siren sounds before they are taught to read. They play in parks where half the land is given over to tunnels and shelters. Barely a day goes by where you’re not having to grab the hands of your children to drag them underground so that the low kill ratio remains just that.

Benji, you need to look up and try to understand the word “terrorism”.

Irie, your last comment was an exercise in question avoidance like no other. I asked you what Israel should do, and you replied that they should implement a two-state solution. I said given their current opponents in this conflict don’t support a two-state solution, how might Israel go about implementing a two-state solution by themselves? You follow up with non-sequitur bluster.

The reality is that government in Tel Aviv supports a tss. The one in Gaza does not. Hamas does not accept the right of Israel to exist. Anyone seriously interested in a sustainable peace built on a tss would be looking to Hamas for the concession.

Irie - “See here for the Likud “charter” ”

The Likud would change its charter for peace: I ask you again - do you think that Hamas would ever change its charter?

The detailed tally here shows only 2 months of relative peace, and 4 months of massive rocket/mortar attacks.

Actually, looking at the detail at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (there’s graph near the bottom entitled “The Lull in Fighting”) the massive reduction in attacks actually lasted more like four and a half months. Then the increase in early November and December.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Missile+fire+from+Gaza+on+Israeli+civilian+targets+Aug+2007.htm

Benji,

Have you looked up “terrorism” yet? Do you still think the terrorisation of a civilian population can only be measured in bodies?

Benji, you need to look up and try to understand the word “terrorism”.

Yes, I have already said the rockets are terrorism, in that they strike fear into people. However:

“Clearly everyone wants to be surrounded by concrete block, but we need to remember that Qassams are more a psychological than physical threat.”

Defense Minister Director-General Yaakov Toran.

They rockets are very rudimentary, inaccurate and unguided. It’s quite clear from an offensive military point of view they are virtually insignificant, and in terms of terrorism, they are “more a psychological than physical threat”, as Defense Minister Director-General Yaakov Toran notes.

Benji, there is a difference between clarifying the impact of 8,500 rockets over 8 years and understating it. You are most certainly doing the latter, and you fucking know you are. Someone who understood the term “terrorism” rather than simply knowing how to type it would not be doing this.

The population of Sderot has halved in the last 8 years. What proportion of the original population must be forced to flee before Israel is justified in responding to rocket attacks?

Brownie - why do you put up with Benji here ?

Hamas started firing larger numbers of rockets again in November after Israel killed six people in Gaza as they dealt with an alleged tunnel to Israel.

Well, more specifically, they killed six Hamas militants.

And there’s no need to describe the tunnel as “alleged” - Hamas did not deny its existence. And its purpose was fairly self-evident - unless perhaps you’d like to speculate otherwise.

And furthermore - given the array of superior rockets that Hamas now seems to have amassed - it is quite clear that Hamas were using the ceasefire as nothing more than a convenient period to stock up, before the next inevitable resumption of hostilities.

As they have done in every previous “ceasefire”.

Hardly the behaviour of an outfit committed to peace, is it?

Brownie - “The reality is that government in Tel Aviv supports a tss.” How, then, do you explain the increase in state sponsored settlements in the WB?

“The one in Gaza does not. Hamas does not accept the right of Israel to exist. Anyone seriously interested in a sustainable peace built on a tss would be looking to Hamas for the concession.” Well, I’m looking for Hamas to make this concession. Everyone is. And they probably would, given similar steps by Israel. The problem is two sided. Yes, Hamas must stop the rockets, but Israel must stop the occupation, must stop the siege, must stop the settlements. These are all breaches of the 2ss. Why do you only see the crimes of one side in this equation?

And Brownie, wouldn’t you agree that Likud is the mirror opposite of Hamas - a religious fundamentalist organisation that rejects the other sides right to exist? And if so, what should we do if Likud is elected? Should the response be the same as the response to Hamas - i.e. international boycott?

And Brownie, wouldn’t you agree that Likud is the mirror opposite of Hamas - a religious fundamentalist organisation that rejects the other sides right to exist?

