- This topic has 301 replies, 42 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Cav
That is it in a nutshell. Not one of the pathetic left on here have offered a single alternative other than to take Dairy of Anne frank off the TV so as not to upset islamists
paulostermeyer wrote:
Apologies if you have the impression I am talking down to you, that certainly was not my intention.No worries, Paul – I didn’t think you were, but thought I’d get clarification!
No reason whjy you shouldnt Paul. He doesnt know what hes talking about
, and most people who have studied 20th Century history, can understand the economic, social and ultimately policitcal reasons that brought about first the persecution of the Jews in Europe and then their extermination. That doesn’t mean I condone it.
Am i reading this right?
This is a good summary of Hamas’s role
Cav, in a previous post, you suggested that Arafat appreciated the gravity of his mistake when dismissing the agreement you describe, but when asked if the package could be resurrected, Israel said no. I take it on trust that this situation was exactly as you have described it.
Presumably therefore, Israel would be prepared to negotiate once more, given the right conditions, and the right negotiating partner, as they view this as in their best interests?
I concede that Hamas cannot be considered an appropriate negotiating partner whilst they refuse to accept Israel’s right to exist, but the current incursion into Gaza is hardly likely to encourage Palestinians that peace is what Israel is after.
You ask "What is Israel to do?". The answer depends entirely on their motivations.
If they are motivated to secure a lasting peace, then their current actions appear completely contrary to such an outcome. If their motivation is to crush Hamas, their current actions seem more likely to encourage recruitment to that organisation in the long term.
The action in Gaza is short-sighted on a number of fronts, imo. It is completely tactical (again, it’s my belief that the upcoming elections play a part in this), and does not pay any heed to the more strategic aims of the Israeli State – which are presumably to build a lasting peace with the Palestinians.
I acknowledge that focusing on the strategic over the tactical will not stop Hamas from launching rockets into Israel. But then again, this incursion – no matter how long it goes on for – is unlikely to achieve that either.
Your experiences of vistiing Israel notwithstanding, are you able to condemn the behaviour of the IDF in respect of their specific treatment of the dead mothers, starving children and IRC?
Taken at face value it is to be condemned, unquestionably.
However neither of us is privy to the reason why it happened, one can only assume the commander had what he considered to be sound reasons for making the decision.
I would also venture to suggest he really would need a sound reason because your average Israeli in the street would be equally appalled at those scenes.
Gaza was opened in November 2005 with free and unhindered movement for its population into and out of its territory. The border was patrolled by the Palestinians who were allowed full veto on movement, monitored on the ground by the EU with live TV surveillance sent to a remotely located Israel. This despite the resumption of Hamas rocket attacks just 2 weeks after Israel left the Gaza Strip to the Ghazans in September 2005.
They were forced to close it again in June 2006 following an unprecedented build up of arms by Hamas. The 6000 Palestinians stranded on the ¨wrong side¨ when the border was closed were left to die in the streets by their Egyptian ¨brothers¨.
No reason whjy you shouldnt Paul. He doesnt know what hes talking about
Clivex, just because you are unable to understand the depth of my arguments, doesn’t mean that I don’t know what I’m talking about. It only means that you don’t know what I’m taking about.
I concede that Hamas cannot be considered an appropriate negotiating partner whilst they refuse to accept Israel’s right to exist,
Even more fundamentally who would you actually negotiate with?
, and most people who have studied 20th Century history, can understand the economic, social and ultimately policitcal reasons that brought about first the persecution of the Jews in Europe and then their extermination. That doesn’t mean I condone it.
Am i reading this right?
I’m with Clivex on this one.
The only thing that brought about the persecution of the Jews in the 20th century was unbridled xenophobia. There was never any justification for it, and it was in no way "understandable" – whether you condone it or not.
I acknowledge that focusing on the strategic over the tactical will not stop Hamas from launching rockets into Israel. But then again, this incursion – no matter how long it goes on for – is unlikely to achieve that either.
Why not? I suppose in the second world war we shouldnt have fought the battle of britain because "it wont stop them you know"
So back to the original question. What should they do about the rocket attacks?
It is by no means a certainty that this will be a recuiter for Hamas. Unless Palestinians are simpletons who simply perceive every event in a knee jerk manner, they will be well aware that the continued aggression from Hamas, at the very least, invited the attacks. Its not as if Hamas were overwhelmingly popular there anyway (especially given their immediate post election behavior during which more plaestinains were probably excuted than we have seen in the last week) and the tradition of islamism in Palsetine is weak
As the article i posted above correctly points out, Hamas and Hezbollah are idealogically driven organisations that put their greater aims (destruction of israel, etc etc) above immediate any Palestinian concern.
, and most people who have studied 20th Century history, can understand the economic, social and ultimately policitcal reasons that brought about first the persecution of the Jews in Europe and then their extermination. That doesn’t mean I condone it.
Am i reading this right?
I’m with Clivex on this one.
The only thing that brought about the persecution of the Jews in the 20th century was unbridled xenophobia. There was never any justification for it, and it was in no way "understandable" – whether you condone it or not.
I would suggest that Firefox visits Yad Vashem in Jerusalem.
Indeed I would suggest that every world leader should visit it as soon as they take office – if they want to see the absolute depths of man’s inhumanity to man there is no better place. It took me two visits to get round it all – I just couldn’t take the emotional hit in a single visit – I have never, ever, cried so much in my life.
The only thing that brought about the persecution of the Jews in the 20th century was unbridled xenophobia. There was never any justification for it, and it was in no way "understandable" – whether you condone it or not.
Wrong!
Its racism not xenophobia. There was no jewish nation
Pedant for the day
I find the use of the word "understandable" within that post very sinister. Suggest you step back from that one Firefox
Firefox
You are all over the place
Firstly, past talks with Arafat and so on do not answer the immediate security question of what israel should do now about the rockets.
Again, no answer…
Secondly, if you feel that using certain tanks to stop the continued aggression is wrong perhaps Israel should simply launch 6000 missiles…. just to be even. .
As for the jewish question, I found the use of the word "understandable" very sinister.
Suggest you drop that point now
Why not? I suppose in the second world war we shouldnt have fought the battle of britain because "it wont stop them you know"
A strange analogy, clivex, and one that doesn’t fly at all, given the immeasurably greater strength of Israel’s military capability over that of the Palestinians.
So back to the original question. What should they do about the rocket attacks?
The truth? I don’t know. I just think that the current campaign hurts Israel’s strategic objectives, rather than helps them.
It is by no means a certainty that this will be a recuiter for Hamas.
I think history suggests otherwise, to be honest. Oppression (perceived or real) always begats those who will fight against it, whether they be Bolsheviks, French Resistance fighters, the ANC, Irish paramilitaries or any other example you might want to consider.
Thankfully, history also shows us that progress can be made in even the direst of conflicts, once people grow weary of the death and destruction that accompanies them. Some reports out of Gaza have indicated that a schism may be developing within Hamas; between those who want to serve the best interests of the Palestinian people, and those of a more fundamentalist "Destroy Israel" persuasion.
Perhaps the Gaza incursion has forced some level of introspection within that organisation, and it will ultimately be a defining moment in the road to peace?
Who knows? I’d be quite happy for my pessimism about the value of current operations to be proven entirely incorrect.
Paul, if we are to accept the current military action is an attempt to disarm and disable Hamas from firing rockets and mortars into Israel – and I have no reason to believe this is not the case.
I would suggest a more appropriate use of force would have been to annex the section of land on the Gaza/Egyptian Border. This action would allow the Israelis’ to systematically destroy the tunnels through which the rockets are currently being smuggled. In addition secure border crossing could be set up. As I understand it (reported on ITV News on Wednesday) the Israeli air-force has been dropping leaflets along the border warning anyone within 500 meters of the border to leave their homes. An assumption has been made that the Israelis’ intend to carpet bomb the area in order to destroy the tunnels – we shall wait to see whether this is true or not.
In the longer term the only solution is for the people of Gaza (themselves) to alienate Hamas (and their like). The only hope of achieving this is to provide them with the economic conditions whereby a prosperous peace is preferable to historic prejudices. The economics conditions should include obviously the basics – Food, Clean Water, Sanitation, Electricity, etc – but should also include Schools, Hospitals, Police Force, Fire Service – all the trappings of a Modern State (with the exception of a Standing Army).
Funding for the above would come from the International community in return for International Governance with a level of Palestine involvement.
Some reports out of Gaza have indicated that a schism may be developing within Hamas; between those who want to serve the best interests of the Palestinian people, and those of a more fundamentalist "Destroy Israel" persuasion.
I would suggest that this has been evident from the start and possible a motivation behind the current action
Hamas’s rhetoric in the past has vered all over the place form those who would near enough recognise Israel to those that wish to see a racial genocide.
Also, there has been a clear lack of leadership from hamas ….at least in the media communications
As for the recruiting, you could also argue that populations become sick of war and conflict and in time question what purpose it serves. Ie what do the rockets into southern israel acheive other than more of the same? That is perhaps how the sentiment in UIster developed
Firefox…The arguments used by the nazis were purely racial. The illegal immigrants issue is socio econonmic. The Jews in germany were german citizens. I find nothing to "Understand" about demonising a racial grouping. It suggests that there is unified way in which the jews behaved or acted. That is pure undiluted racism. I can perfectly understand why excessive immigration, from all races, is seen as a problem
Paul, if we are to accept the current military action is an attempt to disarm and disable Hamas from firing rockets and mortars into Israel – and I have no reason to believe this is not the case.
I would suggest a more appropriate use of force would have been to annex the section of land on the Gaza/Egyptian Border. This action would allow the Israelis’ to systematically destroy the tunnels through which the rockets are currently being smuggled. In addition secure border crossing could be set up. As I understand it (reported on ITV News on Wednesday) the Israeli air-force has been dropping leaflets along the border warning anyone within 500 meters of the border to leave their homes. An assumption has been made that the Israelis’ intend to carpet bomb the area in order to destroy the tunnels – we shall wait to see whether this is true or not.
In the longer term the only solution is for the people of Gaza (themselves) to alienate Hamas (and their like). The only hope of achieving this is to provide them with the economic conditions whereby a prosperous peace is preferable to historic prejudices. The economics conditions should include obviously the basics – Food, Clean Water, Sanitation, Electricity, etc – but should also include Schools, Hospitals, Police Force, Fire Service – all the trappings of a Modern State (with the exception of a Standing Army).
Funding for the above would come from the International community in return for International Governance with a level of Palestine involvement.
I hope you are sitting down but – I’m not going to argue with you on any of that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.