Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Gaza under attack yet again.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd assumed there'd be an extensive intelligence and informer network in Gaza - but I read, in Haaretz I think it was, that it had been disrupted significantly by hamas, hence the surprise at the size of the tunnel network and the relatively high number of Israeli casualties. Is there anything on this kind of thing knocking about?
 
I'd assumed there'd be an extensive intelligence and informer network in Gaza - but I read, in Haaretz I think it was, that it had been disrupted significantly by hamas, hence the surprise at the size of the tunnel network and the relatively high number of Israeli casualties. Is there anything on this kind of thing knocking about?
Think i have something from arse end of last year, give us a bit.
 
I'd assumed there'd be an extensive intelligence and informer network in Gaza - but I read, in Haaretz I think it was, that it had been disrupted significantly by hamas, hence the surprise at the size of the tunnel network and the relatively high number of Israeli casualties. Is there anything on this kind of thing knocking about?
Need to Pm you a sec, can you let me in the back, your ma won't hear, promise
 
Spot on. And THIS is why the situation is intractable.

"PEACE" requires the total destruction of one regime or the other, which will never happen.

In that instance it did, in this instance it doesnt. Lifting the siege - or even just allowing Gaza to trade with the rest of the world - and not bombing it every couple of years would deal with more than a few of the grievances on the Palestinian side.
 
I'd assumed there'd be an extensive intelligence and informer network in Gaza - but I read, in Haaretz I think it was, that it had been disrupted significantly by hamas, hence the surprise at the size of the tunnel network and the relatively high number of Israeli casualties. Is there anything on this kind of thing knocking about?
Som 72 hour ceasefire announced. I'm guessing this is connected to the (ludicrous) Israeli claim that they have destroyed 80% of tunnels - 'hey, we've done our job, we can stop now'


If the rockets keep coming they are lying. The tunnels are a great stategy against drones and armour.
 
In that instance it did, in this instance it doesnt. Lifting the siege - or even just allowing Gaza to trade with the rest of the world - and not bombing it every couple of years would deal with more than a few of the grievances on the Palestinian side.

So lift the siege and hamas will go away?
 
Its quite interesting that tunnels have been used in Gaza since biblical times and the Israelis have only realized it now.
 
So lift the siege and hamas will go away?
They wont go away, but have (for a long time) agreed that lifting the siege will mean they declare a truce - not just a ceasefire. Due to the history of Fatah, they'll still be the most popular party, but their hold will be weakened. As it will by the tunnels losing their importance, Hamas make a lot of money through controlling them. If goods can come in via 'normal' channels, they'll lose income - as they are doing by their falling support from other countries (nowt from Syria or Egypt now, for obvious reasons)
 
Last edited:
Let the rockets come on?

.

The rockets arent a major issue. No really they aren't. They are so ineffective and useless that most fall short or are being intercepted by iron dome. This idea that they represent a real threat and Israelis are living in fear has been blown out of proportion. Now that doesnt make the firing of them right-but we need some perspective here.

On another note not related to this point-this idea that Hamas are using human shields. Hamas have very little choice as to where they launch these things from-their power base is in the 6th most densely populated areas in the world. But if it was indeed morally wrong they should launch missiles in populated areas then surely it's wrong for the state of Israel to build illegal settlements and encourage jewish settlers to live in areas within range of these missiles. Both sides are as bad as each other when it comes to putting their own people at harm they really are
 
Probably not, but allowing the population of Gaza to live something approaching a normal life will almost certainly reduce the chances of things kicking off every so often.

As long as Hamas continue down the road of their charter, beliefs, rhetoric and action I cant see the chance of it not kicking off being that greatly reduced.
 
Depends what basics...communities the world over survive without clean safe drinking water, if that's what you mean. It just isn't much of a life and life expectancy is very low.

Gaza is, however, different.

There are no rivers.

The ground water is undrinkable (largely due to Israel tapping it off before it flows into Gaza, drawing in salt from the sea: WikiFact).

So there are only two water sources:
  • Imports (from Israel - no sources in the Egyptian Sinai!); and
  • desalination of ground water or even sea water (which uses huge amounts of electricity: and as we all know the power station is out).
It takes about three days to die from dehydration.
 
As long as Hamas continue down the road of their charter, beliefs, rhetoric and action I cant see the chance of it not kicking off being that greatly reduced.

TBH though it doesnt really matter what Hamas currently believe; sort out many of the grievances of the ordinary people for whom they are currently the only viable option and they will end up facing a choice between becoming an irrelevance and having to change tack.
 
As long as Hamas continue down the road of their charter, beliefs, rhetoric and action I cant see the chance of it not kicking off being that greatly reduced.
They can hardly change their charter under current circumstances. They're not idiots, they have to deliver something other than constant war and lining their own pockets, or they'll go the same way as Fatah.
 
The rockets arent a major issue. No really they aren't. They are so ineffective and useless that most fall short or are being intercepted by iron dome. This idea that they represent a real threat and Israelis are living in fear has been blown out of proportion. Now that doesnt make the firing of them right-but we need some perspective here.

On another note not related to this point-this idea that Hamas are using human shields. Hamas have very little choice as to where they launch these things from-their power base is in the 6th most densely populated areas in the world. But if it was indeed morally wrong they should launch missiles in populated areas then surely it's wrong for the state of Israel to build illegal settlements and encourage jewish settlers to live in areas within range of these missiles. Both sides are as bad as each other when it comes to putting their own people at harm they really are

The morality is fucked both ways, Grannie.

I'd happily see the settlers in the occupied areas bulldozed out. I'd drive the fucking machines if I were able. But popping off missiles from a civilian populated area that you know is going to be flattened ten minutes later because of your action, is a cunts trick too.
 
Last edited:
TBH though it doesnt really matter what Hamas currently believe; sort out many of the grievances of the ordinary people for whom they are currently the only viable option and they will end up facing a choice between becoming an irrelevance and having to change tack.


Really? I think an alternative needs to be worked on-because if Hamas are the only viable option then that says a lot about the state of alternatives in Gaza
 
Really? I think an alternative needs to be worked on-because if Hamas are the only viable option then that says a lot about the state of alternatives in Gaza

Indeed, though full responsibility for why there are no other viable options rests - of course - with the occupying power.
 
The morality is fucked both ways, Grannie.

I'd happily see the settlers in the occupied areas bulldozed out. I'd drive the fucking machines if I were able. But popping off missiles from a civilian populated area that you know is going to be flattened because of your actions ten minutes later, is a cunts trick too.

Well they have little choice-but aside from their limited tactical choices they are also doing it for political gain and for those reasons the settlers/actions of the Israeli state are as despicable as those of Hamas
 
Gaza is, however, different.

There are no rivers.

The ground water is undrinkable (largely due to Israel tapping it off before it flows into Gaza, drawing in salt from the sea: WikiFact).

So there are only two water sources:
  • Imports (from Israel - no sources in the Egyptian Sinai!); and
  • desalination of ground water or even sea water (which uses huge amounts of electricity: and as we all know the power station is out).
It takes about three days to die from dehydration.

To clarify; there are a lot of communities which survive on rainwater and groundwater. This is the point I was making. I was in no way trying to suggest that it is not a major issue.
 
I'd happily see the settlers in the occupied areas bulldozed out. I'd drive the fucking machines if I were able.
Unfortunately, the Israeli state is never going to bulldoze that many settlers, so a partition to 1967 borders is all but impossible.
 
To clarify; there are a lot of communities which survive on rainwater and groundwater. This is the point I was making. I was in no way trying to suggest that it is not a major issue.

I wasn't so much arguing you as using the opportunity to point out an under-reported aspect of Israel's control over Gaza, specifically - due to there being (almost) no rainwater nor drinkable groundwater. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_...e_Palestinian_territories#Other_surface_water (and check the edit history to see whether it has unreverted hasbara vandalism!)
 
Last edited:
...this idea that Hamas are using human shields. Hamas have very little choice as to where they launch these things from-their power base is in the 6th most densely populated areas in the world. But if it was indeed morally wrong they should launch missiles in populated areas then surely it's wrong for the state of Israel to build illegal settlements and encourage jewish settlers to live in areas within range of these missiles. Both sides are as bad as each other when it comes to putting their own people at harm they really are

Hmm.

Any chance of inserting into the discourse the response to the "human shields" line "but the State of Israel is deploying human targets!"?
 
What pisses me off about this is the way Hamas are viewed by SOME sections of the left-that is through rose tinted glasses. They are a nasty anti semitic and homophobic organisation. Sure we can argue about scale and context blah blah blah-fact is the same murderous intent and mindset exists between the Israeli state and Hamas-they are both vile entities. When I see Mark Regev on TV and the Hamas Leadership I want to kick my TV off its stand. They make me puke-and Hamas aren't the answer...they are part of the problem. They both compliment each other well because they justify each others agenda
 
I wasn't so much arguing you as using the opportunity to point out an under-reported aspect of Israel's control over Gaza, specifically - due to there being (almost) no rainwater nor drinkable groundwater. Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_...e_Palestinian_territories#Other_surface_water

An article originally in Ha'aretz discussing the "Captain R" murder of the 13 year old girl mentioned earlier in the thread mentioned this, somewhat obliquely (emphasis added):

In January 2002, in response to the deaths of four soldiers in the Africa outpost, the IDF decided to demolish a line of houses on the other side of Rafah, along the Philadelphi corridor. The army spoke about razing a limited number of uninhabited houses, but the Palestinians claimed the real number of houses destroyed was much larger, that some of houses were inhabited and that some of the residents escaped by the skin of their teeth from the bulldozers. The head of the Southern Command at the time, Doron Almog, was interviewed on television and emphatically denied the Palestinian accusations. But when Almog began to investigate, he discovered other facts.

First, it became clear that the number of demolished homes was closer to the Palestinian assessment. The operation was conducted during the night and the commander of the force, an officer with the rank of lieutenant colonel, erred in identifying a palm tree that was designated as the border of the area slated for demolition. The bulldozers felled a different tree, further away, and this led to an additional row of homes being destroyed by mistake.

Almog was also in for a surprise with regards to the question of whether the homes were inhabited. The major general called in all of the parties involved in the operation, including two men named Vaknin and Dima, who operated the D-9 armored bulldozers. "How do you verify that no one is in the home?" Almog asked the drivers and learned that there are two schools of thought. According to the Vaknin method: "First, I give a small hit to a wall with the bulldozer’s blade. The wall cracks. And then, if I see people fleeing the house, I know it is inhabited." Dima had a different method: "The first thing I do is to knock the water tank off the roof. If water spills out, it indicates the house is inhabited.
 
we were talking about a potential role for the Israeli jewish w-c, I thought. And Histradut are important because they go way more central to the state and the working-class than the TUC are. They bind the whole (Jewish) people together (in theory), that's why they were set up. Today, there is no significant w-c opposition to the war, no big anti-war demo's (which there were during the first and second intifadas). Because of how jewish and palestinian workers are overwhelmingly kept apart, it is incredibly rare for them to strike together, it is systematically made as hard as possible, way beyond anything any western government has managed. Sad but true.

How do sanctions fit into this? Well, the sporting and cultural boycotts did have something of an effect in SA, and they do here, and while few companies decided to pull out of SA, the sanctions and boycotts made it far harder for them to get any new investment in, and so the economy was badly affected. They also forced SA's biggest supporters (notably the UK & US) to break that support (a bit). It sent the message that 'this cant go on.' And the white minority eventually were forced to act on that.

Isolating the state may not necessarily break workers from the it, but it can hardly make matters any worse.

To get back to this; because this to my mind is the more important stuff we should be discussing: based purely on Israeli friends, it is starting to become the case that Jewish and Palestinian workers occasionally strike and march together. The Tent City in 2011 for example involved Jewish and Palestinian workers.

I'm not gonna disagree with what you're saying about SA exactly - but I am going to say this. Before the Soweto uprising, and the formation of Cosatu and the UDM, the emergence of real working class struggle against the Apartheid state (seperate to the exiled ANC by the way), there were no sanctions or whatever. Cultural, financial or otherwise, there weren't. What made companies reluctant to invest was the clear determination of the black majority to destroy Apartheid.

That is I guess why I'm so sceptical of BDS - without serious class struggle within Israel itself, I don't see how the money will dry up.
 
Do you think Israeli capital wants 100 000 low wage workers and a captive market gone? Or is this a purely ideological conflict and material things like capital shouldn't enter into any analysis?

Can you expand on this point please as I don't think it's been properly explored on this thread. Who are the 100 000 low wage workers? Those in the west bank or do you mean Gaza because if it's Gaza I don't see how Israeli capital uses their labour. Also, by 'captive market' do you mean Gazans or those Palestinians in the West Bank? Again, I can see how that fits with the West Bank but not Gaza, apart from the fact Israel controls Gaza's energy but the IDF bombed the power station so isn't that destroying their energy market there, for now at least? You made some good points in post #3070 about the politics of it and dividing Hamas and Fatah further but I'm not entirely clear on how capital fits into it, it obviously does though.

Also, and I know this sounds crass and I'm directing this point at anyone who cares to answer it, but why don't Israel just level Gaza? Yes they're making a pretty good job of it now of course but they're obviously not going to go all out and destroy it completely, for now anyway. Is it because there's still arable land in Gaza? Is it because the international outrage would be too strong? It's not strong enough now of course but I think that would change if Israel did decide to destroy it completely. Is it because the West Bank would descend into unrest too great to be quelled by occupying forces there? Again, I know it's well suppressed now but I should imagine it would be difficult to suppress the level of unrest that would arise there should Gaza be completely destroyed. Is it any of the above, none of the above or some other reason I'm completely missing?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom