Israeli

[Funkycoldribena]

league67 said:

You are criticizing someone's choice of videos? You?

I'll get back to you in a minute Im just looking up some Miranda Hart videos on the subject.

[anonymous-user]

Jimbeaux said:

Have we not all gotten past the bit about believing the Palestinians living in peace has anything to do with Hamas? Really? Please.

Peace for the Palestinians is most definitely reliant on what Hamas and the Israeli government do and don't do.

[skyrover]

league67 said:

skyrover said:

If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.

The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.

Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq

I know, those pesky Palestinians should be grateful. It's only like thousand+ of them died. Pfft, in great scheme of things; nothing.

Edited by league67 on Wednesday 30th July 21:12

I was responding to the assertion that the Israeli's are ignorant of collateral damage, while pointing out the death toll could have been much much higher.

I'm not agreeing with Israeli actions, merely highlighting that it's quite clear these are targeted strikes as opposed to indiscriminate carpet bombing.

Edited by skyrover on Wednesday 30th July 21:29

[Jimbeaux]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

My point being (and you know it) was that peace between Israel and the PA will not deter Hamas, as their goal is not such but the eradication of Israel. We are way past this.

[league67]

jonby said:

I'm genuinely not quite sure what you're getting at in the last sentence of your first paragraph regarding Hamas - I can see couple of interpretations of the question. I'll answer it as best I can - personally, I would not condemn Hamas any more or less than I do now if 20 schools in Israel were bombed that killed 1000s of children, let alone 1 school with 15 deaths. My personal interpretation of the Hamas launched rockets is that their primary aim is to draw return fire from Israel, their secondary aim to cause 'some damage' on an indiscriminatory basis and their third, if 'they are lucky', is that the odd target with a load of Israelis is hit causing a load of deaths.

So whatever happens, Hamas' fault. Right.

jonby said:

So whilst if the Hamas bombs caused more deaths it would be tragic (just as I find the deaths in Gaza tragic), it wouldn't make me more or less inclined to think Hamas are guilty of war crimes. Forgive me if I'm wrong but I'm interpreting the first bit of your second paragraph as suggesting that only SOME in Hamas are extremists ? That makes me smile, for all the wrong reasons. Hamas hide bombs in schools, fire them from hospitals, use the cement sent in for essential infrastructure to build tunnels, rape their citizens financially to the extent their leaders have become billionaires (the Arab press quote their wealth as being even higher than the western press reports) and IDF are the ones singled out for committing war crimes ?

Yes, you are quite right, it must be that Hamas was firing rocket from school with 3000 people in and hoping that UN staff there wouldn't notice.
As for 'raping their citizens financially', Palestinians seems to prefer that 'rape' to being killed by 'precision' targeted strikes.

jonby said:

I've deliberately left your most important question until last. Yes, of course there are instances I'd consider the IDF to have committed war crimes. I think it would be a struggle to find any war where both sides aren't guilty of them. I also think that post-war, when investigations are easier, lots of tragic mistakes are uncovered following most conflicts, from friendly fire to technical faults to incorrect information. To be clear that's not to say there aren't also straightforward war crimes in addition to mistakes, just that establishing which they are (if they are either) is pretty difficult right now


But in this instance, if it was established that the IDF had deliberately targeted a school, knowing civilians were there, with no suggestion of military personnel, military hardware, launch sites or tunnel entrances being present, but still sent a missile, that would IMO constitute a war crime. Actually, I almost don't care whether it's a war crime - I'd see it as plain wrong and would happily stand up and say 'not in my name' whether it was a crime or not

Right, so if Regev comes on television and says that ' the IDF had deliberately targeted a school, knowing civilians were there, with no suggestion of military personnel, military hardware, launch sites or tunnel entrances being present, but still sent a missile' that would be enough proof for you? Well, that does sound both reasonable and plausible. I can almost see it happening.

jonby said:

I'm assuming that IDF did send the bomb in question and the target was intentional though of course some news to the contrary may come out. On that basis, if IDF didn't believe it to have military significance, what exactly was their objective ? Killing for the sake of killing ? Really ? If it was, as I say I'd consider it a war crime but I simply don't see it as being their objective.

I do agree with you that IDF didn't kill those kids for the sake of killing them. Same as with power station, or television station. Or mosque. Collective punishment in order to influence behaviour. I do believe that IDF couldn't care less if there is 'collateral damage'.

jonby said:

I'd reiterate previous posts btw that I don't actually think Israel should be adopting the policy that it does as personally, I think Israel would be better off not responding to Hamas goading, continuing to use Iron Dome to defeat most rockets, having some more casualties but then having the world's media on it's side as a result of it's restraint and then hopefully, a US/UN backed effort to demilitarise Gaza would result. I fully understand why they are taking a different approach however

You have extremist in Knesset that want to 'wipe' Palestinians from the face of the earth. Unlike Hamas, Israel has the means of doing that. If someone like Kerry, is concerned with behaviour of IDF, that should ring alarm bells. I understand why it doesn't. After all it's very handy to have monopoly on suffering on constantly bleating on about defense.
On this very thread we had morons suggesting that Palestinians should just leave both Gaza and WB. Wouldn't that be nice.

In short; I don't believe that IDF's objective is to kill Palestinians for 'the sake of killing' them. I do believe that, contrary to Geneva convention, are punishing and killing people in order to influence behaviour. But then again, it's not like that Israel is concerned much by international law, is it?

[Mermaid]

Jimbeaux said:

My point being (and you know it) was that peace between Israel and the PA will not deter Hamas, as their goal is not such but the eradication of Israel. We are way past this.

So would the final solution include the eradication/subjugation of Hamas 1st, and then the West Bank incumbents as some (friendly to israel) suggest?

[Jimbeaux]

Mermaid said:

Jimbeaux said:

My point being (and you know it) was that peace between Israel and the PA will not deter Hamas, as their goal is not such but the eradication of Israel. We are way past this.

So would the final solution include the eradication/subjugation of Hamas 1st, and then the West Bank incumbents as some (friendly to israel) suggest?

"Final Solution"? Are you being mean there? Getting rid of Hamas or bypassing them and making a peace would be my solution. However, I am pretty certain that Hamas will not allow the PA to make any decisions for themselves.....that ship has sailed.

[league67]

skyrover said:

league67 said:

skyrover said:

If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.

The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.

Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq

I know, those pesky Palestinians should be grateful. It's only like thousand+ of them died. Pfft, in great scheme of things; nothing.

Edited by league67 on Wednesday 30th July 21:12

I was responding to the assertion that the Israeli's are ignorant of collateral damage, while pointing out the death toll could have been much much higher.

I'm not agreeing with Israeli actions, merely highlighting that it's quite clear these are targeted strikes as opposed to indiscriminate carpet bombing.

Edited by skyrover on Wednesday 30th July 21:29

They are indeed targeted. TV Station, mosque, hospital, school, power station. Drop leaflets for people to leave their homes. People do exactly that. People go to the shelter because they were told to do so, and if they don't obey they would die. So once in the shelter, you bomb shelter, and after that you proclaim that you did that because there were some rockets, that nobody can find, there.

As I said, Palestinians should be grateful that they are not carpet bombed.

[league67]

Funkycoldribena said:

I'll get back to you in a minute Im just looking up some Miranda Hart videos on the subject.

It'll probably be more objective than your usual choices. But it's not something that you are concerned with, is it?

[catso]

league67 said:

As I said, Palestinians should be grateful that they are not carpet bombed.

I imagine they'll take great comfort from that thought...

[Mermaid]

Jimbeaux said:

"Final Solution"? Are you being mean there? Getting rid of Hamas or bypassing them and making a peace would be my solution. However, I am pretty certain that Hamas will not allow the PA to make any decisions for themselves.....that ship has sailed.

Does sound like it but no historical context intended.

Hamas exist - they are not for anyone to dispense with like some French fries. Treat them like st and Israel will never win - guaranteed. And if they do win the battles, they will have lost the war even with their No 1 fan, as is becoming clear.

Hamas are part of the solution, not the problem as some see. If you lived in Gaza, what would be your thoughts?

Jaw, jaw, not war, war.

[Jimbeaux]

Mermaid said:

Jimbeaux said:

"Final Solution"? Are you being mean there? Getting rid of Hamas or bypassing them and making a peace would be my solution. However, I am pretty certain that Hamas will not allow the PA to make any decisions for themselves.....that ship has sailed.

Does sound like it but no historical context intended.

Hamas exist - they are not for anyone to dispense with like some French fries. Treat them like st and Israel will never win - guaranteed. And if they do win the battles, they will have lost the war even with their No 1 fan, as is becoming clear.

Hamas are part of the solution, not the problem as some see. If you lived in Gaza, what would be your thoughts?

Jaw, jaw, not war, war.

They cannot be a part of the solution if their stated goal is Israel's eradication. If it were to just gain peace for the Palestinians, maybe so, but that is not the case. I lean toward the other poster's idea of working with Fatah and marginalizing Hamas. That, however, will likely be difficult if Hamas maintains its weaponry.

[Stelvio1]

Palestine over 1000 dead, Israel less than a score dead - spin?, these are facts...

Tunnels? - they have an opening in Israel too? - seal 'em up in your land??

[VinceFox]

Watching report on news now from emergency room.

They've gone way, way too far.

[Mermaid]

Jimbeaux said:

They cannot be a part of the solution if their stated goal is Israel's eradication. If it were to just gain peace for the Palestinians, maybe so, but that is not the case. I lean toward the other poster's idea of working with Fatah and marginalizing Hamas. That, however, will likely be difficult if Hamas maintains its weaponry.

Israel wants to eradicate Hamas, and then work on Fatah. If Hamas had better weaponry, would Israel be more reasonable?

[skyrover]

Mermaid said:

Jimbeaux said:

They cannot be a part of the solution if their stated goal is Israel's eradication. If it were to just gain peace for the Palestinians, maybe so, but that is not the case. I lean toward the other poster's idea of working with Fatah and marginalizing Hamas. That, however, will likely be difficult if Hamas maintains its weaponry.

Israel wants to eradicate Hamas, and then work on Fatah. If Hamas had better weaponry, would Israel be more reasonable?

If Hamas had better weaponry, there would simply be more dead... neither side would be more "reasonable"

[Mermaid]

skyrover said:

If Hamas had better weaponry, there would simply be more dead... neither side would be more "reasonable"

Not many killed by NK, India, Pakistan recently.

Now if Russia/Saudi struck up a strategic alliance with Hamas...

[psgcarey]

Israel is not causing more deaths because they need the support of the west, particularly America. If America threatened to suspend the aid they give Israel they would withdraw.

Israel is pushing the boundaries to see how far they can go before international opinion turns too far against them.

Think of it like a toddler pushing the boundaries with its parents, to see how far it can go before it gets sent to the naughty step.

[RedTrident]

The tide in the UK has turned against Israel. YouGov poll has 62% believing Israel is committing war crimes. It's even beginning to turn in the US with a Pew Research Center poll showing that among 18 to 29-year old Americans, 29% blame Israel more for the current violence, while 21% blame Hamas.

Wonder how many sleeping child will be murdered whilst in their mother's arms tonight. Bizarrely, I don't think it'll be who began the conflict as the clear terrorists that will be responsible for the death of innocent women and children.

Israel are not going to beat Hamas by bombing them imo.

[otolith]

Hamas's strategy is going to plan.