Israel to pull out of Gaza

[Eurytus]

[quote name='Samalander' post='1657357' date='Jan 21 2009, 22.18']b. Any leader who brought the two state solution to the Palestinian people then (and maybe now) would have been ripped apart. They are fed since childhood on dreams of toppling the "Zionist Entity" and returning to the homes of their grandfathers. Any leader who signed a compromise with us, would have been branded traitor.[/quote]

Arafat was not assassinated but Rabin was.

Discuss.

[Inigima]

[quote name='Malatesta' post='1657651' date='Jan 22 2009, 00.06']Thank you for not making me reply to his stupidity.[/quote]
thanks for contributing

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657830' date='Jan 22 2009, 04.59']Here are some excerpts from the "[url="http://www.ochaopt.org/?module=displaysection&section_id=104&edition_id=&format=html"]Protection of Civilians Weekly Report[/url]" made
by the [i]UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the Occupied Palestinian Territory[/i] during the same period:

To sum up, the Israeli navy shoots at Gazan fishing boats on a regular basis, also IDF are shooting at anti-Barrier demonstrators on a regular basis.

My main point with my objection to your statement however was to point out that this is not a situation of one side attacking the other side, while that side are defending themselves. Both sides are attacking the other side on a regular basis. If you want to wait until there are no attacks from either side before you're going to start peace negotiations, then you're going to wait a long time.[/quote]
Okay, I'm looking at these examples. Several of them (5/14, by my count) involve rubber bullets and were meant to be nonlethal. A few (3/14) involve forcing fishing boats to return to shore, although there were no fatalities; I'm not sure what's going on there, is that an attempt to enforce a blockade? I suspect that in a couple (2/14) the IDF may have believed the victim was a threat, but I can't prove that. A couple are errors; several of them, with some overlap, occurred in the context of areas the IDF instructed civilians not to go.

Now, a lot of these shouldn't have happened, and Israel's no saint. And I suspect that a lot of them happened because Israel thought there might be a threat and doesn't really lose much sleep if they're wrong. But I just don't see the same type of deliberate, targeted civilian murder here that I do in rocket attacks. There's no ambiguity there -- you fire rockets at civilian settlements, you are [i]trying[/i] to kill civilians.

[The Iceman of the North]

[quote name='Inigima' post='1657892' date='Jan 22 2009, 13.45']Now, a lot of these shouldn't have happened, and Israel's no saint. And I suspect that a lot of them happened because Israel thought there might be a threat and doesn't really lose much sleep if they're wrong. But I just don't see the same type of deliberate, targeted civilian murder here that I do in rocket attacks. There's no ambiguity there -- you fire rockets at civilian settlements, you are [i]trying[/i] to kill civilians.[/quote]
I just don't see the clear moral and ethical difference between intentionally [i]trying [/i]to kill civilians and [i]actually [/i]killing civilians trough negligence or indifference.

The fact that they are using rubber bullets doesn't make it any better in my eyes. Rubber bullets can be lethal if you're unlucky, and shooting at demonstrators (or for that matter soaking them in sewage) is still totally unnecessary. You might have noticed that there have been a number of violent demonstrations in Europe over the past year, with people throwing rocks, molotov cocktails or even shotting fireworks towards the police. I have yet to hear of anywhere where the police have answered with shooting at the demonstrators (there have been demonstrations started because the police shot someone, but that's beside the point).

[shadowbinding shoe]

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657904' date='Jan 22 2009, 14.57']I just don't see the clear moral and ethical difference between intentionally [i]trying [/i]to kill civilians and [i]actually [/i]killing civilians trough negligence or indifference.

The fact that they are using rubber bullets doesn't make it any better in my eyes. Rubber bullets can be lethal if you're unlucky, and shooting at demonstrators (or for that matter soaking them in sewage) is still totally unnecessary. You might have noticed that there have been a number of violent demonstrations in Europe over the past year, with people throwing rocks, molotov cocktails or even shotting fireworks towards the police. I have yet to hear of anywhere where the police have answered with shooting at the demonstrators (there have been demonstrations started because the police shot someone, but that's beside the point).[/quote]

The difference is between protests made by your citizens and protests made by semi-independent conquered people. Notice that when protests are made by Israeli Arabs (who are Israeli citizens) things are different.

[Inigima]

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657904' date='Jan 22 2009, 07.57']I just don't see the clear moral and ethical difference between intentionally [i]trying [/i]to kill civilians and [i]actually [/i]killing civilians trough negligence or indifference.

The fact that they are using rubber bullets doesn't make it any better in my eyes. Rubber bullets can be lethal if you're unlucky, and shooting at demonstrators (or for that matter soaking them in sewage) is still totally unnecessary. You might have noticed that there have been a number of violent demonstrations in Europe over the past year, with people throwing rocks, molotov cocktails or even shotting fireworks towards the police. I have yet to hear of anywhere where the police have answered with shooting at the demonstrators (there have been demonstrations started because the police shot someone, but that's beside the point).[/quote]
You're going to stand there with a straight face and tell me you don't see the difference between murder in the first degree and involuntary manslaughter? I mean, the second is [i]bad[/i], but it seems pretty indisputable that the former is much worse.

[The Iceman of the North]

[quote name='Inigima' post='1657920' date='Jan 22 2009, 14.17']You're going to stand there with a straight face and tell me you don't see the difference between murder in the first degree and involuntary manslaughter? I mean, the second is [i]bad[/i], but it seems pretty indisputable that the former is much worse.[/quote]
Yes, a handful of murders in the first degree is no worse than hundreds of "involuntary manslaughters" in this situation. You have to take into consideration the power play going on here.

Your position is "natural" as an American, and is typical of the attitude of those in a (relative) powerful situation in a conflict. "Collateral damage is unfortunate, but shit happens!" If you had been on the side that constantly experience the consequences of "collateral damage" you might have a different opinion.

Hamas doesn't target civilians just because they are evil, but with the weapons they have, civilian "targets" are the only targets they are likely to hit. The Israeli also target areas they know is full of civilians, but they can use the excuse that there's always some militant in the area that is the [i]real [/i]target.

[Pathetic]

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657904' date='Jan 22 2009, 14.57']The fact that they are using rubber bullets doesn't make it any better in my eyes.[/quote]
As with involuntary manslaughter vs. murder in the first degree, many people do see a difference between the equivalent of a hit with a baseball bat and [url="http://www.firearmstactical.com/images/Wound%20Profiles/M855.jpg"]this[/url]. The people who actually get shot at, for a start.

[quote]I have yet to hear of anywhere where the police have answered with shooting at the demonstrators (there have been demonstrations started because the police shot someone, but that's beside the point).[/quote]
There should be medals for bravery given out whenever that happens. Just standing there, not being able to do anything to protect yourself, while hundreds of people are screaming death treats right in your face, and doing their very best -- even if their best tends to be crap -- to kill you, your friends, and anybody else who happens to be around. I can't imagine what it feels like. I'm astounded whenever police manage it -- let alone a military unit, whose training goes completely against such behavior.

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657938' date='Jan 22 2009, 15.34']Hamas doesn't target civilians just because they are evil, but with the weapons they have, civilian "targets" are the only targets they are likely to hit.[/quote]
The attitude that when you find just actions too hard you should do reprehensible deeds to further your goals, I suspect many would find evil.

[Samalander]

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1657938' date='Jan 22 2009, 15.34']1) Your position is "natural" as an American, and is typical of the attitude of those in a (relative) powerful situation in a conflict. "Collateral damage is unfortunate, but shit happens!" If you had been on the side that constantly experience the consequences of "collateral damage" you might have a different opinion.
2) The Israeli also target areas they know is full of civilians, but they can use the excuse that there's always some militant in the area that is the [i]real [/i]target.[/quote]
1) I knew we should have deployed the killer robots!! They have perfect targeting systems, their databanks are full of intel on all Hamas militants, they never use excessive firepower, they are very difficult to damage and they don't care at all about personal preservation!! These are the forces we should have deployed!!
But you know.. in the end some Hamas militant will grab a child as protection after the bullet already left the killer robot's firing system, or the Hamas militant will shoot at the killer robot and hit a munitions depo (the killer robots themselves never miss, remember), then it's loss of innocent lives and then the whole world will be like : "Israeli Killer Robots commit atrocities in Gaza!!!"
2) Did you actually see post 200?

[Malatesta]

[quote name='Pathetic' post='1657955' date='Jan 22 2009, 21.57']There should be medals for bravery given out whenever that happens. Just standing there, not being able to do anything to protect yourself, while hundreds of people are screaming death treats right in your face, and doing their very best -- even if their best tends to be crap -- to kill you, your friends, and anybody else who happens to be around.[/quote]

Oh right 21st century protesting has the primary primary goal of trying to kill police, their 'friends' and 'anybody else'.

:rolleyes:

[Samalander]

[quote name='Malatesta' post='1658002' date='Jan 22 2009, 16.37']Oh right 21st century protesting has the primary primary goal of trying to kill police, their 'friends' and 'anybody else'.
:rolleyes:[/quote]
The way they do it in the Middle East, yes. You nailed it. These are not peaceful protestors singing "Cum-Ba-Ya". They have rocks and spikes, sticks and chains, nails and molotov bottles and they really like using all that stuff on innocent people driving by. There was almost a lynching of an innocent Israeli couple in Israel, when they drove by such a "protest" (more of a riot, really) of Israeli Arabs against the operation in Gaza. Maybe if they had died, we would have had better PR. That's how it works in this thread, no?

[The Iceman of the North]

Samalander, you are kind of missing the point. Representatives from the IDF have repeatedly stated that their first priority on the ground in Gaza was to protect the Israeli soldiers. Which might seem logical, but it is a clear violation of the Laws of War.

I suggest you read up on [url="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5"]The fourth Geneva Convention[/url] on the protection of civilians in time of war.

[shadowbinding shoe]

[quote name='Marie-Angélieef' post='1656605' date='Jan 21 2009, 14.36']Can you explain why even Regev says that Hamas was not firing those missiles, rather than saying they were fired by Hamas-supported organisations? If the other parties were signatories to the ceasefire, why did Israel not say anything publically then?[/quote]

Not sure. Could be because it was a short interview and because he considered the tunnel a more severe breach more directly linked to Hamas.


[quote]Again, do you have proof of it being "the natural right of Palestinians", as opposed to "in reply to Israel cutting off supplies", or "not fully opening the blockade", or some other excuse?[/quote]

I think I'm a pretty poor web-searcher but under 'Hamas' and 'right to resist' I found such quotes as:

[quote]What the critics of Hamas are alleging — without showing evidence — is that Hamas (or any Palestinian, for that matter) is behind the launching of rickety rockets from Gaza. However, even if Hamas is behind the launching of the rockets, so what!? Hamas, is the elected representative of Palestinians. Palestinians have the legal right to self-determination. They have the moral right to resist occupation. However, the right to resist must also be recognized as a legal right.3 It is absurd to argue that there is no legal right to resist the illegal act of occupation — a prima facie denial of the right to self-determination. History bears this out. Did the early Americans not claim a right to resist British colonialism?4 Did the Europeans not have a right to launch guerrilla attacks on the Nazi occupation regimes? Why does Levy deny this right to Palestinians?[/quote] from Kim Petersen

and
[quote]"Hamas will continue to wield its weapons and to claim its right to resist. Resistance will continue to be a strategic option until the last piece of Palestinian land is liberated, until the last refugee returns...."[/quote]
from Khaled Mashal (December 2005)

Basically they say that as long as Israel exists in this Muslim region they have the right to resist them.

More concretely, examining the firing of missiles from Gaza and the justifications given for them by Hamas, it is easily noticeable that after actions by the IDF they object to, they fire a lot of missiles and target them to longer distances (Ashkelon instead of Sderot) but at the same time they fire a few missiles at a time to nearby areas (Sderot and smaller places) all the time without it being a response to anything.

[quote]According to that news article, the rocket numbers were as follows:
June, post-ceasefire: 3
July, 8
August, 3
September, 1
October, 1
Do you disagree with those numbers? If no, then how can you argue that Hamas were building up to the situation pre-ceasefire, where 149 rockets were fired in May, and 84 in pre-ceasefire June? Except for July, each month had fewer rocket launches than the previous one. If yes you do disagree with the figures, then do you have another source that shows different numbers?[/quote]

Finding actual numbers as opposed to generalities was harder than I'd guessed. Israeli Security site has these figures: (the amount of detail this site goes into is mind-boggling)[url="http://www.shabak.gov.il"]site[/url]

July, 8
August, 7
September, 3
October, 4
First week of November: " Prior to the developments following the destruction of the tunnel in the Gaza Strip, 2 incidents of breaking the “Lull” were recorded (rocket and mortar fire), in contrast to one such incident last week."

The lowest number is in September, than beginning to rise in October. This is the midpoint of the truce. At the start of November there are already 2 in less than a week. The numbers before the ceasefire (more then 50 a month) were themselves unusually high. Going from once a week to every other day is already reached.

Attitudes expressed by Hamas at that time gave this impression as well. Their agreement to the ceasefire according to them was based upon the demand that until its end Israel would extend the ceasefire to Hamas members in the West Bank as well. Also the word used for the ceasefire agreement (Tahadia) means a cease-fire during which you arm and prepare yourself for the next conflict. Hamas felt it would be ready after six months of relative quiet.

[quote]So if Hamas can produce them, why can't someone else? (I know it's only Wiki, but [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_domestic_weapons_production"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_d...pons_production[/url] indicates that Islamic Jihad also has developed MRLs, and a number of groups have developed various short-range rockets.) Even if Hamas gets a cut from every purchase of every item in Gaza (and as far as I can tell, they do), can you really say that they can prevent someone else from assembling the items into a rocket launcher, or explosives? Please note here that I'm only talking about munitions made from unrelated bits -- obviously Hamas would know if someone is smuggling in [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M270"]one of these[/url] and would know there's no other possible purpose for it than launching rockets.[/quote]

The only things that can go over the border are rockets and for shorter ranger mortars and for the really short ranges sniper fire. All the self produced rockets are collectively called Qassam (the differences between the different models is not that great) and their maximum range is about 10 km. The imported rockets called Grad are still not that big but they come ready made so confusing them with something else is very unlikely. They are equivalent of the Russian Katyusha and can reach 40 km. With Hamas controlling the tunnels such rockets cannot be passed into Gaza without their say so.

People hear they're self made and figure anyone can make them in their garage. This is simply not true. The aerodynamics of such missiles must be very precise and their fuel really homogeneous and high quality for them to fly at all not to mention in relatively straight lines. And of course the Gazans must build them with poor materials which compounds their problems. Factories producing missiles are not that easy to conceal.

You can find better info here: [url="http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Qassam-rocket"]Self made Pal. rockets[/url]

[quote]Yes, that's what I've been trying to do. It's why I said it's difficult, as Hamas acts as both. I was wrong earlier when I said both the political and military wings of Hamas are both called Hamas -- I learned today that the military wing of Hamas is actually called the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades. As I said, it's not as clear-cut as the IRA launching Sinn Fein to act as its political representatives.
If you're trying to say that Hamas is not a political party as well as a military organization, that's different. If that's the case, then how did they run in elections? Surely they must have had a political wing in order to take part in Parliamentary elections? Otherwise it would have gone directly to a military takeover, wouldn't it?[/quote]

Hamas started originally as a religious charity organization. After a while they became a terrorist organization as well. This was all before there was a PLO and Palestinian elections. When elections were held they ran non-militant members of the organization for office. Currently there are at least 3 parts of Hamas that work together pretty losely. There is the political leadership led by Haniya, there is the Gazan military and militants and there is the Syrian leadership led by Halad Mashaal. Of them the political arm is the weakest. The Syrian arm is important because it connects Hamas to Syria and Iran. Through it money and arms come into Gaza. It tends to be the most militant. The militants in Gaza control what happens in Gaza. It was their decision for example and not Haniya's to start a civil war in order to take over Gaza.

[The Iceman of the North]

[quote name='Samalander' post='1657995' date='Jan 22 2009, 15.32']2) Did you actually see post 200?[/quote]
What of it? Nobody is saying that Hamas didn't launch missiles during the conflict. The question is - what would be the correct response to this?

Given the damage that these missiles is causing, to me the correct response would have been to send troops to the site to identify, apprehend or terminate those launching the missile. If there were no sign of the militants, I'd be ok with searching the building to see if there were any stash of weapons. What would be an overreaction would be to shell or bomb the building.

[Big Brother]

Interesting development:

"Palestinian civilians have accused Hamas of forcing them to stay in homes from which gunmen shot at Israeli soldiers during the recent hostilities in Gaza, the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported Thursday. "

[url="http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057874.html"]link[/url]

I have no idea how reliable this Italian newspaper is.

[the silent speaker]

"Send troops to the site"? You mean, the site in Gaza from which the missiles were launched? Because that right there is your ground invasion.

[The Progressive]

[url="http://www.economist.com/world/mideast-africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12991363"]Israelis begin to ask if the war was worth it.[/url] The internal debate leading to the election is has the war indeed “changed the reality” in the border region when [url="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gI3mvb6-rK7nAuNIXPLr-sl0nDngD95S8RMG0"]smuggling has resumed.[/url] In fact, smuggling activities have never stop even at the height of the bombardment.

Meanwhile, the struggle to rebuild Gaza is heating up as Hamas is bolstering its support by [url="http://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSLM758746"]cash distribution to Gazans most hard hit by the war[/url], while Israel is still preventing the PA from getting money into Gaza.

[Samalander]

[quote name='Eurytus' post='1657871' date='Jan 22 2009, 14.11']Arafat was not assassinated but Rabin was.

Discuss.[/quote]
1. Arafat made it an art to never actually agree to anything regarding land compromises.
2. Are we sure he wasn't assassinated? His death is still quite mysterious.
3. The person who killed Rabin is reviled by the vast majority of israelis. If someone were to shoot Mahmus Abbas right now, great parts of the Palestinian People (the religious types like Hamas) will applaud.

[Samalander]

[quote name='The Iceman of the North' post='1658050' date='Jan 22 2009, 17.03']Samalander, you are kind of missing the point. Representatives from the IDF have repeatedly stated that their first priority on the ground in Gaza was to protect the Israeli soldiers. Which might seem logical, but it is a clear violation of the Laws of War.
I suggest you read up on [url="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5"]The fourth Geneva Convention[/url] on the protection of civilians in time of war.[/quote]
Do you know when those accords were signed? At that time, nobody envisioned a situation like this : Armed forces fighting from within civilian population centers, in civilian clothes (they are not even trying to keep this part secret. One of Hamas' senior officers said in a press conference they gave whatever troops they had in uniform an order to remove their uniforms and dress like civilians. He explained this was because of the unique situation of Israeli war drones flying overhead all the time).
As for the order for the Israeli troops to protect themselves : I have no problems with that order. If they were told: Round up civilians and execute them, I would have a problem. But this? Every soldier has the right, nay, duty, to protect himself.

[The Progressive]

[quote name='Samalander' post='1658529' date='Jan 22 2009, 12.24']If someone were to shoot Mahmus Abbas right now, great parts of the Palestinian People (the [b]religious types[/b] like Hamas) will applaud.[/quote]

Reports from the West Bank, Gaza and the Palestinian diaspora suggest widespread anger at the Palestinian Authority for its passivity and a rise in support for Hamas, even among [b]secular[/b] Palestinians, in appreciation of its determined resistance to the brutality of the Israeli occupation and military operations.

[url="http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090209/falk"]http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090209/falk[/url]

[Rane]

[quote name='Samalander' post='1658529' date='Jan 22 2009, 18.24']2. Are we sure he wasn't assassinated? His death is still quite mysterious.[/quote]
Claiming that the palestianians might have killed him is ridiculous.


[quote]3. The person who killed Rabin is reviled by the vast majority of israelis. [b]If someone were to shoot Mahmus Abbas right now, great parts of the Palestinian People (the religious types like Hamas) will applaud.[/b][/quote]
And you base this on what?