• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Israel / Gaza Thread

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Can we get back to the topic at hand and not the back and forth he said she said crap.

What should Israel do to respond to dozens of rocket attacks per day?
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Why should israel provide those things? Can't they get diesel, electricity and medicine from same place they get those missiles? Or better yet make them themselves but that would require some education and work ethic other than studying hate and jihad.

Gee, I wonder, maybe it's because Israel's "withdrawal" from Gaza was a complete fucking farce since they still control the borders (land and sea) and the airspace. Sounds like a great way for Gazans to fend from themselves.

The land they "withdrew" from, ie. the settlements, were not given back to the Gazans, and is still off limits. The IDF used Netzarim as a staging point for the ground invasion. The "withdrawal" was nothing more than a tactical publicity stunt.

They get lots of armaments and missiles in there no problem. Also can you show me some evidence Israel blocks food and other nessesites from around the world? And while you're at it proof Israel didn't 100% withdrawal from gaza. If they do that I agree Israel is reponsible for their welfare - but I await proof.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/950381.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976086.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...raelandthepalestinians
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7737243.stm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27801489/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ain-Gaza-blockade.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article...eatens-civilian-health
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...8nov21,0,4556575.story

That took a Google search and two minutes worth of work.

I see nothing of blocking foreign shipments. I guess by 'blockade' you mean cutting off welfare to those who want to kill you. Cry me a river.

:roll: 1.5 million people don't have supplies because Israel won't let them in, if you want to label them all as terrorists, be my guest. You're clearly indoctrinated and won't change your mind about the matter. If it were up to me, there would be ONE SECULAR STATE encompassing the entire territory, but then you'd have a problem because the inherently racist and exclusive Jewish state of Israel would no longer exist.

Since you clearly can't read, I've taken the relevant information from the links I posted. I see a whole ton of "foreign shipments" being blocked, and the only Israeli welfare being blocked is diesel WHICH WAS PAID FOR. So they're shady businessmen too...

http://www.latimes.com/news/na...8nov21,0,4556575.story
Secretary-General Ban telephoned Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week to call for passage of trucks from two U.N. agencies that feed about two-thirds of Gaza's 1.5 million people. He phoned again Thursday to make the same appeal to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who has taken over from Olmert as head of the Kadima party.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad announced Thursday that they were ready to halt the attacks if Israel opened the crossings and stopped the incursions. The attacks from Gaza tapered off Thursday; the Israeli army counted just one incoming rocket, which caused no harm.

U.N. officials say the security threat posed by the latest rounds of rocket and mortar fire, which have caused few injuries and no deaths, does not justify such tight restrictions. Because Israel controls most access points to Gaza, they say, it is obligated under international law to try to maintain essential services for civilians.

Israeli restrictions have left the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, the larger of the two U.N. suppliers of humanitarian aid, with only enough food to last through this weekend.

A shortfall in deliveries of industrial diesel purchased from Israel has kept Gaza's only power plant shut for most of the last week. Blackouts last up to 20 hours a day in Gaza City, where electricity from other sources is being rationed.

On Wednesday, the territory's largest flour mill shut down when it ran out of grain; 27 of Gaza's 47 bakeries were reported closed Thursday. Many Gazans baked bread at home from U.N.-supplied flour.

Hamas suspended welfare payments to 98,000 Gazans after shipments of cash from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank were turned back.

Israeli officials say the accounts of shortages are exaggerated to stir sympathy for Gaza. Yet for two weeks the same officials, citing security concerns, have barred reporters from entering Gaza.

Executives of 15 international media groups, including The Times, have signed a letter to Olmert protesting the rare restriction on journalists.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976086.html
Israel has not accepted Hamas proposals for a truce including an end to Hamas rocket attacks on Israel and to Israeli attacks on Hamas personnel in Gaza and the West Bank. Israeli officials say a truce would enable Hamas to rearm.

Carter said Israel and its ally the United States were trying to make the quality of life in Gaza markedly worse than in the West Bank, where the rival moderate Fatah faction retains power.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27801489/
JERUSALEM - Israel stood fast Wednesday by its decision to clamp shut cargo crossings at the Gaza Strip, brushing off pleas to ease the blockade from United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon.

The crossings, a main source of imports to Gaza, have been cracked open occasionally to allow in fuel and vital supplies. But the closures have drastically reduced the amount of goods entering the already impoverished seaside territory of 1.4 million people, causing shortages of many basic goods.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ain-Gaza-blockade.html
Despite mounting international pressure for a resumption of desperately needed food and fuel, Israel's border crossings have remained closed to humanitarian deliveries to the aid-dependent territory.

The blockade, imposed after Hamas seized power in June 2007, has forced the United Nations to suspend food distribution to 750,000 Gaza residents and the territory's sole power plant to shut down.
 
