Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 96

Thread: Gaza, Israel & Rockets (merged thread)

  1. #41
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Thumbs up Good Stuff!

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    Awhile ago there was a thread on an Israeli documentary which interviewed a number of Mossad / Shin Beth directors. Today Der Spiegel has an interview with one of them:

    Link:http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-982094.html

    Hard assessments made, e.g.:
    Good find David!

  2. #42
    Council Member CrowBat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Haxbach, Schnurliland
    Posts
    1,563

    Default

    I find various posts here outright 'fascinating'.

    It started with one poster's explanation about him losing interest in this conflict because it will never end, and that it will never end because of American public opinion which the Palestinians are not trying to win. And, of course, on his commentary about Palestinians foolishly insisting on violence to confront Israel, and this because of their perceived grievances.

    Another poster then added that the conflict began in the 1940s; yet another poster (well-informed readers are not going to miss the backgrounds of the character in question) went on to explain that 'Arab marauders expelled from Jordan have no right to anything there'.

    Also 'fascinating' was the post about 'Moslem world going nowhere'....

    With this, 2-3 people here have explained it all - about US standpoints about this conflict, created by Israeli PR and religion-based prejudice, plus a big dose of Americans insisting on forgetting their own backgrounds and fundamental ideas, not to talk about their own involvement in this conflict and promises they made.

    Accordingly: 'There is no logic in this conflict; Palestinians have been created by the Israelis, who have found "a country without a people for a people without a country"); Palestinian Arabs (and Arabs in general) know - and understand - only violence, they have never tried it with peace' and this is giving Israel 'all rights' to continue doing what it is doing since 1947 etc., etc., etc.

    Anybody here who has ever heard anything about establishment of the American University of Beirut? MacMahon Correspondence? Arab Revolts of the early 20th Century? Balfour Declaration? King-Crane Commission? Kingdom of Syria? San Remo Conference? Line in the Sand...and so many similar affairs from the 1910s and 1920s?

    Has any of you at least a trace of clue why Herzl created the myth about Palestine as a 'wasteland'?

    Any clue why could anything of above-mentioned be 'important' in the context of this conflict?

    Perhaps it would be good for few people to inform themselves about such affairs - and do so even before going into discussions about Ahkenazi Jews; Zionism; Jewish terrorism in Palestine of the 1930s and promise of establishing Israel in military and economic hegemony over the Middle East (issued to US representatives already in 1947); ethnic cleansing of Arabs (whether Moslems or Christians) from Palestine; about Unit 101 and Qibya; about Lavon Affair; the Water War; the 1956 Suez War; the June 1967 War and the war in Jordan of 1970 (both resulted in yet more ethnic cleansing);
    Sadat's peace offer from 1971 and the October 1973 War; dismemberment of Lebanon...etc., etc., etc... indeed, about various truces with people supposedly not existing...

    Note: and that's something like 'required' long before one would enter discussion over the topics like 'Moslem world going nowhere'...

    Bottom line: ever since Truman was afraid he would lose elections, the situation for American politicians became quite simple. Express unlimited sympathies, support Israel regardless the cost, and you'll get Jewish votes. And so, no matter how 'irrelevant', indeed 'uninteresting' the Arab-Israeli conflict might be for Americans, its future is directly related to US elections - and US-taxpayer's money.

    Don't like it? Well, most of Israelis and their supporters abroad (in the USA and elsewhere) don't like all of this either.

    Perhaps that's the reason you don't know about all of these affairs?

