[Cause]

http://www.unrwa.org...-rockets-school

[Mentalist]

So now there's a ground invasion of Gaza.

Will this solve anything?

[amphibian]

It almost never has (in modern warfare history/after 1900).

There's basically one recorded "success" in suppressing an insurgency in modern history - the US/Filipino efforts against the Hukbalahap Rebellion in the 1950s. That campaign of brutality in the name of governance and safety succeeded in large part because they cut off radio/communication with the outside world in a way that's not possible today.

[Vengeance]

Mentalist, on 17 July 2014 - 08:25 PM, said:

So now there's a ground invasion of Gaza.

Will this solve anything?

Absolutely If the last 13 years of war have taught us anything it is that War and invasions solves all problems.


As long as your problems are

1. You have too many bullets and need to use them
2. Funeral homes are going out of business and need bodies to bury
3. There are too many people living in that area
4. There is some kind of political scandal that only a war can distract from
5. Your a military officer and the only way you can get a promotion is to kill X enemy
6. Your Dick Cheney

[D'iversify]

Well, things haven't exactly been getting any better, and neither side looks like they're going to get anything significant out of this. I think this may indeed be pretty counterproducitve for Israel given that Hamas are in many ways weaker than for many years (lost Iranian support for siding with the Syrian opposition and al-Sisi has also cracked down on smuggling from Egypt, whereas the border was more open under Morsi), but all this ground offensive is doing is inflicting relatively superficial damage on Hamas as an organisation whilst causing civilian casualties and major infrastructural damage. Hamas gets to win sympathy in the Arab world by playing underdog and has the benefit of increased solidarity of Gaza's citizenry. And given the asymmetry of casualties and damage, plenty of Palestinian sympathisers will overlook Hamas' repressive social policies and utterly counterproductive use of rockets (given that their use justifies Israel's claims of Hamas as a terrorist organisation whilst causing minimal real damage to the Israeli state and increasing anti-Palestinian solidarity among israelis). Mind you, Hamas has been very useful for Israel in distracting people from the more significant conflict in the West Bank, where Israel's continued colonisation of Palestinian territory threatens to conflagrate in the near future in violence that will dwarf what is happening in Gaza.

[Gothos]

Over 600 dead by now and I'm starting to wonder why doesn't Israel go in by foot? There's tunnels and underground bases and bunkers, how effective are airstrikes and armor in fighting that sort of installations as opposed to spec ops entry?

[Studlock]

IDF bomb a UN run shelter, kill 16. As accidents go it's one big fucking accident: http://gawker.com/at...e-on-1610156125

Can we stop pretending Israel is anymore than a settler state doing settler state things? This is the same kind of shit we see/saw in North America, South Africa, Eastern Europe, etc. To justify their continued political existence the settlers dehumanized the settled and then pretend to be in the right when the settled attempt to defend themselves (and I'm not pretending the Hamas are fucking do-gooders but you can't really except an non-radical response to the cluster fuck that is Israel).

At this point it doesn't really matter whose right or wrong, children are fucking dying and only one government's bombs are doing the killing.

[Aptorian]

Gothos, on 23 July 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

Over 600 dead by now and I'm starting to wonder why doesn't Israel go in by foot? There's tunnels and underground bases and bunkers, how effective are airstrikes and armor in fighting that sort of installations as opposed to spec ops entry?

Fighting on Hamas turf, in their networks of tunnels and fortifications would be extremely bloody. Urban warfare facing guerilla tactics is not a war you want to fight unless you have something you can actually win.

Bombings cost nothing but money (oh, and civilian casualties but Palestinians don't count), it's much easier to sell to he public.

[Andorion]

Has anybody seen this?

This Land is Mine

Seems to summarise the situation a bit.

[Studlock]

That seems to summarize every situation from the beginning to the end of human existence.

[Cause]

Studlock, on 24 July 2014 - 06:43 PM, said:

IDF bomb a UN run shelter, kill 16. As accidents go it's one big fucking accident: http://gawker.com/at...e-on-1610156125

Can we stop pretending Israel is anymore than a settler state doing settler state things? This is the same kind of shit we see/saw in North America, South Africa, Eastern Europe, etc. To justify their continued political existence the settlers dehumanized the settled and then pretend to be in the right when the settled attempt to defend themselves (and I'm not pretending the Hamas are fucking do-gooders but you can't really except an non-radical response to the cluster fuck that is Israel).

At this point it doesn't really matter whose right or wrong, children are fucking dying and only one government's bombs are doing the killing.

It's a war. The duly elected government of Gaza is firing rockets at Israel and Israel is firing back. As I said before one side is not worse than the other because they have more strength. The incident is still unclear as well and reporting it too early to know exactly what happened. Twice already Hamas has been caught stashing rockets in the schools and they have a history from firing rockets from them. I would say its too early to assign blame except to say that war sucks.

Also please don't compare the Israeli people living in their historic and religious homeland after emigrating their legally with the invasion, conquering and enslaving of the new world. A faulty analogy is poor rhetoric. My government called Gaza a concentration camp, I wonder how they feel about the fact that the 'camps prisoners' have better medical care, life expectancy and employment than the average citizen of my country (Look it up if you don't believe me) and if Gaza is an open air prison it seems Egypt must also have good reason to believe that maintaining the sanctity of a countries borders is imortant. Hyperbole clouds the issue, it does not solve it. Except for the six day war (and even then they pre-emptively struck at what was obviously a coming invasion) Israel has never begun a war, I will never understand how in winning these wars they have become the bad side. Are civilian casualties tragic? Yes. Has a war ever been fought without them? No.

Your last sentence is especially confusing. Right and Wrong always matter. Israel has a missile shield, it has a bomb shelter, air raid siren and Gas mask for very citizen. The failure of Hamas to cause more damage than it has does not excuse its attempt to do so every day. They hide rockets in schools, they threaten people not to evacuate threatened areas and have called for people to expose their breast to Israeli rockets as human shields. Using the casualty list as a measure of wars morality would lead me to conclude that Russia was the most morale side in WW 2 followed by Japan and Nazi Germany.

[Illuyankas]

If it's a war, then Gaza has a right to defend itself against its aggressor and oppressor! Those deadly rockets that have killed one person in Israel this whole conflict (the other two casualties labelled 'civilian' were hit by mortars, and one of those was running food to the IDF and would be called a militant if he was Palestinian) can only be appropriately matched by warningless blasting of populated schools, obviously. Twice Hamas stashed rockets in vacant buildings and when asked to remove them did so, and again it is a school that was bombed (let alone the fucking hospital that was fired on by fucking tanks) and there is no god damn excuse for it! There can be none for it! Even if there's a freaking rocket site on the roof - which for reference there wasn't - you don't blow up buildings full of injured people and kids!


Actions speak louder than words, dude. I'm sorry your country has poverty issues but being impoverished doesn't magically make Gazans have the freedom of movement and selfgovernance typical to things that aren't prisons. Egypt just deposed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood for a more secular government, and as a country is now more favourable towards Israel than France, or Germany, which as a result is letting them get funding from the US for keeping the border closed and being hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood's allies Hamas. Speaking of:

I wonder how few rockets would be fired if Fatah and Hamas' unity government was allowed to have the power to stop the subgroups and splitters from firing their own projectiles? What excuse would Israel have for breaking ceasefires now? Oh, and how many wars do you look favourably upon with a completely avoidable 70% civilian casualty rate?


The Hamas human shield argument is bullshit: The report on Operation Cast Lead (where Israel broke the ceasefire and then killed over a thousand Palestinians with less casualties than in this current massacre) by Amnesty International, section 4.2.2 shows that the allegations about Hamas using human shields is bullshit, whereas there are pictures of IDF handcuffing children to vehicles and blindfolding children in front of them if you don't believe the testimonies inside the report. Oh wait! How about these?!

Human Rights Watch report on the IDF's use of human shields in Jenin in 2002
Al Mezan Center for Human Rights report on the IDF's use of human shields in Beit Hanun in 2003
B'Tselem report on on the IDF's use of human shields in Beit Hanun (again), this time in 2006
The Guardian reports on the IDF's use of human shields in Operation Cast Lead
New York Daily News report on the Goldstone Report mentioning its conclusion that Israel used human shields
Haaretz report on the Goldstone Report, as above
The UN's Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead (Confirmation of the IDF's use of Palestinian civilians as human shields are discussed on pages 218-231)

Some highlights!

Quote

HRW Report, 2002 posted:

Among the most serious "human shielding" cases documented in Jenin by Human Rights Watch were the cases of four brothers, a father and his fourteen-year-old son, and two other men who were used to shield IDF soldiers from attack by Palestinian militants while the IDF soldiers occupied a large house located directly across from the main UNRWA compound in the camp. In separate interviews with Human Rights Watch, the victims described how they were forced to stand on the balcony of the house to deter Palestinian gunmen from firing in the direction of the IDF soldiers. The Palestinian civilians also described how the IDF soldiers had forced them to stand in front of the soldiers when the soldiers fired at Palestinian gunmen, while resting their rifles on the shoulders of the Palestinian civilians.

Quote

B'Tselem Report, 2006 posted:

The three who were kept in the building were two of her sons, Hazem, 14, and Qusay, 16, and her nephew, Khaled, 23. The three were taken to the staircase, at the entrance to the third-floor apartment, where the soldiers were located. The three sat there until around 8:00 P.M, about 45 minutes before the soldiers left the building. During this time, soldiers inside and outside the building were engaged in exchanges of gunfire with armed Palestinians. The staircase was not in the direct line of gunfire. Just before the end of the incident, the soldiers ordered the three to go downstairs, in front of them, to the entrance of the building.

'Oh but it's Hamas that are forcing the Gazans to stay in their homes while the poor little IDF blow up every building for miles around. They're forcing us to kill them! They're making us pull the trigger! That baby? He made me do it! Those hundreds of children now dead? They were asking for it! That guy looking for his family before he was shot three times by a sniper while on camera, leaving his surviving relatives to find out what happened to him when they saw the video of his death on twitter? His fault! Our doorknockers, missiles without warheads that we drop on people's houses and collapse their upper floors so they know we're going to destroy their house for no reason 57 seconds later, that are more destructive than the qassams launched by Hamas and have also killed at least three children, making them three times as deadly as those fired by Hamas? We warned them! Those houses in the West Bank we're destroying because the occupants are relatives of some of the 400 Gazans we arrested - some of whom were released in the last peace talks before we decided that we'd change it from 'no UN for prisoners' to 'settlements for prisoners' and collapsed them - and of the cousin to the teenage boy that settlers made drink petrol and burned to death, the one we beat up and tried to co-erce him into stating it was an anti-gay attack before he went back to the US? Collective punishment and punitive demolishment are all they deserve!'

I don't understand how Israel's murderous actions can be defended, it's just so frustrating. They're making the militant asshole party who fires (albeit ineffectual) rockets at civilians the less awful, murderous and evil side to this conflict! Do you think I want to be defending a group that used suicide bombers? The nicest thing I can say about that is that they trailed them even off before the wall went up, and these are still the side that kills the least civilians! Intent is not as important as actions when it comes to casualties on this scale. 3 civilians and 32~ soldiers, to 720~ people of which every man over 16 is counted as a combatant. Ignore the rhetoric, who says they're doing their best to not kill civilians, all that. Who shells what are recognisably children on a beach, then aims and fires again? Who when faced with a foe that targets military conveys when the option to aim is given them, levels streets of houses? Who fires at schools and hospitals? Who knowingly points at a packed hospital and pulls the trigger? That's the side that's commiting the crimes against humanity. That's the current Israeli government.






Incidentally here is a list of organisations you can donate to in order to help out the people on the ground in Gaza:

Quote

Charitable causes that deliver humanitarian aid:

Oxfam International - http://www.oxfam.org/

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies - http://www.ifrc.org/

Amnesty Interational - http://www.amnesty.org/

Medical Aid for Palestinians - http://www.map-uk.org/

UNRWA - http://www.un.org/unrwa/

Doctors Without Borders - http://www.doctorswi...ers.org/donate/

ANERA - http://www.anera.org

Norwegian Aid Committee - http://www.norwac.no/board.html - This is the group with doctors in Gaza. Can't donate online, though.

Knitters Without Borders - http://www.yarnharlo...log/tsffaq.html

Bristol Computers 4 Palestine Project - http://www.bristolco...alestine.co.uk/

United Palestinian Appeal - http://www.helpupa.com/

American Friends of Magen David Adom - http://www.afmda.org/index.aspx


**If you just want to buy some stuff and give directly to the Palestinian people, here are links for that**
[/b]

Non-Profit Human Rights/Educational Groups:

Electronic Intifada - http://electronicintifada.net/

The Israeli Information Center For Human Rights In The Occupied Territories - http://www.btselem.org/English/

Ma'an News Agency - http://www.maannews.net

The Free Gaza Movement - http://www.freegaza.org

[Cause]

Illuyankas, on 25 July 2014 - 12:04 PM, said:

If it's a war, then Gaza has a right to defend itself against its aggressor and oppressor! Those deadly rockets that have killed one person in Israel this whole conflict (the other two casualties labelled 'civilian' were hit by mortars, and one of those was running food to the IDF and would be called a militant if he was Palestinian) can only be appropriately matched by warningless blasting of populated schools, obviously. Twice Hamas stashed rockets in vacant buildings and when asked to remove them did so, and again it is a school that was bombed (let alone the fucking hospital that was fired on by fucking tanks) and there is no god damn excuse for it! There can be none for it! Even if there's a freaking rocket site on the roof - which for reference there wasn't - you don't blow up buildings full of injured people and kids!

Gaza does have the right to defend itself and the right to the consequences. Gaza can't compete with the Israeli military and they know it. They have rejected 3 ceasefires even though they are as you say suffering the most. They can't say no to 3 ceasefires and then cry victim as well. So mortars and rockets are different! What the fuck is your point. A weapon is a weapon and I assure you the 3 civilians killed in Israel don't consider them to be a minor matter, or at least they wouldn't if they could. IF Hamas wants to be real soldiers all they have to do is put on a uniform and stop using hospitals and schools and then die by the hundred. I am not a fool, I know why they fight the way they do. I am okay with it. Israel is not a monster for dealing with them as they must. Also don't be disingenuous, a school is not a vacant building. It is a school built by the UN for the poor refugees of palestine who then stashed rockets in it. The definition of a military target! Hamas knew they were schools and they know people flock to them during these flare ups. The explosion may have been exacerbated by the munitions stored in the school, the rockets Hamas fired can't be aimed for shit and they might have hit it themselves, they already blew up their own power station. The facts are not clear. In any event I doubt the matter is as clear cut as someone saw school children in his targeting scope and thought why not.

Quote

Actions speak louder than words, dude. I'm sorry your country has poverty issues but being impoverished doesn't magically make Gazans have the freedom of movement and selfgovernance typical to things that aren't prisons. Egypt just deposed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood for a more secular government, and as a country is now more favourable towards Israel than France, or Germany, which as a result is letting them get funding from the US for keeping the border closed and being hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood's allies Hamas. Speaking of:

I wonder how few rockets would be fired if Fatah and Hamas' unity government was allowed to have the power to stop the subgroups and splitters from firing their own projectiles? What excuse would Israel have for breaking ceasefires now? Oh, and how many wars do you look favourably upon with a completely avoidable 70% civilian casualty rate?

Ironically Hamas and Fatah once considered each other splinter groups and had a civil war in 2005. Also freedom of movement in no country that I know allows freedom to cross borders. If gaza is a country Israel is a different one and the border is guarded. Especially when the two nations are hostile. Does the situation really surprise you? Also how can my country have 'povery issues' and Gaza be a war crime and a humanitarian crisis when they are better off. Either they are being starved or they are not, either they must fear death every day or they must not.

Hamas says it wants to kill all the Jews and take all of Israel. You can find a quote here and there that says their charter is just for shows these days but can't be changed for reasons of history? Not reassuring to Israel and not conductive to good negotiations. Hamas regularly speaks of long term ceasefires, not peace agreements and sees them only as a chance to regroup and rearm for the next fight.

Quote

The Hamas human shield argument is bullshit: The report on Operation Cast Lead (where Israel broke the ceasefire and then killed over a thousand Palestinians with less casualties than in this current massacre) by Amnesty International, section 4.2.2 shows that the allegations about Hamas using human shields is bullshit, whereas there are pictures of IDF handcuffing children to vehicles and blindfolding children in front of them if you don't believe the testimonies inside the report. Oh wait! How about these?!

Human Rights Watch report on the IDF's use of human shields in Jenin in 2002
Al Mezan Center for Human Rights report on the IDF's use of human shields in Beit Hanun in 2003
B'Tselem report on on the IDF's use of human shields in Beit Hanun (again), this time in 2006
The Guardian reports on the IDF's use of human shields in Operation Cast Lead
New York Daily News report on the Goldstone Report mentioning its conclusion that Israel used human shields
Haaretz report on the Goldstone Report, as above
The UN's Goldstone Report on Operation Cast Lead (Confirmation of the IDF's use of Palestinian civilians as human shields are discussed on pages 218-231)

Some highlights!

Quote

HRW Report, 2002 posted:

Among the most serious "human shielding" cases documented in Jenin by Human Rights Watch were the cases of four brothers, a father and his fourteen-year-old son, and two other men who were used to shield IDF soldiers from attack by Palestinian militants while the IDF soldiers occupied a large house located directly across from the main UNRWA compound in the camp. In separate interviews with Human Rights Watch, the victims described how they were forced to stand on the balcony of the house to deter Palestinian gunmen from firing in the direction of the IDF soldiers. The Palestinian civilians also described how the IDF soldiers had forced them to stand in front of the soldiers when the soldiers fired at Palestinian gunmen, while resting their rifles on the shoulders of the Palestinian civilians.

Quote

B'Tselem Report, 2006 posted:

The three who were kept in the building were two of her sons, Hazem, 14, and Qusay, 16, and her nephew, Khaled, 23. The three were taken to the staircase, at the entrance to the third-floor apartment, where the soldiers were located. The three sat there until around 8:00 P.M, about 45 minutes before the soldiers left the building. During this time, soldiers inside and outside the building were engaged in exchanges of gunfire with armed Palestinians. The staircase was not in the direct line of gunfire. Just before the end of the incident, the soldiers ordered the three to go downstairs, in front of them, to the entrance of the building.

I know Israel has done the same, I also know its not official policy and people have been court-martialed and jailed for it. I will provide my links later when I get home.

Quote

'Oh but it's Hamas that are forcing the Gazans to stay in their homes while the poor little IDF blow up every building for miles around. They're forcing us to kill them! They're making us pull the trigger! That baby? He made me do it! Those hundreds of children now dead? They were asking for it! That guy looking for his family before he was shot three times by a sniper while on camera, leaving his surviving relatives to find out what happened to him when they saw the video of his death on twitter? His fault! Our doorknockers, missiles without warheads that we drop on people's houses and collapse their upper floors so they know we're going to destroy their house for no reason 57 seconds later, that are more destructive than the qassams launched by Hamas and have also killed at least three children, making them three times as deadly as those fired by Hamas? We warned them! Those houses in the West Bank we're destroying because the occupants are relatives of some of the 400 Gazans we arrested - some of whom were released in the last peace talks before we decided that we'd change it from 'no UN for prisoners' to 'settlements for prisoners' and collapsed them - and of the cousin to the teenage boy that settlers made drink petrol and burned to death, the one we beat up and tried to co-erce him into stating it was an anti-gay attack before he went back to the US? Collective punishment and punitive demolishment are all they deserve!'

You know if Israel wanted to it could actually carpet bomb the Gaza strip as you describe. That is not what they are doing. Don't exaggerate to make your point. Also I suppose the argument could be made that if you pointed a gun at me I don't have to kill you, but I would if I could and I would feel no remorse. Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel will fire back! They action is at least equivalent regardless that the death toll is unequal. If hamas could do more damage do you think they wouldn't?

Quote

I don't understand how Israel's murderous actions can be defended, it's just so frustrating. They're making the militant asshole party who fires (albeit ineffectual) rockets at civilians the less awful, murderous and evil side to this conflict! Do you think I want to be defending a group that used suicide bombers? The nicest thing I can say about that is that they trailed them even off before the wall went up, and these are still the side that kills the least civilians! Intent is not as important as actions when it comes to casualties on this scale. 3 civilians and 32~ soldiers, to 720~ people of which every man over 16 is counted as a combatant. Ignore the rhetoric, who says they're doing their best to not kill civilians, all that. Who shells what are recognisably children on a beach, then aims and fires again? Who when faced with a foe that targets military conveys when the option to aim is given them, levels streets of houses? Who fires at schools and hospitals? Who knowingly points at a packed hospital and pulls the trigger? That's the side that's commiting the crimes against humanity. That's the current Israeli government.

Run me through your thought process here. Hamas fires rockets at Israel, very few casualties are actually felt but the countries international airport is closed down for safety concerns of other countries national airlines. The economy suffers from constant air raid sirens. Every firing of the iron dome costs 20 000 dollars. One person dies. A rocket misses the nuclear reactor by over a km no big deal. Hamas continues to fire. Israel asks for a ceasefire. Hamas says yes and Israel and Hamas live in peace and harmony forever?

[Illuyankas]

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Gaza does have the right to defend itself and the right to the consequences. Gaza can't compete with the Israeli military and they know it. They have rejected 3 ceasefires even though they are as you say suffering the most. They can't say no to 3 ceasefires and then cry victim as well. So mortars and rockets are different! What the fuck is your point. A weapon is a weapon and I assure you the 3 civilians killed in Israel don't consider them to be a minor matter, or at least they wouldn't if they could. IF Hamas wants to be real soldiers all they have to do is put on a uniform and stop using hospitals and schools and then die by the hundred. I am not a fool, I know why they fight the way they do. I am okay with it. Israel is not a monster for dealing with them as they must. Also don't be disingenuous, a school is not a vacant building. It is a school built by the UN for the poor refugees of palestine who then stashed rockets in it. The definition of a military target! Hamas knew they were schools and they know people flock to them during these flare ups. The explosion may have been exacerbated by the munitions stored in the school, the rockets Hamas fired can't be aimed for shit and they might have hit it themselves, they already blew up their own power station. The facts are not clear. In any event I doubt the matter is as clear cut as someone saw school children in his targeting scope and thought why not.

Yes, the consequences of all those innocent people being killed enmass. You're right! It's almost if the onus of responsiblity is on Israel to STOP KILLING SO MANY PEOPLE. The ceasefires that change nothing but let Israel rearm for another bombing run, that even if Hamas did follow these proposed ceasefires the splinter groups wouldn't and one rocket has been, would be and will be cause enough again for Israel to break their own ceasefire and continue bombing houses. Surely Israel is also at fault for not listening to Hamas' proposed ten year ceasefire? Yes mortars and rockets are different, mortars aren't used as justification for the deliberate destruction of intrastructure and houses and hospitals! Do the hundreds of Palestinian civilians killed by Israeli missiles and shells and bullets consider them a minor matter? Hmm yes why won't Hamas just commit suicide and let Israel force the Gazans out of the strip and 'somewhere else', and yes Israel is a monster for blowing up a building that a rocket was fired from a spot close to with or without warning, hope this helps! A vacant building is a building that has no one in it, which is what the school was before the UN came back and found the rockets, which again were moved the instant the building was occupied. If you think there is a military target with a civilian presence THAT IS STILL NOT JUST CAUSE TO KILL THOSE PEOPLE. IT WILL NEVER BE JUST CAUSE. EVEN IF THEY ARE A HUMAN SHIELD IT IS A MONSTROUS INHUMANE AND EVIL ACT TO KILL THEM, WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS. Let's see what evidence is available for Israel's claim that this school that was bombarded wasn't them for a change first, of course. While we're at it let's have the proof that Hamas was responsible for the kidnapping and deaths of these three settler teenagers and not a splinter group, too.

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Ironically Hamas and Fatah once considered each other splinter groups and had a civil war in 2005. Also freedom of movement in no country that I know allows freedom to cross borders. If gaza is a country Israel is a different one and the border is guarded. Especially when the two nations are hostile. Does the situation really surprise you? Also how can my country have 'povery issues' and Gaza be a war crime and a humanitarian crisis when they are better off. Either they are being starved or they are not, either they must fear death every day or they must not.

And now they're the lawful unity government of Palestine. Hooray! Freedom of movement within said country, to go to cities, or the beach, or across the strip. I've posted the limits Palestinians have had imposed on them in their own country in this thread already. But it's ok, South Africa has a lower life expectancy so the Palestinian situation is, what, justified? Somalia is worse off too, so Palestinians should just suck it up? This statement has no point and purpose in a thread about the I/P conflict.

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Hamas says it wants to kill all the Jews and take all of Israel. You can find a quote here and there that says their charter is just for shows these days but can't be changed for reasons of history? Not reassuring to Israel and not conductive to good negotiations. Hamas regularly speaks of long term ceasefires, not peace agreements and sees them only as a chance to regroup and rearm for the next fight.