TheIrie, why do you keep making your ignorance so obvious? Don’t you think you ought to learn a bit about the subject, before posting hundred of useless comments and derailing threads?

Benjamin - Surely the aim of terrorism is to be more of a psychological than physical threat. What is the wider context of the quote from the Defense Minister?

Mark T: And there’s no need to describe the tunnel as “alleged” - Hamas did not deny its existence.

So there we go with two more Benji lies - that the tunnel may have been fictional and those 6 killed were not Hamas blackshirt torturers.

I am checking into the foreign ministry link -

Still waiting for the “Israel targets hospitals” link by Benji. Only if he would care to exonerate himself from this lie.

Again, what is wrong with Israel hating Islam loving leftists that compels them to lie so brazenly for a racist regime like Hamas?

Benji, did I tell you that the assassin mass murderer Prophet Mohammad owned and raped slaves? (someone deleted that BTW). Now if con man Mohammad is in the constitution of Hamas and each and every Islamic nation, what does that tell you about Muslims in general? Yes, in general Benji? Can you say the sky is blue, or are you such a coward that you are unable to draw a logical inference?

What proportion of the original population must be forced to flee before Israel is justified in responding to rocket attacks?

Israel is justified in responding to the rocket attacks in the way its political leadership sees fit. However, the way it responds is an indication of the calibre of its leadership. A stupid leadership acts in the way it has done, and its an indication of weakness.

Israel is vainly trying restore deterrence against a guerrilla and political movement when it failed against in its last attack on a guerrilla and political movement in the invasion of Lebanon in 2006, that too caused widespread damage and civilian casualties. That guerrilla and political movement, Hez, was created partly through Israel’s previous invasion of Lebanon.

So. What I am trying to work out here is whether Hez will be simply strengthened in the long term by this latest carnage, or will the military action simply sire another movement more extreme?

When the dust settles and people count the dead bodies and collect the body parts, many people will think Israel callous for doing this. I prefer to think that Israel has just got a stupid and deluded leadership, like Maoists who think that through force they can quickly recast politics.

It’s almost laughable, too, that these fools can’t even write their own lines. It’s part of the “War on Terror” they say, too. So they’ve been handed by the Americans the dog-eared script that much of the world is thoroughly disillusioned with.

So there we go with two more Benji lies - that the tunnel may have been fictional and those 6 killed were not Hamas blackshirt torturers.

I never stated those they killed were not Hamas, although I have no evidence they were “blackshirt torturers”.

I have no evidence that the tunnel existed. If you supply me with evidence, I shall happily delete the word ‘alleged’.

What is the wider context of the quote from the Defense Minister?

He was talking about spending priorities.

I never stated those they killed were not Hamas

No. But you just referred to them as “people”, which of course allows the interpretation that those killed were civilians.

Why not be specific?

I have no evidence that the tunnel existed

Hamas has not denied Israel’s version of events.

Benjamin - Spending priorities in regards to what? I assume that the local population under rocket threat were wanting more defenses built or similar?

So Benji lies again and when caught, he says, well “as far as I know” that was correct.

Hey idiot, the burden of proof is on the claimant. When will you learn this dictum of modern civil society? Maybe you should move to Gaza as your methodology and integrity seems to match the average Mohammadan worshipping Muslim?

If you cannot attest to the factuality of a certain claim, you dont express it as a truth statement. Understood? And if you do, dont come back and idiotically say, well that was just a guess. You say “I stand corrected” - slimebag.

You claimed 3 rockets for 4 months of the 5.5 months of truce.

Your own link says Israel received 8, 12, 11, 4, 2 rockets and mortars.

Now tell me liar, which of these 5 months is a 3 rocket/mortar month? And before you slime off, let me tell you as far as a victim is concerned, there is substantially no difference between a mortar and a rocket.

Have you converted to Islam Benji? Your string of taqiyyas matches the kind of lies and dishonesty I have witnessed only in Islamic countries. You will feel at home in Gaza or South Lebanon. Just a suggestion.

And they probably would, given similar steps by Israel.

