[Closed] What is happening in Gaza is a war crime

Its a bloody war, terrible things happen by accident or deliberate action, sadly terrible things happen to kids in this country, and we are not haveing a war, just be glad the media is allowed to report, whats happening, not like our wars, where there are hidden facts, and people got killed, on both sides.

WHY CAN WE JUST NOT HAVE PEACE, ON EARTH.

iam not an israeli or an arab, just a normal chap.

Don't worry, the highly paid Middle East Peace Envoy will sort it all out.

Who blurr, he couldnt sort out the uk.

Oh, he sorted out the UK alright, and now we are enjoying the benefits of his expertise.

They say rats abandon a sinking ship....

D'you know, I'm really surprised on one has started a mahoosive thread on the current Gaza situation already. You'd have thought that all the views would have been aired by now....

Safe Haven to all the non-combatants and c**k punches all round for the people who don't know what to do with themselves unless there is a war on.

Then nuke the place from orbit.

It's the only way to be sure.

Will now wait for my Nobel Peace prize. **** Yeah!!

Sadly there will be war crimes being committed all over the world, not just in Gaza.

.

project - Member

........just be glad the media is allowed to report, whats happening, not like our wars.......

.

The media is most definitely [u]not[/u] allowed to report.

Quote :

"Israel argues that excluding the international media from Gaza is helpful because foreign journalists are unethical and biased in their reporting.

Foreign journalists are "unprofessional" and take "questionable reports at face value without checking", said Danny Seaman, who heads Israel's government press office, which vets and issues permits to foreign correspondents."

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-international-media-excluded ]Deal to admit journalists aborted[/url]

The [u]only[/u] reason we know about the incident which pantsonfire is referring to, is because the Israelis haven't yet figured out a way of silencing the International Committee of the Red Cross.

.

Although it would appear that the Israelis are working on that one - apparently the Israelis can drive the Red Cross out of Gaza by shelling their schools and aid convoys.

Seaman... that sounds an apropriate name

That's one side of the story but let's hear what the Israelis have to say about that.

Don't worry, the highly paid Middle East Peace Envoy will sort it all out.

I watched that documentary the other night about the Polish "Anne Frank" and while I understand the Israelis' frustration with Hamas, you have to wonder, seeing the footage of Jews rounded up like animals in a ghetto, picked off at will often at the mere whim of the Nazis, do they not have any sense of irony (in no comedic form) when they stand back and take a look at their actions in Gaza.

While it is nowhere near "history repeating itself", the state of Israel is committing war crimes but I fear, noone from any Israeli government will ever be held to account for it in The Hague.

I do not follow the logic that says that jews should be [i]especially[/i] ashamed of shelling civilian populations, denying access for the Red Cross, using white phospohorous in populated areas, attacking mosques on the offchance that they contain arms caches etc etc etc etc etc [i]because[/i] of the holocaust.

Yes, a minor skirmish with a few hundred deaths is exactly like gas chambers, ovens and industrialised murder.

As much as it is a crime it is moreso a chuffing disgrace.

If you were a young man in palestine right now I am sure you are more likely to want to take up arms against israel as a result of this continued action wthan before hich I would assume is not the best of outcomes for any of the sides. I know I would.

We need to get Team America to Gazza....oh wait they are already there.

as a middle aged and middle class man in Norway i want to take up arms against the Isrealis

Go for it.

except i'm a pussy with a big gob

I agree that what is happening in Gazza is a war crime however this is a bit of a strong topic for STW and potentially their sponsors TBH.

chewkw - Member
That's one side of the story but let's hear what the Israelis have to say about that.

chewkw I know from previous posts you are a fascist pillock, however even for you this is a good one. The Red Cross is an International organization renowned for its neutral stance, hence for them to make a statement like this means that its got a 99% chance of being accurate.

Whereas the Israelis govt, might have a reason to lie about this don't you think.

Really scary thing is considering what is getting out, and is broadcast by the BBC which is now heavily censored by the Govt, we are only be seeing the tip of the iceberg.

I agree that what is happening in Gazza is a war crime

hora, are you suggesting that STW is sponsored by an international conspiracy of zionist elders who will use their shadowy financial powers to close down this thread?

🙄

The Israeli government's politics and security cabinet are a bunch of genocidal bastards who are committing war crimes and should be indicted before the ICC in the Hague along with Shimon Perez.

The Israeli people should be ashamed of their government and what it is doing in their name in order to get elected (anyone who doesn't realise this is an election campaign for dominance in the Knesset, not a security campaign is very naieve indeed).

But the problem is that anyone who criticises the actions of Israel is branded an anti-semitic, as for most people Isreali = Jewish (obviously ignoring the people of Israeli nationality who are muslim, christian and even Seikh!).

Yeah OK, Hamas include a nasty bunch of Iran supported murders, but they also provide health care, education and were democratically elected - you can't demand free and fair elections then demand that the people pick someone else if you don't like the result! Especially after your illegal occupation of thier land and your oppression of their people destroys the moderate views giving Hamas a huge popularity.

But of course nothing but the diplomatic equivalent of tutting gently will happen, America won't let the international community actually DO anything as that would undermine the "Iran/Muslim evil, Isreal good" subtle dialetic that the US pedal.

The UN and the USA should get off their pathetic asses and instead of wringing thier hands whimpering "oh but its all such a mess" they should send in Peacekeepers to establish proper border patrols, eleiminate rocket attacks from Hamas and helicopter gunship attacks from Isreal, open the ports etc. so Palestinians have some hope of a livelihood and maybe get some f*cking PEACE!
I'd support that much more than some oil grabbing war in Iraq on the basis it might make the world safer.

Grrrr.... rant over.

Im sure the Palestinians would rescue Israel children struck down by rocket attacks wouldn't they....??

They and Iran want to wipe Israel out - so imo there more than right to be defending themselves. I find it strange with the Palestinians - they fire rockets etc, if Israel wanted to and wasn't stopped by the press going mental they could/would wipe the Gaza strip off the face of the planet.

It's Palestine causing the problem - Israel built its boarder defence and left it be but still rockets come over the boarder - so when they retaliate there the bad ones ?

I would also agree with the Israel's - the press is being one sided and sympathetic to the Palestinians so bloody right to keep them out. Remeber what they were like in the Falklands.

[i]It's Palestine causing the problem - Israel built its boarder defence and left it be but still rockets come over the boarder - so when they retaliate there the bad ones ?[/i]

Congratulations - you've avoided reading, or understanding, any of the huge volume of information that's been written in recent days, and turned history on its head.

forums all over the world are going on like this , about how wronge , war crimes blah blah blah, of course its wronge, but its never gonna stop ,untill these idots stop and talk , with open doors for the world to see, it happend in N.I , it will also need to happen in afganistan, THE VIOLENCE WILL ONLY STOP WHEN THESE IDIOTS TALK, i doubt the Israelis are going to worry much on what the west thinks, im not a religeous in any way shape or form , but i pray that new U.S president can somehow usher in a new era of peace , i also agree on him not publicly saying anything on the matter , untill he comes to power, i hope he makes the right choices.

Offroading,

I agree the qassam and grad-type rockets aimed at civilians are also a disgusting act. However, whilst hamas are a terrorist militia, The Israeli Army and airforce are supposed to be bound to a higher standard - that of the Geneva Convention on the Conduct of War.

Its expressly against that convention to target civilian infrastructure of a people. Schools, Hospitals, Mosques and Police Stations are NOT legitimate targets in ANY war.

Hamas are also wrong to target civilians, however, when they target military personel this is (whilst not helpful to the "peace process") acceptable as international law recognises the right of a people to physically oppose an occuping or invading force through combat, sabortage and disruption (providing that they don't target civilians).

badger ive served in a few wars/conflicts and im afraid a lot happens on all sides thats not really in the Geneva Convention on the Conduct of War.

SR its quite hard for one side to talk to another, when one of the parties that need to sit around the table keep assassinating the other side.

or are you suggesting that the Israeli's should start doing seance's?

Hang on , hang on, I admit to not being particularly interested in the whole damned affair, after all, its been goin on for thousands of years hasnt it ?
But, in defence of the Israeli's , -
Havent they dropped leaflets warning civilians out of a particular are before they drop bombs ?
Havent they warned Hamas that if they continue to lob rockets into Israel, the heavy retribution would be taken,.....
cue current action.
And, most importantly, isnt it Hamas that is launching these rockets from sites which they dont think the Israelis 'Dare' Bomb ? ie Hospitals/schools etc etc.

Cmon guys, at least the Israelis are an effective modern miltary operation, with spydrones in the air, and the capability to carry out what they have warned they would......they know what the hell is going on and why they are doing what they are.

Hamas is, and always will be as far as I can see, a Terrorist organization, and sometimes the only way to deal with such is exactly as is happening, and unfortunately, yes, lots of civilians get killed.

Stop lobbing rockets, and this maybe this wouldnt have happened ????

Just my opinion, simplistic as it may be.

5thElefant - Member

Yes, a minor skirmish with a few hundred deaths is exactly like gas chambers, ovens and industrialised murder.

The Germans were able to do what they did to Jews because there was a global war going on and essentially no one was watching.

Although the Nazis were extraordinarily secretive about what they were doing, they were also very much aware that, even if the horrible truth came out, no one could do anything about it. And of course they were fully convinced that they would win the war.

Even if the Israelis wanted to carry out the 'industrialised murder' of the Palestinians, they would be physically unable to do so.

The suggestion by many, of the similarities between what the Nazis did and what the Israelis are doing now, is [i]not[/i] based by identical circumstances, it is based on a similar mindset.

That is, that the Palestinians are sub-human and there lives worthless. That the Palestinians have no rights and can be simply driven off their lands. That the Palestinians can be herded onto small areas of land and then those areas sealed off from the outside world [i]etc. etc.[/i]

An example of this is, when challenged about the shelling of a UN school and the resulting death of young Palestinian children, the Israelis responded by claiming that Hamas was using the school to launch mortar attacks against their forces. Obviously they felt this completely justified their actions (quite apart from the fact that it was complete bollox)

The Israelis seemed [i]genuinely[/i] confused when it was suggested that this was unacceptable. They didn't appear to understand the concept that the lives of Palestinian children are in fact precious, not worthless and to be conveniently discarded if necessary. Of course there can be no doubt that the Israelis would not even [i]consider[/i] such action, if Hamas fighters were launching an attack from a school crammed with Israeli children.

.

Yes 5thElefant, the comparison is [i]not[/i] with identical historical events, but with a similar attitude which suggest that one group of people are simply 'sub-human'. I would have thought that was obvious, no ?

Spot on Macca - it's a war. Bad things happen in wars, and there are casualties both innocent and guilty, and that extends to both sides.

Society, borders, economies both local and global are also based on people believing others are inferior to themselves.

You want a utopia ernie, you go and find one on another planet, as the one you're on isn't sociologically constructed to have one.

.

Bad things happen in wars....blah.......blah....

.

So why then, do we have an international war crime tribunal at The Hague ? ? ? ?

Surely the war crime investigators should realise that "bad things happen in wars" ?

Perhaps they should all come and live on my utopian planet ?

.

BTW, did the Nazis at the Nuremberg Trails try this "sh1t happens in wars" defence ?

........they should have tried it - I reckon that it might have worked.

It's not a war crime, it's a crime.

Israel is out of order. They are shelling civillians to try and get at Hamas. Bottom line - a lot of people in important places don't give a sh*t about Palestinian lives. If you can't flush out those who are firing rockets then you are morally bound to try and find another solution. You can't shell innocents - end of.

The actions of the Israeli governments are simply racist.

Yes 5thElefant, the comparison is not with identical historical events, but with a similar attitude which suggest that one group of people are simply 'sub-human'. I would have thought that was obvious, no ?

The war crime thing is there to bring to justice those who commit war crimes. And that will happen if they are adjudged to have been committed.

However, the comment I was making is that any war will have collaterol damage. Some significantly more than most, and when you're dealing with terrorist operations rather than military operations, the strength of intelligence is the key to limiting collaterol damage. It's a well known and documented tactic of isolated terrorist cells to insinuate and exist within "safe" society and attack at opportune and unsuspecting moments. What should be the case is that those "safe" areas the terrorists insinuate to are adequately cleared prior to any military operation, or those harboring them should eject them on the basis of their own safety and innocence.

However, the latter generally doesn't happen, and the former cannot be 100% accurate. So, civilians get hurt. That's a standard on the rules of engagement of pretty much any military operation.

To my mind, the Israelis have not specifically targeted civilians, as they know better than to do that. Equally they have probably one of the best secret services around, with huge investment in it, purely as they are aware of their precarious position both politically and geographically, and seek to protect themselves, as any right thinking nation would. Equally, Hamas feel they are 100% right in what they're doing, and potentially they are.

Also, how many of us have been involved in conflict? I know two on the forum that have, and chatting to them it's abundantly clear that nothing is clear cut on the ground. It's very easy to cry "war crime", "oh my god Nazi-esque regime, bring them down" from our nice comfy offices, based on media reports. I'm not going to do that as there's little point.

When you're directly involved in the real time strategic operations and decisions of both perceived aggressor and oppressor, then fair enough, but until then, I cannot agree with statements such as "war criminals" and "israelis are nazis", and I struggle to see how anyone else can.

Agree with the OP. Its a crime that the media wont leave him alone or the FA wont offer him a job.

everybody knows bad shit happens in wars, and civilians do get accidently killed. The problem is some of these events don't appear to be accidents.

To most peoples minds, moving civilians into a building and then shelling it from a distance, bombing UN schools and leaving children/toddlers to starve to death whilst clinging to the bodies of their dead parents, whilst actively blocking the red cross from helping them is pretty indefensible.

If it was any other country than Israel this would be described for what it is, ethnic cleansing.

I read some interesting stuff at one point about "risk transfer warfare" which is in point here. Sadly the authors' names have slipped out fo my head for the moment.

The general point was that Western armies and governments claim that it is right to target only combatants, but then go to enormous lengths to avoid their own combatants being placed at significant risk. The result is what we call "collateral damage", which we claim is unavoidable, regrettable and morally different from targetting civilians.

This leads to a "war" in which the western army uses high-tech weaponry to attack "combatant" targets which cannot in any meaningful sense fight back, and in the process "collaterally" kills civilians who are not trying to fight at all. However, the moral difference between the deaths of an impoverished 17 year old boy with an AK47 and an impoverished 17 year old boy without an AK-47 when both are killed by rockets fired from warplanes operating thousands of yards above rifle range whose pilots are at no pracgtical risk of harm is not really terribly clear. Both are presumably pissed with the guy in the warplane, neither stands a chance of hurting him, he kills both of them.

The pilot cannot discriminate effectively between the two without exposing himself to a collossally higher level of risk, by flying much lower or slower, by getting out of the plane and going down into the streets with a rifle without heavy artillery cover etc etc. The risk that this would pose to the Western pilot is not acceptable, so the risk is instead borne by the impoverished 17 year old boy who does not have a rifle.

Given the dubious moral authority of the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, and the practical failure to separate them because risk to Western combatants is unacceptable it is therefore doubtful whether the claimed moral distinction between "proper" war and "terrorist outrages" is really tenable.

Western military attacks third world "army" and in the process kills civilians. Third world army cannot kill western military. It's chances of hurting anyone are absurdlty low. So it attacks people it can hurt, who do (as is fairly pointed out) vote for the guys who sent the soldiers in the first place. If we assume that the third world guys have a point (and we have to concede that the palestinian factions have a point, even if they are not entirel in the right and do some very wrong things) then it is not clear that, morally speaking, they have to lose the argument simply because their military forces are incapable of hurting Israeli military forces most of the time. In other words, the use of overwhelming force in the certain knowledge that there will be collateral damage rather than using less force and exposing troops to risk goes some way to legitimising a response which actively seeks to target civilian populations.

NB: This is an argument about morality and legitimacy. Soldiers need not trouble themselves too much about such things while trying to stay alive, but their commanders and political masters probably should.

Nothing new. Incinerating Dresden wasn't done to Marquess of Queensbury rules.

are you saying that just because atrocities have happened in the past thats OK? and the mistakes shouldn't be learnt from?

"Only the dead have seen the end of war"

Who said that and how long ago?

No. I'm saying killing people while avoiding being killed yourself isn't a novel concept. It's the basic principle of war.

I'm sure they're killing fewer civilians than if they carpet bombed the place overnight, then called in the Americans to finish it off the next day. About 24,500 less.

pk-ripper - Member

.........I cannot agree with statements such as "war criminals" and "israelis are nazis", and I struggle to see how anyone else can.

No pk-ripper, not people doing it from "nice comfy offices, based on media reports". People who are basing their claims on what is actually happening - not on Israeli government claims, as you obviously are.

As a result of reports which the UN has received from it's relief workers in the area, Israel stands accused [i]specifically[/i] of 'war crimes'. I make no apology for choosing to believe the UN relief workers before the claims of the Israeli government in Jerusalem. Furthermore, the International Committee of the Red Cross, which is probably the most neutral organisation in the world has backed up the claims.

On the question of a 'Palestinian Holocaust' and the comparison with the Nazis. Again, the accusations are made by highly qualified people.

This is what Richard Falk the United Nations Human Rights Investigator and professor of International Law at Princeton University has said, quote :

[b]"There is little doubt that the Nazi Holocaust was as close to unconditional evil as has been revealed throughout the entire bloody history of the human species....................Against this background, it is especially painful for me, as an American Jew, to feel compelled to portray the ongoing and intensifying abuse of the Palestinian people by Israel through a reliance on such an inflammatory metaphor as ëholocaust.í"[/b]

This is the full article, but I don't suppose you'll read it as it says things which you probably don't want to hear.

[url= http://www.jewishconscience.org/11.html ]Slouching Toward a Palestinian Holocaust[/url]

Only those who lose wars are war criminals. If you win you are not prosecuted

This is the full article, but I don't suppose you'll read it as it says things which you probably don't want to hear.

[i]Jews can be drama queens too shocker.[/i]

Let me know when the death toll hits 1,000,000 and I'll concede that holocaust is appropriate.

.

Jews can be drama queens too shocker.

.

Yeah, right, the United Nations Human Rights Investigator is a drama queen 🙄

.

You just carry on believing that bollox and keep your head firmly in the sand.

Or wherever it is that it's stuck.

What bollocks is that? The bollocks that 500 deaths in a minor military action doesn't equate to 6,000,000 deaths through systematic extermination? That bollocks?

erm, I'm not basing it on israeli government claims at all, I'm sitting in an office, and therefore specifically saying that I cannot form a formal opinion one way or the other. And the OP equally so.

If the UN is aware of war crimes perpetrated by Israel I would fully expect them to prosecute however necessary.

And I will happily read the article when I'm not in the office. However, I would like to suggest, regardless of who writes an article, that that is merely another media, and i could probably provide you with any number of conflicting media, which I could then use to support any point I was making. Whether you or I give more credence to one or another is entirely subjective.

So, therefore I refer you back to the point I made earlier - we, on here, are all reliant on secondary information, media, and it is human nature to read selectively and with generosity to something they inherently believe in. That is as much what I am challenging as anything else.

I would also draw your attention to the fundamental rule of justice. Israel stands accused of war crimes, which as you've so clearly suggested the UN is able to progress and try against. As yet they have not admitted any, have not been tried for any, and no prosecution or defence has been laid open for scrutiny by both parties, so at the present time, the only reachable verdict can be "not guilty", surely?

Big Dummy's post is by far the most measured and objective on here. Emotions seem to rule quite high in the rest.

5thElefant - Member
.

What bollocks is that?

The bollocks about dismissing the UN Human Rights Investigator as a "drama queen".

I thought my post made that pretty obvious.

Still, you if you couldn't figure that out, then I can hardly expect you to understand very much.
You best leave it to the tabloids to do your thinking for you, eh ?

.

If the UN is aware of war crimes perpetrated by Israel I would fully expect them to prosecute....

Why's that ? I wouldn't.

Unless it's got the full backing of the US government there's no chance of that happening.

.

However, I would like to suggest, regardless of who writes an article, that that is merely another media

Erm, no. It's not "just another media" article. You might not agree with it but, it's the informed opinion of a United Nations human rights investigator and a professor of international law. Of course it doesn't mean he's right. But his opinion carries considerably more weight with me than that of an Israeli government spokesman, or indeed some of the herberts on here.

.

Needless to say, no matter how overwhelming the evidence against Israel is, some will always choose not to believe it.
[i]Even if[/i] Israel was to be successfully prosecuted at The Hague, some would still argue that the trial was flawed, the evidence fabricated, etc etc

Afterall, even after Nuremberg and all the evidence, some [i]still[/i] argue that the Nazi persecution the Jews never happened.

[i]They all died of cholera don't you know ..........[/i]

I think ernie_lynch has been pretty accurate from I been reading and seeing. I don't have the time or expertise to discus the horror which is going on in Gazza, but independent reports coming back pretty much are what ernie_lynch has been linking here.

I am also sickened by the way some people on here can be so casual with regards to children and families being murdered because of their race.

Perhaps if Massa didn't locate all there military targets beneith hospitals, schools and amoung housing areas casulty's wouldn't be so high.

I wonder when the UK extremists will react to this.

What measures do people think appropriate for Israel to take?

I am also sickened by the way some people on here can be so casual with regards to children and families being murdered because of their race.

What measures do people think appropriate for Israel to take ?

Complying with the Geneva Convention would be a good start.

"What measures do people think appropriate for Israel to take? "

Nuke.

Complying with the Geneva Convention would be a good start.

How? What do you suggest is a proportinate responce?

Maybe I am a bit dim but as I see it.

Israel pulled out of the Gaza strip.
Palestines voted Hamas into power.
Palestines started to lop rockets into Israel.
Israel invaded Gaza.

So if the France decided that many, many years ago they controlled Britain and as such wanted to destroy Britain and re occupy it. That would all be fine and dandy?

Even if they started lobbing rockets at you and your family as your sat down watching the tv at night. Thats all good because the normans were here years ago! Surely this would mean war between Britain and France? Surely?

Or maybe everyone would agree that it was the Frances right to try to kill us as long as it was not too many?

sofatester
"Only the dead have seen the end of war"

Who said that and how long ago?

plato said it , aa lloooonnngggg time ago

It isn't quite like that shands.

Israel pulled out of the Gaza strip.

Israel retained effective military, economic, and administrative control over the Gaza Strip and therefore continued to occupy the Gaza Strip, even after the implementation of its "Disengagement Plan"

Quote :

[i]"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process . . . . Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda ."[/i]
Dov Weisglass, Senior Advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

Israel has maintained a blockade of Gaza in which nothing can go in or come out. This blockade is illegal - there is no disputing that.

Palestines voted Hamas into power.

Indeed they did. Hamas was encouraged by the US to participate in the elections. These were the most free, fair, and democratic elections ever held in any Arab country anyway in the world.

Palestines started to lop rockets into Israel.

The rockets are in response to illegal action by the Israelis. The Palestinians have an unalienable right to defend themselves. The Palestinians agreed to a ceasefire with Israel. Israel broke the ceasefire on the 4th of November. One of the terms of the ceasefire was that Israel lift her illegal blockade of Gaza. Israel [i]never[/i] complied with that term.

Israel invaded Gaza.

Yes, Israel attacked Gaza by land, sea and air.

.

btw, I think you're a little confused about who lived where first.

[b] richc : "chewkw I know from previous posts you are a fascist pillock ..."[/b]

Eh? What did I do or say?

It's a war you know.

😯

What did I do or say?

.

Let me try and help you with that one.

Does trying to justify the slaughter of civilians by a right-wing racist state ring any bells ?

and there's little old me thinking they put up the security screen in response to suicide bombers killing innocent civilians. Or is it that Jewish civilians are not innocent in your twisted logic!

I don't know if that comment was aimed at me shands, but since I don't actually know what you're talking about,
I think I'll leave it there.

life is precious, any life. So why would Hamas have the right to try and kill anyone. So simple, if Hamas really wants to stop theyre people being hurt and killed. If they stopped the rocket attacks. Israel would have no reason to be there and as such would be forced to retreat. Surely thats not rocket science (pardon the pun).

I cannot support the taking of life (or the threat to life) by either side in this conflict (or indeed in any conflict) and in this particular conflict there is so much propaganda behind even reports by learned persons that without first hand experience of the situation it is impossible to be 100% certain of forming any opinion. It is probably fair to say that some peoples politics and beliefs are so entrenched that they are unable to concede any point at all.

Couple of questions:

ernie_lynch ~ do you support Hamas (and their Iranian backers) to the extent that you agree that the Israeli state should be obliterated and Israelis wiped from the face of the earth? Not meaning to pick on you but you do seem to be one of the more vociferous supporters of Hamas and you seem to give the impression that you believe you are better informed than anyone speaking against you.

Also, have Israel blockaded the Gaza boundary with Egypt such that "[i]...nothing can go in or come out.[/i]"?
I ask this because I do not know the answer and I haven't seen reference to this particular boundary (except reference to a network of tunnels).

[i]life is precious, any life. So why would Hamas have the right to try and kill anyone. So simple, if Hamas really wants to stop theyre people being hurt and killed. If they stopped the rocket attacks. Israel would have no reason to be there and as such would be forced to retreat. Surely thats not rocket science (pardon the pun).[/i]

You really don't have a clue, do you? Do you think that Hamas decided to start firing rockets just for grins? Gaza is a big refugee camp, full of people driven out of their homes, and bombed on a daily basis year after year. Hamas are the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. At what point do you accept that they have a right to defend themselves? Or is it their fate to just lie down and let the Israelis walk over them however they want?

"[i]Do you think that Hamas decided to start firing rockets just for grins?[/i]"

I don't think any of it is done for 'grins'? (Daft thing to suggest really, DrJ).

"[i]Gaza is a big refugee camp, full of people driven out of their homes, and bombed on a daily basis year after year.[/i]"

But it's not really, is it. Although Gaza may contain a number of refugee camps, there are also structured towns and cities there. To say Gaza is bombed on a daily basis year after year is simply not true.

"[i] Hamas are the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people. At what point do you accept that they have a right to defend themselves?[/i]"

Is firing rockets indiscriminately over the border actually defending themselves? Against what?

"[i]Or is it their fate to just lie down and let the Israelis walk over them however they want?[/i]"

It certainly shouldn't be and this is where the Palestinians do need the support of the wider world. Unfortunately, it appears to me that the only excuse that Israel has to start and continue this military action is because of the rocket attacks. It may seem simplistic to say stop the rocket attacks and you stop the battle but by stopping the rocket attacks it does take away Israel's only justification for the current action. Whilst there is a huge outcry against the Israeli bullies at the moment, in a lot of peoples eyes the military action is justifiable because of the Hamas rocket attacks. Take away the rocket attacks and you remove that justification. Internationally, Israel would loose what public support it has for their current military action immediately and could not justify any further action.

Huge international pressure should then be placed on Israel to allow borders to be opened and policed by a multi-national force. Of course, you then return to the problem of trust. Given what has been happening in recent years, can Israel trust Hamas to use the open borders solely for legitimate purposes.

Hamas need to stop the rocket attacks. Israel need to let the Palestinians live and trade freely.

But, Hamas aren't going to recognise Israel and Israel aren't going to trust Hamas so, what is the answer?

Given the current situation you may say that it is forgivable to think of Hitler as a visionary.

Big Dummy nice post interesting an informed
Ernie Lynch ... you save me having to post ta
5th Elefant ... I only hope you are saying these things as a wind up very tedious very wrong ... i hope you know this

psling - since you didn't follow the reference I gave earlier, I will quote for you a passage that describes what Gaza is. If you want to call it something other than a camp, be my guest.

-------------------------

In the U.S., all our TV pundits and major newspapers ever tell us about the Gaza Strip is that 1. it's a Hamas stronghold, and 2. it's the most densely-populated piece of real estate on earth. But they don't tell us that it wasn't always like that. They don't mention that Gaza wasn't a stronghold of Islamic nationalism till Israel's occupation administration in Gaza funded Hamas as a counterweight to the secular nationalism of the PLO, then engaged in a phony 15-year "peace process" that hopelessly compromised the secular nationalist parties that had supported a compromise peace with Israel, leaving Hamas as the only credible resistance to the continuing occupation.

They don't tell you either about the time before the Gaza Strip became the most densely-populated place on earth; when Gaza was a small coastal city, rather than a moon scape,

and its environs were wheat fields and orchards - cultivating citrus products, dates, grapes, figs and mulberries - rather than refugee camps.

And they DEFINITELY don't mention how the transformation in Gaza's fortunes came about. They don't tell you where those 1.5 million people now squashed into the Gaza Strip came from. Because they come from what is now Israel, and they didn't leave their homes there voluntarily in order to spend their days in an overcrowded, bombarded slum. Eighty per cent of the people in the Gaza Strip are refugees. These are the people who have been expelled from Israel since 1948, and always had to be expelled according to the logic of Zionism, if a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine, where most people happen not to be Jewish. The vast majority of the people in the Gaza Strip are the original inhabitants of the towns and villages of southern and coastal Israel, who took refuge from Zionist armies in Gaza City because it was the last southern city left in Palestinian hands in 1948.

In short, the people in the Gaza Strip who are today firing rockets at the towns of southern Israel are, overwhelmingly, the children and grandchildren of the Palestinian people who were expelled by Israel from those very same towns in order to gerrymander a Jewish majority where one did not naturally exist.

Yesterday, rockets from Gaza fell on the Israeli city of Ashkelon. Benny Tziper in the Hebrew-language version of Ha'aretz online was the only person I saw publicly mention that the Israeli city of Ashkelon was, until quite recently, the Palestinian city of Majdal al-Asqalan

whose Arab population was expelled within the lifetime of many present-day Israelis to the refugee camps of the Gaza Strip:

[...]A nice man was there at the entrance to the museum, an invalid of IDF from the Yom Kippur War, who was born and lived all his life in Ashkelon. From his knowledge and enthusiasm one could tell that he loves the city very much. He had no problem telling me how in 1953 the Arabs were expelled, and the long process of looking for a new name for the place started (the Arab name was Majdl), till it was decided to call the place Ashkelon. The entire communications between the authorities regarding the cleansing of the city of Arabs and Hebrewisation of the name is exhibited in the museum. I think that nobody makes the connection today between the fact that the Qassams land on Ashkelon and the fact that poor Arabs who did nothing wrong to anybody were put on trucks and expelled from their city to Gaza fifty five years ago, and since then they are there and Ashkelon is here. And this did not happen in wartime or as a result of hostilities, but from a cold calculation that the area must be cleansed of Arabs. There is a picture in the museum that shows the Arabs sitting and waiting in front of the of Israeli military government building. It sends shivers down my spine because it happens in the year I was born. And it is really, really hard for me to realize that at the time that my parents were happy with my birth, other people were put on trucks and expelled from their homes.[...]

DrJ wrote

If you want to call it something other than a camp, be my guest

That's exactly what I'd call it. The world's biggest one. I'm not going to be surprised when I hear the Israelis have started building showers and ovens to save on expensive rockets - maybe once the Americans realise they can't afford to spend billions propping them up any more.

5th Elefant ... I only hope you are saying these things as a wind up very tedious very wrong ... i hope you know this

I'd be quite happy to agree that it was all very bad indeed if half-wits stopped comparing it to the systematic extermination of millions of people. Compared to that its completely irrelevant. It does their argument no good at all. At best it makes them appear unable to do sums, utterly ignorant of recent history or simple anti-semites. That, I must admit, is utter argument bait to me.

psling - Member

Couple of questions:ernie_lynch ~

.

Well since you're asking me a direct question, I reckon you deserve a direct answer (shame some people won't answer my direct questions)

.

do you support Hamas (and their Iranian backers) to the extent that you agree that the Israeli state should be obliterated and Israelis wiped from the face of the earth?

.

I fail to see why I should base my moral judgement on whether or not Iran supports something. After all, Iran supported the war waged by the Coalition Forces to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan - should I have opposed that war solely on those grounds ?

.

But the answer to your question is yes, I support Hamas in their fight against Israel. For over 40 years Israel has violated international law. It has illegally occupied territories and refused to comply with the Geneva Convention. It [i]still[/i] acts illegally to this day, from the illegal withholding of tax receipts, to the illegal blockade of Gaza. As I've said before, the Palestinian people have an unalienable right, enshrined in international law, to fight a hostile foreign power. What other nation on Earth would be expected to do nothing whilst another nation tried to strangle them with a blockade ? Would Britain sit back and do nothing if another nation had sealed her borders by land, sea and air ?

.

On the question of whether "the Israeli state should be obliterated", the answer again is yes. The destruction of the Zionist State and the establishment of a free, democratic, secular Palestinian State, where all Palestinians, whether they are Muslim, Christian, or Jew, can live, is as morally imperative as the destruction of the Apartheid State was - and the Zionist State is immeasurably more brutal than the Apartheid State.

.

And yes, I'm fully aware that Hamas wishes to establish an Islamic State, a problem which cannot be ignored. But I am also aware that Hamas are pragmatic and open to negotiations. Their repeated willingness to enter negotiations concerning ceasefires (or 'calms' as they call them) [b]and[/b] their excellent record of abiding by them, is proof of this.

.

Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that it was the US and Israel which destroyed the power and influence of the secular Fatah faction of the PLO. Years of determination that Fatah should be allowed to achieve [i]nothing[/i] guaranteed that. As did the abuse and humiliation of it's leader Yasser Arafat, with his imprisonment in the ruins of his Ramallah Compound until he was finally murdered by the Israelis.

.

Remember the glee and joy with which George Bush welcomed the death of Yasser Arafat ? And how he claimed to the world that it was Yasser Arafat who had held back the Palestinian people, and how the Palestinian people could now move forward ? Unbelievably now, it's one of the aims of the Israeli operation in Gaza to re-establish Fatah there.

.

It's also worth pointing out that in the 1980s when the US was supporting and encouraging Islamic opposition to the secular government of Najibullah in Afghanistan, Israel was supporting and encouraging Hamas in it's opposition to the secular Fatah faction of the PLO.

.

On the question of the blockade and whether really "nothing can go in or come out" The answer is nothing can go in or come out [i]without[/i] the explicit approval of Israel. Israel does sometimes lifts the blockade for a few hours. Sometimes it lets things through, sometimes it doesn't. It is completely illegal and in violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. It has been described as a "crime against humanity" by UN Human Rights Council's investigator.

.

you seem to give the impression that you believe you are better informed than anyone speaking against you.

.

Not at all. I don't believe that for a minute, and I fail to see why should have come to that conclusion. Indeed far from it - I believe that most of the Zionist apologists are fully aware of the facts. Although I have to say that I'm pretty stunned how uniformed [i]some[/i] people are about the plight of the Palestinians.

Still, I guess that's one of the reasons why the Israelis get away with what they get away with, wouldn't you say ?

5thElefant - Member

......if half-wits stopped comparing it to the systematic extermination of millions of people.

.

You appear to be acting like a 'half-wit' yourself 5thElefant, by pretending that the only thing the Nazis ever did was to kill 'millions of people'.

Were they still not Nazis in the 1930s [i]before[/i] they had killed 'millions of people' ?

What were they during that period then ?

.

If it makes you feel better, how about comparing the Israelis today, with the Nazis in Germany during the 1930s ?

Were they still not Nazis in the 1930s before they had killed 'millions of people' ?

By suggesting the Israelis are like Nazis 'before they started murdering millions of people' clearly implies that's what's next. Which it quite clearly isn't.

That is the main thing that makes me want to argue the side of the Israelis. Your argument is based on a blatant lie.

If it makes you feel better, how about comparing the Israelis today, with the Nazis in Germany during the 1930s ?

I've already made comparison on here with the Boer War - prat.

clearly implies that's what's next

.

No it doesn't you wally (I'm enjoying these low level insults btw ) No one is saying that they are going to build gas chambers - don't be so ridiculous.

The comment has been made that the Israelis are acting like Nazis in their attitude towards the Palestinians.

And as I've pointed out before, that comment has been made by the United Nations Human Rights Investigator - himself a Jew.

No it doesn't you wally (I'm enjoying these low level insults btw 8))

No one is saying that they are going to build gas chambers - don't be so ridiculous.

The comment has been made that the Israelis are acting like Nazis in their attitude towards the Palestinians.

And as I've pointed out before, that comment has been made by the United Nations Human Rights Investigator - himself a Jew.

How about Apartheid South Africa? Israel is a lot like those fellas.

Now we must be able to agree on that? You fat anti-semitic humus eating bleeding-heart liberal.

I've made the comparison with Apartheid South Africa more times than I care to count.

In fact, if you use that little wheel on your mouse and scroll up a few inches, you see that I've refer to the Apartheid State 5 posts up.

So you're blind as well as stupid then ?