The IRA said it wanted the British Empire gone for good. Look how that turned out. I imagine the charter can't be changed to satisfy the hardcore crowd on that side but again actions and words, the statements from top level rabbis about how wiping out the Palestinians is their right or from still-employed professors that the only way to rebuff an Arab is to rape his female relatives are also not reassuring. Things Israel have done that are not conducive to good negotiations: changing agreements partway through, boasting of ruining peace accords, recapturing civilians released as part of a previous agreement, breaking ceasefires. Once Israel proves it can hold a long term ceasefire - oh, and shows some willingness to actually let Palestine govern itself with its own elected officials and run its own borders and not bomb it negligently - perhaps a peace agreement can be reached. And if you don't think Israel is doing exactly that you're wilfully deluding yourself.

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

I know Israel has done the same, I also know its not official policy and people have been court-martialed and jailed for it. I will provide my links later when I get home.

So I post proof that Hamas don't use human shields and the IDF does, and you say 'they don't do it officially'.

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

You know if Israel wanted to it could actually carpet bomb the Gaza strip as you describe. That is not what they are doing. Don't exaggerate to make your point. Also I suppose the argument could be made that if you pointed a gun at me I don't have to kill you, but I would if I could and I would feel no remorse. Hamas fires rockets at Israel, Israel will fire back! They action is at least equivalent regardless that the death toll is unequal. If hamas could do more damage do you think they wouldn't?

Haha yeah 'they could easily kill all of them instead of just hundreds and hundreds' is definitely swaying me. Using your analogy, Gaza is the crippled person on the ground throwing sharp rocks with his one unbroken arm begging for help, and Israel is the man who broke his bones and holds a gun on the ambulance crew to stop them tending his injuries and whenever a sharp rock comes close he kills another dozen members of the man's family. I fire a rocket at you out of desparation which strikes a tree and scares a cat, you level the house of a police chief and kill twenty two of his family members and you feel no remorse. Do you think the level of retaliation is irrelevant, only the fact you retaliated? And I think if Israel ended the blockade, stopped the settlements, stopped the bombings, set up an internationally-moderated reconciliation tribunal, and started following international law while retracting to the '67 borders, then Hamas wouldn't need to.

Cause, on 25 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Run me through your thought process here. Hamas fires rockets at Israel, very few casualties are actually felt but the countries international airport is closed down for safety concerns of other countries national airlines. The economy suffers from constant air raid sirens. Every firing of the iron dome costs 20 000 dollars. One person dies. A rocket misses the nuclear reactor by over a km no big deal. Hamas continues to fire. Israel asks for a ceasefire. Hamas says yes and Israel and Hamas live in peace and harmony forever?

Hahaha yes the international flight ban, that was quickly undone once Israel stated at length how little danger they were in from the rockets so it was perfectly safe to fly there! Except that living under the rockets is a living hell! The economy! £20k for a rocket! A rocket with a cement tip because no rocket they have can reach that far with an explosive warhead and it would never hit anything sensitive anyway!

I would like Israel to stop killing Palestinians and let them have their country, thanks. Israel has the power to do that, and they're using it to kill children and blame them for being in the way.

[Gothos]

Illuyankas, on 25 July 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

Haha yeah 'they could easily kill all of them instead of just hundreds and hundreds' is definitely swaying me. Using your analogy, Gaza is the crippled person on the ground throwing sharp rocks with his one unbroken arm begging for help, and Israel is the man who broke his bones and holds a gun on the ambulance crew to stop them tending his injuries and whenever a sharp rock comes close he kills another dozen members of the man's family. I fire a rocket at you out of desparation which strikes a tree and scares a cat, you level the house of a police chief and kill twenty two of his family members and you feel no remorse. Do you think the level of retaliation is irrelevant, only the fact you retaliated? And I think if Israel ended the blockade, stopped the settlements, stopped the bombings, set up an internationally-moderated reconciliation tribunal, and started following international law while retracting to the '67 borders, then Hamas wouldn't need to.

This, this, this, THIS.
A UN school bombed, death toll now over 700. This is just plain barbarism.

I'm not sure where it comes from but this looks awfuly like to the IDF and the state of Israel, Palestinians weren't real people.


edit: self-policing

This post has been edited by Gothos: 26 July 2014 - 09:27 AM

[Cause]

I wanted to prove im internally consistent so I tracked down this old post of mine

Quote

I have always held to the position that there is no such thing as a war crime, only war. The allies did things that objectively might be considered war crimes during world war II. They firebombed how many European and Japanese cities to win the war? They destroyed how many dams, flooded how many houses to win the war? They hurt civilians! What else were they supposed to do? War crimes are too subjective, coloured too much by our own perspectives and take place in a context that we cant understand until its kill or be killed and wont understand once the situation is over.

War is a terrible thing, most often unnecessary but right or wrong when things reach that point the laws of war become only suggestions. Even America with all its technology, guided missiles and what I truly believe is for the most part an army guided by noble principals could not prevent civilian casualties during their recent wars. Were they war criminals? Or does dropping bombs in cities even at legitimate targets inevitably result in casualties? In the text book example of a war crime that you describe could anyone intervene without having to kill a child or two in the process?

War is War. War is terrible and the only way to stop 'war crimes' is to stop the war. Once it begins they are inevitable. Hell even electricity is now regarded as a basic human right by many.

I also find it more than interesting that I found my old post in the thread about the Syrian civil war. It’s been going on for 3 years, has far more atrocities and is still only 2 pages long. 18, 000 Palestinians are now being starved to death in Yarmouk camp Syria, 2000 have been killed and 100,000 displaced during the war. I guess no one cares. Arab on Arab violence must be measured with a different morality yard stick. The only reason I have not brought it up before s because IF Israel is guilty of War crimes Syria being guilty too won’t make it right. I bring it up now though to show just how arbitrary people’s opinions on this subject can be.
I stand by what I say above. War is the only crime, it is horrible but sometimes necessary. If we are too deal with war crimes it must be done justly and consistently. Which can never happen in the UN when the Security Council can Veto anything that upsets their interests or when the Human Rights council is accused of anti-Israel bias by both Koffi Annan and Ban ki-moon.

I am fine with the Allies firebombing Dresden, I believe America had little recourse but to nuke japan twice. I think the invasion of Iraq is extremely dodgy because of the faulty intelligence that caused it and the long term damage it did. The 4000-7000 civilian casualties that America caused during the two month invasion are not a war crime though, they were collateral damage not the intended purpose. That’s not to say I can’t see a red line that no one ever has cause to cross: the Auschwitz death camp, Abu Ghraid or the Haditha killings. I am both fine with and opposed to parts of the Gautenoma bay controversy.

Closer to home I am one of few people who support my police forces actions during the so called ‘marikana mine massacre’. My countries police opened fire on striking mine workers and killed 40 of them. It was tragic and completely unavoidable if not for its incompetent handling. Yet I hold that if 3000 people want to gather on a hill armed with knives, spears and clubs and have already killed 8 people and 2 police officers and took their guns then you better believe I support the police opening fire on them when they charge the police lines.

Being a civilian is not some kind of magical protection spell. You are responsible for your own actions, you are unfortunately bound to the consequences of your government’s actions even when you maybe never voted for them. To demand that Israel Ignore Hamas rocket fire because else wise they will cause civilian casualties is an absurdity that you yourself would not adhere to if threatened. To ask Israel to send in soldiers on the ground on foot to check every target and to hold their fire when threatened if civilians are nearby is something no solider or you would ever do!

I defend Israel in these situations not because I am pro-Israel, I care less about this issue then my posts in this thread may indicate. What I deplore is when people hold the actions of Israel to a different standard than they hold their own countries or than they hold Hamas or Hezbolla to.

If we care about Palestinians why don’t we care about the ones in Yarmouk camp? Why don’t we care about the ‘apartheid’ that Jordan practices against them? Why don’t we care that until last year I think I was a Palestinian was barred from holding over 70 types of jobs in Lebanon. Most importantly why did we not care when Hammas fought Fatah and there was not an Israelis solider around and they fought in Hospitals, used ambulances and executed civilians. (And yes Illy every time they use a hospital for military purposes they weaken its protection, when they stash rockets in schools whether vacant or not they weaken its distinction and when they fight from ambulances they weaken their sanctity)

If we care about human rights why are we not protesting Syria? Where are the marches against Assad in France, England and South Africa? How can Israel be a worse violator of human rights than Sudan, Syria or N. Korea. How on earth can the United Nations' Commission on the Status of Women hold Israel responsible for Palestinian women? The UN nations obsession with Israel is making them a joke.

Hamas is the elected government of the Palestinians. They have not renounced east Jerusalem, they have not changed their genocidal charter, they still deny the holocaust. They have now refused a 4th ceasefire. Is Israel perfect? No. Have they killed civilians? Yes. Could they act in another way against this enemy? …

This post has been edited by Cause: 27 July 2014 - 05:18 PM

[Illuyankas]

So the deliberate mass killing of civilians is perfectly fine with you as long as they're not too open about it. That is exactly what you're saying. What is wrong with you?

No, seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you? I mean, I was going to point out that the western world and the US in particular fund Israel to a great extent making us culpable for their actions in a way that isn't applicable to Syria and the other conflicts there, or the US being the sole vote against setting up an investigation into human rights violations in Israel or that an IDF soldier should in fact go into these places on foot and search out the supposed bombs because an Israeli's life is not worth more than a Palestinian's amongst other things but you don't really care at all, do you? Other places are bad so we should just let them use our money and kill hundreds of people into order to ethnically cleanse them off their land. I guess if you're really that blasé about it the fact that the IDF claimed to have used pinpoint precision to turn Shuja'iyya from this:



to this:



doesn't really bother you in the slightest, since war crimes aren't real?

Quote

They have now refused a 4th ceasefire.

They agreed to a 12 hour ceasefire - to which Israel blasted a building to bits with a huge strike twenty minutes beforehand - and kept it, only for Israel to state they wanted to add four hours on top without the agreement of the other side, so how could they break a ceasefire they didn't sign onto? They're not Israel after all, they actually hold to their ceasefires.

Quote

Is Israel perfect? No. Have they killed civilians? Yes. Could they act in another way against this enemy? …

Yes. They won't, though. They're going to continue to deliberately target civilians without explicitly stating so, and you're going to continue to be okay with that fact.


(seriously 'I'm fine with the Dresden firebombings' what the fuck!? 'I'm fine with a needless, provenably actively harmful and pointless atrocity, please listen to my opinions on why Israel deserves our support in murdering their prisoners for daring to resist' where do you even go from there, you're decided to not just cede the moral high ground but to descend into the cavernous depths far, far below it, you poison all your arguments by proudly boasting that you're factually wrong from the start!)

[Illuyankas]

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza - Debunked

Quote

1) Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.

As the occupying power of the Gaza Strip, and the Palestinian Territories more broadly, Israel has an obligation and a duty to protect the civilians under its occupation. It governs by military and law enforcement authority to maintain order, protect itself and protect the civilian population under its occupation. It cannot simultaneously occupy the territory, thus usurping the self-governing powers that would otherwise belong to Palestinians, and declare war upon them. These contradictory policies (occupying a land and then declaring war on it) make the Palestinian population doubly vulnerable.

The precarious and unstable conditions in the Gaza Strip from which Palestinians suffer are Israel’s responsibility. Israel argues that it can invoke the right to self-defense under international law as defined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. The International Court of Justice, however, rejected this faulty legal interpretation in its 2004 Advisory Opinion. The ICJ explained that an armed attack that would trigger Article 51 must be attributable to a sovereign state, but the armed attacks by Palestinians emerge from within Israel’s jurisdictional control. Israel does have the right to defend itself against rocket attacks, but it must do so in accordance with occupation law and not other laws of war. Occupation law ensures greater protection for the civilian population. The other laws of war balance military advantage and civilian suffering. The statement that “no country would tolerate rocket fire from a neighboring country” is therefore both a diversion and baseless.

Israel denies Palestinians the right to govern and protect themselves, while simultaneously invoking the right to self-defense. This is a conundrum and a violation of international law, one that Israel deliberately created to evade accountability.


2) Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.

Israel argues that its occupation of the Gaza Strip ended with the unilateral withdrawal of its settler population in 2005. It then declared the Gaza Strip to be “hostile territory” and declared war against its population. Neither the argument nor the statement is tenable. Despite removing 8,000 settlers and the military infrastructure that protected their illegal presence, Israel maintained effective control of the Gaza Strip and thus remains the occupying power as defined by Article 47 of the Hague Regulations. To date, Israel maintains control of the territory’s air space, territorial waters, electromagnetic sphere, population registry and the movement of all goods and people.

Israel argues that the withdrawal from Gaza demonstrates that ending the occupation will not bring peace. Some have gone so far as to say that Palestinians squandered their opportunity to build heaven in order to build a terrorist haven instead. These arguments aim to obfuscate Israel’s responsibilities in the Gaza Strip, as well as the West Bank. As Prime Minister Netanyahu once explained, Israel must ensure that it does not “get another Gaza in Judea and Samaria…. I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan.”

Palestinians have yet to experience a day of self-governance. Israel immediately imposed a siege upon the Gaza Strip when Hamas won parliamentary elections in January 2006 and tightened it severely when Hamas routed Fatah in June 2007. The siege has created a “humanitarian catastrophe” in the Gaza Strip. Inhabitants will not be able to access clean water, electricity or tend to even the most urgent medical needs. The World Health Organization explains that the Gaza Strip will be unlivable by 2020. Not only did Israel not end its occupation, it has created a situation in which Palestinians cannot survive in the long-term.


3) This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.

Israel claims that its current and past wars against the Palestinian population in Gaza have been in response to rocket fire. Empirical evidence from 2008, 2012 and 2014 refute that claim. First, according to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the greatest reduction of rocket fire came through diplomatic rather than military means. This chart demonstrates the correlation between Israel’s military attacks upon the Gaza Strip and Hamas militant activity. Hamas rocket fire increases in response to Israeli military attacks and decreases in direct correlation to them. Cease-fires have brought the greatest security to the region.

During the four months of the Egyptian-negotiated cease-fire in 2008, Palestinian militants reduced the number of rockets to zero or single digits from the Gaza Strip. Despite this relative security and calm, Israel broke the cease-fire to begin the notorious aerial and ground offensive that killed 1,400 Palestinians in twenty-two days. In November 2012, Israel’s extrajudicial assassination of Ahmad Jabari, the chief of Hamas’s military wing in Gaza, while he was reviewing terms for a diplomatic solution, again broke the cease-fire that precipitated the eight-day aerial offensive that killed 132 Palestinians.

Immediately preceding Israel’s most recent operation, Hamas rocket and mortar attacks did not threaten Israel. Israel deliberately provoked this war with Hamas. Without producing a shred of evidence, it accused the political faction of kidnapping and murdering three settlers near Hebron. Four weeks and almost 700 lives later, Israel has yet to produce any evidence demonstrating Hamas’s involvement. During ten days of Operation Brother’s Keeper in the West Bank, Israel arrested approximately 800 Palestinians without charge or trial, killed nine civilians and raided nearly 1,300 residential, commercial and public buildings. Its military operation targeted Hamas members released during the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange in 2011. It’s these Israeli provocations that precipitated the Hamas rocket fire to which Israel claims left it with no choice but a gruesome military operation.


4) Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians.

Hamas has crude weapons technology that lacks any targeting capability. As such, Hamas rocket attacks ipso facto violate the principle of distinction because all of its attacks are indiscriminate. This is not contested. Israel, however, would not be any more tolerant of Hamas if it strictly targeted military objects, as we have witnessed of late. Israel considers Hamas and any form of its resistance, armed or otherwise, to be illegitimate.

In contrast, Israel has the eleventh most powerful military in the world, certainly the strongest by far in the Middle East, and is a nuclear power that has not ratified the non-proliferation agreement and has precise weapons technology. With the use of drones, F-16s and an arsenal of modern weapon technology, Israel has the ability to target single individuals and therefore to avoid civilian casualties. But rather than avoid them, Israel has repeatedly targeted civilians as part of its military operations.

The Dahiya Doctrine is central to these operations and refers to Israel’s indiscriminate attacks on Lebanon in 2006. Maj. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot said that this would be applied elsewhere:

What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. […] We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases.

Israel has kept true to this promise. The 2009 UN Fact-Finding Mission to the Gaza Conflict, better known as the Goldstone Mission, concluded “from a review of the facts on the ground that it witnessed for itself that what was prescribed as the best strategy [Dahiya Doctrine] appears to have been precisely what was put into practice.”

According to the National Lawyers Guild, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, Israel directly targeted civilians or recklessly caused civilian deaths during Operation Cast Lead. Far from avoiding the deaths of civilians, Israel effectively considers them legitimate targets.


5) Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

This is arguably one of Israel’s most insidious claims, because it blames Palestinians for their own death and deprives them of even their victimhood. Israel made the same argument in its war against Lebanon in 2006 and in its war against Palestinians in 2008. Notwithstanding its military cartoon sketches, Israel has yet to prove that Hamas has used civilian infrastructure to store military weapons. The two cases where Hamas indeed stored weapons in UNRWA schools, the schools were empty. UNRWA discovered the rockets and publicly condemned the violation of its sanctity.

International human rights organizations that have investigated these claims have determined that they are not true. It attributed the high death toll in Israel’s 2006 war on Lebanon to Israel’s indiscriminate attacks. Human Rights Watch notes:

The evidence Human Rights Watch uncovered in its on-the-ground investigations refutes [Israel’s] argument…we found strong evidence that Hezbollah stored most of its rockets in bunkers and weapon storage facilities located in uninhabited fields and valleys, that in the vast majority of cases Hezbollah fighters left populated civilian areas as soon as the fighting started, and that Hezbollah fired the vast majority of its rockets from pre-prepared positions outside villages.

In fact, only Israeli soldiers have systematically used Palestinians as human shields. Since Israel’s incursion into the West Bank in 2002, it has used Palestinians as human shields by tying young Palestinians onto the hoods of their cars or forcing them to go into a home where a potential militant may be hiding.

Even assuming that Israel’s claims were plausible, humanitarian law obligates Israel to avoid civilian casualties that “would be [url=http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/9ac284404d38ed2bc1256311002afd89/50fb5579fb098faac12563cd0051dd7c]excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.” A belligerent force must verify whether civilian or civilian infrastructure qualifies as a military objective. In the case of doubt, “whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed [url=http://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/9ac284404d38ed2bc1256311002afd89/f08a9bc78ae360b3c12563cd0051dcd4]not to be so used.”

In the over three weeks of its military operation, Israel has demolished 3,175 homes, at least a dozen with families inside; destroyed five hospitals and six clinics; partially damaged sixty-four mosques and two churches; partially to completely destroyed eight government ministries; injured 4,620; and killed over 700 Palestinians. At plain sight, these numbers indicate Israel’s egregious violations of humanitarian law, ones that amount to war crimes.

Beyond the body count and reference to law, which is a product of power, the question to ask is, What is Israel’s end goal? What if Hamas and Islamic Jihad dug tunnels beneath the entirety of the Gaza Strip—they clearly did not, but let us assume they did for the sake of argument. According to Israel’s logic, all of Gaza’s 1.8 million Palestinians are therefore human shields for being born Palestinian in Gaza. The solution is to destroy the 360-kilometer square strip of land and to expect a watching world to accept this catastrophic loss as incidental. This is possible only by framing and accepting the dehumanization of Palestinian life. Despite the absurdity of this proposal, it is precisely what Israeli society is urging its military leadership to do. Israel cannot bomb Palestinians into submission, and it certainly cannot bomb them into peace.

The kill count is now over 1000 Palestinians, but otherwise this is an excellent article.

e: Some of the hyperlinks aren't working for some reason, please read the actual article for more.




e2: Found that info on Hamas from before, via http://en.wikipedia...._10-year_truce:

Quote

In January 2004, Hamas leader Yassin said that the group would end armed resistance against Israel in exchange for a Palestinian state in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and that restoring Palestinians' "historical rights" (relating to the 1948 Palestinian exodus) "would be left for future generations."[41] On January 25, 2004, senior Hamas official Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi offered a 10-year truce, or hudna, in return for the establishment of a Palestinian state and the complete withdrawal by Israel from the territories captured in the 1967 Six Day War.[41] Al-Rantissi stated that Hamas had come to the conclusion that it was "difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation."[41][42] Israel immediately dismissed al-Rantissi's statements as insincere and a smokescreen for military preparations.[42] Yassin was killed in a targeted killing on March 22, 2004, by an Israeli air strike,[43] and al-Rantisi was killed by a similar air strike on April 18, 2004.[44]

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 27 July 2014 - 08:15 PM

[amphibian]

I posit that if you are presenting an argument against the existence of war crimes, you need to take a breather for a while and reassess the things you are thinking and saying.

That's indefensibly awful.

[Cause]

Darn it I Lost my whole post, as best as I can remember what I was saying

I re-read what I wrote and I don't believe I said or even implied that war crimes don’t exist. Only I wished to suggest that war is closer to being the true crime (though sometimes being unavoidable) rather than any acts committed during them. Further I posit that the definition of a war crime is constantly in flux or at least our interpretation or choice to apply international law is highly subjective

The London Blitz, the nuking of Japan and the indiscriminate bombing of Germany are all at once both war crimes and sound tactics. WW2 was a time of total war when the economies, resources and populations of whole countries were being fed into the war effort. The factory that built war-planes was a target but not the factory worker who built them? Guns kill people, Bombs Kill people! Somehow we have laws governing how they should kill people? Absurd. White phosphorous is both illegal and illegal in war. It’s only a war crime if it accidentally touches and burns human flesh, it is okay to use it mark positions for later shelling .In the US-Russia relations thread Gothos praises the Ukrainian forces for not going the way of the IDF. What he means when a quick check shows that the fighting in one city alone has caused over 500 civilian casualties and both sides have been accused of targeting civilians by human rights watch I have no idea. I posit that you can’t drop bombs in a city without killing a civilian at some point. Since your probably fighting over a city where else would you drop the bombs?

The invasion of Iraq caused 3500-7000 civilian casualties in 2 months. The opening stages of operation ‘enduring freedom’ caused 3000 deaths by coalition bombings alone. The nato bombings of Yugoslavia killed 500-5000 civilians and the nato intervention in Libya killed 60 civilians.

War is tragic and civilians die (Even wars meant to help civilians seem to kill them). To expect otherwise is madness. For Illy or anyone else to ask that IDF soldiers go into Gaza in APCs armed with batons, tazers and stun grenades and fight the good fight bloodlessly is insanity. He has even somehow made Israel’s offer to extend a ceasefire sinister.

Also here are some videos I would love it if someone who speaks Arabic can confirm the translations:
http://youtu.be/g0wJXf2nt4Y - human shields
http://youtu.be/J08GqXMr3YE - human shields
http://youtu.be/eQ6S0-o3uFI - human shields
http://youtu.be/fcrWy3PT6zc - human shields
http://youtu.be/e09uYp7sRrE - embarrassing, ouch
http://youtu.be/5oesBeCFAlg - not this conflict but using an ambulance
http://blog.unwatch....ainst-humanity/ - UN Palestinian ambadassor on war crimes.

http://youtu.be/gqthkdPaa2I - Hamas owned TV
– I would love a first-hand account on this

This is Hammas: https://en.wikipedia...i/Hamas#Charter
Please read the ranting’s of their clerics, the anti-Semitism and the holocaust denial

This is Palestinian Jihad: https://en.wikipedia...nt_in_Palestine
Please notice the flag. Also this is not a fringe group that Hamas can’t control as Illy would have it. They operate schools, mosques and hospitals.


Also Illy this quote

Quote

In January 2004, Hamas leader Yassin said that the group would end armed resistance against Israel in exchange for a Palestinian state in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and that restoring Palestinians' "historical rights" (relating to the 1948 Palestinian exodus) "would be left for future generations."[41] On January 25, 2004, senior Hamas official Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi offered a 10-year truce, or hudna, in return for the establishment of a Palestinian state and the complete withdrawal by Israel from the territories captured in the 1967 Six Day War.[41] Al-Rantissi stated that Hamas had come to the conclusion that it was "difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation."[41][42] Israel immediately dismissed al-Rantissi's statements as insincere and a smokescreen for military preparations.[42] Yassin was killed in a targeted killing on March 22, 2004, by an Israeli air strike,[43] and al-Rantisi was killed by a similar air strike on April 18, 2004.[44]

Simply agrees with my point that Hamas won’t give up on east Jerusalem. Did you know that the UN does not even fully recognize Israel’s ownership of even west Jerusalem since it was originally supposed to be governed by the UN in the original 1948 partition plan but they do recognize that Palestine can have the east? Israel’s annexation of east Jerusalem is not recognized because they struck first in 1967 and yet if they had not there would be no Israel. Strangely Russia is gaining ground in its right to annex the Crimean peninsula. International Law is Iron! In any event Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the only holy site in Judaism (last time Jordan and the Palestinians had control they refused Jews access to the temple mount, desecrated it, destroyed about 50 shulls and used Jewish gravestones to line latrines) asking to divide it is the equivalent of ending the peace talks. Also the right of return might as well be code for the destruction of Israel. Do we think that 5 million + Palestinian voters will keep Israel as Israel?

Also in asking for the gaza strip and the west bank and east Jerusalem (ie the entirety of the Palestinian state recognized internationally) and in return giving a ten year truce what they are really saying is they think they need ten years of build up before going after the rest! A phased liberation it’s even spelt out for you. These people don’t want peace. If you think Israel rejecting this magnanimous offer is suprising you are insane.