What would you have done?

[Shaul]

As i said, some cannot evacuate. There are various reasons for this.

Schools and hospitals... Sheesh. And as far as i know there was never any indication that hamas were using them to hide in

There are two wrongs here.

Yes, you have "said". Said without evidence either that such people exist nor that Israel targeted them. Just as you "said" that schools and hospitals were targeted again without evidence nor that Hamas was not among any that have been hit. You are making wrong allegations.

 

[Shaul]

Are they using the weapons they sold to bomb Gaza?

The is a non sequitur from what I wrote. Israel has a huge arms industry. They don't need U.S. aid to get weapons. That was the point.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, you have "said". Said without evidence either that such people exist nor that Israel targeted them. Just as you "said" that schools and hospitals were targeted again without evidence nor that Hamas was not among any that have been hit. You are making wrong allegations.

You mean like the evidence you didn't give for precisely targetted bombing?

The evidence is all over Google.

Nope i think you are watching too much fox news (or equivalent)

 

[ChristineM]

The is a non sequitur from what I wrote. Israel has a huge arms industry. They don't need U.S. aid to get weapons. That was the point.

So where does the money come from to manufacture the weapons. Certainly not from the taxes of a few million inhabitants.

 

[Shaul]

You mean like the evidence you didn't give for precisely targetted bombing?

The evidence is all over Google.

Nope i think you are watching too much fox news (or equivalent)

As I wrote, I don't think your mind is open. I know you want to tell yourself that. But nonetheless, I now doubt it even more than before.

 

[Shaul]

So where does the money come from to manufacture the weapons. Certainly not from the taxes of a few million inhabitants.

From the sales of arms to other countries. Which is one reason why what I wrote about Israeli arms sales being $12 billion was relevant.

 

[ChristineM]

As I wrote, I don't think your mind is open. I know you want to tell yourself that. But nonetheless, I now doubt it even more than before.

Yup you don't like it when your own accusations are fired back at you, do you!

 

[ChristineM]

From the sales of arms to other countries. Which is one reason why what I wrote about Israeli arms sales being $12 billion was relevant.

That is circular reasoning.

They made the arms from the money earned from selling the arms?

 

[Shaul]

That is circular reasoning.

They made the arms from the money earned from selling the arms?

That isn't circular. They made the money from foreign arms sales which pay for their domestic arms needs.

 

[Shaul]

Yup you don't like it when your own accusations are fired back at you, do you!

??? I never made any accusations. Are you admitting that you have?

 

[ChristineM]

??? I never made any accusations. Are you admitting that you have?

You accused me of being narrow minded so please don't play the stupid card . I blame watching fox news for the deliberate ignorance.

And I'm done with this nonsense,

 

[Shaul]

You accused me of being narrow minded so please don't play the stupid card . I blame watching fox news for the deliberate ignorance.

And I'm done with this nonsense,

I didn't accuse you of being narrow minded. I wrote that in my opinion you might not be open minded. An opinion that I wrote I hoped was incorrect. After you provided more evidence of being non-open minded I wrote that I was, sadly, more of that opinion. That isn't an accusation. It is an opinion of your behavior, not a denigration of your person.

Oh, and just for the record, I don't watch Fox News. I have stated that many times here on RF, so I don't know where you got that erroneous notion. There are some people here on RF that have a real visceral hatred for Fox News. I guess you are one of those. That's your business. It has nothing to do with me.

Have a nice day.

 

[ChristineM]

I didn't accuse you of being narrow minded. I wrote that in my opinion you might not be open minded. An opinion that I wrote I hoped was incorrect. After you provided more evidence of being non-open minded I wrote that I was, sadly, more of that opinion. That isn't an accusation. It is an opinion of your behavior, not a denigration of your person.

Oh, and just for the record, I don't watch Fox News. I have stated that many times here on RF, so I don't know where you got that erroneous notion. There are some people here on RF that have a real visceral hatred for Fox News. I guess you are one of those. That's your business. It has nothing to do with me.

Have a nice day.

Not open minded is not narrow minded... Explain
You wrote it and confirmed it in a second post

I said fox news or equivalent.

I prefer news to be unbiased and honest.

 

[Shaul]

Not open minded is not narrow minded... Explain
You wrote it and confirmed it in a second post

I said fox news or equivalent.

I prefer news to be unbiased and honest.

To be open minded is to be amenable to changing one's position. Obviously closed minded being the opposite. To be narrow minded is to be focused on a particular point of view or opinion, perhaps to the exclusion of other points of view. But that doesn't require being closed to alternatives.

In the last post to which I replied you specifically mentioned only Fox News and implied that I used it. Hence my previous reply.

 

[ChristineM]

To be open minded is to be amenable to changing one's position. Obviously closed minded being the opposite. To be narrow minded is to be focused on a particular point of view or opinion, perhaps to the exclusion of other points of view. But that doesn't require being closed to alternatives.

In the last post to which I replied you specifically mentioned only Fox News and implied that I used it. Hence my previous reply.

So you are not open minded then. As i said, you don't like things you claim being fired back at you

And i am certain you read my previous post stating "or equivalent". The use of fox thereafter is just a catchall.

 

[YoursTrue]

First of all, the question posed in the OP was what would you do whether you were Israel's PM. That means that all you have right now is the IDF and possibly some US forces, though I don't exactly know whether they may be commanded in the same way. So the question is, what practical strategy do you have in mind given the capabilities and limitations of the IDF?

Let me put it another way: how do you "weed out" some 30-40k Hamas agents (with thousands more inactive supporters) from a densely populated urban area, while simultaneously defending your country from airstrikes from two borders? Do you have soldiers knocking on every door in Gaza and politely asking whether there are Hamas agents there?

Here is what the IDF has been doing so far: Pushing Gaza civilians to move to the southern part of the strip. Hamas has blocked these efforts but several hundreds of thousands still managed to evacuate. Then the IDF started bombing northern Gaza, attempting as much as possible to concentrate their strikes on particularly locations they knew, per military intelligence, to be housing Hamas cells, weapons and supplies. As in every war ever, some of the casualties included civilians, people who did not or could not evacuate. We've now reached the second phase, which is the ground assault.

Given all of this, what would have been your practical strategy to "weed out" Hamas, which you have hinted to being superior to the IDF's strategy? In case you might be wondering, I am honestly curious and not being sarcastic. Though I served in the army, I'm not a military strategist.

It makes sense that there are many supporters of Hamas within the realms of Gaza which makes you wonder. Naturally no one likes to be hurt or have family members hurt. People are influenced. So -- here is a reasonable history of Hamas and Israel: People Claim a Majority of Palestinians in Gaza Elected Hamas — Here's Why It Isn't That Simple