Israel is justified in responding to the rocket attacks in the way its political leadership sees fit.

What do you think Israel’s repsonse to the halving of the population of Sderot should have been? Make it something that Israel hasn’t already tried and watch fail.

Spending priorities in regards to what? I assume that the local population under rocket threat were wanting more defenses built or similar?

Here’s the link:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3222783,00.htm
(near the bottom)

Benji, still waiting for the correction on “alleged”.

Yes, he’s making the point that there is finite budget for security measures and that spending more in places like Sderot would yield diminishing returns given the measures already taken (bunkers, early warning systems, etc.) and fairly low-level physical threat posed by the rockets.

What he’s not doing is minimising the terror aspect of living a town where you’re having to scurry to shelters with your family on a daily basis because the people in charge 20 miles away want to kill you for being Jewish.

You claimed 3 rockets for 4 months of the 5.5 months of truce.

Dear me. I said an average of 3 rockets per month for 4 months: “reducing rockets attacks to an average of 3 per month for four months (down from a previous average of 179)”.

Checking those figures on Israeli Ministry of Affairs website, the average is actually 3.5 for the 4 consecutive months of the lowest firing, although I have some other figures that suggest 3.

At any rate, at 3 or 3.5, its a dramatic reduction from a much higher average.

Benjamin - So $24 million plus a potential $9.6 million for defense against the rocket attacks.

Even ignoring the psychological damage caused by the potential to be blown up at any time of day or night it seems per rocket HAMAS are getting a good return on their investment in terms of the cost to Israeli society.

Also as Brownie rightly points out the selective quote you pick doesn’t quite have the same ring when put in context.

Benji, still waiting for the correction on “alleged”.

You have not provided me with anything. You simply made a statement.

If Hamas weren’t building a tunnel, you’d think they would deny it when Israel accused them of doing so, wouldn’t you?

Or are they stupid?

Come on Benji, give it up. Frankly you’re only making yourself look pathetic.

Brownie - what you are saying is actually quite radical. You are placing all the onus on one side. “The issue is Hamas’ rejection of two states, ffs!”. Similar Israeli rejection is not the issue, in your view. If you open your eyes to the actual reality, it is as follows. Israel currently says it accepts the 2ss (it may not, after the election), but systematically undermines it. Not only on debateable issues of security, but also in the form of building settlements. Hamas say they reject the 2ss, but have proposed 20 year ceasefires for example, and when tested, they stick to them reasonably well.

As for the first step - it should be mutual. The first step, as Tony Blair said, is to simply stop the immediate violence. It is the ceasefire being called for by everyone in the world, including Hamas, with the exception of the US and Israel.

The halving of the population of Sderot, is a result of the failure to make peace. Just as the abject misery inflicted on the people of Gaza is. You cannot give security to the people of Sderot by bombing Gaza, anymore than you can bring security to the people of Gaza by rocketing Sderot. So, both sides are to blame.

The issue is the peace process, ffs!

What he’s not doing is minimising the terror aspect of living a town where you’re having to scurry to shelters with your family on a daily basis because the people in charge 20 miles away want to kill you for being Jewish.

I never said he was minimising the terror aspect, in the sense they are more of psychological threat. I simply quoted him as saying “we need to remember that Qassams are more a psychological than physical threat”. Clearly that is the case because the rockets are very rudimentary, inaccurate and unguided. It’s quite clear from a offensive military point of view they are virtually insignificant.

Here are the figures for rocket and mortar attacks on southern Israel:

Year No. of rockets Mortar bombs
2001 4 245
2002 35 257
2003 155 265
2004 281 876
2005 179 238
2006 946 22
2007 896 749
2008 1,571 1,531

And to think, Israel should be annoyed about this?

Benji, you won’t answer the question about what proportion of Sderot’s population must flee before Israel can respond to rocket attacks, so I’ll ask a different question. What is the rocket attack threshold that would justify a military response from Israel? It clearly isn’t 1000 per year. So how many?

Mark T

You have not provided me with any link saying what Hamas did or didn’t say about the affair.

