Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Silas Vitalia]

So the Palestinians, the populace that is, are royally *effed.* 

Basically they're the cause Du-jour for the Arab World and the various leaders of those countries love that they provide a great distraction to point at and say "LOOK AT WHAT ZE JEWS ARE DOING TO OUR BROSEFS!"  Meanwhile the vast majority of them keep just as tight borders AGAINST the Palestinians because they don't want none of that mess.

Hamas, the PLO and the various other random groups of clowns essentially have a captive populace from which to recruit, extort and generally take advantage of.  They essentially don't want the situation to change and as such they only play at serious negotiations.

The Israelis would LOVE to have happy-fun Jew land and kick everyone else out but they do sort of realize that the Palestinians were there first, even if they did jack squat with the land and essentially initially welcomed the investment and attention as they were a backwater of the various Nations over there and rarely got any of the "pie" so to speak.  That being said, there is a burgeoning percentage of the Israelis who have said "enough is enough" and are starting to sound more and more like their own personal bogey-man Hitler with their talk of eliminating the problems and basically "settling" them out.  They keep building more and more settlements (Armed camps and excuses to bomb essentially) closer and closer to the already seriously overcrowded Palestinian lands.  Add to that the lock down of any and all opportunity, be it jobs, recreation or even a day without explosions and they are just feeding into the growth of Hamas and the other clowns.

The long and the short of it is...there IS no solution barring one side getting wiped out or a mass migration of (probably the Palestinians) into their own new turf...which would probably just set a repeat of what's going on now, only with someone "new" playing the role of abuser.

Interesting points Drakolus, especially about the other arab nations using the Palestinians as their raison d'etre for all sorts of shittery.

I know 'disproportionate response' is a hard subject, because militarily you want extreme effing prejudice with an opponent. you don't want a fair fight, you want to kill all of them and 0 of your own guys, preferably from a distance.   

Basically it's never, ever going to be solved militarily. 

The only legit way I see this ever moving forward is for the USA to threaten to cut the Israeli purse strings to force everyone back to the table, which would of course require a popular president at the end of his 8 year term not fearing re-election to spearhead.  Clinton almost got it done but Arafat blew that one in the end. 

The thing is only one side is being dehumanized in the media, and that's the poor brown side, who unfortunately does most of the dying and living in pretty crappy conditions.

[Louella Dougans]

Something like more than half of the population in the Gaza strip is reliant on UN food aid to exist.
More critical than food, is that the aquifers from which Gaza City draws water are going to be dry within a few years. Once they are dry, that's it. Gaza has to be evacuated. And if Gaza has to be evacuated, then those refugees will never be allowed to return.

And the Israelis know this. And so do the Gazans.

With this new thing of tunnels into Israel being discovered, then the Israelis will probably seek to extend the "buffer zone" at the edge of the Gaza Strip, which would mean demolishing and levelling all buildings, and probably installing listening posts to listen for tunnelling and digging.

And if that isn't all that effective, then in a few years, they'll extend the buffer zone further, pushing the Gazans into a smaller and smaller area, which will speed up the rate at which the water issue becomes critical.

The Israeli strategy seems to be, a constant level of violence, such that the world media and the world public become apathetic to it - Violence in Palestine becomes not-news, and so it continues until the water situation will put an end to it for good. While simply pushing all the Gazans into the sea at once would get international condemnation, this fairly low level of violence doesn't get anything like the same amount of criticism.

The fatigue of the media can be seen, when things like, I remember this being reported a year or so ago, but web traffic for people looking at pictures of Israeli female reservists posting selfies in uniform, in total, was of a size comparable to web traffic for news about what was happening on the ground. Like, for every 100GB of internet news about an Israeli ground offensive, there was like 20GB of pics of women in uniform.

[Vizage]

The only legit way I see this ever moving forward is for the USA to threaten to cut the Israeli purse strings to force everyone back to the table, which would of course require a popular president at the end of his 8 year term not fearing re-election to spearhead.  Clinton almost got it done but Arafat blew that one in the end. 

Just to provide some news; Senator Kerry has actually being putting a lot to pressure on both parties to get back to the table for much of his term. Below is an article from a prominent Israeli news source there are many other articles. I suggest taking a small peek.
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-news/1.605993

Also: Contrary to what been said so far, there is actually a greatly growing urge from the Israeli people to seek peace through talks and negotiation. As members of the Israeli government, while not dominating power blocs but large enough forces have assembled to basically force this issue.

The current Minister of Finance is a great example of this. Yair Lapid, he has on multiple occasions now threatened to "shut down" the Israeli government if the Prime Minister refused to sit down for talks with the PLO. A proponent of the Two-State solution Yair is just one of many Israeli's who are looking to put this conflict behind them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yair_Lapid

This conflict is an extremely complex, if not the most complex one going on to date. I would HIGHLY recommend people avoid talking in absolutes about it as it would very likely make you wrong. There is very little simple about this conflict, and a lot has happened since its inception.

[Lyn Farel]

That conflict is mostly the tip of the iceberg anyway. The real conflict is a lot about water and natural resources, and that, nobody never speaks about it.

Also, the real ennmy of the Hamas is not Israel. Israel is just the cultural and religious scarecrow oppressor, but the real ennemy is the Palestinian governement that even with its feeble authority (especially since the death of Arafat), is a major pain in their ass since it doesn't follow the same agenda at all, and represents a direct threat to hamas legitimacy over palestinian populations.

Interesting fact also : Cisjordanian population were very few to manifest their support to the hamas, where the region is mostly ruled by the fatah party, which is closer to the palestinian governement and doesn't call for the same warmongering actions. It's a very regional conflict between the hamas/gaza and Israel, where ofc the hamas is supported by some other arabic countries and despised by others.

...I'll start off the conversation with my view that the Western media seems woefully uninterested in taking an even-handed approach to the conflict.

I don't have access to television or print media, but from what I have read on news aggregators and the like, there have been a number of cases where MSM journalists have been handed 'involuntary vacations' or 'surpise reassignments' for editorial comments which paint Israelis (both citizens and IDF) in an unflattering light. The suspicion is of course that these are punitive measures designed to have a chilling effect on other western reporters.

So the fear is probably anti-defamation lawsuits, as there is a well-heeled lobby dedicated to spinning public support for western military supremacy in the region, and their hawkishness tends to spill over into their civil affairs.

May depend where you live.

Medias are not very soft with Israel in Europe. Especially the German and French governments that never really liked Israel. The German one for historical reasons as well as just "I can't bear the other one", especially after military deals that got... mhh, how to say it... pear shaped (cf german submarines sold to Israel, or stolen depending on the source). The French one for deep diplomatic relations with Palestine, and especially Lebanon.

Which is also telling that we - the westerners - were ready to let Israel roflstomp neighbor countries like Lebanon because rockets and threats were fired from there too. Question of alliances.

In any case, there is only one tv channel that continues to speak about these issues that I know of (franco german one) on a regular basis and do actual journalism (also on Syrian issues, African issues and most forgotten conflicts in the world). And they generally are extremely critical of Israel.

2, Israel has during this and past campaigns engaged in preemptive phone calls and "roof knocking" (dropping of flares or small, nonlethal bombs on building roofs) to give warning before actually destructive strikes are performed. In many cases this warning period has been used to pile people into buildings, either in the hopes of warding off an actual airstrike or creating casualties.

Apparently it doesn't work very well...

Like their white phosphorous "doctrine" they used to apply everytime.

1) We should strike at night to avoid most civilians casualties.
2) We should use white phosphorous flares at night to improve our odds at fewer civilian casualties (you know, to see better because it's dark and all).
3) White phosphorous seems to also cause a lot of casualties when it enters in contact with humans.
4) We should use more white phosphorous flares to avoid that kind of things to happen !

If there is something the Israeli are very good at, it's telling themselves that they absolutely want to prevent civilian casualties. Wouldn't be good PR and all, so better to put the storytelling machine at work.

The only legit way I see this ever moving forward is for the USA to threaten to cut the Israeli purse strings to force everyone back to the table, which would of course require a popular president at the end of his 8 year term not fearing re-election to spearhead.  Clinton almost got it done but Arafat blew that one in the end. 

Arafat never spoke for the Hamas (but for the Fatah), even if it was the closer thing we had of a public figure that was listened and followed by many palestinians. It was actually one of the worst enemies of the hamas. It was also the one that spoke extensively with Yitzak Rabin. Or more precisely, was the fruit of Yitzac Rabin efforts leading to the accords of Oslo and the cessation of the hostilities leaded by Arafat, that became de facto a legitimate palestinian leader. Which also explains why Arafat retained a bit of legitimacy, influence and power, unlike his successor.

[Odelya]

Amos Oz once said that a problem is that Israelis act as if they were losers while in reality they are winners, and Palestinians act as if they were winners while in reality they are losers. I find that really convincing.

While I have abandoned discussing the conflict in public (and in EVE Online forums, wtf?) I am frustrated that many people don’t seem to care for civilian casualties—unless it plays into their political agenda. I am also frustrated that many people don’t seem to care differentiating between state and society. I am frustrated that uninvolved take positions that are almost always one-sided and leave little room for ambivalence. Enough said.

[Ché Biko]

[..]the Palestinians [..] essentially initially welcomed the investment and attention

I'm not sure what you're referring to here, but so far I am only able to interpret this as a sarcastic take on the First Arab–Israeli War.

Also, I don't really want to get involved into this discussion a lot besides pointing out when I think people get their facts wrong, but recent events have inspired me to work on a political cartoon for the first time in my life:

Nethanyahu, in SWAT gear, complete with ballistic shield, and armed with a decent assault rifle, faces off against a Hamas combatant. The Hamas guy hold a woman and her young daughter in front of him, and fires his pistol at Nethanyahu, but his shots pose little threat, although he manages to hit his toe. Nethanyahu responds by firing a burst from his rifle, killing the Hamas guy and his human shield.
Nethanyahu removes his helmet and turns to his colleague: "Every policeman would have done the same." His colleague, George Zimmerman, also removes his helmet and responds "Of course."

[Desiderya]

Especially the German[...] governments that never really liked Israel. The German one for historical reasons as well as just "I can't bear the other one", especially after military deals that got... mhh, how to say it... pear shaped (cf german submarines sold to Israel, or stolen depending on the source).

O_O
Let me put this in words:
What? This is an amazing load of bull. =)


Also on a more general note.

[Esna Pitoojee]

The Israeli strategy seems to be, a constant level of violence, such that the world media and the world public become apathetic to it - Violence in Palestine becomes not-news, and so it continues until the water situation will put an end to it for good. While simply pushing all the Gazans into the sea at once would get international condemnation, this fairly low level of violence doesn't get anything like the same amount of criticism.

If anything, this works both ways: Rockets and mortars have been dropping into Israel from Gaza for months; outside of Israel, this simply isn't news. I don't know if it's the constant grind of it, or if it's because we just roll our eyes and go "oh those terrorists, at it again?" But, Israel shoots back? Instant headline.

[..]the Palestinians [..] essentially initially welcomed the investment and attention

I'm not sure what you're referring to here, but so far I am only able to interpret this as a sarcastic take on the First Arab–Israeli War.

This is an entirely serious reference to the state of the development of the land early on in the 20th century; early Zionist settlers often bought land (including what was then viewed as wasteland) for development from the local Arab landowners and in some cases forged very close working relationships with them.

It's difficult to pinpoint exactly when this flipped towards hostility, but two good points to bring up is the Balfour Declaration in 1917 followed by the appointment of Haj Amin al-Husseini as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in 1921. He was a heavy promoter of Arab nationalism (and, arguably, antisemite); the Balfour declaration and continued Jewish immigration to the land made an easy point for Husseini to stir up anger towards "foreign powers" forcing an unwanted decision on an "Arab matter". Whatever the reason, there was a sharp uptick in riots in the 20s, leading to the formation of various Jewish self-defense units.


Regarding the internal Israeli politics: The leftwards swing that is occurring now should be viewed in the context of that having taken a hefty turn towards a right wing/hawkish position since the late 80s/early 90s in many respects. This is now swinging back, particularly under the influence of large numbers of European immigrants.

[scagga]

1, there are now no Israeli settlements in Gaza. The Gaza strip was returned to Palestinian authority and all settlements removed in 2005.

Esna, I'm not sure that the removal of illegal settlements from the little strip of land known as the gaza strip was all that was needed to cease the oppression.

2, Israel has during this and past campaigns engaged in preemptive phone calls and "roof knocking" (dropping of flares or small, nonlethal bombs on building roofs) to give warning before actually destructive strikes are performed. In many cases this warning period has been used to pile people into buildings, either in the hopes of warding off an actual airstrike or creating casualties.

I hear they use mortar rounds.  Bearing in mind the expanses of space and population density, where would you recommend running to in Gaza if you had minutes to pack up your family and go? (assuming you knew where the 'warning' bomb had landed).  Do you know of any other urban battlefield in modern times where this would be deemed acceptable?

3, during this most recent round of fighting there have actually been Israeli utility workers dodging rockets in order to restore electricity to Gaza after a Hamas rocket knocked it out. Not joking.

Fixing what their country has broken again and again. I'm sure their app came in handy. Did you know that if a palestinian approaches to within about 1km of the gaza border they are automatically liable to be shot without question?

4, Hamas has actually refused to allow aid deliveries at times. Again, I wish I was joking.

That's terrible.  Did you know Israel does the same thing on a larger scale?  But that's ok because construction materials, medicines and certain foodstuffs are dual use, of course.  We need to stop drawing false equivalences between the oppressors and the oppressed.

5, rocket fire out of Gaza continued incessantly even during the "lull" period preceding this conflict. During this time, there was little (if any) Israeli return fire.

Perhaps next time they could include Hamas in the negotiations for the ceasefire?  It's no good if you announce a ceasefire that you haven't agreed.

I'm not trying to say that every Israeli is a pure and noble white knight; there's a lot of shit that Israel needs to get its act together on as well. But seriously, it seems to me that the most immediate (and eventually long-term) difficulties with Gaza cannot be resolved even if Israel opts not for large-scale military responses (as they did during the past "lull" in the conflict).

Agree with you there. Violence will never win this conflict.

[scagga]

And while I'm normally pretty sympathetic to the situation the Palestinians are faced with, in this particular round of fighting, they are the aggressors, not Israel. Sure, it probably wasn't a great idea for some Israelis to kill a Palestinian teen in retaliation for the three of theirs that were killed, but Palestine and Hamas trying to play the victim card and shooting off rockets in response to that is pretty fucking retarded. Is Israel's current reaction a bit out of proportion? Maybe, but I'm a subscriber to the Ender Method, so I'm not really going to hold it against them given how fucking patient they have been over the years.

Point of information: We don't know who committed the terrible act of kidnapping and killing the 3 Israeli teenagers.  Hamas denied responsibility but were held responsible, and hundreds of their officials were arrested without charge.  They usually take credit for their crimes and are proud of them.  I wonder if that could be considered a provocation, bearing in mind that Hamas is a brutal, violent organisation.

Have a look at the timeline:
http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/07/14/3459100/timeline-how-war-returned-to-gaza/

[Lyn Farel]

Especially the German[...] governments that never really liked Israel. The German one for historical reasons as well as just "I can't bear the other one", especially after military deals that got... mhh, how to say it... pear shaped (cf german submarines sold to Israel, or stolen depending on the source).

O_O
Let me put this in words:
What? This is an amazing load of bull. =)


Also on a more general note.

I don't see what this has to do with anything that I said. Not sure if trolling or serious. =)

Edit : I won't make you the offense to link you all the articles that you will find by just googling Israel German Relations. It doesn't take to be genius to notice that as much as the relations between both countries have always been rather fruitful in terms of trade and military cooperation, the diplomatic side has regularly been stained by various issues over the years, and especially lately.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Honestly, atm we have better relations to Israel then the US. While there were always points of contention between the Israeli and German government, I think both sides appreciate the honesty of each other, so that there are points of contention is no indicator for a strained relationship, but a rather strain resistant one. And that's entirely ignoring that germany feels that it has a historical debt to Israel.

And really, I don't know where you get the idea that those german built subs where stolen by the Israelis. If that'd be so, it was quite convenient that we built in the silos for their tactical nukes just as they asked bevore stealing them. <,<

[Esna Pitoojee]

Esna, I'm not sure that the removal of illegal settlements from the little strip of land known as the gaza strip was all that was needed to cease the oppression.

Alone, of course removal of the settlements wouldn't have solved the conflict. The expectation was that with the initial withdrawal complete, there would be an in-turn move for peace from the Gazans and the Palestinian Authority, which could be reciprocated in turn, etc etc. Instead, Hamas rolled in and promptly crushed all opposition then started calling for a renewal of the conflict against Israel.

I hear they use mortar rounds.

If find this freakishly unlikely verging on impossible. I of course do not have easy access to Israeli munitions storehouses, but I can tell you the only guided mortar projectiles I can locate are heavy 120mm rounds whose impact is wildly out of line with what the effects of Roof Knock impacts look like (a lot closer to a firecracker than anything else).

