Why does Hamas launch rockets from cities?

[Alceste]

:clap

So, it's only numbers that matter-- not any cause-and-effect? not any methodology of how a people may wage war? not any responsibility of how a sovereign body may put their own people at risk? Please tell us in which war was it somehow fought whereas the numbers of dead must be be more even? Should the U.S. during WWII purposely allow more of its own people to be killed so as to more even up the score with the Germans and Japanese?

Me thinks you play too many video games.

The cause of war is hate. The effect of war is hate. Both sides of every war always blame the sub-human villains on the other for "starting it". I'm not equipped with the requisite stupidity to believe either of them. To me, this is monkeys being monkeys, scrapping over a banana patch. I just find it very sad when they kill each other's babies.

 

[metis]

I'm not following you. Your conclusion seems to be at odds with your own arguments.

I reread what I posted, but it reads clear to me. Which parts do you see as being contradictory?

 

[Alceste]

*post moderated*

I don't see any anti-semitism in your posts. Only an aversion to violence. For one clue, your arguments are consistently humanistic regardless of what conflict we are discussing - it's not only "the Jews" who you think should not blow up children. It's everybody. For another, your criticism is not aimed at "Jews" but at the state of Israel.

Any time a nationalistic bloodlust is stirred up among a people, we pacifists get a new label. I was "Anti-american" for rejecting Bush's wars. Now I'm an anti-semite for rejecting Netanyahu's.

 

[metis]

The cause of war is hate. The effect of war is hate. Both sides of ever war always blame the sub-human villains on the other for "starting it". I'm not equipped with the requisite stupidity to believe either of them. To me, this is monkeys being monkeys, scrapping over a banana patch. I just find it very sad when they kill each other's babies.

Believing in a false equivalencies is a form of "stupidity". Not even having a clue of cause-and-effect is "stupidity". And yes, you are well "equipped" with it.

Generally speaking, we hate war, whether the "we" are Jews or Israelis, and undoubtedly most Palestinians. To claim that we somehow consider Palestinians as being "sub-human" is a blatant lie, especially since we and they have suffered so much historically. The enemy here is Hamas, not the Palestinians, and it's truly pathetic that you stereotype both them and us.

I don't hate Palestinians, have spent considerable time with them here in the States and in Israel (and also Muslems in general, I might add), and to call both they and us as "monkeys" fighting over a "banana patch" is an insult to both peoples.

What a condescending piece of dung you posted above.

 

[Avi1001]

Interesting.

Here's my take. The guys in the DIR are pretty extreme. Conservative, Conservadox and Orthodox. Essentially extremists. They drove me from the DIR.

Metis and I are the two reform, libs.

Both sides, Israel and the Palestinians are engaging in too much violence. They must be stopped. The only chance is influence by the large countries. If this does not happen, there will be more violence.

Keep in mind this asymmetric war. Traditional vs. Terrorist. That makes it more difficult to analyze.

 

[Mycroft]

Interesting.

Here's my take. The guys in the DIR are pretty extreme. Conservative, Conservadox and Orthodox. Essentially extremists. They drove me from the DIR.

Metis and I are the two reform, libs.

Both sides, Israel and the Palestinians are engaging in too much violence. They must be stopped. The only chance is influence by the large countries. If this does not happen, there will be more violence.

Keep in mind this asymmetric war. Traditional vs. Terrorist. That makes it more difficult to analyze.

The death toll isn't asymmetric is it, though?

 

[Alceste]

Believing in a false equivalencies is a form of "stupidity". Not even having a clue of cause-and-effect is "stupidity". And yes, you are well "equipped" with it.

Generally speaking, we hate war, whether the "we" are Jews or Israelis, and undoubtedly most Palestinians. To claim that we somehow consider Palestinians as being "sub-human" is a blatant lie, especially since we and they have suffered so much historically. The enemy here is Hamas, not the Palestinians, and it's truly pathetic that you stereotype both them and us.

I don't hate Palestinians, have spent considerable time with them here in the States and in Israel (and also Muslems in general, I might add), and to call both they and us as "monkeys" fighting over a "banana patch" is an insult to both peoples.

What a condescending piece of dung you posted above.

The enemy here is warmongers. Both in Israel and Palestine, and everywhere else. May they all receive the violent deaths they wish upon one another, and may the rest of us have the good fortune not to be caught in the crossfire.

 

[Avi1001]

The death toll isn't asymmetric is it, though?

How many deaths have Hamas caused over the last 10 years?

Anyway, I don't think it's fruitful to argue whether Hamas is worse than Israel or Israel is worse than Hamas. We know that argument has no winner.

I argued on another thread that the real solution to this 3,000 year old battle is education. I was told that would take too long. How long will this approach take ?

An area related to education is communication. There needs to be better communication between these enemies. In this day and age of Internet and communications, there is no reason they can't be communicating more and better. Why can't the US and Europe work on these issues ?

 

[LuisDantas]

I reread what I posted, but it reads clear to me. Which parts do you see as being contradictory?

So, it's only numbers that matter-- not any cause-and-effect?

Cause and effect have been addressed by Alceste, mainly by pointing out (albeit in another thread, not this one) that there is no evidence that Hamas is restraining the movements of civilians, while Israel has been observed doing so.

