Israel, Gaza and the propaganda war

[Demosthenes]

But it is a bit of a problem. What should hamas do?

If what they say is true, that there are a few people in israel who have blocked off all access to gaza by sea, land and air and have stopped humanitarian aid from getting in so that some families are forced to eat grass and cannot access proper medical treatment, every now and again launch air strikes at people in gaza, and these people in israel either are the government or else can't be stopped by the israeli government, in as far as there is one, just what are hamas supposed to do about it, given their not unreasonable view that their own citizens are entitled to protection.

I can certainly say that to me that hamas's actions seem disproportionate. And I'm not prepared to try to defend them. But, I'm not sure what alternative there is for hamas apart from sitting on their hands, accepting it, and asking them to please stop it.

It's a fair point.

Personally, I reckon the only solution is that the world and Israel pay them substantial compensation to move out, and pay arab countries to accept them and make them citizens. tbh in the long term I think this would turn out better for everyone, and cheaper.

 

[Zachor]

It's a fair point.

Personally, I reckon the only solution is that the world and Israel pay them substantial compensation to move out, and pay arab countries to accept them and make them citizens. tbh in the long term I think this would turn out better for everyone, and cheaper.

It would certainly have been cheaper than the continual wars and terrorism.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Ahh the tory cunt now stalks me....not surprised really, you are a right wing toss pot.

Why would I wish to "stalk" you? I've been posting on threads on this forum since before your first banning, Fong. You're just plain not worth stalking, but I can understand how believing that you have a dedicated band of stalkers might boost your fragile ego.

You silly silly little boy.

 

[Demosthenes]

Sensible post. There is not much else the Israeli government could have done in the face of the violence and obstinancy coming out of Gaza from Hamas. Of course the Israeli people are entitled to protection. I wish it hadn't come to this but it has and the question is when will it stop and how. I don't think that Israel is in any mood to suffer the running sore of a Gaza run by an exterminationist fascist organisation and may well carry on until Hamas are no longer a threat. After that the Palestinian civilians in Gaza should be the subject of a massive international aid programme to stop a humanitarian disaster and rebuild a Gaza which has been destroyed by war and the depredations of Hamas on their society.

Palestinians I spoke to seemed to think that hamas were a good organisation, who had done loads of good things for the palestinian people.

 

[Dravinian]

people complain that "israel's not allowed to fight back" etc. i agree that there is a disproportionate amount of focus on palestine by the left and by the media in general for a number of reasons.

the fact is that israel IS allowed to basically get away with whatever it wants, hamas has been labelled a terrorist organisation and charities such as Interpal have had their assets frozen, Israeli goods sold in British supermarkets, British arms companies giving Israel arms, US military aid etc so asking "why israel can't defend itself" is a nonsense question and it assumes that condemnation of Israel has any affect at all on the actions of that state. It doesn't.

Strawman argument is made of straw.

"Asking why Israel can't defend itself"........

I don't see that, what I see is people pointing out that there are two sides to the argument and BOTH sides are utter tossers who act with no regard for innocent human life.

If you got someone from outer space who had never heard of these two countries, knew nothing about the conflict or the ongoing situation.

And you showed them this thread and others like it, they would believe that Palestine was some poor hard done by country that had done no wrong, never done anything wrong and that Israel was some crazy land hungry aggressor who ONLY attacked Palestine to get land.

When that is NOTHING like the reality that exists.

See I am not biased, I think both sides act like cunts, both sides need to sort their lives out and until they BOTH sort their lives out then I got no real sympathy for either of them.

Unfortunately in these threads I am in a minority. Most people have picked a side and will portray the facts in whatever way suits their argument. Thus Isreal only attacks for land and Palestine is constantly bombing schools...depending on which side you taken.

Which really just makes you a dick, whichever side you are on.

 

[Dravinian]

Why would I wish to "stalk" you? I've been posting on threads on this forum since before your first banning, Fong. You're just plain not worth stalking, but I can understand how believing that you have a dedicated band of stalkers might boost your fragile ego.

You silly silly little boy.

Yet here you are, stalking me again.

You talk about ignore, why don't you use it, you ultra right wing neo conservative twat.

 

[Demosthenes]

Strawman argument is made of straw.

"Asking why Israel can't defend itself"........

I don't see that, what I see is people pointing out that there are two sides to the argument and BOTH sides are utter tossers who act with no regard for innocent human life.

If you got someone from outer space who had never heard of these two countries, knew nothing about the conflict or the ongoing situation.

And you showed them this thread and others like it, they would believe that Palestine was some poor hard done by country that had done no wrong, never done anything wrong and that Israel was some crazy land hungry aggressor who ONLY attacked Palestine to get land.

When that is NOTHING like the reality that exists.