Bearing in mind the expanses of space and population density, where would you recommend running to in Gaza if you had minutes to pack up your family and go? (assuming you knew where the 'warning' bomb had landed).  Do you know of any other urban battlefield in modern times where this would be deemed acceptable?

Turn this around: In what other modern urban battlefield in any modern war has any side bothered to specifically locate and warn the civilian population in immediate proximity to an impending military strike? If this is not "deemed acceptable", would you find it more acceptable somehow if Israel simply dropped the actual kill-bomb without warning? You seem to presume that the onus lies with Israel to prevent any and all damage to civilian infrastructure while the rockets that are being fired from Gaza are being deliberately placed in civilian targets.

Fixing what their country has broken again and again.

Not sure what you mean here. The line running in from Israel has functioned without issue since the last time we went through this retarded cycle.

To steal what you said above: In what other modern urban battlefield has one side deployed its public employees specifically to prevent loss of civilian utility access in extremely close proximity to military targets while the fighting was ongoing?

Did you know that if a palestinian approaches to within about 1km of the gaza border they are automatically liable to be shot without question?

One, trust me, it's never "without question". There is always an investigation into something like that.
Two, they they may be shot at, if they approach in an aggressive or unusual manner. Calmly approaching the actual border checkpoints as is normal is a good way to avoid this. This really isn't to different from any other DMZ space, especially considering the sheer number of times in which those approaching the border have either fired on or set up an explosive of some kind.

Perhaps next time they could include Hamas in the negotiations for the ceasefire?  It's no good if you announce a ceasefire that you haven't agreed.

Hamas has been involved in all three ceasefires I mentioned so far (extended lull leading up to the current conflict, failed ceasefire on 7/15, and failed ceasefire on 7/17). In the first case, they were actually credited for preventing longer-range fire against Israeli cities, but rockets continued to drop on cities near the border. In the second, the issue seems to have been that while Hamas' political leadership tentatively agreed to the ceasefire, their military refused to comply and continued to fire. In the third case, both Hamas and Israel confirmed agreement to the ceasefire, but mortar rounds from Gaza kept coming anyhow.

Agree with you there. Violence will never win this conflict.

Pretty much; just perpetuates a sick cycle. I'm writing up a longer post to comment more on this.

[Lyn Farel]

Honestly, atm we have better relations to Israel then the US. While there were always points of contention between the Israeli and German government, I think both sides appreciate the honesty of each other, so that there are points of contention is no indicator for a strained relationship, but a rather strain resistant one. And that's entirely ignoring that germany feels that it has a historical debt to Israel.

And really, I don't know where you get the idea that those german built subs where stolen by the Israelis. If that'd be so, it was quite convenient that we built in the silos for their tactical nukes just as they asked bevore stealing them. <,<

Well of course. I was pointing to all those... recurring points of contention, not to a permanently damaged relationship or anything.

I would have to dig up the thing about those subs. There was that political "game" between Israel and Germany when Germany decided not to sell them eventually, and Israel taking advantage of the political situation in Germany to force their hand anyway ? Something like that ? I shouldn't have talked about something I don't remember very well. Its quite old.

[Desiderya]

The german government pretends not to know (despite knowing since '61, apparently) that Israel uses nuclear rockets on these submarines. The submarines in question are being built (last to be shipped ~2017) with the german government paying 33-50% of the costs, probably in hope of gaining some leverage for demands regarding the settlements - which is the point of contestion, by the way, as we'd like to call it "Attempts at changing the situation through diplomacy"[1]

Regarding anti-semitic:
It's very common in this special case. If you think back a few years there was, at least in europa, a wave of anti-american sentiments, demonstrations and quite vocal opposition against the Afghanistan war (albeit even less than 2nd Iraq war). I do not remember seeing the same level of hatred[2] levelled against the USA or US americans in public, despite the similarities being so striking. Terrorist strike at home for the sake of destruction[3], a response blown out of proportions with questionable reasoning and a lot of civilian casualties. I guess "The Jews" are easier to dislike/hate, for historical reasons, and the extreme views surfacing in the mix of old-fashioned ressentiments and proper critique are why being aware of the language used is important. It would be the same as saying "The Muslims" instead of Hamas, al-Quaida or other terrorist friends.

[1]while sprinkling nuke capable subs into the mix. For peace, obv.
[2]Not evident in this thread, here we're just dealing with certain ressentiments