Israel can't deny that bombing civilian-inhabited places further fuels the hatred and keep the war alive.

not any methodology of how a people may wage war? not any responsibility of how a sovereign body may put their own people at risk?

And that is a good example of videogame mentality: thinking that keeping superior firepower and killing "only the unavoidable" number of civilians is good enough.

Please tell us in which war was it somehow fought whereas the numbers of dead must be be more even? Should the U.S. during WWII purposely allow more of its own people to be killed so as to more even up the score with the Germans and Japanese?

You know, the North Africa field of operations in WWII was noted for how medics of both sides did not care whether their patients were of any specific nationality.

Before that, WWI had the Christians Truces (albeit under the furious disapproval of the brass).

Now we have regressed in the matter of armed conflict ethics to the point that a war that AFAIK isn't even officially declared is expected to accept claims that civilians were warned to leave the building so that the "good guys" may blast it with a clear conscience.

WWII was ethically questionable, at least since the embargo to Japan and definitely since Hiroshima. But the current situation is no better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

 

[LuisDantas]

to call both they and us as "monkeys" fighting over a "banana patch" is an insult to both peoples.

Warmongers from both sides have earned no better than to be insulted, though.

 

[LuisDantas]

The death toll isn't asymmetric is it, though?

Are you sure that you did not mean that is is asymmetric?

 

[Avi1001]

WWII was ethically questionable, at least since the embargo to Japan and definitely since Hiroshima. But the current situation is no better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

This is a critical point, and I am surprised it was not brought up earlier.

The Allies came together during WWII to save the Jews from genocide and annihilation....right ?

Was this really the case....or did the allies act in their own self interest, against Hitler's aggression ?

I learned recently, that as Hitler swept through Europe, more and more Europeans accepted his anti-Semitic views.

In any event, the US is a country with real diversity, and acceptance of minorities. So we are the ones that need to develop and deploy the model. But the model must not be one of gratuitous violence.

 

[Mycroft]

Are you sure that you did not mean that is is asymmetric?

Sorry, yes.

 

[metis]

Cause and effect have been addressed by Alceste, mainly by pointing out (albeit in another thread, not this one) that there is no evidence that Hamas is restraining the movements of civilians, while Israel has been observed doing so.

Israel can't deny that bombing civilian-inhabited places further fuels the hatred and keep the war alive.

And that is a good example of videogame mentality: thinking that keeping superior firepower and killing "only the unavoidable" number of civilians is good enough.

You know, the North Africa field of operations in WWII was noted for how medics of both sides did not care whether their patients were of any specific nationality.

Before that, WWI had the Christians Truces (albeit under the furious disapproval of the brass).

Now we have regressed in the matter of armed conflict ethics to the point that a war that AFAIK isn't even officially declared is expected to accept claims that civilians were warned to leave the building so that the "good guys" may blast it with a clear conscience.

WWII was ethically questionable, at least since the embargo to Japan and definitely since Hiroshima. But the current situation is no better.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

I have already addressed the above on this and some other threads, so I really don't have the time to go back through this again. You might check my response to Avi on one of these threads just a couple of minutes ago for a brief synopsis.

 

[metis]

Warmongers from both sides have earned no better than to be insulted, though.

And that solves which problem?

 

[metis]

The Allies came together during WWII to save the Jews from genocide and annihilation....right ?

Was this really the case....or did the allies act in their own self interest, against Hitler's aggression ?

Only the latter sentence is true.

 

[Flankerl]

Interesting.

Here's my take. The guys in the DIR are pretty extreme. Conservative, Conservadox and Orthodox. Essentially extremists. They drove me from the DIR.

Metis and I are the two reform, libs.

Oh no you poor thing.
No one drove you away from the DIR. You chose to leave the DIR and be all "iam so persecuted" about it.

And of course everyone but you is an extremist.

 

[Avi1001]

Oh no you poor thing.
No one drove you away from the DIR. You chose to leave the DIR and be all "iam so persecuted" about it.

And of course everyone but you is an extremist.

I'm glad to see you miss me.

Btw, leaving the DIR was a good thing for me...no more warnings, etc.

I stiil read the DIR stuff, and when I disagree, which is usually, I post to the Avi thread, so keep your eyes open for some posts to come soon on asymmetric warfare,

And yes, it is true, I am as much of an extremist as you and the guys in the DIR...but at least I am a pacifist, see ya, Flankie.

 

[LuisDantas]

And that solves which problem?

Perhaps none, since there is such a strong predisposition to see those only on the other side. But refusing to lend prestige to warmongers is a basic matter of decency.

 

[metis]

Perhaps none, since there is such a strong predisposition to see those only on the other side. But refusing to lend prestige to warmongers is a basic matter of decency.

And calling someone a "warmonger" just because they feel that a people have the right of self-defense accomplishes exactly what? I can't speak for others, but I want peace. But I also know we have to work for peace as it's not just going to fall into our laps, and there are various ways this may be accomplished, and I do prefer the more peaceful ones. After all, the people I have admired the most was Gandhi, King, Cesar Chavez, and Mandela.

BTW, I hope you're aware of the fact that dharma does not teach against the defense of the innocent even if that involves military action.