Israel attacks gaza strip

[Luminous]

Luminous I appreciate your replies, but I would differ with you about the authority of Hamas. I mean, the US and Israel wanted the Gazans to hold an election, and when they picked the party they wanted and not the one US wanted it was denied. What message does that send the Gazans? It sends the message that says, you will obey us or you will stay in the situation you are in and we won't help you, you choose. It sends the message that the process of democracy that is hailed as the greatest government type since sliced bread, doesn't really work.

that is even clear to us in U.S.
ex: BUSH. sometimes the stupid just have more children. democracy is as Plato (ithink) said it: "MOB rule". but it also keeps the largest number of unslothful (those who vote) people happy.

The sentiment that "we don't deal with terrorists" isn't working here. Continuing to say that you (Hamas) cannot be included directly with any deals, you must let others decide your fate doesn't work. If Israel is truly commited to peace as it claims, you have to try something else. Just like Hamas needs to try something else other than those crude rockets. Hamas has never been tested with their authority being recognized. It was immediately ignored as a terrorist group, but it might be worth everyones time to give them that shot. Give them the opportunity to run the place and see what else they do. You may be surprised that with the business of life, they may become less interested in trying to bomb Israeli towns.

that's true. one has to deal with terrorists. however Hamas cannot be considered a rightful power untill it doesn't have militia and it cannt be considered a party that one can work with for good untill it stops being terrorist. i don't know about that. like the Nazi's they would probably use money for weapons against Israel and dissentors with in their own people.

As far as Israel controlling the area forever, that may not be as far fetched as you think. I'm sure they don't want to but they feel they have to. I mean if you lift yor foot off their necks and give them a second to breathe they may retaliate. This is the thing Israel don't want. No retaliation. That's what I think a ceasefire means to them, for the Gazans to just forget everything that happened and never raise arms again no matter the situation. Israel must keep control of the area or risk the rise of power from the Palestinians in that area. With power the Gazans may not be so quick to forgive the wrongs meted out to them. However, you can control people by their stomachs. Keep someone hungry and halfway dependant on you, and you have them. It's not too much they can do to you if they are hungry. The only other option is to kill them all. You may think that extreme and it is, but it's real and the way things are shaping up Israeli government isn't all that opposed to the idea. Think about it as long as they say they aren't targeting civies they can keep killing them anyways. As long as they say Hamas is using them all for human shields they can bomb anyplace they chose, at any time without having to offer up any more of an explanation than that. Before you know it, there isn't anyone left in Gaza worth mentioning, problem solved. Israel can't very well say that's what they are doing and stick to it, but they can get it achieved while the world watches it and does nothing. If not by bomb then by starvation and illness. If the sewers aren't working properly you're talking about diseases just from filth. Not to mention from an Islamic pov clean water is of extreme importance. If not enough medicine can come through people will die from simple complications and illnesses.

why assume it isn't true. they haven't targeted civilians because that is not their goal. though i'm sure inside they wish others wouldn't care so they could. I think Hamas is capable of such a thing. both target civilians and use human shieds ex: hide inside schools and public places.

In a way yeah. See it's all about the intent. If I am willing to go the way of peace while at the same time having my own authority equal to and independent of you, then I am not a puppet government. I am acting on my own and on the behalf of my people to be peaceful with you. However, if I go the way you want me to because my authority is directly connected with what you allow it to be, then I am a puppet of yours. If the Gazans had chosen such a party to lead them, they would have still got shafted just in a different way. Leaders in puppet governments do only what they are told so that they do not lose whatever perks and the appearance of power that they have. They don't do what is best for their people, because if what the people want conflict with what the puppeteer wants, then the people can forget it. The West Bank government is a puppet government, because it doesn't put up any fight, it has no real authority, and it is afraid to speak out strongly against the murder going on in the strip. In fact it cannot speak out strongly, it must side with Israel pretty much because if not then his bootleg authority gets taken.

yet listening to your wisers does not a puppet make. By your logic, you are a puppet to Muhammadism becuase you do not put up a fight against it. Us does not speak out stongly either. are we puppet of Israel or the Jews? NO, we know that speaking out against the lesser evil would only give strengh to the stronger evil. its very Machiovellian.

 

[Luminous]

Originally Posted by DallasApple
Sigh..thats fine then ..but give up your children.Let the adults volunteer to sacrifice for a government that apparently cares nothing about preserving your very life here on earth.

And we are only talking about the dead ones..What about the mamed for life?Physically and emotionally ...

Love

Dallas

Einstein: Lets pray for the best for everyone..

At least Hamas is becoming more ethical than Israel which is "intentionally" targetting civilians to force Hamas accept the UN truce, which would be declared as a political win of Israel over Hamas. It's like Israel is trying to reach the number of casualities that would let Hamas give up the battle!!...Totally dirty!

I dont like Hamas: FOXNews.com - Hamas Purges Gaza Schools of Rival Fatah Teachers - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News
there is more.

//
YouTube - United Nations: Hamas Did Not Break the Truce, Israel Did.

this video and related ones are such crap: YouTube - THE HAMAS ROCKETS is a HOAX - part 1 - MOSSAD is shooting rockets into Sederot,Israel

this is more like it: YouTube - Hamas Purposely Locating Rockets in Residential Area

 

[England my lionheart]

I totally agree with you...I was never with the idea of disarming Hamas, and I believe any peace agreement that requires disarming Hamas is a stupid trial. Hamas doesn't have any gauruntees that would make her trust Israel (not for the sake of Hamas, but rather for the sake of Palestinians).
Hamas knows very well that it won't be the winner in this war (military wise), thats why I believe the war is becoming more political, and Hamas wants to keep it so.

In fact, for the moment, Hamas has no option but to continue fighting..

You've got all the right to be angry..

If the attack on the house is true there can never be a justification for that,Israel should never have gone down the route of a ground incursion in the first place.
The problem with all conflicts concerning the UN is it takes so long to make a decision and when it eventually comes its too little and too late,this is because some countries cannot or will not concour with others,i guess its a case of too many chefs spoil the broth.
I think the best hope we have is that it does'nt escalate into a large scale conflict although to the Palestinians it must seem pretty much that.
When the coalition invaded Iraq there were civilian casualties and Saddam used Human shields and this is what this style of conflict brings,i just wish it would stop with a long term solution.

 

[Luminous]

I believe Israel just released video proving that Hamas hides in schools and it fires agains troops.

 

[England my lionheart]

I believe Israel just released video proving that Hamas hides in schools and it fires agains troops.

I believe they do,its a more powerful weapon propaganda that an AK,like i said it has been used before so its no surprise to me.

 

[emiliano]

If an entity has territory which is indisputably under their control, a clear, established government and bureaucracy, and a loyal military made up of citizens to defend it, then it is a state, regardless of the opinions of any other entity.

Conversely, if an entity has no territory indisputably under their control, no clearly established government or bureaucracy, nor loyal military made up of citizens to defend it, it is not a state, regardless of the opinions of any other entity.

"Legitimacy" is a lie invented by European politicians who wanted to dominate the world.

This is interesting, let see and question it. How did said entity acquired this indisputable control? Why is the hopes of those in the entity that lost the control of lesser value? Why would they stop the straggle to regain it? As far as I can tell the Palestinian also have a committed civilian armed force to defend their rights, they can show cause for their claims to ownership of the territory, they are the legitimated owner regardless of how many times they have been invaded and conquered and the best solution is an international tribunal that can negotiated a just outcome and that has the power to ensured compliance by both parties)(
The idea of global domination is not exclusively European .

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Ending the blockade is one, and backing off to the 1967 borders is another one.

From my point of view, "ending the blockade" of a terrorist organization committed to the eradication of Israel means enabling the massive enhancement of terrorist infrastructure, while "backing off to the 1967 borders" means bringing that infrastructure qualitatively closer to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. To accept what you deem legitimate would be stupid, irresponsible, and, in fact, suicidal.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

As far as I can tell the Palestinian also have a committed civilian armed force to defend their rights, they can show cause for their claims to ownership of the territory, they are the legitimated owner regardless of how many times they have been invaded and conquered ...

Nonsense. Hamas is no more legitimate than Al Qaeda, and those who seek to legitimatize it bare significant responsibility for terrorism and the despicable sewer it engenders.

