Israel/Palestine

...
an Israeli bombardment killed at least 34 people, many of them children, near a UN school.

Hundreds of Palestinians had sought safety at the school after fleeing from a refugee camp in the face of Israeli advances.

It was the second deadly attack near a UN school in hours, and the worst since Israel sent ground forces into Gaza last weekend.
Click to expand...

UN officials say they provided their location co-ordinates to Israel’s army to ensure that their buildings in Gaza were not targeted.
Click to expand...
 
No one is happy with the casulties and israel will have to be extremely careful from now on. On the other hand, there is no reason at all why they should stop trying to eradicate the militant wing (if it is just a wing) of Hamas


What is certain is that Hamas is using the hezbollah tactic of ensuring that civilian institutions become targets

And Hamas has shown its true colours This is a race war . Not that that would be unappealing to some of those that "protested" and led the protests on Sunday anyway

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5454204.ece

Not reported on the BBc of course. Bowen wouldnt allow that would he?
 
Who said the following?

“If somebody was sending rockets into my house, where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that.”

“In terms of negotiations with Hamas, it is very hard to negotiate with a group that is not representative of a nation-state, does not recognise your right to exist, has consistently used terror as a weapon and is deeply influenced by other countries.”
 
clivex said:
Who said the following?

“If somebody was sending rockets into my house, where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that.”
Click to expand...

Dunno.

Could have been Benjamin Netanyahu. Could have been Abu Ubaida. And both would have a point.

I suspect it was probably Barak Obama though.
 
...which will disappoint a lot of people wont it? And he said it in southern israel..

As much as his supposed "slience" has now (not remembering his vow not to get involved whilst bush is still in place...and quite right too)
 
Maybe it will disappoint some, clivex, but Obama has never been anti-Israeli, regardless of how he was painted in the States pre-election.

Indeed, I'd go so far as to suggest that it's those who suggested he was anti-Israeli, or somehow a 'soft leftie' on the subject of the Middle East, who will be most disappointed in his comments - given they clearly called him completely wrong.

I can't quite recall who such types might be - any ideas? :p
 
I'd go as far to say that the people that have been left most dissapointed by Obama since November 2 has been the liberal faction of the Democratic party actually.
 
Not me...Not after i heard his speech in the early summer anyway

I sense that Obama is a realist more interested in the here and now than dwelling on past grievances. his tone willbe to move forward. The here and now of course is that Hamas attacks have to be stopped before any progress can be made.

He certainly wont be carying ken livingstone or richard Pearl style baggage thats for sure....
 
I'd go as far to say that the people that have been left most dissapointed by Obama since November 2 has been the liberal faction of the Democratic party actually.
Click to expand...

Very true judging by what i know about some of his appointments
 
Try and stay out of arguments like this on the internet as they're very complex and arguments get misunderstood and out of hand very easily. That said, Israel should have done a fantasic job of radicalising a few more people over this last fortnight.
 
I wouldn't have thought Obama is going to be significantly different on the middle east than his predecessors. To no small extent the tail wags dog where Israel is concerned and its never really clear just who needs the support of who the most. The influence of the Jewish lobby in American politics is well documented and I'd be surprised if Obama was daft enough to risk alienating the group. He might not like it as much as some of the other Presidents, but sometimes pragmatism has to come before principle.

On a slightly different tack I was moderately horrified to hear the IDF's spokesperson tonight defending their decision to attack this school. It just didn't seem to register with her that even if there was the odd mortar being fired from it (which is of course denied and impossible to prove either way) it just wasn't acceptable to do what they did. An army normally operates under rules of engagement but it must be clear to the world by now that Israel is using a different rule book. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it was the mindset that came across. It's as if she was saying it didn't matter how many children they killed because it was Hamas's fault. Well I'm afraid it does. They could easily have withdrawn, surrounded the school, stormed it, used snipers all sorts of possibilities. Insterad they went blundering in with a Merkava 3 it appears, and really don't seem to understand that this would be viewed badly aroudn the world. I think he just highlighted that there was a total lack of regard for civilians, and it was if they seemed genuinely oblivious to what they'd done. There was no sense of regret or doubt, she came across as if she really didn't care.

Own goal
 
United Nations representatives on the ground have confirmed that no militants infiltrated the school. They have also confirmed that the Israelis are kept informed of the exact co-ordinates of UN buildings.

Three other Palestinian civilians where killed at another UN Facility in area where there was no fighting.

During the last war in the Lebanon a bunker buster bomb was sent into a UN underground bunker killing all UN observers inside.

A UN observer was shot in the back by an Israeli sniper and paralysed having resurfaced after days from a UN observation point bunker in an attempt to re-start a generator necessary for life under ground.
 
On a slightly different tack I was moderately horrified to hear the IDF's spokesperson tonight defending their decision to attack this school
Click to expand...

No doubt you were also "moderately horrified" to hear Hamas's constant defence of its attacks on civilians too
 
Come on, Clive, the situation has become grotesque. Even you must recognise there are limits. How many more people are you prepared to see die?
 
Sheikh said:
United Nations representatives on the ground have confirmed that no militants infiltrated the school. They have also confirmed that the Israelis are kept informed of the exact co-ordinates of UN buildings.

.
Click to expand...

Thats sounds very unlikely to be true
sounds like a Jimmy Carter or Koffi Annan special report
 
Not one more person, other than Hamas leaders who initiate the attacks. (the israelis struck an excellent blow early on). But what would be "grotesque" would a nation state allowing an enemy to continually attack its civilians by launching rockets on its cities.

How many more times does the simple fact, that surely even a five year old would understand, that no responsible state anywhere in the world would tolerate this, have to be explained?

And obviously if Hamas were concerned about their civlians they would not be copying the Hezbollah tactics

This is simple logic

So the war must continue until that is resolved.

Four pages into this thread and not one suggestion from any of the islamist supporting hand wringing left as to how else these attacks can be stopped

Absolutely useless...
 
You might recall a phrase the UK government once used about Northern Ireland, when it referred to an 'acceptable level of violence'. It recognised that it could not defeat terrorism. The violence finally stopped when both sides recognised victory was impossible and they would have to negotiate.

Like it or not, Israel will one day have to do the same with Hamas.
 
The violence was stopped in NI once the population became sick of the terrorists and also following strong intelligence success against the IRA. Also the IRA had to step far away from its supposed original aims. As vile as they were, their ultimate aims were nothing like the same as Hamas's

Hamas will not be negotiating with Israel until it recognises the state of Israel and drops its genocidal beliefs.

The idea that you can senisbly negotiate with those that believe that you have no right to exist either as a citizen or as a person is laughable. Its impoosible to imagine where common ground could even start

There can be negotitions on short term solutions but the longer term is more or less out of the question at the present time

Hamas requires new leadership to progress.
 
clivex said:
No doubt you were also "moderately horrified" to hear Hamas's constant defence of its attacks on civilians too
Click to expand...

I was their seeming inability to accept any responsibility for their actions and the tacit way they seemed to be saying well its alright it's only Palestinians.

Let me give you an example. If they were aware that this was a UN building with civilian children inside (possibly being held as shields) they could easily have chosen to deal with it as a hostage situation. If there were Israeli's inside do you really think they'd have driven a tank through and fired 3 indiscriminate shells to kill the hijackers/ hostage takers? Of course they wouldn't and neither have they in the past. They'd have used a commando type special forces raid. I think its fair to say that they calculated that the use of armour was a low risk option with acceptable collateral. There seemed to be absolutely no sense of regret to the spokespersons words and it was as if she'd started to believe her own propoganda (which is always dangerous). She just didn't seem to be able to realise that killing 30 people was wrong. She was pretty well saying it was fine to do so, and then using that handwashing piece of selective culpability which abrogate sher of responsibility by attaching blame elsewhere. In many respects it's not a million miles removed from the way a radical Islamist can say its Allahs will, and simply detach themselves from any responsibility. I'm still struggling to put my finger on it.

Firing tanks at schoolchildren isn't war. Alright wars have always been messy and they use real weapons and people get killed. It's always been so and always will be. But this was a close quarter thing (not a high altitude carpet bomb) and pretty well avoidable which involved a calculated decision. It might not be of My Lai proportions but its inching nearer.

As regards not offering any solutions? Well this might surprise you Clive, but I'm far from convinced I've got one, anymore than I am that one exists. Controlled hostility might be as good as it gets, but bear in mind that the Israeli's have killed as many of their own soldiers to date as Hamas seen to have. I think the last scoreboard I saw was something like 659 versus 9. It stands to reason that Hamas aren't going to take the Israeli army in a conventional battlefield war for all sorts of reasons, so there has to be a chance that they'll succeed in widening this beyond Gaza.

The only saving grace I see in this is the apparent reluctance of other arab nations to join the clarion at this stage. Let's not forget that Hamas pose a threat to many other regimes in the region if they were allowed to expand and one suspects there's a few Sunni areas and leaders who aren't driven by a religious dogma, who might be quite happy to see the two bogged down in a battle
 
Hamas will not be negotiating with Israel until it recognises the state of Israel and drops its genocidal beliefs.
Click to expand...

I think that is true. And Israel is going to have to recognise that Palestinian lives are worth the same as its own citizens'.
 
clivex said:
As vile as they were, their ultimate aims were nothing like the same as Hamas's
Click to expand...

Really? As far as I am aware, Clive, the motive of both groups is/was to regain territory that was forcibly taken away from them.

That said, comparisons of the two conflicts amount to nothing for me.

The notion of destroying Hamas is ridiculous - Israel have all but admitted as much. They have reverted to the notion that they will continue their offensive until rockets are no longer fired into Israel, which is equally as ridiculous.

Whilst of course they have a right to defend themselves, they seem to not want to realize that they are playing directly into the hands of Hamas (and thus damaging their ultimate objective of its destruction) by wantonly bombing schools and hospitals, which essentially amounts to a Hamas PR mans dream!

EDIT: the daily three hour cease-fire that has apparently been agreed is a positive sign BTW.
 
Whoa! Does one have to have a solution to recognise a problem?

My understanding is that in line with the Oslo Accord there was a ceasefire.But this righteous nation, that in its very creation thought that 'freedom fighters' were entitled to hang British soldiers in the street and follow other tactics that they now term terrorist when employed against them, decided that the elected body chosen in Gaza to represent Gaza was a legitimate target for murder. Hitting the leadership presumably they wished to destroy those who were not prepared to compromise with them.

That is not a ceasefire in any definition and thus the rockets began again. Hardly surprising, eh.
 
Back
Top