Hopeful story for the New Year

[andak01]

“I have never felt there was a difference among people — Jews, Muslims, Christians — we are all human beings,” he says. “I worked in Israel for years and so did my father. We know that it is not about what you are but who you are. And that is what I have taught my children.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/world/middleeast/31children.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

[redcake]

Hopeful, in that perhaps outsiders like yourself might have the chance to expose themselves to the conflict a little more depth, for a change.

Arabs and Jews relating to each other as normal people and not enemies is pretty much commonplace, normal every day life in Israel. It's far more visible than the distrust and hatred which the media focuses on.

This article also shows a bit of hand. The new strategy is to suggest both Israelis and Arabs are equal victims of circumstance at the hands of an entity outside their control, or "the man". It's another form of pushing a false history through moral equivalency.

[Aliyah1995]

Thanks for posting, Andak. Politics aside, it is heartbreaking (both children's situations).

[andak01]

Thanks for posting, Andak. Politics aside, it is heartbreaking (both children's situations).

Appearently not for everyone. Some would feel it's "moral equivalency" even to feel compasion for the little girl the same way we would for the little boy. After all (take your pick):

- she was a human shield

- it was only retalliation

- she was collateral damage

- every effort was made to avoid hurting civilians

- she's a potential jihadi or mother of jihadis anyway, the parents are using taqiyah to pretend to have compassion

From that perspective she had it coming.

[redcake]

Some would feel it's "moral equivalency" even to feel compasion for the little girl the same way we would for the little boy.

Actually, it's your presumption that an Israeli wouldn't feel the same compassion for the child that clouds your thinking. Now you just listed the insane reasonings you think could be attributed to someone pro-Israel. It's gross, Andak. You're inappropriate as always.

The moral equivalency factor has nothing to do with the children, just like the children weren't the motivation for writing this story.

[andak01]

Actually, it's your presumption that an Israeli wouldn't feel the same compassion for the child that clouds your thinking. Now you just listed the insane reasonings you think could be attributed to someone pro-Israel. It's gross, Andak. You're inappropriate as always.

Why on earth would I presume that??? Obviously the hospital has taken her in, and that's a wonderful testimony to them. If that weren't true then the story itself wouldn't exist. For you to assume that this is an anti-Israel story is piffle.



The moral equivalency factor has nothing to do with the children, just like the children weren't the motivation for writing this story.

And neither IMO was moral equivalency. Being a parent and worrying over an injured child is morally equivalent. That takes the politics out of the situation because children and human compassion are even bigger things that who shot whom first or who had a moral right to shoot a rocket. The doctors at the hospital obviously have comprehended that.

[redcake]

Why on earth would I presume that???

You didn't imagine the inner thoughts of a pro-Israeli rationalizing the girl's injury, blaming the victim?

In order to think this story is special, or "hopeful" you are in fact, putting the politics into the story. You are starting from a mindset that an Arab and Jew dehumanize each other, and that it's remarkable for a friendship to evolve. Worse the article suggests it takes dire circumstances for such a thing to happen. What garbage.

The concept of moral equivalency has always been lost on you, Andak, so I won't bother, but it's sad you think there's anything notable being described in that article.

[Kachah]

It's an Israeli hospital funded by Medinat Israel. Show me the symmetrical case.
Magen David Adom would ferry a wounded Arab to a hospital as well as it does Jews or Christians. And Red Crescent would give lift to the militant animals who appreciate the cover.
There is no moral equivalency. As usual, the Jews are for life and Islam is divided.

[redcake]

Exactly, and that's why such details were omitted from this story.

[Kachah]

Well, they were not omitted, really, the article says that it's the Israeli government who made all these happen and allowed the poor Arab father to be with his kids etc etc. With all my distaste for the NYTimes and general Western left media - they don't lie or falsify things openly and blatantly like their gods and teachers do in Russia, China or North Korea. But they give them a spin which, as you are correctly pointing out, is almost undetectable for an average Joe and gives the andaks of this world the "right" to claim some "equivalency".
THe girl was injured by an unfortunate mistake of an IDF pilot who was on a mission to locate and assasinate precisely the scum who had been sending these rockets DELIBERATELY into residential areas in Israel (and one of which ended up wounding the poor boy). Horrible as it is, Israel takes steps to alleviate the circumstances in the only way possible - by providing free treatment and care for the girl and family mambers. Okay, it is not obviously reversing her state but it is realistically what can be done under circumstances. Now, which particular hospital in Gaza, horrified by the boy's condition, offered to take care of him and his mother? None? You sure? Well then, has any Arab organization responsible for this crime (or ANY at all) expressed their regret and sorrow just learning about the innocent kid? None again?
Moral equivavlency my ass.

[redcake]

The article doesn't credit Israel properly, or allow for the context you're describing.

The Times attempt at moral equivalency is inaccurate.

[Kachah]

The article doesn't credit Israel properly, or allow for the context you're describing.

The Times attempt at moral equivalency is inaccurate.
"The Israeli government, which brought him here for emergency help, ...... The government has backed off, supporting Mr. Aman on minimum wage and paying for Marya to go to a bilingual Arabic-Hebrew school nearby".
You see, the facts are there - yet, as you have noticed, they are not to the credit of the government. THat's what I called "a spin".

[andak01]

You didn't imagine the inner thoughts of a pro-Israeli rationalizing the girl's injury, blaming the victim?

No I didn't imagine that. Those aren't my thoughts, I've read them on this board often, perhaps not by you but by others.


In order to think this story is special, or "hopeful" you are in fact, putting the politics into the story. You are starting from a mindset that an Arab and Jew dehumanize each other, and that it's remarkable for a friendship to evolve. Worse the article suggests it takes dire circumstances for such a thing to happen. What garbage.

Arabs and Jews do dehumanize each other daily. Not all, but all too often. What's more, the media exploits that dehumanization and only rarely gives us a peak at anything else. The only solutions profferred are bombs or troop surges or martyrs. Until we understand that dehumanization is the cause of this mess, not just an effect, it'll go on forever.


The concept of moral equivalency has always been lost on you, Andak, so I won't bother, but it's sad you think there's anything notable being described in that article.

Of course, because you have morals and I can't because of who I am. I got it. But to you, that's not dehumanizing.

[Mil]

Arabs and Jews do dehumanize each other daily.

99% of that goes to the Arabs, if going by the population difference alone.

[bararallu]

It a lot higher per capita as well.

We dont dehuminize Arabs as a matter of course, public policy or whatever. Arabs not only dehuminize us everywhere as a matter of state organs (state owned press) they also demonify us at every chance and blame us for things like natural disasters and such. Moral equivalence just ads to that demonification process by subtracting egregious and wanton acts from one side and, by fiat, distributing it to the other, just to have a balanced outlook on things. BS.

[andak01]

It a lot higher per capita as well.

We dont dehuminize Arabs as a matter of course, public policy or whatever. Arabs not only dehuminize us everywhere as a matter of state organs (state owned press) they also demonify us at every chance and blame us for things like natural disasters and such. Moral equivalence just ads to that demonification process by subtracting egregious and wanton acts from one side and, by fiat, distributing it to the other, just to have a balanced outlook on things. BS.

I'll agree that there is significantly more dehumanization among Arabs than among Jews. But there are also things taken for granted that don't even count as dehumanization which, if they were applied to Jews would be intolerable.

The Clarion Fund, a front group for Aish Hatorah distributed 28 million DVDs of the anti-Muslim movie "Obsession" prior to the last presidential campaign. Imagine if 28 million copies of anti-Jewish DVDs were distributed in an effort to paint John McCain as a "secret Jew". Would that be acceptable? But don't take it from me.

Rabbi Jack Moline described it as "the protocols of the learned elders of Saudi Arabia.'"[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%E2%80%99s_War_Against_the _West



http://obsession.swflnet.com/news_obs/stories/interfaith_leaders_release_statement.htm

[Kachah]

How is painting Obama "a secret moslem" anti-Islam? It's anti-Obama.
Andak, andak... you desperately want to prove this phantom of "equivalency" with no argument at your disposal. The movie is anti-radicalist to begin with. Now, if there is any other Islam (which I am not so sure of) - that particular brand of it the movie deliberately abstains of criticizing. And most importantly, the action was a part of an election campaign.
To do anything "equivalent" the moslems should learn first how to run free elections, don't you think?

[Mil]

The Clarion Fund, a front group for Aish Hatorah distributed 28 million DVDs of the anti-Muslim movie "Obsession" prior to the last presidential campaign. Imagine if 28 million copies of anti-Jewish DVDs were distributed in an effort to paint John McCain as a "secret Jew". Would that be acceptable? But don't take it from me.

They openly print Articles and even make movies on that in the Arab countries... Where is the outrage? Where is your particular outrage and that of your mosque on the matter.

Jews have our Goldstones and we can criticize ourselves. Where are Arab Goldstones?

[andak01]

How is painting Obama "a secret moslem" anti-Islam? It's anti-Obama.

Why is it anti-Obama??? Is there something wrong with being Muslim and president?


Andak, andak... you desperately want to prove this phantom of "equivalency" with no argument at your disposal. The movie is anti-radicalist to begin with. Now, if there is any other Islam (which I am not so sure of) - that particular brand of it the movie deliberately abstains of criticizing.

Because they deliberately make clear that there is no other Islam even though Muslims on the other side are being killed daily for standing up against it. If there was one Islam, why would Muslims be blowing each other up? Presumably we'd all be in lock step! Instead there is a jihad of radicals against moderates who stand in their way. And this is a new thing, not something that's eternal to Islam, but something that was unheard of not that many years ago. What example of a suicide bombing is there prior to 1980? For that matter, how much terrorism was there anywhere prior to 1970?


And most importantly, the action was a part of an election campaign.

Right, of course. So may I ask, if a Jewish candidate was up for election and 28 million DVDs warning of how a Zionist can't be patriotic to America went out, you'd think that was "just part of the election"?


To do anything "equivalent" the moslems should learn first how to run free elections, don't you think?

You mean like the one that elected Mosaddegh, prior to a US supported cout d'etat? Or the ones in Turkey? Or the ones set up under the US run regiems in Afghanistan or Iraq? Or the elections suppressed by so many US backed dictators? Or the free elections that elect people like Hamas?

[andak01]

They openly print Articles and even make movies on that in the Arab countries... Where is the outrage? Where is your particular outrage and that of your mosque on the matter.

Last Friday, another kutbah at my mosque responding to terrorism. This time specific to the attempted Christmas attack, and a scholar that studied in Medina stating that such attacks are not Islamic as does MPAC and ISNA and CAIR and the North American fatwa and the Saudi fatwa and the statements of Sheikh Tantawi. And they can do that every kutbah until Judgement and still be told that specifically they aren't doing that. So don't tell me what my mosque does and doesn't do.


Jews have our Goldstones and we can criticize ourselves. Where are Arab Goldstones?

Many Nigerian Muslim groups have come out and criticized the latest attack, not the least of whom the attacker's own father, who BTW alerted authorities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NYzs8IjxhY

And BTW, many of the Arab Goldstones have paid with their lives and their families lives. A few are even in our American military cemetaries.

[redcake]

Arabs and Jews do dehumanize each other daily.

You're talking to someone who doesn't view the two identities as mutually exclusive.

See, you are entirely unaware of your own predisposed bias.

I am also purposely pointing out that anyone who believes (as you seem to) that Arabs and Jews represent separate communities is ignorant of Israeli society. How could anyone view these circumstances as a ray of hope unless they were trying to depict the situation as "Jews and Arabs hate each other".
It's not just simplistic, it paints an inaccurate picture that in actuality dehumanizes one side, Israelis. That's right. For Israel to put these children side by side and provide care for them even when it was beyond hope, and then have Western media depict it as out of character, is dehumanizing.

The most prejudice Israelis I know still treat the Arabs they encounter DAILY as humans. Can the same be said for life in the mid-east, outside of Israel? So you tell me, why should we treat this story as a rare ray of hope, when it goes on every day in Israel?

[andak01]

You're talking to someone who doesn't view the two identities as mutually exclusive.

See, you are entirely unaware of your own predisposed bias.

I'm using the common terminology of this forum. If you'd like to introduce another, I'm listening.


I am also purposely pointing out that anyone who believes (as you seem to) that Arabs and Jews represent separate communities is ignorant of Israeli society.

Vis a vis the story this thread is based on, I'm not so sure. It seems to me that these families could only have met each other under the circumstances of that hospital. The story isn't about Israeli Arabs outside of the territories, it's about a Jewish child victimized on the border by terrorism and a Muslim child on the other side of a wall who got in the way of an attack. So yes, I'd stand by the statement that Siderot and Gaza are separate communities. Are you here to educate me that they are not?


How could anyone view these circumstances as a ray of hope unless they were trying to depict the situation as "Jews and Arabs hate each other".

I suppose it's just my predisposed bias and ignorance to assume that people under Israeli rule and those under Hamas are living in separate communities and hate each other as a general rule. Silly ol' me.


It's not just simplistic, it paints an inaccurate picture that in actuality dehumanizes one side, Israelis. That's right. For Israel to put these children side by side and provide care for them even when it was beyond hope, and then have Western media depict it as out of character, is dehumanizing.

Well no, not at all. I completely got that Israel is providing care. I think I already mentioned that in fact. Further, I didn't see anywhere in the article a hint that it was out of character.


The most prejudice Israelis I know still treat the Arabs they encounter DAILY as humans. Can the same be said for life in the mid-east, outside of Israel? So you tell me, why should we treat this story as a rare ray of hope, when it goes on every day in Israel?

As I've said, much to your derision, my wife grew up playing with Jews in Casablanca. She was never taught any disrespect for them.

[redcake]

I'm using the common terminology of this forum. If you'd like to introduce another, I'm listening.

Why do you need new terminology? It's your problem that you define Jews and Arabs as the antithesis of each other, or a people eternally at odds. We're not allowed to speak of Muslim Terrorism but it's cool to think Arab and Jewish children are predisposed to act out Holy Wars on the playground.



So yes, I'd stand by the statement that Siderot and Gaza are separate communities. Are you here to educate me that they are not?

Oh, look. Andak found his scarecrow. He will now use the phrase "separate communities" to try and miss the point.

p.s. They're about a half mile or so apart.




I suppose it's just my predisposed bias and ignorance to assume that people under Israeli rule and those under Hamas are living in separate communities and hate each other as a general rule. Silly ol' me.

Yup. You nailed it. Sure you thought you were being sarcastic, but nope.
A) You placed Israel alongside Hamas.
B) You assigned them all the role of hating the other, equally.

Use your brain and don't be such a pawn to propagandists.


my wife grew up playing with Jews in Casablanca. She was never taught any disrespect for them.

Ask her if she would have had any trouble playing with Jews outside Casablanca.

Then ask her why Sderot has a huge Mimuna celebration, and see if she can't convince you that your concept of separate communities is less sophisticated then a freshman poli-sci major's at Berkeley.

[Kachah]

Why is it anti-Obama??? Is there something wrong with being Muslim and president?
Yeah, let's play hear no evil - say no evil. Because this accusation was directed against Obama, not against Islam. It's election, you know... one out of two gets the office and a ride in the Air Force One.