 

[darkendless]

This is interesting, let see and question it. How did said entity acquired this indisputable control? Why is the hopes of those in the entity that lost the control of lesser value? Why would they stop the straggle to regain it? As far as I can tell the Palestinian also have a committed civilian armed force to defend their rights, they can show cause for their claims to ownership of the territory, they are the legitimated owner regardless of how many times they have been invaded and conquered and the best solution is an international tribunal that can negotiated a just outcome and that has the power to ensured compliance by both parties)(
The idea of global domination is not exclusively European .

I didn't know hate-filled terrorist organisations had the same rights as everyone else. I thought it was just a case of hunting and removing that pathetic excuse for a life form from civilisation as quickly as possible?
Like i've said 10 times in this thread, if ever they owned that territory, they have given up their claims by using violence.

 

[Elessar]

This is interesting, let see and question it. How did said entity acquired this indisputable control? Why is the hopes of those in the entity that lost the control of lesser value? Why would they stop the straggle to regain it? As far as I can tell the Palestinian also have a committed civilian armed force to defend their rights, they can show cause for their claims to ownership of the territory, they are the legitimated owner regardless of how many times they have been invaded and conquered and the best solution is an international tribunal that can negotiated a just outcome and that has the power to ensured compliance by both parties)(
The idea of global domination is not exclusively European .

How the entity acquired control is irrelevant in any and all cases. Legitimacy is a lie. There is only actuality. The actuality is, that Israel has all the properties of a state, and is thus a state. "Palestine" does not have all the properties of a state, and is thus, not a state. Whether one side is more "in the moral right" than the other is irrelevant for the purposes of politics. A state exists has the properties of a state. Claiming to be a state is irrelevant.

Western Sahara is not a state, it does not have the properties of a state, despite its claim to be a state and international recognition thereof. Palestine is not a state, it does not have the properties of a state, despite its claim to be a state and international recognition thereof. Taiwan is a state, it has the properties of a state, despite its claim to NOT be a state and international nonrecognition thereof. Somaliland is a state, it has the properties of a state, and thus proves its claims to be a state, despite international nonrecognition thereof. Somalia is not a state, it does not have the properties of a state, despite its claim to be a state and international recognition thereof.

I could go on, but you get the picture. A "state" is a state whether or not it claims to be, and a "nonstate" is not a state, whether or not it claims to be. "Legitimacy" is a lie. For any state to fail to recognize or act in accord with the existance of another state is ignorance, at best, and delusional, at worst. Did UN recognizing the Republic of China in Taiwan as the "one true China" from 1945-1975 make the People's Republic of China a nonstate? Of course not! Has the UN recognizing the People's Republic of China as the "one true China" from 1975-present made the Republic of China in Taiwan a nonstate? Of course not!

I hate the cliche, but, in the simplest of terms, "might makes right". Existence creates true legitimacy.

 

[EiNsTeiN]

From my point of view, "ending the blockade" of a terrorist organization committed to the eradication of Israel means enabling the massive enhancement of terrorist infrastructure, while "backing off to the 1967 borders" means bringing that infrastructure qualitatively closer to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. To accept what you deem legitimate would be stupid, irresponsible, and, in fact, suicidal.

Well, then what's left for the Palestinians to negotiate for?!

 

[EiNsTeiN]

Nonsense. Hamas is no more legitimate than Al Qaeda, and those who seek to legitimatize it bare significant responsibility for terrorism and the despicable sewer it engenders.

In fact, almost non of the Arab countries view Hamas as a terrorist organization, but rather an organization that works on defending Palestinian rights, and like any one, can committ mistakes..

 

[darkendless]

In fact, almost non of the Arab countries view Hamas as a terrorist organization, but rather an organization that works on defending Palestinian rights, and like any one, can committ mistakes..

Didn't you say in another thread all Arabs would fight for the dignity of Palestine? Well there you go, thats why, they share a common interest so its ok for them to fire rockets into Israel.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

From Haaretz:

Obama aide denies report he will launch low-level contact with Hamas

A spokesperson for U.S. president-elect Barack Obama on Friday denied a report that Obama is expected to engage Hamas in dialogue, after he takes office.

The U.K. newspaper The Guardian reported on Thursday quoted unnamed sources reportedly close to Obama's transition team, who said he has been urged by close advisors to launch low-level contact with Hamas.

"The President-elect has repeatedly stated that he believes that Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to Israel's destruction, and that we should not deal with them until they recognize Israel, renounce violence, and abide by past agreements," said Brooke Anderson, chief national security spokesperson for the Obama transition team.

"The President elect's repeated statements are accurate," added Anderson. "This unsourced story is not."​

I suspect what we're seeing is evidence of (hopefully minor) schisms within the Obama camp. What I've failed to adequately consider (or, perhaps better, appreciate) is the probability that Obama's entrance will be heavily influenced by his Secretary of State. As I noted previously, I believe the Guardian story served to embolden Hamas. If the incoming administration shares this concern we might expect to hear from Mrs. Clinton over the next few days. Certainly no one (other than, perhaps, Hamas, Hizbullah, et al) wants the current situation to persist through January 20th.

 

[Luminous]

Hamas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hamas is fighting to force religion upon agnostic children and thus convert them away from their original religion by force.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

From my point of view, "ending the blockade" of a terrorist organization committed to the eradication of Israel means enabling the massive enhancement of terrorist infrastructure, while "backing off to the 1967 borders" means bringing that infrastructure qualitatively closer to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. To accept what you deem legitimate would be stupid, irresponsible, and, in fact, suicidal.

Well, then what's left for the Palestinians to negotiate for?!

I think that's an extremely important question, EiNsTeiN, and fully worthy of its own thread. Here, however, I think it's nonresponsive. I've argued that what you offer as legitimate would be stupid, irresponsible, and suicidal for Israel. I'd really like to know whether or not you agree.

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

My question is this, if it is nonsensical for Hamas to ask for a lifting of a blockade and pretty much asking for anything else as far as demands go, then why would they stop fighting? If the deal only works in favor of Israel but Gaza's situation must remain unchanged, what are they to do? What do they have a right to ask for if not a right to decent life? Why don't they have a right to that? If Israel is unwilling to concede to any demand no matter what it is, why should it expect Hamas to budge?

Really I think I can answer these questions myself. Israel wants Gazans to accept anything, and I do mean anything, that it does because no matter what Israel is ALWAYS right. Whatever it decides over the Palestinians including those in the West Bank will be correct and unable to be challenged. After all the lives of Palestinians are not nearly worth a single Israeli life. The right for Israel to exist supercedes every other right of every other non-Israeli in the region. It is on Hamas and the rest of the Gazans to stop fighting while Israel makes no promises. If it makes no promises it cannot be held to any. It's like one poster here said "might makes right". As long as Israel has the biggest guns, the Palestinians are just out of luck hoping for a life that doesn't included being shelled arbitrarily, and unable to receive outside help. Unable really to leave Gaza at all, they need to sit down and be quiet.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Nonsense. Hamas is no more legitimate than Al Qaeda, and those who seek to legitimatize it bare significant responsibility for terrorism and the despicable sewer it engenders.

In fact, almost non of the Arab countries view Hamas as a terrorist organization, but rather an organization that works on defending Palestinian rights, and like any one, can committ mistakes..

Two points, EiNsTeiN:

1. that almost none of the Arab countries view Hamas as a terrorist organization does not necessarily mean that Hamas is not a terrorist organization any more than the fact that almost all of the Arab countries view homosexuality as a disgusting abomination necessarily means that homosexuality is a disgusting abomination, and
2. there exist real and compelling reasons why countries such as Egypt and Jordan view the Arab Brotherhood as a dangerous cancer and why, therefore, Egypt categorically rejects the very real threat of a Rafah border crossing under Hamas control.

From my perspective, any organization committed to terrorism and the eradication of Israel is a wholly illegitimate existential threat.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

My question is this, if it is nonsensical for Hamas to ask for a lifting of a blockade and pretty much asking for anything else as far as demands go, then why would they stop fighting?

For the sake of the Palestinian people.

 

[Sahar]

1. there exist real and compelling reasons why countries such as Egypt and Jordan view the Arab Brotherhood as a dangerous cancer and why, therefore, Egypt categorically rejects the very real threat of a Rafah border crossing under Hamas control.

And it's a disaster for a country like Egypt to consider Hamas a more dangerous threat than Israel.