  3. #43
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,109

    Default Israeli opinion

    Israeli attitudes to IDF use of force in Gaza. Tweeted by Rex Brynen, from:http://www.peaceindex.org/indexMonth...6#.U9fQfaORcdW

    davidbfpo

  4. #44
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,109

    Default Gaza Tunnels: How They Work, What Israel Knew

    A blogger has translated an Israeli press report, which helps to explain the situation:http://blogs.forward.com/jj
    davidbfpo

  5. #45
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,109

    Default Gaza and the Lonely Death of Just War Theory

    A Kiwi academic blogged on the issues. He starts with:
    Just war comes in various forms, but at its core it is based on seven key principles. These principles state that in order for a war to be just,
    1. The war must be fought for a just cause.
    2. The war must be declared by a lawful authority.
    3. It must be fought for a right intention.
    4. It must be a last resort after peaceful alternatives have been tried.
    5. It must have a reasonable chance of success to avoid prolonging suffering.
    6. The force used must be proportionate.
    7. Innocent civilians should not be harmed.
    In short, wars should be fought only for a just or legitimate cause, and the war itself must be conducted in a just manner. The argument is that in order for a war to be considered just (or legitimate), it should adhere to all of these seven principles.

    (Later) In sum, it is plainly obvious that this is far from a just war. It violates four of the seven principles of just war outright, and may also arguably violate the other three. The only reasonable assessment is that this in fact, a deeply unjust war, a disproportionate massacre of a largely defenceless people. It is exactly the kind of war of aggression that just war theory was designed to prevent or mitigate, and by engaging in it, Israel is behaving like a rogue state.
    Link:http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.w...st-war-theory/

    Painful reading for some I think.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 07-30-2014 at 12:20 PM.
    davidbfpo

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    This is merely an opinion piece and certainly not a definitive position.

    Not all academics are 'smart'.

    Israel is fighting a war of survival and seem to be making every effort to limit the collateral damage in keeping with the survival of the state of Israel... IMHO.

    It would be interesting to contrast the current Gaza offensive with that of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.


    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    A Kiwi academic blogged on the issues. He starts with:Link:http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.w...st-war-theory/

    Painful reading for some I think.

  7. #47
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA
    Israel is fighting a war of survival and seem to be making every effort to limit the collateral damage in keeping with the survival of the state of Israel... IMHO.
    It's absurd to make the argument that Israel is fighting a "war of survival" when 5% of the casualties are Israeli contrasted with the estimate that of the remaining 95%, 70-80% are estimated to be civilians.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  8. #48
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,109

    Default A 'war of survival' for who?

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Israel is fighting a war of survival and seem to be making every effort to limit the collateral damage in keeping with the survival of the state of Israel... IMHO..
    This is not a 'war of survival' for Israel; rockets, mortar bombs and raiding from Gaza have occurred for many years. The current episode is no different. Yes the attacks, especially the rockets, can be lethal for unlucky Israelis not in a shelter - which is amply shown in the deaths to date:
    ...two Israeli civilians and a Thai national killed by Hamas rockets fired from Gaza.
    The bigger impact on Israel is the losses to the IDF:
    ... 53 members of the Israel Defense Forces have died..
    Alongside the mobilization of IDF reservists, the BBC cites 65,000.

    In 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead Israeli losses were: 9 (IDF 6) and in the November 2012 Operation Pillar of Defense losses were: 6 (IDF 4).

    All quotes, map and figures are found here:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28252155

    Leaving Palestinian deaths aside you can make a far more plausible argument that Gaza is facing 'national survival' as Israel's bombardment destroys buildings, alongside the extension of the imposed three kilometre "buffer" zone, further concentrating the population. Destroying the only electricity generation plant in Gaza will have an effect, although some power comes from Israel.
    davidbfpo

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    This is not a 'war of survival' for Israel; ...
    OK you also miss the point, let me help you.

    This is just the latest battle in Israel's 'war of survival'

    Here is a short article to give you a short historical idea of what Israel has faced ...

    Israel is fighting for survival

    The war started in 1948 and has continued battle after battle, with this being the latest.

    I quote from the article:

    The wayward Hamas rocket, so idiotically trivialized by Israel’s critics, doesn’t have to kill anyone to take a toll. People will seek safety as surely as water seeks its own level.
    You would have noticed that even here some fail to see the simple truth in this quote. I have asked before whether these people who support the media line are just not as smart as they think they are or are they actively plugging the leftist line.