Because they deliberately make clear that there is no other Islam even though Muslims on the other side are being killed daily for standing up against it. If there was one Islam, why would Muslims be blowing each other up? Good question. If they blow EACH OTHER up how can you claim that some of them are not militant? Which group belongs to the "right" Islam? And if they are so easily separable, why don't we just sort out the militants and teh rest will live in peace?
Come on, man. Sunnis are killing shia and vice versa - which ones are more or less militant? Where is this mainstream Islam with 80-90% of followers dedicated to building peaceful law abiding society with high tolerance to other people's views and absolute, non-negotiable zero tolerance to terrorism and violence? What is it that we are missing here?


Right, of course. So may I ask, if a Jewish candidate was up for election and 28 million DVDs warning of how a Zionist can't be patriotic to America went out, you'd think that was "just part of the election"?I didn't say "just", I said that the whole thing was construed to win the election, not to reprimand Islam. But be this as it may, there were enough antisemitic literature and artefacts produced in America and being produced now. So what?



You mean like the one that elected Mosaddegh, prior to a US supported cout d'etat? Or the ones in Turkey? Or the ones set up under the US run regiems in Afghanistan or Iraq? Or the elections suppressed by so many US backed dictators? Or the free elections that elect people like Hamas?No, I mean like the onesin America or Australia or Britain or any other democratic country. By the way, out of your samples I would accept that the election of Hamas was free will of the "Palestinian" people and no fishy business was going on like in afghanistan recently.
Apparently, pure freedom of hate and real democracy have little in common.

[andak01]

Why do you need new terminology? It's your problem that you define Jews and Arabs as the antithesis of each other, or a people eternally at odds. We're not allowed to speak of Muslim Terrorism but it's cool to think Arab and Jewish children are predisposed to act out Holy Wars on the playground.

What a pack of lies. First, I've never in any case questioned someones right to speak about terrorism. That's all we speak about around here. Second, it's me on this forum that stands against the clash of civilizations almost alone. Almost everyone else claims Armageddon is a foregone conclusion. I take every opportunity possible to show that Muslims and Jews have cooperated in the past and can and will do so in the present and the future.


Oh, look. Andak found his scarecrow. He will now use the phrase "separate communities" to try and miss the point.

OK, then if they aren't separate communities, anyone from either should simply be able to walk from one to another and back. Right?


p.s. They're about a half mile or so apart.

How long does it take to walk a half a mile? How long does it take to walk THAT half a mile?


Yup. You nailed it. Sure you thought you were being sarcastic, but nope.
A) You placed Israel alongside Hamas.

Israel IS alongside Hamas. You said it yourself, half a mile. Israelis are ruled by Israel and Gazans are ruled by Hamas. Is it equating them to say that??? Only in your twisted mind. Iraq was ruled by Saddam Hussein. Uganda was ruled by Idi Amin. The US is ruled by the American government. Am I equating them with the United States in that statement???????


B) You assigned them all the role of hating the other, equally.

Did I do that? Obviously that isn't true. But there is a lot of hatred.


Use your brain and don't be such a pawn to propagandists.

Which propagandists? The New York Times?


Ask her if she would have had any trouble playing with Jews outside Casablanca.

My own children don't and she contributed significantly to their views.


Then ask her why Sderot has a huge Mimuna celebration, and see if she can't convince you that your concept of separate communities is less sophisticated then a freshman poli-sci major's at Berkeley.

She's never lived in or visited Sderot. As for Mimuna, I'm sure that Russian Jews in Israel maintain Russian customs and Polish Jews maintain their customs. So what?

[andak01]

Good question. If they blow EACH OTHER up how can you claim that some of them are not militant? Which group belongs to the "right" Islam?

I'm thinking that the ones that blow up mosques are wrong. Most Muslims agree with me. Many right wingers and Al Qaida think the bombers are practicing the "right" Islam. After all, what use have they got for Muslims who don't blow up mosques?


And if they are so easily separable, why don't we just sort out the militants and teh rest will live in peace?

Why can't you sort out ETA from the Spanish or the Mexican drug dealers from Mexicans? Because they operate in secret and they deliberately try to blend in. It took decades to get rid of the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka and decades to even come to terms with the IRA. If this was easy, everyone would do it tomorrow.


Come on, man. Sunnis are killing shia and vice versa - which ones are more or less militant?

That is so in parts of Iraq. In Pakistan, that is not the case.


Where is this mainstream Islam with 80-90% of followers dedicated to building peaceful law abiding society with high tolerance to other people's views and absolute, non-negotiable zero tolerance to terrorism and violence? What is it that we are missing here?

You're missing the fact that ONE man in an airplane at Christmas can stain the reputation of 1.3 billion and that of every mosque or bookstore he visited. Meanwhile many, many Muslims condemned his actions, but the focus is on the one rather than the many.

Nobody has any accurate idea of how many terrorists there are in the world. But there are a couple of facts that crop up that give some idea. First of all, the most aggressive claims for the number of attacks last year was around 14000. About half of that is in Iraq and Afghanistan both of which operate as semi-lawless war zones. Second, the most extensive watch list contains about 500,000 individuals. To get on that, a single person only have to report suspicion. Third, the Pew Center's most recent surveys show that support for terrorism is going down rapidly.

Based on those figures we can expect more attacks in the coming year and terrorism is definitely still a threat. But that isn't what it would be if there was majority support for terrorism. And it isn't what it was prior to 9/11.

There is no single cure for terrorism, just as there is no cure for murder or rape. But that doesn't mean there are no victories.


I didn't say "just", I said that the whole thing was construed to win the election, not to reprimand Islam.

Yeah right.


But be this as it may, there were enough antisemitic literature and artefacts produced in America and being produced now. So what?

So what if 28 million copies of Mein Kampf were mailed to politicians and journalists in order to smear a Jewish political candidate?


By the way, out of your samples I would accept that the election of Hamas was free will of the "Palestinian" people and no fishy business was going on like in afghanistan recently.
Apparently, pure freedom of hate and real democracy have little in common.

Real democracy doesn't always produce winners. Hitler was democratically elected.

Let me take this opportunity to say again that the election of Hamas was one of the saddest days I can recall. I can't think of anything worse for Gaza.

[frizzer1]

Nice story.
But if the children were in an arab hospital where both were treated equally and friendships between jews and arabs evolved.....then you would have a real story.
But alas, it would never happen and that is the tragedy.

[bararallu]

precisely.

[andak01]

So then you'd rather wait for that to happen, or continue to prove your moral superiority on a daily basis through this type of compassion? The article states that she wouldn't have had a chance for survival in Gaza.

[redcake]

Do they have Hospitals in Gaza, Andak?

The greater tragedy is that anyone would feel the moral superiority to pluck this one story and throw symbolism behind it which discounts the level of humanity which does currently exist.

What exactly do you get out of pretending that the basic humanity displayed in the story is ground breaking?

Even if you come away thinking the conflict is an adult feud, and that the sense of humanity depicted in the story could only occur amongst the pure hearts of children, it would be wrong.

[andak01]

Do they have Hospitals in Gaza, Andak?


Maybe not as many as they used to.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2009/Gaza-health-20090115/en/index.html

Even worse, they've stopped paying their bills.

“We already pay $7 million a month to Israeli hospitals,” he said in a telephone interview. “Since the first day of the Gaza aggression, I said that I will not send to my occupier my injured people in order for him to make propaganda at my expense, and then pay him for it.”

..

Israel has long pointed to its medical care of Palestinians as an example of its advanced skills and humanitarianism. Palestinians generally are eager to gain the benefit, but are also resentful. As relations have chilled, each side has accused the other of political manipulation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/world/middleeast/10patients.html

[redcake]

Look what your article left out:


He objected to the New York Times headline that said "Palestinians stop paying Israeli hospitals for Gaza and West Bank patients," noting that the PA "never paid Israeli hospitals directly; they receive payment from the Israeli government that deducts the debts from taxes that Israeli authorities collects for the PA."

Abu Moghli insisted that "we in the PA will continue our three-year plan to upgrade our own medical services. It was not a sudden decision. The only sudden decision I took was to refuse to send Gazans wounded due to Israeli aggression to go to Israeli hospitals.

"As for the sick, we have a high-level medical professional committee to decide who needs to go to Israeli hospitals for care we cannot provide."http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304787873&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

So they're looking for a reason to withhold funds knowing their citizenship will suffer. Typical Palestinian tactic.

Meanwhile, you just quoted another NY Times article, bolding even MORE baseless moral equivalency.


As relations have chilled, each side has accused the other of political manipulation.

Repeating accusations, without proving there is merit only fuels conflict. Accusations are not proof. Where Palestinians have conceded that politics are a deciding factor for Palestinian trauma care, what do you have that proves Israel has done the same, on the same level as refusing care?

[andak01]

Look what you neglected to respond to.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7866159.stm

I abhore the Palestinian acts of terrorism and their rockets which have killed about 40 people, injured hundreds and damaged buildings. In light of that, Israel must be allowed the means to deal with it. Does that include bombing hospitals and taking out city blocks? Does that include killing over 10 times as many civilians over the same period?

I'm having a hard time with the fact that, although I've already cast my balot against the morality of Hamas, I'm not allowed to have any negative opinion on any action by Israel without being condemned. It is not a condemnation of Israel to say that war crimes were committed during retalliation for terrorism. Saying that has no bearing on what I think about Gazans unless we utterly discount the possibility that any Gazan can be innocent. I refuse to go there, because thats what I condemn about what they've done to Israelis.

[redcake]

In light of that, Israel be allowed the means to deal with it. Does that include bombing hospitals and taking out city blocks? Does that include killing over 10 times as many civilians over the same period?

I suppose when you live in a fantasy land of moral equivalency, you think the lack of equivalent death tolls is an injustice too.





I'm not allowed to have any negative opinion on any action by Israel without being condemned. It is not a condemnation of Israel to say that war crimes were committed during retalliation for terrorism.

It's not a condemnation of Israel, to distort the truth, and accuse them of war crimes? Huh?

Also, who said you can't have negative opinions of Israel? We just ask you to base them in reality, not false libels, or distortions, and double standards.
You're basically waving the tired old canard that criticism of Israel isn't allowed. How did you get to that from your shining beacon of hope, where the unfathomable happened, and an Arab and a Jew got friendly?


unless we utterly discount the possibility that any Gazan can be innocent.

Who is doing that? Earlier I called you out for your depiction of the supposed mindset of Israelis dehumanizing Arabs, and now you're doing it again. If this were your therapy session, I'd say we made a breakthrough.

[bararallu]

I suppose when you live in a fantasy land of moral equivalency, you think the lack of equivalent death tolls is an injustice too.



This is certainly what Andak stresses over the years that I've been here anyway. Not the initiation of hostilities or the attempts at mass murder, but post facto death tolls, even though our enemy fires from hospitals. mosques, ambulances or behind packs of kids.

There is only one answer to this.... if we wanted to do what the Arabs have attempted to do to us over the years, at this point there would scarcely be any Arabs sucking O2 from the atmosphere... in the Middle East, much less just Gaza. AKA the golden rule as we know it and the Arabs know it.

[andak01]

I suppose when you live in a fantasy land of moral equivalency, you think the lack of equivalent death tolls is an injustice too.

On the contrary. I applaud Israel's successful efforts to lower their own death toll both among their soldiers and among civilians. What's more, I'd be quite accomodating to understand that due to some circumstances, death tolls are higher among Palestinians even by a geometric factor of 3 or 4. We are to believe that cutting edge precision weapons and taking every effort to reduce civilian casualties results in 10 times and more the civilian casualties from targetted attacks against civilians? I'm basing my numbers on the IDF, not anything from Hamas or other source. In 2008, there were about 20 Israelis killed by Qassam attacks. According to the IDF, at least 200 Gazan civilians were killed in Operation Cast Lead. This is not some accusation. It is based on public knowledge provided by the IDF. I'm willing to believe it isn't worse.

A fantasy would be to believe that the proper punishment for this...

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/934513/DSC_0047-(Medium)_wa.jpg

Is this.

http://imeu.net/engine2/uploads/2/crater-gaza-city.jpg


It's not a condemnation of Israel, to distort the truth, and accuse them of war crimes? Huh?

I'm not accusing them. Bombing a hospital is a war crime.


Also, who said you can't have negative opinions of Israel? We just ask you to base them in reality, not false libels, or distortions, and double standards.

There isn't any double standard. I've already made clear that I condemn Hamas wholeheartedly. I don't give them a free ride on anything. For that matter, I don't agree with pulling money away from treating their people.

I respect Israel's right to defend itself and I have no criticism for many of the actions they have taken in that regard.


You're basically waving the tired old canard that criticism of Israel isn't allowed. How did you get to that from your shining beacon of hope, where the unfathomable happened, and an Arab and a Jew got friendly?

I wasn't there, but you've managed to drag me back. In a world you paint where the NY Times, CNN, the BBC, the UN and every other instrument of journalism or international law is just seen as attacking Israel and siding with Hamas, I can't see that any criticism is possible.


Who is doing that? Earlier I called you out for your depiction of the supposed mindset of Israelis dehumanizing Arabs, and now you're doing it again. If this were your therapy session, I'd say we made a breakthrough.

I don't think it's an Israeli mindset, it's the mindset of a certain group of Israelis. Plenty of Israelis were critical of certain actions taken.

[redcake]

Are you sure that hospital accusation is valid? Are you sure Hamas isn't using some of the former hospitals which are no longer serving patients, as command centers?

It appears you're challenging Israel's claim they use precision weapons to lessen civilian casualties. What basis do you have other than death tolls?

I also have to ask how you can spend as much time on this forum as you do and still claim no criticism against Israel is possible. Have you been censored on this forum? No, on the contrary, you were in a position to do the censoring, and you have expressed nearly a decades worth of dissenting views which were critical of Israel. I'm asking you to substantiate your criticism, which is probably too much to ask from someone impressed by Arab/Israeli civility.



I don't think it's an Israeli mindset, it's the mindset of a certain group of Israelis. Plenty of Israelis were critical of certain actions taken.

So we're to accept that an Israeli is either critical of ubsubstantiated accusations against their country or is of a mindset that dehumanizes Arabs?

[andak01]

This is certainly what Andak stresses over the years that I've been here anyway. Not the initiation of hostilities or the attempts at mass murder, but post facto death tolls, even though our enemy fires from hospitals. mosques, ambulances or behind packs of kids.

I guess then the question, is there any amount of humanity you wouldn't be willing to fire through to get to a single Hamas shooter? Because if not, then a lot of hostage negociators are going to be out of work. Just blow up the bus, train, bank, city or wherever the terrorist is hiding. That only doesn't work if the terrorists are making human shields of someone you actually care about like a human being.

[andak01]

It appears you're challenging Israel's claim they use precision weapons to lessen civilian casualties. What basis do you have other than death tolls?

http://imeu.net/engine2/uploads/2/crater-gaza-city.jpg

http://rainbowwarrior2005.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/bombed-cemetary-ap2.jpg

http://www.actionla.org/actionla_images/Gaza122708-3.jpg

http://www.actionla.org/actionla_images/Gaza122708-4.jpg

Plus testimonials of Israeli soldiers. Plus various journalists.

[Kachah]

Ah, this bullshit again about Israel killing too many in retaliation. 10 times is way too much, kill 3 to 4 times your own toll and andaks would accept it.
Nice policy. Why don't you just give us your formula, we'll call it "andak's law" and our kids will study it at school in applied mathematics?
The allies lost - how many - a million? - in WW2. THey killed how many - a dozen? - of million Japanese. And - 4-5? - million Germans. Is it too much? Is it too few? Who knows. It's whatever it takes.
Whatever it takes, Andak. Who's fault is it that you bring a knife to a gunfight? I don't know. But in this case don't start the fight or don't be surprised with its outcome.
I suggest to you that precisely the caution and the intention to minimize the enemy's toll keep terrorism going in the first place. The "civilians" who let Hamas fire from their backyards know that they will not be subjected to indiscriminate bombing. And Hamas would simply kill them as "collaborators" if they protest. So which risk would they rather take? Another lesson in applied math.

[redcake]

If all else fails, link to a random selection of war photos out of context.

That's enough evidence for him...if there's a 20 foot crater in Gaza, it must have been the Jews. Which one of those is supposed to be the picture of the bombed out hospital turned baby milk factory, again?

[andak01]

Ah, this bullshit again about Israel killing too many in retaliation. 10 times is way too much, kill 3 to 4 times your own toll and andaks would accept it.
Nice policy. Why don't you just give us your formula, we'll call it "andak's law" and our kids will study it at school in applied mathematics?
The allies lost - how many - a million? - in WW2. THey killed how many - a dozen? - of million Japanese. And - 4-5? - million Germans. Is it too much? Is it too few? Who knows. It's whatever it takes.

Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were fighting from behind a wall in a contained ghetto. Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were part of a country but not part. The Japanese and Germans had airforces with which to counteract air strikes. The possible loss was all of Europe and perhaps the world.

Israel did not face any sort of existential threat. So pretending that all or nothing is justified is bull. Furthermore, I'm not convinced that this is the end of attacks from Gaza. It probably isn't.


Whatever it takes, Andak. Who's fault is it that you bring a knife to a gunfight? I don't know. But in this case don't start the fight or don't be surprised with its outcome.

I've already repeatedly condemned them for their actions. But if a murderer holds a family hostage, we wouldn't condone blowing the house up. If a sniper was holed up in a neighborhood, we wouldn't blow up the neighborhood.


I suggest to you that precisely the caution and the intention to minimize the enemy's toll keep terrorism going in the first place. The "civilians" who let Hamas fire from their backyards know that they will not be subjected to indiscriminate bombing. And Hamas would simply kill them as "collaborators" if they protest. So which risk would they rather take? Another lesson in applied math.

Well then just kill all of them and get it over with. You've justified that none of them deserve any better.

[bararallu]

Hmmm... Here are these great sources of journalism. (http://www.peacewithrealism.org/headline/Israel_organ-harvesting_anti-Semitism.htm)

[bararallu]

Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were fighting from behind a wall in a contained ghetto. Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were part of a country but not part. The Japanese and Germans had airforces with which to counteract air strikes. The possible loss was all of Europe and perhaps the world.

You're kidding right? Every one of these factoids is not only debatable in context but demolishable with historic examples. First and foremost is the fact that Hamas fights for, as stated in their wretched screed, the entire "[Muslim] Arab Nation". Since there is no such thing as a Hamas nationality nor a Palestinian one historically. That is reiterated by constituents of said nations on a regular basis. How many planes should we count then Andak?

Now to just gloss this historically; At the end of the War when the Germans took many losses, and the Japanese took most of theirs they had no air force. BTW, both the Germans and the Japanese were colonists, like Arabs, that over-reached their war carrying (but not war mongering) capabilities and fought in places that they had invaded, like the Arabs. Even the town I was born in, currently in the Ukraine, was German speaking as the far edge of the empire. And at the end of the war there certainly were entrenched pockets of "resistance" by Nazis trying to save their skins fighting behind old women and children, often using their own as soldiers... sounds familiar?

[Reffo]

On the contrary. I applaud Israel's successful efforts to lower their own death toll both among their soldiers and among civilians. What's more, I'd be quite accomodating to understand that due to some circumstances, death tolls are higher among Palestinians even by a geometric factor of 3 or 4. We are to believe that cutting edge precision weapons and taking every effort to reduce civilian casualties results in 10 times and moreI hate to remind this to you andak but first and foremost, the Israeli government's job is NOT just to REDUCE the death toll of Israeli civilians but to STOP IT entirely. If that can be done without harming Gazan civilians then well and good but if due to the tactics and strategy of Hamas, Gazan civilians have to be harmed in order to stop the death toll of Israeli civilians then that's what the IDF has to do ...

On the other hand, it is the job of Hamas, the elected (and well supported) government of Gaza to STOP the casualties of Gazans. Now I ask you andak and I ask for your honest opinion: Is that what Hamas is doing?


I'm not accusing them. Bombing a hospital is a war crimeIt would be if the hospital would be targeted without provocation but according to the rules of war, if an enemy makes use of a civilian installation such as a hospital and fires at soldiers, from those premises, then all bets are off and even the hospital becomes a legiimate target. Having said that, I believe that care should still be exercised but the consequent responsibility for any civilian casualties reverts to the party that initiates the hostilities from the hospital premises. In fact, that party is guilty of war crimes ...

Now again, andak, I ask for your honest opinion: Is Hamas guilty of such war crimes or not? Do they make use of civilians and civilian installations as shieds or not?


There isn't any double standard. I've already made clear that I condemn Hamas wholeheartedly. I don't give them a free ride on anything. For that matter, I don't agree with pulling money away from treating their peopleYou seem to imply that Hamas is an imposed entity on a hapless Gazan population. But the reality is entirely different. It is a historical fact that back in 2006 (or was it 2005?) the overwhelming majority of Palestinian Arabs (particularly in Gaza) voted for Hamas in a fair and square democratic election. And it was no secret what Hamas stood for: They stood for war, they stood for violence and they stood for Israel's total destruction (they still do). So, why exactly is it wrong to pull money from a people who voted for and still seem to support such a party?


I guess then the question, is there any amount of humanity you wouldn't be willing to fire through to get to a single Hamas shooter? Because if not, then a lot of hostage negociators are going to be out of work. Just blow up the bus, train, bank, city or wherever the terrorist is hiding. That only doesn't work if the terrorists are making human shields of someone you actually care about like a human beingExcuse me andak but your analogy is flawed because:

Hostages do not support the hostage taker's policies ...
Hostages do not elect the hostage takers to represent them ...
Hostages are ordinary citizens and their government IS responsible for their lives...

On the other hand:

Most of the Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, DO support the policies of Hamas ...
Most of the Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, DID elect Hamas to represent them ...
The Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, are citizens of an entity which declared and waged war on Israel and therefore Isael can only do 'so much' to minimize casualties amongst them, especially since the policies of Hamas are such as to put them deliberately in harms way.


Now andak, if you want to dispute what I said above, then just explain the following fact to me and again, please be honest:

How come over 1400 Afghani civilians lost their lives, in 2009, due to the actions of NATO and US forces? I picked only on 2009 because Obama was in power for most of 2009 and he was the commander in chief. Yet he could not put an end to the civilian casualties which as a nobel peace prize lauriate I am sure he would have liked to do ... yet he could NOT. I bring that up because the Taliban fight a similar style of dirty war that Hamas is fighting ... Yet you expect Israel to be effective in reducing the casualies of civilians, a feat that NATO and US forces are unable to bring about ... Why do you expect MORE from the IDF than from NATO/US forces, andak?


Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were fighting from behind a wall in a contained ghetto. Neither the Japanese nor the Germans were part of a country but not part. The Japanese and Germans had airforces with which to counteract air strikes. The possible loss was all of Europe and perhaps the world.NOT towards the end andak. Towards the end, the airforces and the armies of both Germany and Japan were decimated. Yet, the allies did not slow down ...


Israel did not face any sort of existential threat. So pretending that all or nothing is justified is bull. Furthermore, I'm not convinced that this is the end of attacks from Gaza. It probably isn'tYes it did, historically but you are right that at the moment Israel does have the upper hand in the same way that the allies had the upper hand towards the end of WW2. Yet it seems that people of your political persuasion begrudge Israel the idea of finishing off their enemy (Hamas) in the same ruthless way that the allies finished off Nazi Germany and the Empire of the Sun in WW2. In fact, if Israel would act half as ruthlessly against Hamas, you guys would have Israel proverbially (and probably more than proverbially) lynched and crucified ....

[Kachah]

Israel did not face any sort of existential threat. .
Andak, after this statement I can't take anything seriously from you. It's below any possible criticism.
Since Yom Ha'atzmaut fighting existential threat is pretty much all Israel has been doing as a nation. 62 years soon. Every fool knows that.
THe threat from Hamas is clearly existential as Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist. The fact that Hamas lacks technical and operational capacity today does not make the threat less existential.
Another good example is Iran which today is not technically a clear and present danger. THe timetable to becoming one is very boldly laid down: it coinsides with its progress in mastering the uranium enrichment process. Of course, when we wake up one morning and learn from the news that the mad ayatollahs have now access to the nukes you will not argue the existential nature of its threat. Wouldn't that be too late though?

[GratefulFred]

Member of Knesset Dr Ahmad Tibi was on a cooking show yesterday showing how to cook some rolled up lamb/meat with nuts inside on channel 2.

On 99 out of 100 other occassions he's condemning us.

[Kachah]

Member of Knesset Dr Ahmad Tibi was on a cooking show yesterday showing how to cook some rolled up lamb/meat with nuts inside on channel 2.

On 99 out of 100 other occassions he's condemning us.Well, we all know Dr Tibi MK... and at this point I would suggest that he is condemning the government of his country (not a bad thing by itself) for what he alleges are its wrongdoins. He is an elected official after all. Many if not all legislative assemblies around the world have a (village idiot) sorry, a loose cannon amongst them. A whistle blower if you want. Once in a while he'll call a real deal, other times people just remain alert.
Now, is he or isn't he a conscious and active enemy of the state, is he or isn't he conducting or inciting treacherous activity I guess should be a matter of state security. But before the verdict is drawn let's not at least smear the position of Member of Knesset he is holding apparently as a result of democratic and honest election process.

[andak01]

If that can be done without harming Gazan civilians then well and good but if due to the tactics and strategy of Hamas, Gazan civilians have to be harmed in order to stop the death toll of Israeli civilians then that's what the IDF has to do ...

That is a given, and I understand that Gaza civilian casualties may rise significantly above those of Israelis.


Now I ask you andak and I ask for your honest opinion: Is that what Hamas is doing?


I've already repeatedly stated, Hamas is committing war crimes and terrorism. But all of Gaza is not responsible for that and all of them should not be punished.


In fact, that party is guilty of war crimes ...

We are agreed, and almost unanimously the various human rights groups have come to the same opinion.


Now again, andak, I ask for your honest opinion: Is Hamas guilty of such war crimes or not? Do they make use of civilians and civilian installations as shieds or not?

Gaza is a very crowded and small place. I think that charge could be made always whether it is true or not. They cannot operate within Gaza without being near civilians. And gladly they can't operate outside of Gaza.


So, why exactly is it wrong to pull money from a people who voted for and still seem to support such a party?

I don't believe I've mentioned pulling money. If you'd like to discuss that separately we can.



Excuse me andak but your analogy is flawed because:

Hostages do not support the hostage taker's policies ...
Hostages do not elect the hostage takers to represent them ...
Hostages are ordinary citizens and their government IS responsible for their lives...
If a government is acting in a way that endangers my life, then I am hostage to that government. Not everyone voted for Hamas, but everyone was endangered when over 2000 buildings were destroyed in an urban area.


On the other hand:

Most of the Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, DO support the policies of Hamas ...
Most of the Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, DID elect Hamas to represent them ...
The Gazans, whom you liken to hostages, are citizens of an entity which declared and waged war on Israel and therefore Isael can only do 'so much' to minimize casualties amongst them, especially since the policies of Hamas are such as to put them deliberately in harms way.
From what I see, Israel has not only done nothing to reduce casualties, but they have carried on in a way to maximize pain, maiming, starvation etc. Having said that, my own government is responsible for situations just as bad. So I don't single out Israel as the bad guys in the world. And yes, there are many regiems like Sudan that do much worse.

Israel is not the bad guy in this situation, but they could use their superior resources to do much better. The whole Gaza offensive could have been a combination ground operation and police action.



How come over 1400 Afghani civilians lost their lives, in 2009, due to the actions of NATO and US forces? I picked only on 2009 because Obama was in power for most of 2009 and he was the commander in chief. Yet he could not put an end to the civilian casualties which as a nobel peace prize lauriate I am sure he would have liked to do ... yet he could NOT.

Nor could the Russians or the British or any other invasion force since Alexander. It's the nature of the place, not of Obama or Bush.


I bring that up because the Taliban fight a similar style of dirty war that Hamas is fighting ...

I don't see much comparison. Much as I hate both of them, I fail to see that an urban operation from an enclosed space is equal to a mountain operation in an untamed wilderness. Philisophically they are light years apart.


Yet you expect Israel to be effective in reducing the casualies of civilians, a feat that NATO and US forces are unable to bring about ... Why do you expect MORE from the IDF than from NATO/US forces, andak?

You are right from the aspect that this happens as I've stated above. But at least in instances like Haditha and Abu Graib there is an admission of guilt and a pretense of bringing those who did it to justice.


NOT towards the end andak. Towards the end, the airforces and the armies of both Germany and Japan were decimated. Yet, the allies did not slow down ...

And it was after that most brutal of wars that institutions like the UN and the Nuremburg trials were created to prevent that from happening again. I don't say they were without hypocrisy or terribly successful, but there was an urge to act on lessons learned.


Yes it did, historically but you are right that at the moment Israel does have the upper hand in the same way that the allies had the upper hand towards the end of WW2.

I imagine you would have the upper hand on a bunch of walled in folks making garage bombs. Give me helicopters, sattelites, laser sites and some 500lbs bombs and I'll do the same.


Yet it seems that people of your political persuasion begrudge Israel the idea of finishing off their enemy (Hamas) in the same ruthless way that the allies finished off Nazi Germany and the Empire of the Sun in WW2. In fact, if Israel would act half as ruthlessly against Hamas, you guys would have Israel proverbially (and probably more than proverbially) lynched and crucified ....

I don't know. We have yet to reach the point at which the US would actually act against Israel for anything they do to Hamas. You might get a "naughty, naughty" speech out of Obama if you genocided everyone in Gaza and put their heads on pikes.

[andak01]

Andak, after this statement I can't take anything seriously from you. It's below any possible criticism.
Since Yom Ha'atzmaut fighting existential threat is pretty much all Israel has been doing as a nation. 62 years soon. Every fool knows that.

Israel faces existential threats from many sides. You could easily argue that Hizbollah was and is an existential threat. But Hamas has not the means, the brains or the brawn to pose such a threat to Israel. Can you even fantasize a scenario where they could defeat a modern conventional army such as Israel has?


THe threat from Hamas is clearly existential as Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist.

So do some old men living in Austria. They've probably got some fertilizer and metal tubing in his shed too.


The fact that Hamas lacks technical and operational capacity today does not make the threat less existential.

From an imperialist point of view, probably not. Just like 10000 cavalry troops faced an existential threat from Geronimo and his bloodthirsty band of 40.


Another good example is Iran which today is not technically a clear and present danger. THe timetable to becoming one is very boldly laid down: it coinsides with its progress in mastering the uranium enrichment process. Of course, when we wake up one morning and learn from the news that the mad ayatollahs have now access to the nukes you will not argue the existential nature of its threat. Wouldn't that be too late though?

Iran is not Hamas. Iran's military makes Hamas look like the stone age.

[redcake]

That is a given, and I understand that Gaza civilian casualties may rise significantly above those of Israelis.

It's great that you understand it, but why do you think it's a moral sticking point? Why is a death toll anything to use in a debate? You're using the number of survivors as a point of "proof". It's irrational.

This is actually a product of the Palestinian's desire to blatantly sacrifice the lives, which they don't value to begin with. You can not shame a country over it's survival.




Gaza is a very crowded and small place.

No it's not. Gaza City, and specific areas are just condensed in population.




Israel has not only done nothing to reduce casualties, but they have carried on in a way to maximize pain, maiming, starvation etc.

Would Israel have been better off executing the entire Palestinian population humanely back when there was only 600,000 of them?

Basically, you give Israel no credit for the humanity in which it provides Palestinians, including aid, and just basic quality of life, such as electricity.





I don't know. We have yet to reach the point at which the US would actually act against Israel for anything they do to Hamas. You might get a "naughty, naughty" speech out of Obama if you genocided everyone in Gaza and put their heads on pikes.

See, it really is you presenting the imagined genocide angle at every turn. It doesn't apply to the Israeli mindset, or the conflict would be settled already.
What you've just revealed is that you're feeding off the worst most antisemitic leftist marketing propaganda and you're incapable of parsing your words.

[andak01]

This is actually a product of the Palestinian's desire to blatantly sacrifice the lives, which they don't value to begin with. You can not shame a country over it's survival.

Who said I'm trying to shame anyone. It isn't a shame if regrettable things happen in the heat of battle. That is part and parcel to most conflicts. I do expect a nation with as high a moral sense of itself as Israel to acknowledge that it could have happened with them too and investigate the allegations.


No it's not. Gaza City, and specific areas are just condensed in population.

Gaza strip population density 10,665/sq MI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip)


Would Israel have been better off executing the entire Palestinian population humanely back when there was only 600,000 of them?

I'll let you hang yourself with your own rope on that one.


Basically, you give Israel no credit for the humanity in which it provides Palestinians, including aid, and just basic quality of life, such as electricity.

I thought I gave Israel credit in the first post of this thread. I mentioned the care offered again. I gave Israel credit for protecting its own civilians with improved warnings and shelters. I almost haven't mentioned Hamas without also mentioning terrorism. Nor do I mourn any Hamas terrorists who were killed.


See, it really is you presenting the imagined genocide angle at every turn. It doesn't apply to the Israeli mindset, or the conflict would be settled already.

I don't believe I've used the word genocide. I don't believe excessive casualties constitute genocide and I would argue that they don't.


What you've just revealed is that you're feeding off the worst most antisemitic leftist marketing propaganda and you're incapable of parsing your words.

Well yeah, those bastions of anti-semitism, the New York Times, the BBC, the Goldstone Report and anyone else who isn't copacetic with every single thing that Israel does. There sure are a bunch of Jewish anti-semites in the world!

[Reffo]

Gaza is a very crowded and small place. I think that charge could be made always whether it is true or not. They cannot operate within Gaza without being near civilians. And gladly they can't operate outside of GazaHamas could identify it's fighters by dressing them in uniforms or at least make them wear armbands. But that's not what they do, they deliberately mingle amongst civilians and attack Israeli soldiers while hiding amongst civilians and/or from civilian installations such as hospitals and Mosques.

That's a war crime andak and you know it ...


I don't believe I've mentioned pulling money. If you'd like to discuss that separately we canI reread the context in which you made that statement and I now understand that I misunderstood what you said, my mistake ...


Not everyone voted for Hamas, but everyone was endangered when over 2000 buildings were destroyed in an urban areaNo, but the majority DID, knowing full well that by doing so they vote for war with Israel. War has consequences and unfortunately I am not aware of any war in which the innocent don't suffer with the guilty ...

So what do you want Israel to do about it? Walk up to every individual Gazan and investigate who they voted for? You know that is impossible ... so let us put the blame for the suffering where it belongs: On the society that voted for war, the Gazans, NOT on Israel who was/is forced to wage a war it does NOT want in order to protect it's own civilian population ...


From what I see, Israel has not only done nothing to reduce casualties, but they have carried on in a way to maximize pain, maiming, starvation etc. Having said that, my own government is responsible for situations just as bad. So I don't single out Israel as the bad guys in the world. And yes, there are many regiems like Sudan that do much worseThat is just NOT true andak. Israel carried out an extensive campaign to warn civilians in Gaza of impending attacks on neighbourhoods prior to attacking targets during operation Cast Led.

And NO, it is NOT true that Gazans are being starved. Have you seen what starving people look like? Do Gazans look like that in any of the newsreels that you see? And do you think they would not be paraded in front of the cameras if they would look like starving people? I think they would because Hamas are master propaganists and they would NOT miss any opportunity to parade their "victimhood" in front of the cameras ....


Israel is not the bad guy in this situation, but they could use their superior resources to do much better. The whole Gaza offensive could have been a combination ground operation and police actionI am glad that you acknowledge that Israel is NOT the bad guy. As for the rest of your sentence above, I don't know what you mean. Perhaps you can elaborate in greater detail and tell us how srael could do better and still achieve their objective of stopping Hamas from coninually targeting and murdering Israeli civilians. After all, that is Israel's ultimate objective and by your own admission they have NOT yet achieved that objective even though you seem to believe that Israel's tactic are overly harsh.

By the way, please don't respond by suggesting that Israel could negotiate with Hamas or talk them into peace because they tried that before and Hamas is NOT willing to talk, certainly not directly. Nor are they willing to stop the war until they would destroy Israel. They said they are willing to bide their time, if necessary for generations, until they would achieve their objective and in the meanwhile, they pledge to continue their war of attrition, continually targeting, murdering nd maiming Israli civilians ...

Given the above, I would be most interested in your ideas about how (specifically) Israel could do better ... (who knows, I/we may learn something).


Nor could the Russians or the British or any other invasion force since Alexander. It's the nature of the place, not of Obama or BushI wasn't having a go at Obama. I was illustrating how difficult it is to eliminate civilian casualtie in wars. The point that I was making was precisely what you acknowledge in bold.


I don't see much comparison. Much as I hate both of them, I fail to see that an urban operation from an enclosed space is equal to a mountain operation in an untamed wilderness. Philisophically they are light years apartThe terrain may be different but the tactics of the Taliban are similar. They both fight a guerilla warfare and they both hide amongst civilians and attack soldiers from amongst civilians and civilian infrastructure. And in doing so, both Hamas's and the Taliban's objective are the same:

To maximise their own success by using illegal ambush tactics, making themselves look as civilians ...
To use civilian casualties as a means of propaganda to embarass and vilify their respective enemies (NATO/USA forces and the IDF) when they respond and civilians inevitably die in the crossfire ..



You are right from the aspect that this happens as I've stated above. But at least in instances like Haditha and Abu Graib there is an admission of guilt and a pretense of bringing those who did it to justiceIsrael too has prosecuted and imprisoned rogue soldiers who did not follow the rules of engagement. It does not however happen everyday because soldiers don't often ignore orders.

I think that your problem, andak, is that Israel does NOT react to every spurious allegation that is being made against it by it's numerous enemies who wage a continuous propaganda war against the Jewish state.


And it was after that most brutal of wars that institutions like the UN and the Nuremburg trials were created to prevent that from happening again. I don't say they were without hypocrisy or terribly successful, but there was an urge to act on lessons learnedYes but only against the Germans and the Japanese (the losing side). Whereas the winning side (the allies) got off scott free even though they too used extremely brutal and ruthless methods, against German and Japanese civilians, in order to finalize the war in their own favour ...

Don't get me wrong, I don't blame them for it. It's the nature of war ... unfortunately the innocent suffer with the guilty but you and people of your political persuasion don't seem to concede that fact when it comes to Israel ...


I imagine you would have the upper hand on a bunch of walled in folks making garage bombs. Give me helicopters, sattelites, laser sites and some 500lbs bombs and I'll do the sameyou seem to have missed my point andak. I wasn't crowing about Israel's prowess, I just responded to your point in your earlier post .... Read the context again, please!


I don't know. We have yet to reach the point at which the US would actually act against Israel for anything they do to Hamas. You might get a "naughty, naughty" speech out of Obama if you genocided everyone in Gaza and put their heads on pikesI wasn't talking about the USA, I was talking about people of YOUR political persuasion some of whom (like you) may condemn Hamas in a cursory way then jump on Israel and expect IT to right the wrongs that Hamas perpetuates against Israeli civilians and it's own people ...

By the way, I believe that under Obama, the USA too has a greater tendency to follow your example, unfortunately!

[redcake]

I do expect a nation with as high a moral sense of itself as Israel to acknowledge that it could have happened with them too and investigate the allegations.

They do, and have. They are the most scrutinized nation in the world at times of war. Their human rights conduct has been the subject of untold amounts of reports. It's very curious for your to claim otherwise.

I think you should also correct something. Israel doesn't have merely a high moral sense of self, it conducts itself with a high sense of morals. The increased deaths can be traced back to escalations by the Palestinians themselves, over a long period of time, using state sponsored long range rockets.



Gaza strip population density 10,665/sq MI

It's 21 miles long with undeveloped areas, and neglected utilities.




I thought I gave Israel credit in the first post of this thread. I mentioned the care offered again.

You did, but as we get further into this discussion, I was right to challenge those hollow sentiments.



I don't believe I've used the word genocide.

The word you used was "genocided". As in your belief that Obama wouldn't do anything but scold Israel if Palestinians were "genocided". Your making another suggestion that Palestinians are dehumanized, genocide is plausible, and that this perspective is an accurate starting point for discussion. That's the bone I've picked with you from the beginning.

[andak01]

You did, but as we get further into this discussion, I was right to challenge those hollow sentiments.

They weren't hollow to me or I wouldn't have posted this thread in the first place. I was feeling a bit hopeful, but you've succeeding in sucking most of that away. Back to my initial response which you thought was over the top, I think we've covered most of it save for the last one.

- she was a human shield

- it was only retalliation

- she was collateral damage

- every effort was made to avoid hurting civilians

- she's a potential jihadi or mother of jihadis anyway, the parents are using taqiyah to pretend to have compassion

From that perspective she had it coming.

[Kachah]

So do some old men living in Austria. They've probably got some fertilizer and metal tubing in his shed too..
THis is ridiculous. Why are you trying to pretend to be sillier than you are? Of course the old Austrian men hate Israel and Jews and probably have tubing and fertilizer. But they are far away, they don't have popular support, funding from powerful sponsors, weapons handouts, power, organizational infrastructure and many other things which Hamas with all its technical and tactical backwardness does posess and what makes Hamas, not some Austrian old farts, an existential threat. Existential by nature. Tomorrow the ayatollahs or takeo's KGB friends will give them the means of materializing their dreams and ...



Iran is not Hamas. Iran's military makes Hamas look like the stone age.Andak, you are constantly missing the point. I know, it's deliberate but nonetheless.
It's not about who is more militarily stronger. It's about intentions and purposes. In 1933 the entire Hitler's military looked like the stone age compare to the French or British... But his intentions remained the same in 3, 5, 10 years time. THe existential nature of his threat to the world has not changed.
Anyway, by now you cannot pretend that you don't get the idea. Technical capacity of your enemy today is obviously important but it can be dealt with as any other defined and quantified risk. Dealing with uncertainties while being aware of the true intentions is much harder but even more important.

[redcake]

From that perspective she had it coming. [/I]

Wow, ... gross ...
Your imagination is far worse than the reality...and that, kiddo, is what sucks away my hope. ....

[Kachah]

I think andak represents or is under the influence of the fashionable leftie idea of "symmetry", "equality of evil" or as it was mentioned here "moral equivalency" of the fighting sides. It holds that fighting is wrong and overwhelming power makes it wronger. Both sides must be equated in evil as they both equate in activities such as shooting, attacking, taking cover etc. A true leftie would take some pious position of a bystander calling for calm. And obviously add some "justice" in a form of providing funds to the "oppressed" while criticizing the "oppressor".
Funny enough, it resembles the current ideological position of the Russian KGB power clique where they are successfully brainwashing people into belief that the sides in Cold War were ideally symmetrical with no moral superiority of the West whatsoever. The reason the West won was purely economical or even just luck. In fact the majority of Russians would be very surprised if somebody suggested to them that the West held moral high ground in the COld War. Two equal tides collided, one lost, another one came on top, that's it.
It's nothing like, andak.

[andak01]

Tomorrow the ayatollahs or takeo's KGB friends will give them the means of materializing their dreams and ...

Short of an actual Iranian invasion, what would that take? Hamas has proven for decades that shoveling money at them doesn't improve their lot or their military prowess. Israel to their credit has made it impossible to get any relevant military supplies.


In 1933 the entire Hitler's military looked like the stone age compare to the French or British...

They also had some of the best universities, and control of the world's steel production and factories that could be converted for military uses. Are you really making a comparison? Not only that, but there were still generals alive with military strategic experience from WWI. Would you compare that to Hamas?


Anyway, by now you cannot pretend that you don't get the idea.

I understand the idea entirely. A walled in terrorist enemy hurling unaimable rockets with enough explosives to blow up a car or one wall of a school IF they hit something is an existential threat to a country with nukes, F-16s, sattelite technology, tanks, robots and guns that shoot around corners. Makes perfect sense to me. That justifies destroying their civilian factories and infrastructure and then not allowing it to be rebuilt.


Technical capacity of your enemy today is obviously important but it can be dealt with as any other defined and quantified risk. Dealing with uncertainties while being aware of the true intentions is much harder but even more important.

I can understand how there are many uncertainties with a free roaming enemy like Iran or Syria. How many uncertainties there are in a well observed, enclosed space of 360 square kilometers is another question.

[andak01]

I think andak represents or is under the influence of the fashionable leftie idea of "symmetry", "equality of evil" or as it was mentioned here "moral equivalency" of the fighting sides.

I guess you feel obligated to say that after all I've said to the contrary.


It holds that fighting is wrong and overwhelming power makes it wronger. Both sides must be equated in evil as they both equate in activities such as shooting, attacking, taking cover etc.

Didn't say anything resembling that. I will say that if one side is overwhelmingly more powerful than the other, it's a farse to speak of an existential threat. It does remind me of the last 40 Apaches being hunted down by 10000 US troops being written up as an existential threat to the US government. People bought into that one too, and those 40 probably killed more Americans than have died in all of the Qassam strikes ever. Does that mean that his bloody rampage should have been allowed to continue, or that I think it was right to slaughter settlers? No, of course not. But the myth of military equivalency is just that.

[Reffo]

andak

Yes, I will say it too: Hamas represents an existential threat to Israel. Not today, because I agree that today they haven't got the capacity to destroy Israel but they certainly have the will and the intention. And more than that, they have others who are very sympathetic to Hamas, who have oil, weapons and manpower. Given the opportunity to allow those powers to freely interact, cooperate with, impart their skills and supply Hamas. Then over Time, Hamas's ability to make that threat real, would improve. And in the meanwhile, can be a real thorn in Israel's side. They can go on and murder Israeli civilians, harass and terrorize them to the point of causing political turmoil in Israel. Couple that to the propaganda war that they wage, with the help of willing and in some cases naive western allies who aid and abet Hamas, and they can and do cause Israel real damage even in the short term ...

I believe that's what Kachah was saying and I agree with him.

[Reffo]

... And even more than that: Hamas is the party that keeps the rage alive amongst Arabs. They are the ones that keep the torch going and prevent peace till other more powerful and numerous enemies of Israel will join the battle. That's another reason why Hamas represent an existential threat to Israel. Because I will say it again: They keep the war going and prevent the possibility of peace between Arabs and Jews and that too represents a threat to Israel ... And of course to the Arabs too but they are too short sighted and blinded by hatred to see it ....