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Why should israel provide those things? Can't they get diesel, electricity and medicine from same place they get those missiles? Or better yet make them themselves but that would require some education and work ethic other than studying hate and jihad.

Gee, I wonder, maybe it's because Israel's "withdrawal" from Gaza was a complete fucking farce since they still control the borders (land and sea) and the airspace. Sounds like a great way for Gazans to fend from themselves.

The land they "withdrew" from, ie. the settlements, were not given back to the Gazans, and is still off limits. The IDF used Netzarim as a staging point for the ground invasion. The "withdrawal" was nothing more than a tactical publicity stunt.

They get lots of armaments and missiles in there no problem. Also can you show me some evidence Israel blocks food and other nessesites from around the world? And while you're at it proof Israel didn't 100% withdrawal from gaza. If they do that I agree Israel is reponsible for their welfare - but I await proof.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/950381.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976086.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...raelandthepalestinians
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7737243.stm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27801489/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ain-Gaza-blockade.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article...eatens-civilian-health
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...8nov21,0,4556575.story

That took a Google search and two minutes worth of work.

If you read the articles, it was in response to the rocket attacks.

She argues that "Israel must negotiate with the elected Hamas government for there to be any kind of a solution to the rocket fire on the south."

"The Israeli prime minister denounced the continuing rocket fire into Israel from Gaza, but agreed to look seriously into the urgent matter raised by the secretary-general," the statement added.

The Israeli supreme court today upheld the government's blockade of fuel and electricity supplies to the Gaza Strip.

Israeli human rights groups had challenged the sanctions, which the government claims are aimed at halting rocket attacks by Gaza militants.

Israel sealed the passages two weeks ago after a five-month-old truce between Israel and Gaza militants started unraveling in an effort to halt rocket and mortar fire at Israeli border towns.

"This decision has been taken following fresh rocket fire against Israeli territory," it added.

I'm seeing a theme here....
 
Originally posted by: shrumpage
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Why should israel provide those things? Can't they get diesel, electricity and medicine from same place they get those missiles? Or better yet make them themselves but that would require some education and work ethic other than studying hate and jihad.

Gee, I wonder, maybe it's because Israel's "withdrawal" from Gaza was a complete fucking farce since they still control the borders (land and sea) and the airspace. Sounds like a great way for Gazans to fend from themselves.

The land they "withdrew" from, ie. the settlements, were not given back to the Gazans, and is still off limits. The IDF used Netzarim as a staging point for the ground invasion. The "withdrawal" was nothing more than a tactical publicity stunt.

They get lots of armaments and missiles in there no problem. Also can you show me some evidence Israel blocks food and other nessesites from around the world? And while you're at it proof Israel didn't 100% withdrawal from gaza. If they do that I agree Israel is reponsible for their welfare - but I await proof.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/950381.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976086.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...raelandthepalestinians
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7737243.stm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27801489/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ain-Gaza-blockade.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article...eatens-civilian-health
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...8nov21,0,4556575.story

That took a Google search and two minutes worth of work.

If you read the articles, it was in response to the rocket attacks.

She argues that "Israel must negotiate with the elected Hamas government for there to be any kind of a solution to the rocket fire on the south."

"The Israeli prime minister denounced the continuing rocket fire into Israel from Gaza, but agreed to look seriously into the urgent matter raised by the secretary-general," the statement added.

The Israeli supreme court today upheld the government's blockade of fuel and electricity supplies to the Gaza Strip.

Israeli human rights groups had challenged the sanctions, which the government claims are aimed at halting rocket attacks by Gaza militants.

Israel sealed the passages two weeks ago after a five-month-old truce between Israel and Gaza militants started unraveling in an effort to halt rocket and mortar fire at Israeli border towns.

"This decision has been taken following fresh rocket fire against Israeli territory," it added.

I'm seeing a theme here....

I also see a theme -- it is called self preservation!!
 
Originally posted by: shrumpage
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: Zebo
Why should israel provide those things? Can't they get diesel, electricity and medicine from same place they get those missiles? Or better yet make them themselves but that would require some education and work ethic other than studying hate and jihad.

Gee, I wonder, maybe it's because Israel's "withdrawal" from Gaza was a complete fucking farce since they still control the borders (land and sea) and the airspace. Sounds like a great way for Gazans to fend from themselves.

The land they "withdrew" from, ie. the settlements, were not given back to the Gazans, and is still off limits. The IDF used Netzarim as a staging point for the ground invasion. The "withdrawal" was nothing more than a tactical publicity stunt.