    Israel is the legal creation of the United Nations. It has an absolute right not merely to exist but to do so safe from rockets or incursions by tunneling terrorists.
    Tell me I am wrong.

  10. #50
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    You're really going to cite a column by Richard Cohen as your source? The same Cohen who is repulsed by mixed-race couples and thinks it's perfectly acceptable to shoot black youth because well, they're black... Oh wait - now your citation makes sense.:
    Citations please.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  11. #51
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
    This is not a 'war of survival' for Israel; rockets, mortar bombs and raiding from Gaza have occurred for many years. The current episode is no different. Yes the attacks, especially the rockets, can be lethal for unlucky Israelis not in a shelter - which is amply shown in the deaths to date:
    Not a war of survival, but as JMA says perhaps a battle in the war for survival. I don't see how Israel can not respond to the rockets.

    Let me make it clear that my personal opinion is that overall Israel is conducting its war for survival so poorly as to insure its ultimate demise.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  12. #52
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    carl,

    No problem. Here is Cohen on 15 July 2013 explaining the Trayvon Martin murder:

    There’s no doubt in my mind that Zimmerman profiled Martin and, braced by a gun, set off in quest of heroism. The result was a quintessentially American tragedy — the death of a young man understandably suspected because he was black and tragically dead for the same reason.
    Bold is mine.

    Here is Cohen a few months casually revealing his disgust for mixed race couples since, you know, it's a "conventional view":

    People with conventional views must repress a gag reflex when considering the mayor-elect of New York — a white man married to a black woman and with two biracial children.
    Back to Israel: of course the state has the right to respond to rocket attacks. Is it essential or necessary for that response to result in 70-80% civilian casualties, to result in the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure, or the forcible removal of large segments of the population from their homes?
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  13. #53
    Council Member Firn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,297

    Default

    A terrific infomap by Haaretz, published on the 27th. Since then the casualities have of course gone up.

    ... "We need officers capable of following systematically the path of logical argument to its conclusion, with disciplined intellect, strong in character and nerve to execute what the intellect dictates"

    General Ludwig Beck (1880-1944);
    Speech at the Kriegsakademie, 1935

  14. #54
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,109

    Default Moderator adds

    Israel -v- Palestine is always a heated SWC topic and a number of posts here reflect that. Personal invective has appeared which detracts from the discussion.

    SWC enjoys debate. In a moment I will review the posts again and seven posts were deleted.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 08-01-2014 at 12:56 PM.
    davidbfpo

  15. #55
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    Here is Cohen a few months casually revealing his disgust for mixed race couples since, you know, it's a "conventional view":
    This is the entire paragraph from which your Cohen quote cited above is taken.

    "Today’s GOP is not racist, as Harry Belafonte alleged about the tea party, but it is deeply troubled — about the expansion of government, about immigration, about secularism, about the mainstreaming of what used to be the avant-garde. People with conventional views must repress a gag reflex when considering the mayor-elect of New York — a white man married to a black woman and with two biracial children. (Should I mention that Bill de Blasio’s wife, Chirlane McCray, used to be a lesbian?) This family represents the cultural changes that have enveloped parts — but not all — of America. To cultural conservatives, this doesn’t look like their country at all."

    I think it apparent that the opinion you said Cohen had, is not his at all. It is his view of other's opinion.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  16. #56
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    No problem. Here is Cohen on 15 July 2013 explaining the Trayvon Martin murder:

    Bold is mine.
    Here is the first sentence from the Cohen article you quoted.

    "I don’t like what George Zimmerman did, and I hate that Trayvon Martin is dead."

    Mr. Cohen made a fairly complicated point in this article that cannot be boiled down to one sentence, neither yours nor mine.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  17. #57
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Carl,

    We can agree to disagree, and that's fine. Anyway - in the same thread that JMA dismissed one of David's posts because the linked article was an "opinon" and that "not all academics are 'smart'", he cites a column by Richard Cohen, who is not even a professional researcher and as a career reporter has his own share of controversial opinions. Whatever his views, I'm just not a fan of double standards.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  18. #58
    Council Member CrowBat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Haxbach, Schnurliland
    Posts
    1,563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    ...Israel is fighting a war of survival...
    This is not only absurd, but the same as if you would have said that Aparthaid was fighting a 'war of survival', back in the 1980s.

    Israel didn't fight 'for survival' even back in 1947, when Jewish militants launched ethnic cleansing of 700.000+ Arabs from the (still) British-controlled Palestine, in turn provoking counterattack ('invasion') by Arab neighbours, in May 1948.

    Even less so nowadays - when Israel's existence is as safe as its nukes.

    The ongoing 'battle' is an armed conflict between two parties (Israel and Palestinian militants) insisting on impressing their conditions on the other party.

    Israel's aim is to force Palestinians into complete submission. They should not arm themselves, not defend themselves, but actually disarm themselves and agree to a cease-fire, which Israel is then going to continue breaching through repeated 'targeted killings' of selected Palestinian leaders. The Palestinians should not vote for parties that have military wings either, and preferrably be so friendly to ethnically cleanse themselves from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip too.

    From that standpoint, it doesn't matter that it wasn't Hamas that hijacked three Israeli teenagers, or that it's the PIJ that's shooting most of rockets on Israel. 'Hamas' is to blame, because - as an organization declared 'terrorist' in Israel and the USA - it's an opportune target.

    Aim of Palestinian militants (foremost Hamas and the PIJ) is rather simple: lifting of the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. In exchange, they have offered a 10-years cease-fire.

    Israel turned this offer down because for reasons mentioned above.

    So, since every armed conflict is an extension of politics, you have two parties attempting to force the other to accept all of their conditions, without any exceptions. Major difference (in comparison to earlier times) this time is: after all of earlier experiences, Hamas is not ready anymore to make any kind of concessions.

  19. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrowBat View Post
    This is not only absurd, but the same as if you would have said that Aparthaid was fighting a 'war of survival', back in the 1980s.
    Come on CrowBat you are smarter than that.

    By 1945 Nazi Germany - the Third Reich - was fighting for its very survival. The Apartheid regime was indeed fighting for its survival back then.

    Just so is the state of Israel fighting for its very survival right now on a continuing basis battle by battle.

  20. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    Carl,

    We can agree to disagree, and that's fine. Anyway - in the same thread that JMA dismissed one of David's posts because the linked article was an "opinon" and that "not all academics are 'smart'", he cites a column by Richard Cohen, who is not even a professional researcher and as a career reporter has his own share of controversial opinions. Whatever his views, I'm just not a fan of double standards.
    David's calling Richard Jackson an 'academic' was a mis-characterisation. To understand where Richard Jackson is coming from one needs to note that he describes himself as a pacifist and a Christian. Given the former he is sure to list as many conditions as he can to render a 'just war' impossible and given the latter he presents his case in a sanctimonious and holier-than-thou manner.

    So David should have introduced this person's article as follows: "here is the opinion of an obscure Christian pacifist living in New Zealand, for what that's worth".

Similar Threads

  1. OSINT: "Brown Moses" & Bellingcat (merged thread)
    By davidbfpo in forum Intelligence
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 2 Weeks Ago, 09:11 AM
  2. Assessing Al-Qaeda (merged thread)
    By SWJED in forum Global Issues & Threats
    Replies: 284
    Last Post: 12-24-2018, 01:11 AM
  3. Hamas in Gaza (merged thread)
    By SWJED in forum Middle East
    Replies: 274
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 10:20 AM
  4. Replies: 69
    Last Post: 05-23-2012, 11:51 AM
  5. Replies: 534
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 01:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •