That is, in fact, not an answer to the question, and that surprises me not in the least.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why does Hamas launch rockets from cities?
- Thread starter icehorse
- Start date
That is, in fact, not an answer to the question, and that surprises me not in the least.
RitalinOhD
Heathen Humanist
You asked what the IDF does after tracking a rocket launch. I suggested them using actual people (army) instead of dropping bombs. You see, people with guns are more discriminate than large falling explosives.
If that didn't answer your question, then I guess it goes without an answer. Now I'll go back to losing that sleep.
Great. So you suggest an armed incursion. And what should the IDF do when this force comes under mortar and rocket attack and when, during this engagement, rocket barrages continue to be fired at the civilian Israeli population?
Alceste
Vagabond
I lack the 18 years of military experience Ritalin brings to the table, but I don't think an armed, targeted incursion is all that unreasonable a tactic. That's how the US finally got bin Laden after a decade of blowing little Afghan and Iraqi children to bits and pieces failed to get the job done.
Also, the iron dome is very effective at preventing civilian casualties in Israel, so the need to blow up hospitals full of children is not perhaps as pressing as the IDF would like us to believe.
Respectfully, you did not answer the question. Nor did he.
RitalinOhD
Heathen Humanist
Yup, Israeli soldiers will probably die. That's what happens in war. That's why war is hell. However, if a govt is truly interested in minimizing civilian casualties, thats the only way to go about it, outside of all out cessation of aggression. However, if they decide to continue dropping bombs indiscriminately, they have no right to claim any form of moral or ethical superiority. Nor do they get to play the victim card. That ceased to be an option once they decided to kill 800+ women & children.
Oh, and as I've already stated, the use of weapons lIke Flechette rounds and white phosphorus is just despicable.
On the other side of the coin, Hamas is guilty of endangering, and causing the death of women and children as well, incase you were inclined to pin me as some supporter of terrorists.
Please understand that I neither expect, nor care if you agree with any of this. You asked a question, and it was answered.
Please answer the question.
How different or more extreme is Hamas when compared to other Palestinian groups?
If Hamas ends up humiliated or killed, would that even be a good thing? What can reasonably be expected to happen as a consequence?
RitalinOhD
Heathen Humanist
You don't read between the lines very well do you? Or maybe you just get some enjoyment from being overly difficult to have a discussion with.
In absence of some non violent resolution, they have 2 options. Only one of those options has a far better chance of minimizing collateral damage and death. The downside to that option is putting soldiers in the line of fire. That's just the way it is. However, if they choose to continue with aerial bombardment, then they should expect to be criticized for it. I realize you don't like it, but that's your problem to deal with. Meanwhile I'll be living in reality, where the use of force is overly lopsided.
If you feel compelled to suggest that I haven't answered your question again, save your breathe. I'm no longer interested in trying to decipher your mysterious standards for doing so.
In absence of some non violent resolution, they have 2 options. Only one of those options has a far better chance of minimizing collateral damage and death. The downside to that option is putting soldiers in the line of fire. That's just the way it is. However, if they choose to continue with aerial bombardment, then they should expect to be criticized for it. I realize you don't like it, but that's your problem to deal with. Meanwhile I'll be living in reality, where the use of force is overly lopsided.
If you feel compelled to suggest that I haven't answered your question again, save your breathe. I'm no longer interested in trying to decipher your mysterious standards for doing so.
CMike
Well-Known Member
They don't blow up hospitals filled with children.
Israel's strikes are surgical, and they often don't hit terrorists because of civilians.
There have been hundreds of Hamas rockets that fell short and hit gaza. One rocket hit a hospital.
Another strike that Hamas claimed hit a hospital didn't hit the hospital. It hit a launcher next to a hospital.
They also make up corpses for the camera. The dead count is based on what Hamas say they are which means they are made up.
The outrage should be directed solely toward Hamas.
I blame Obama and the international community for legitimizing Hamas, and showing them that their use of their own civilians as human shields works in the propaganda war.
» GAZA
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10153454198082316&set=vb.73528002315&type=2&theater
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE7ykidY7FA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETm2o0RUB5g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAT1uBNcOHU
Alceste
Vagabond
I may have forgotten the question. Weren't we exploring whether it is possible for Israel to achieve their stated geopolitical intentions without dropping bombs on schools and hospitals full of refugees?
Alceste
Vagabond
I simply don't believe your claims. No amount of linking to other people claiming the same thing on youtube or Facebook will persuade me.
That obviously depends on the group.
There have been more than a few articles in the Israeli press suggesting that the destruction of Hamas could well create a vacuum to be filled by more extreme groups. I seriously doubt that it would be that easy, but I'm far from an expert in such things.
First a caveat: the Middle East rarely lends itself to "reasonable expectations." But if speculation is allowed
Replacing Hamas with a military re-occupation would be a festering disaster.
Replacing Hamas with a PLO committed to a 2-State solution and reinforced by an EU monitoring and security apparatus could be very effective if done in the context of extensive investment in Gaza and a responsible end to the occupation
My question was …
CMike
Well-Known Member
CMike
Well-Known Member
What occupation?
Israel completely pulled out of Gaza. To the shame of Israel they forcefully removed jews from their homes.
We now see the result of that little experiment.
The arab government used the billions of dollars for aid to build terror tunnels and rockets.
Also the EU sucks. They have been supporters of arab terrorist organizations.
If I was in charge of Israel I would never put the country's security on people who are in bed with Israel's enemies.
This isn't hard to understand.
One said, the arab side, wants the jewish side DEAD. The Israel side wants peace, the arab side does not.
Alceste
Vagabond
OK, well first off, the Iron Dome, as I said, has been very effective in preventing civilian casualties, so the rockets are not such a significant threat that hasty action is necessary. So, step one would be to take a deep breath and make a plan. Part of that plan should include consideration of the lives of civilians in the vicinity. Killing a hundred of them may not be the most strategic course of action, especially if a DECREASE in anti-Israel hostility in Gaza (and the world) is one of their aims.
Secondly, I am not at all convinced that every target the IDF has been bombing in Gaza is a rocket launch site. So, suggestion number two is to limit any military strikes to places where rocket launching action is actually occurring. Forget bombing houses where somebody said somebody said some militant might have passed through, and forget about trying to bomb tunnels in urban environments.
Thirdly, Israel should not hold Hamas responsible for rocket attacks by militias it has no control over, and should stop violating their ceasefire agreements with Hamas because some rogue actor snuck a shell off. The bombardment has caused chaos, and in chaos there is no social control. Laying off the attacks might allow Hamas the breathing room to rein in some of the rogue actors who pay no attention to these agreements.
Finally, if the aim is to kill or capture Hamas militants specifically, they really have no choice but to go in there and get them. Yes, soldiers may die, but that's their job. Do you want Hamas or don't you? Blowing up 2000 Gazan civilians hasn't made a dent in Hamas membership. If anything, it's had the opposite effect. The IDF is one of the best armed and best trained military forces in the world, and the opposition is basically running around willy nilly in their pyjamas with scavenged weaponry. If the US could locate and kill bin Laden without leveling a whole town to do it, Israel can do the same.
CMike
Well-Known Member
This kind of demonstrates what is happening.
https://www.facebook.com/theisraelp...73528002315/10153464062312316/?type=1&theater
https://www.facebook.com/theisraelp...73528002315/10153464062312316/?type=1&theater
So the recommendation is that Israel, and the Israeli civilians who are daily shuttling into and out of shelters with each Code Red, rely on Iron Dome while IDF ground sources are sent against Hamas without making any effort to address the heavy mortar or rocket barrage targeting these ground forces?
The aim is to stop the terrorist attacks.