See I am not biased, I think both sides act like cunts, both sides need to sort their lives out and until they BOTH sort their lives out then I got no real sympathy for either of them.

Unfortunately in these threads I am in a minority. Most people have picked a side and will portray the facts in whatever way suits their argument. Thus Isreal only attacks for land and Palestine is constantly bombing schools...depending on which side you taken.

Which really just makes you a dick, whichever side you are on.

tbf, I think that may be more or less what frogwoman thinks as well.

 

[Zachor]

Palestinians I spoke to seemed to think that hamas were a good organisation, who had done loads of good things for the palestinian people.

I see where you are coming from they've run various social services for people but that to me was mostly to push their ideology and gain hold of more of the levers of control both other the people themselves and with the general aparatus of society.

Yes they did vote for Hamas but only because Fatah was corrupt as fuck. The problem is by voting out one problem ie Fatah corruption they've landed themselves with a violent fascistic organisation which has refused to abide by previous agreements, has provoked the Israelis into sealing the border crossings and now has led those who voted for them into the abyss.

 

[frogwoman]

It's a fair point.

Personally, I reckon the only solution is that the world and Israel pay them substantial compensation to move out, and pay arab countries to accept them and make them citizens. tbh in the long term I think this would turn out better for everyone, and cheaper.

Would you say the same thing if the BNP got in power here?

 

[tangentlama]

Would you say the same thing if the BNP got in power here?

Demosthenes and Zachor are advocating ethnic cleansing!

 

[Demosthenes]

Would you say the same thing if the BNP got in power here?

Would I say what?
What do you think I'd say?

 

[tangentlama]

Would I say what?
What do you think I'd say?

Would you support their ideas of ethnic cleansing?

 

[ViolentPanda]

But it is a bit of a problem. What should israel do?

If what they say is true, that there are a few people in gaza who every now and again fire rockets at people in Israel, and these people in gaza either are the government or else can't be stopped by the gazan government, in as far as there is one, just what are the israeli government supposed to do about it, given their not unreasonable view that their own citizens are entitled to protection.

I can certainly say that to me the israeli government actions seem disproportionate. And I'm not prepared to try to defend them. But, I'm not sure what alternative there is for Israel apart from sitting on their hands, accepting it, and asking them to please stop it.

What should Israel do?
Simple: They should react proportionately.
It would, of course, require a change in military doctrine, but it'd also make the possibility of IDF soldiers being tried at some future date for "war crimes" far less likely.
That doesn't mean "sitting on their hands", it means operating within a remit that, when "tit for tat" is called for, only targets those whose guilt can be proven, and does not indulge in collective punishment.

 

[Demosthenes]

Demosthenes and Zachor are advocating ethnic cleansing!

Ethnic cleansing usually means forcing people off their land without compensation, and killing them if they don't go. I'm not advocating that.

 

[Spion]

But it is a bit of a problem. What should israel do?

Stop blockading and besieging Gaza and the West Bank and make some moves towards resolving the 60 year old refugee situation. Palestinian violence is a response to being ethnically cleansed from 1948 onwards

 

[Demosthenes]

What should Israel do?
Simple: They should react proportionately.
It would, of course, require a change in military doctrine, but it'd also make the possibility of IDF soldiers being tried at some future date for "war crimes" far less likely.
That doesn't mean "sitting on their hands", it means operating within a remit that, when "tit for tat" is called for, only targets those whose guilt can be proven, and does not indulge in collective punishment.

But while I agree that that's what Israel should do, - effectively, that means they should do nothing. Because without occupying gaza, they've no means of identifying the actual people firing the missiles, and no means of stopping them.

 

[frogwoman]

What if the palestinians refused to move out? why is it always them that have to make these kind of concessions rather than adderssing the cause of the problem - a sickenly aggressive, racist, expansionist Israel. what if israel decides it wants to occupy more parts of other countries after the palestinians have gone now that it knows it can get what it wants?

 

[Demosthenes]

Would you support their ideas of ethnic cleansing?

What ideas?

 

[Zachor]

Demosthenes and Zachor are advocating ethnic cleansing!

Not necessarily. I'm in favour of a two state solution in West Bank and Gaza I don't see how that makes me in favour of ethnic cleansing? It is obvious that during the turbulent times at the re creation of the state of Israel some Arab people were displaced and sometimes violently. This needs to be compensated for. Furthermore those Arabs from Mandate Palestine who did go to other Arab states were kept by those other Arab governments in abject poverty and not made full citizens of those countries. I'm not one of those who are in favour of Israel from the Jordan to the Sea and I believe that future peace means there should be a Palestinian state in the West Bank.

The other alternative is as one alternative history friend put it to me recently is that Britain as the Mandate Power takes back Gaza and the West Bank although what we would do with such turbulent colony I can't see.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yet here you are, stalking me again.

You talk about ignore, why don't you use it, you ultra right wing neo conservative twat.

Because I prefer to laugh at your risibly inaccurate character assessments.

Oh, and I've not "talked about ignore", I don't do the "ignore" thing. You must be mistaking me for someone else you're deluded enough to believe is stalking you.

 

[Demosthenes]

What if the palestinians refused to move out? why is it always them that have to make these kind of concessions rather than adderssing the cause of the problem - a sickenly aggressive, racist, expansionist Israel. what if israel decides it wants to occupy more parts of other countries after the palestinians have gone now that it knows it can get what it wants?

Don't know. If they refused to move out, then there's no solution, I guess.

 

[Zachor]

What if the palestinians refused to move out? why is it always them that have to make these kind of concessions rather than adderssing the cause of the problem - a sickenly aggressive, racist, expansionist Israel. what if israel decides it wants to occupy more parts of other countries after the palestinians have gone now that it knows it can get what it wants?

They shouldn't have to. They should however be financially compensated for familial suffering at the time of the re creation of the state.

 

[tangentlama]

Collective Punishments

In September 2007, the European Union demanded immediate steps to end the Israeli government's collective punishment of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip by destroying the economy, obstructing the delivery of humanitarian aid and impeding development projects.

The situation of collective punishment of Gazans continues into 2009 with the refusal to re-negotiate with Hamas the conditions of ceasefire to include measures that would revive Gazan economy and see the end of Israeli control of Gazan borders. Israeli Operation Solid Lead (LED) that began late December 2008 is also a continuation of the ongoing collective punishment of Gazan citizens.

Article 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions collective punishments are a war crime.

By collective punishment, the drafters of the Geneva Conventions had in mind the reprisal killings of World Wars I and II. In the First World War, Germans executed Belgian villagers in mass retribution for resistance activity.

In World War II, Nazis carried out a form of collective punishment to suppress resistance. Entire villages or towns or districts were held responsible for any resistance activity that took place there. The conventions, to counter this, reiterated the principle of individual responsibility.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33. is the one more commonly quoted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

 

[frogwoman]

Would I say what?
What do you think I'd say?

i dont "think" you'd say anything. im asking you.

if the bnp took power here and started going on about "voluntary repatriation" as an approach to problems caused between english people and immigrants, would you agree with them?

 

[Demosthenes]

What if the palestinians refused to move out? why is it always them that have to make these kind of concessions rather than adderssing the cause of the problem - a sickenly aggressive, racist, expansionist Israel. what if israel decides it wants to occupy more parts of other countries after the palestinians have gone now that it knows it can get what it wants?

Given that they already pulled out of Sinai, and out of gaza, there are signs that suggest that they don't want to expand indefinitely.

 

[Spion]

I don't see that, what I see is people pointing out that there are two sides to the argument and BOTH sides are utter tossers who act with no regard for innocent human life.

Utter toss. Only one side has driven 750,000 people from 550 villages, stolen thousands of farms and businesses, carried out wholesale murder and driven people from their country, then overrun those refugees again and occupied that land for 40-plus years. And now these people have the temerity to respond they kill 100 for every Israeli that is killed.

You're so full of shit.

 

[Demosthenes]

i dont "think" you'd say anything. im asking you.

if the bnp took power here and started going on about "voluntary repatriation" as an approach to problems caused between english people and immigrants, would you agree with them?

Well I've got no problem with people leaving this country if they want to. But I'd certainly have a problem with involuntary repatriation of british citizens, no matter what their ethnic origin.

 

[frogwoman]

Don't know. If they refused to move out, then there's no solution, I guess.

Why is there no solution if the palestinians refused to move out?

why is it always the palestinians that have to make this kind of concession?

How about Israel started to listen to some of the UN resolutions applied to it for a change or face the consequences - international boycotts right the way up to sanctions?

 

[ViolentPanda]

But while I agree that that's what Israel should do, - effectively, that means they should do nothing. Because without occupying gaza, they've no means of identifying the actual people firing the missiles, and no means of stopping them.

You are joking, aren't you?

Shin Bet and Aman have (like Britain's MI5) access to US sigint and real time satellite data. They have just as much chance of intercepting and interdicting the guilty parties as the British state's military and intelligence apparatus did of doing the same with Irish republican ASUs.
The sad fact is that the Qassam attacks provide a cheap (in terms of Israeli lives) excuse for the state of Israel to invade the Gaza strip, so there's no percentage in interception.

 

[Zachor]

Well I've got no problem with people leaving this country if they want to. But I'd certainly have a problem with involuntary repatriation of british citizens, no matter what their ethnic origin.

Agree there thats my position.