It’s quite clear from a offensive military point of view they are virtually insignificant.

Israel is repsonding to the terrorisation of its southern population. Only you are fixated on the “military signifiance” of the rockets. The vast majority of exploded IRA bombs came with warnings and killed no-one. Would you like to play down their terrorism?

Benjamin
It’s quite clear from a offensive military point of view they are virtually insignificant.

But you also agree that they weren’t launched from an “offensive military point of view” as you labeled them a terrorist act above. So what is your point in making use of that quote to say that?

Benjamin -

Media Reactions

vi) Abu Salim , Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine spokesman, said that by its actions “the Zionist enemy began hinting at the end of the lull arrangement” (Pal-today website, November 5).

Notice that not one of these spokesmen denies the factual basis for the Israeli raid.

Link here -

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ct_e011.htm

If that is not sufficient for you, perhaps you could explain what six Hamas militants were up to in a house 250m from the border?

You have not provided me with any link saying what Hamas did or didn’t say about the affair.

You want a link to Hamas not denying the existence of the tunnel? Think about that one for a second.

Brownie

Indeed, they should be annoyed. But what the detail also shows is that the rockets were massively reduced to an average of around 3 per month for a four month period in 2008. A small but potentially important and significant step to peace.

You want a link to Hamas not denying the existence of the tunnel?

That is not what I said. Read again.

No Benji its not gonna wash. Both the foreign ministry and the EldersofZion website show 7 to 8 on the average rocket+mortar per month during the truce.

I believe the discrepency between your 3 - 3.5 figure and mind is because you are NOT counting mortars.

As said before, mortars are as effective as rockets in a shorter range. If you are talking about a truce, you need to include mortars, and 7 - 8 per months is hardly a truce. It may be a pullback, but still is an act of war. Imagine if Germany kept on firing 8 rockets a month into France.

Your selective use of statistics belies a deeper malaise with you Islam sucking lefties.

Benji, you won’t answer the question about what proportion of Sderot’s population must flee before Israel can respond to rocket attacks, so I’ll ask a different question.

I did. I said Israel has the right to respond in any way its leadership sees fit whenever it is attacked. I am not sure the govt measures it particularly by those fleeing Sderot.

To interject in the Benji/Brownie argument, the pertinent question is whether what Israel is doing at the moment will lead to more or less rocket attacks in the future? I have no doubt it will be more. The four month period in 2008 when less than 20 rockets were fired will seem like a distant dream. If I’m wrong, I’ll happily conceed the point. Its an experiment I’d rather not conduct, but since Israel is intent on it, we (unlike many in Gaza) will live to see the result.

Hopefully Israel will cut the head off the Hamas snake and that would be the end of the despicable postcolonial leftist enamouration with a cult of assassins, thugs, and shakedown artists.

The Palestinians seems to have learnt their lesson regarding these religious parties purporting to “liberate” them from the “occupier”.

Bye bye Hamas and lefties, you can now go home and get a life.

Hamid

Okay, throw the mortars in, its still a massive reduction in the combined total. Its through these small initial steps that peace is made. You can continue with your grand fantasies if you wish.

TheIrie - If the ground offensive is effective in clearing out HAMAS’ stocks of rockets then the issue of more being fired at least in the short/medium term are low. This is certainly possible and much more so than it was in the 2006 campaign against Hezbollah.

Thanks Mark.

Now, can you provide me evidence that the tunnel existed? On the link you have provided, I shall deliberate further on whether it is appropriate to remove the word ‘alleged’.

Indeed, they should be annoyed. But what the detail also shows is that the rockets were massively reduced to an average of around 3 per month for a four month period in 2008. A small but potentially important and significant step to peace.

Yes, and then the attacks increased exponentially once Israel rumbled Hamas’ plans to abduct some of its soldiers a la Hezbollah in south Lebanon. What’s your point? That unless Israel allows Hamas to talk from both sides of its mouth, she should expect rocket attacks?

Look at the provisions in the GFA for Northern Ireland. You don’t get warring parties to sign a piece of paper and, hey presto, you have peace. The GFA required that all signatories exert inluence over paramilitaries to decoomission weapons and to cease hostile activity, amongst other things. This is becasue you don’t have a genuine partner for peace if that partner is plotting acts of war against you, no matter how many pieces of paper they have signed.

The rocket attacks against Israel increased because Israel discovered Hamas’ push for peace was a charade. Alternatively, after 3 months of minimal rocket fire into her territory, Israel decided it would be a good idea to kill 6 innocent Gazans ofr no other reason than she could.

We know where you stand.

Now, can you provide me evidence that the tunnel existed?

Okay.

You’re a troll.

I get it now.

Benji, here’s what you said:

You have not provided me with any link saying what Hamas did or didn’t say about the affair.

You have implicitly asked for a link where Hamas don’t say anything about the tunnel. Logically, I can provide you with a link to a recipe for meatloaf, and I’ll have done what you asked. Get back to me when you’ve absorbed this.

I said Israel has the right to respond in any way its leadership sees fit whenever it is attacked.

No, Benji, I asked *you* what Israel should do in response to half of the population of Sderot being forced to leave the town becuase they don’t feel safe within Israel’s own borders. I also asked what the tipping point was that justified a military response. Two-thirds, three-quarters, etc.? Let’s be having you…

Negotiate with Hamas Brownie. That is what Israel should have done. Direct negotiations. At one point a majority in Sderot wanted this.

TheIrie - Like this?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jZiRW2KrA-SGBdp6VKgWxChCEdow

heh - Benji wants Israel to open its borders because Hamas reduced its rockets from 200 a month to 8 a month. Benji, you are smarter than that.

TheIrie - Negotiate with Hamas

heh - you dont seem to understand the Islamist mentality do you? Hamas is about power and rulership on the Palestinians. Any negotiation with Hamas is a selloff of the Palestinian cause for a decent and democratic state.

You saw what negotiation with Saddam after the 1st Gulf war brought for the Average Iraqi? Dont you reactionary anti-democracy leftists ever get to understand and internalize history?

You are simply pathetic.

As a proud Muslim apostate let me say that Israel will cut off the head of the snake and the Palestinians are and will be deeply grateful for that.

Just in the same way that the average Iraqi has become quite grateful to the US, not to mention the Kurds and minorities.

“Negotiate with a sleezebag” — which part of mars are you from Irie? Do you have any real world experience? Do you have a honest and productive and real job, where you had to experience the real world? Or are you one of those gov social workers, busybodies and a pettybourgeois who never had a honest job?

Negotiate with Hamas Brownie.

Israeli delegation: So, we understand that you don’t recognise our right to exist.

Hamas delegation: That’s right.

You see the problem?

Any negotiations, if they’re to have meaning, must be geared towards a lasting peace between Hamas and Israel. Seeking peace with Israel and desiring its non-existence are mutually exclusive. It logically follows that if you pronounce your unwillingness to tolerate the existence of your neighbour, you cannot, in good faith, be seeking peace with it.

These are the publicly-avowed views of Hamas. Even so, Israel was willing to enter into a truce with Hamas. How is this faith repaid? Hamas oversee the continued attacks (albeit greatly reduced) on Israeli territory, and members of its military wing are discovered plotting to abduct Israeli soldiers. Your response? Negotiate with Hamas.

You couldn’t write this stuff, except you do.

Mark T

Please note, from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
at the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center (IICC) link you provided:

“It [Hamas November reaction to the killing of Hamas operatives] was the first time since the lull arrangement went into effect that Hamas participated in firing rockets into Israel . It was also the first time that the terrorist organizations attacked Israel with massive amounts of rocket and mortar shell fire (until now there were occasional violations of single rockets or mortar shells being fired).”

Israel acted on intelligence that there was tunnel, Hamas operatives were killed, Hamas fired some rockets - for the first time since the lull started. The rest were occasional violations of single rockets or mortar shells by other groups.

Hence, according to the Israelis, Hamas broke the lull only after the Israeli incursion (whether or not the incursion was justified).

Hamas oversee the continued attacks (albeit greatly reduced) on Israeli territory, and members of its military wing are discovered plotting to abduct Israeli soldiers.

According to the Israelis, Hamas kept their side of the bargain up to the incursion - there was nothing fired by them; there were “occasional violations of single rockets or mortar shells” by other groups, which Israel did not regard as violation of the Hamas lull. As for the discovery of “plotting to abduct Israeli soldiers”, the Israelis are less clear on that; they merely say that an abduction “on the model of the attack in which Gilad Shalit was abducted almost 2 ½ years ago” could have occurred, or “another type of terrorist attack in Israeli territory”.

A firefight ensues at building, “under which the tunnel had been excavated” (according to the Israelis). Six Hamas operatives are killed. Then Hamas fires rockets into Israel.

Brownie - Here is an excellent analysis of the situation:

http://icga.blogspot.com/2009/01/end-game-in-gaza-war.html

Pertinent to our discussion:
“Hamas leaders were told they could lift the siege only by abstaining from anti-Israeli violence, acknowledging the legitimate existence of Israel, and accepting the agreements signed between Israel and the PA.

Hamas has consistently refused, arguing that recognition of the peace agreements with Israel would be equivalent to recognizing occupation, particularly against a history of Palestinian concessions that not only failed to end Israeli occupation but deepened it. After Hamas defeated PA military contingents in June 2007 and established a rival political authority in Gaza, the siege of the strip tightened. Hamas, despite its espoused enmity toward Israel, has indicated its willingness to negotiate. It has voiced support for the 2002 Arab League’s declaration offering Israel permanent peace in exchange for returning to its internationally recognized pre-1967 borders. Hamas chief Khaled Meshal and Prime Minister Ismail Haniya similarly confirmed Hamas’ willingness to accept 1967 borders and a two-state solution should Israel withdraw from the occupied territories.“

“Hence, according to the Israelis, Hamas broke the lull only after the Israeli incursion (whether or not the incursion was justified).”

If the incursion was justified, then it implies a prior de facto breaking of the cease fire by Hamas. Idiot.

Also, from the article TheIrie links to:

“Lost in most of the coverage is the fact that the Israel-Hamas truce was working—a fact fully acknowledged in a recent intelligence report released by Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). According to that report, “Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire.” Furthermore, “the lull was sporadically violated by rocket and mortar shell fire carried out by rogue terrorist organizations in some instances in defiance of Hamas.”

Benji, either Hamas looks after Gaza or it doesn’t. If Hamas can’t control the firing of rockets from its territory, then what is the point talking to them?

In any case, you haven’t answered why it is you think Israel unilaterally breached a more or less observed truce to kill 6 innocent Gazans? What were they thinking?

Benji, who is disputing the reduction in rocket fire in the month before the November incident? Why do you keep posting the same, undisputed data?

Did you read my points about the provisions of the GFA? Why do you think a lot of unionists (and nationalists for that matter) were still reluctant to take the word of the PIRA when they talked publicly about peace and had been on ceasefire for years? Do you think an organization that is sworn to your destruction and has agents digging tunnels into your territory is a genuine partner for peace, just because there is a lull in terrorist activity?

Would someone kindly enlighten me as to which dimension ‘theirie’ is living in?

He/she stated: “Especially given that the rocket attacks they claim to be trying to combat have killed about 20 people in 8 years?”

How do they arrive at this figure? I have a list of all those that have died not just from the Hamas missile attacks but also, from the countless suicide bombings organised by Hamas over the past eight years. In one attack alone, more than 21 Israeli civilians were killed - so ‘theirie’ is revealing either how utterly ignorant she/he is of the real situation in Israel *or* how desperately determined he/she is to ignore any Israeli blood that is spilled.

As for any insane notion that Hamas might want peace; well, surely Hamas itself must know what it wants? It states, over and over, in print, in video tapes, at rallies, that it’s sole aim is the utter destruction of Israel AND the removal ‘of every single Jew from every single Muslim land’.

Seems crystal clear to me what Hamas wants.

Benji, either Hamas looks after Gaza or it doesn’t. If Hamas can’t control the firing of rockets from its territory, then what is the point talking to them?

There is an enormous point to talking to them, even indirectly, not least because we are repeatedly told by Israel that it is concerned about the security of folk in its border area. If rocket attacks can be reduced by such an enormous amount by a total Hamas cessation for more than four months, with only a low level of sporadic attacks by other groups, then Hamas has demonstrated a considerable degree of control; this is a major improvement compared to previously, and can be built upon.

Peace is about gradually building confidence on both sides, certainly in this type of situation of pained history and disputed territory, and in that way the recognition of Israel is eventually broached.

It’s bizarre to me that Israel, by recourse to massive military means, seems almost to want to make this into a war of zealots, instead of taking step by step measures which are the building blocks of peace making, that encourage moderation on the other side, rather than the current approach which not only ensures more bloodshed and insecurity, but increases extremism on the other side.

Tabatha

If your are worried about antisemitism you are right to be. However this is an ideology and attitude, and you are deluded Israel’s military action will do anything but strengthen it. This plays straight into the hands of hardliners and extremists both in Hamas and Fatah. As for removing Jews from Muslim lands, well yes this has been said, but I should remind you that members of Likud and others have very clear ideas about forcing Palestinians from what they deem as Jewish land; these operations, the theft of land, the removal of people, and the destruction of property, have occurred and continue.

Peace is about gradually building confidence on both sides

Yes, and Israelis look across the border and see a party in power that is sworn to their destruction, produces daily broadcasts in Arabic that spout the vilest of anti-Semitism, and plans incursions into Israeli territory even as it talks a about peace.

How’s that confidence-building coming along?

I’m an Israeli and I’m asking myself, what have Hamas done for me lately?

However this is an ideology and attitude, and you are deluded Israel’s military action will do anything but strengthen it.

Again, I’m asking you what Israel’s repsonse should be? What should Israel be doing that it hasn’t already tried?

Peace is about gradually building confidence on both sides, certainly in this type of situation of pained history and disputed territory, and in that way the recognition of Israel is eventually broached.

I see how it works. Israel should be prepared to negotiate and make concessions (which is what negotiate in this context means) to a recognised terrorist organisation and then she can demand the right to have her existence recognised.

In the “pained history” of which you speak, what is the template for this form of “negotiation”?

If Hamas ceased all hostile activity tomorrow - that’s all activity, not just reducing the numbers of rockets launched at Israeli civilians - do you think Israel would still bomb Gaza? Do you think she would send a single soldier across the border?

Benjamin,

Let’s take your dangerous ‘logic’ further. According to you, Israel’s response to eight years of terrorism, will ‘increase’ anti semitism?

No. It won’t. Only in those who are ALREADY ANTI SEMITES.

If you seriously believe that a person becomes anti semitic purely because they disagree with Israel’s actions, then you fail to understand the first thing about anti semitism.

Care to recall recent events in Mumbai? When terrorists sought out one of the few Jewish centres in the entire country, and then subjected a Rabbi and his wife to hours of torture, with their young child as a witness? That happened before the recent conflict in Gaza. As did numerous other terrorist attacks on Jews.

Or, to put it another way:

People sometimes remark on the fact that in the Holocaust, the Jews were led into the gas chambers with great ‘ease’. Of course, they didn’t know what was happening for a long time, and had no time nor way of organising a rebellion. Now I ask you - did the Jews’ LACK of response DEcrease anti semitism???

No. Anyone with a functioning brain can see: it did not.

If we abide by your ‘reasoning’ (and I do use that word in the loosest sense possible) then Jews have to put up and shut up when any terrorist group decides to indulge in a bit of target practise with them up to and including deadly missiles from Iran and repeated suicide bombings. And - again according to you - woe betide any Jews who fight back!!! ‘Cause that would ‘increase’ anti semitism!

Your thoughts on this are so flawed as to be alarming. Let me state it so clearly there can be no misunderstanding: Anti semites are anti semites because they are anti semites.

They don’t hate Jews because of anything that Jews DO, or DON’T DO.

Get it?

Israel acted on intelligence that there was tunnel, Hamas operatives were killed, Hamas fired some rockets - for the first time since the lull started. The rest were occasional violations of single rockets or mortar shells by other groups.

I’m interested, Benji, as to what Hamas actually had to with that tunnel before you consider their actions to have violated the ceasefire.

Evidently you don’t consider the construction of the tunnel itself a de facto violation.

How about six Hamas militants emerging the other end in Israel? No?

How about those militants seizing an Israeli soldier? Is that a violation?

I’m not clear where you stand here.

A Hamas spokesman/leader what have you, speaking on tv has informed us that all Jewish people are now legitimate targets.

Try as I might I see nothing that leads me to have any sympathy for this organisation at all. They are murderers.

But for the individual Palestinian, yes. Hamas and the individuals who are this organisation come across as psychopaths, people who have never really attained any kind of human empathy, or understanding and whose only joy in life is the taking of life, theirs, others, they appear not to mind.

And there are actually people in this country who march to support these “Nazis”, is, incredible.

Evidently you don’t consider the construction of the tunnel itself a de facto violation.

No, the Israelis don’t regard tunnel building on the Palestinian side as a breaking of the ceasefire. They went to investigate on the Palestinian side, and it unclear how far the tunnel had progressed. The Israelis state that abduction is a violation of the ceasefire, which it is. However, no abduction take place, and as for attempted to abduction, that is unclear too. All that the Israelis claim is that there was a firefight at the start of the alleged tunnel, on the Gaza side. They mention no specific plot, and even say it could have been about some other possible act against Israel.

I am using Israeli information, compiled from official sources. From that its very difficult to establish what specific Hamas violation of the ceasefire occurred before the subsequent firing of rockets.

This nonsense about HAMAS and the Nazis.
The Nazis were a secular even, pagan group whose philosophy was Darwinism. The survival of the fitness. The strong will survive and the weak will fall.
HAMAS is an intolerant bunch of extreme religious zealots. Who were set up by the Israelis?
In fact, Brett many posters who support your views show more Nazis tendencies. A belief in lebensraum, a belief that might is right and racism. It is not surprising that extreme right wing groups are now ditching anti Semitism for a more pro white Israeli approach.
Interestingly as an economic liberal you have more in common with the Nazis than the zealots because the basic tenet of gladstonian economics is the Darwinian/Malthusian survival of the fitness, there should be no welfare for the poor.
So you, rest of the writers on this site, Nick Cohen, Policy exchange, Demos and Frank field, most of the posters all have this approach to economics. Which is very Nazi approach to life?

Thanks for that gev pearce. You truly are a scholar. You also seem to be very compatible in temperament, comportment and intellect to one of the other rare luminaries (like yourself) who has been posting here as of late who goes by the name Irene. Oh and by the way, I think a lot of people could rally around a Gladstonian Economics = Darwinian & Malthusian Nazis platform. Have you ever considered politics as a career? If not, you should with your talent.

Just to correct the person stating that the Nazis were ‘pagan’ - that is factually incorrect. Hitler defined himself as a Christian, specifically a Roman Catholic. And many or even most of the Nazis had ’slogans’ on their belts etc mentioning G-d. Hitler even pointed to the very parts of the New Testament which in his mind both intensified and legitimised his rabid anti semitism.

Please note: I am not in any way implying that Christians are inherently anti semitic or that Hitler was a good representative of the faith. I am merely stating the fact that he identified as a Christian and was influenced by *some* of the anti Jewish sentiments in *some* parts of the Christian scriptures.

I would also argue that the analogy between the Nazis and Hamas is a valid one. Certainly, several of their aims are the same and Hamas uses similar language to the Nazis when speaking about Jews. This is hardly surprising. I’m sure most or all of us are fully aware that during WW2, the Arab and Islamic worlds were allies of Hitler and declared openly the desire to emulate the ‘final solution of the jews’ throughout Palestine and the Middle East.