They get lots of armaments and missiles in there no problem. Also can you show me some evidence Israel blocks food and other nessesites from around the world? And while you're at it proof Israel didn't 100% withdrawal from gaza. If they do that I agree Israel is reponsible for their welfare - but I await proof.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/950381.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976086.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl...raelandthepalestinians
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7737243.stm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27801489/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...ain-Gaza-blockade.html
http://us.oneworld.net/article...eatens-civilian-health
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...8nov21,0,4556575.story

That took a Google search and two minutes worth of work.

If you read the articles, it was in response to the rocket attacks.

She argues that "Israel must negotiate with the elected Hamas government for there to be any kind of a solution to the rocket fire on the south."

"The Israeli prime minister denounced the continuing rocket fire into Israel from Gaza, but agreed to look seriously into the urgent matter raised by the secretary-general," the statement added.

The Israeli supreme court today upheld the government's blockade of fuel and electricity supplies to the Gaza Strip.

Israeli human rights groups had challenged the sanctions, which the government claims are aimed at halting rocket attacks by Gaza militants.

Israel sealed the passages two weeks ago after a five-month-old truce between Israel and Gaza militants started unraveling in an effort to halt rocket and mortar fire at Israeli border towns.

"This decision has been taken following fresh rocket fire against Israeli territory," it added.

I'm seeing a theme here....

If YOU read the articles, the rocket attacks were in response to the blockade (since the beginning of 2008) not being lifted or even eased.

Secretary-General Ban telephoned Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this week to call for passage of trucks from two U.N. agencies that feed about two-thirds of Gaza's 1.5 million people. He phoned again Thursday to make the same appeal to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who has taken over from Olmert as head of the Kadima party.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad announced Thursday that they were ready to halt the attacks if Israel opened the crossings and stopped the incursions. The attacks from Gaza tapered off Thursday; the Israeli army counted just one incoming rocket, which caused no harm.

U.N. officials say the security threat posed by the latest rounds of rocket and mortar fire, which have caused few injuries and no deaths, does not justify such tight restrictions. Because Israel controls most access points to Gaza, they say, it is obligated under international law to try to maintain essential services for civilians.

End of ceasefire, no change in blockade -> some rockets -> incursions into Gaza -> more rockets -> Hamas now has no food, neither does the rest of Gaza, Hamas still has rockets -> more rockets. Rockets are made out of fertilizer, and have killed four people since mid-November. Israel killed a few hundred civilians in one week.
 
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Adhering to the original terms of the ceasefire which included lifting the blockade on diesel, electricity, and medicine would have been a great start. Hamas resumed firing rockets after talks to renew the ceasefire fell through. One and a half million are still without basic necessities of life.
Your idea lacks logic.

Israel cuts of the supplies because Hamas won't stop the rocket attacks. So Hamas responds by taking a course of action that will ensure Israel ends all aid to Gaza. It makes no sense.

BTW Gaza has a boarder with Egypt, why don't the Egyptians help them with fuel, electricity and medicine?
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Can we get back to the topic at hand and not the back and forth he said she said crap.

What should Israel do to respond to dozens of rocket attacks per day?

I thought Obama was going to talk to everyone and resolve this? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since he isn't President yet, but I fully expect this will be resolved peacefully on Jan 21st.. give or take a day.
 
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Can we get back to the topic at hand and not the back and forth he said she said crap.

What should Israel do to respond to dozens of rocket attacks per day?

I thought Obama was going to talk to everyone and resolve this? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since he isn't President yet, but I fully expect this will be resolved peacefully on Jan 21st.. give or take a day.
Cool... then we can start the conspiracies threads that this latest flair up was created just to make Obama look good ala Reagan told Iran to keep the hostages till after the election...
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Adhering to the original terms of the ceasefire which included lifting the blockade on diesel, electricity, and medicine would have been a great start. Hamas resumed firing rockets after talks to renew the ceasefire fell through. One and a half million are still without basic necessities of life.
Your idea lacks logic.

Israel cuts of the supplies because Hamas won't stop the rocket attacks. So Hamas responds by taking a course of action that will ensure Israel ends all aid to Gaza. It makes no sense.

BTW Gaza has a boarder with Egypt, why don't the Egyptians help them with fuel, electricity and medicine?

Hosni Mubarak is a different story, and a different angry stream of thought, don't distract me!
 
Non Prof John asks the totally ridiculous and ignorant question of " BTW Gaza has a boarder with Egypt, why don't the Egyptians help them with fuel, electricity and medicine?"

And the answer is that Israel is the entity charged with collecting and distributing taxes collected in Gaza, from the residents of Gaza, and is way way way behind in doing a just distribution. And if it were not for the social wing of Hamas, and the contributions from Muslim charities the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, the lot of the Palestinian people would be far worse.

Egypt never had any claim on Gaza, Gaza just happens to be the worst land Israel can dump the Palestinians in, and maybe next non Prof John will ask why the Swiss don't take step up to the plate so the Israelis can keep all the taxes they collect. Hey if PJ can pick some country at random, he might as well stay on a roll.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
And if it were not for the social wing of Hamas, and the contributions from Muslim charities the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, the lot of the Palestinian people would be far worse.
They'd have fewer rockets and AK's too.
 
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Non Prof John asks the totally ridiculous and ignorant question of " BTW Gaza has a boarder with Egypt, why don't the Egyptians help them with fuel, electricity and medicine?"

And the answer is that Israel is the entity charged with collecting and distributing taxes collected in Gaza, from the residents of Gaza, and is way way way behind in doing a just distribution. And if it were not for the social wing of Hamas, and the contributions from Muslim charities the plight of Palestinians in Gaza, the lot of the Palestinian people would be far worse.

Egypt never had any claim on Gaza, Gaza just happens to be the worst land Israel can dump the Palestinians in, and maybe next non Prof John will ask why the Swiss don't take step up to the plate so the Israelis can keep all the taxes they collect. Hey if PJ can pick some country at random, he might as well stay on a roll.

Come on now Non-Lemon Law, the real answer is that Egypt and the rest of the Arab community care less about the Palestinians than the Israeli's do.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn


If you were the leader of Israel what course of action would you take?

I would try to definitively determine what the absolute goal is, for the person that actually launches the rockets against me, and respond with the same intent.
 
Originally posted by: fallout man
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: fallout man
Originally posted by: MotF Bane
Originally posted by: SandEagle
picture #2 and #4 speak for themselves: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7809755.stm

#2: incendiary phosphorous weapons against civilian populations is a violation of the Geneva Conventions
#4: compare that to the tiny Qassams. a disproportionate show of force indeed, paid for with our tax dollars

Never again, unless you're Palestinian

Where do you see incendiary weapons in #2?

It's not #2 (BBC photo sites get updated).

See the strange octopus-like smoke trail thing in one of the photos? That's a WP round that detonated deliberately above ground to cover a large area. If you've watched any news with live/recorded footage of Gaza in the past 12 hours, you will have seen many times what this WP ordinance looks like at night above Gaza city--it's beautiful.

It's also a war-crime, given that Gaza is anything but a non-civillian population center, and using chemical/incendiary weapons on civillian population centers is a war crime.

We (the US) used WP in Fallujah on civillians with devastating results as well. It was explained away with mumbo-jumbo about how WP is not really chemical warfare. :roll:

Huh, thanks! I've been watching live coverage of the bombings online, and figured that they were firing flares for some reason (Hamas sure as fuck doesn't have any ordinance that can target aircraft). That's fucking despicable...

The intended purpose of a flare is to cover an area with light, and they do use WP as a light source. However, flares are the guys that stay up there as a single point of light, since they're WP burning bright and parachuted once they deploy.

Scattering WP over a large, populated area only brings death because WP burns at very high temperature until extinction when in contact with water. This means that in dry, desert air, when you inhale the smoke cloud, you breathe fire and die a horrible death like this guy (nsfw).

If you get unlucky, your death will be slower because you just get it onto your skin like this guy (nsfw).



Originally posted by: Deptacon

#1

Your an Idiot... That is not incendiary phosphorous...... (and also it is called white phosphorous or "willey P" to those who have handled "military" weapons)

#2

You have no idea what they are shooting at or hitting based on the picture

#3

Geneva only applies to nation vs. nation warfare..... I never saw Hamas sign the Geneva Conventions either (and they are not a recognized nation)

Do us a favor ... Don't post like you are military analyst or expert when you get your Intel from news website pics....

You're clearly correct. I sense this because you have a the army grunt icon, can't spell, and use super-cool military lingo like "Wiley Pete."

I look forward to your expert military analyst opinion after you go "handle" some "military" WP--preferably with bare hands.

:roll:

I am glad you sit back all day and check online message board posts for grammar..... Its an essential task to be completed in today's society

And also... like I said..... that is not WP in the picture in Gaza..... newer shells of "smoke" actually contain canistered smoke (similar to cluster bomb method of disbursement) to spread smoke over a larger area.....

It has the signs of WP.... but the fact that it looks like a ground impact and not an Airburst, which is almost always used with WP, I don't believe it is WP...

And when we used WP in Fallugah.... it was after civilians were given 48 hours to leave the city.... anyone who stayed was told they would be treated as hostile....

AND EVEN IF IT WAS.... its an open field... not like they dropped in a market.... hell... fire rockets into a country with one of the most well trained army's of the world.... YOU'RE asking to play with "fire"
 
About time somebody asked the bleeding hearts this question.

Are Israel's attacks a long term solution? Probably not. But something had to be done. And all that's heard on this forum is criticism with no alternative to back it up.
 
Lowered the hawkish superior Jew stance, and respect their elected leaders.
Give Palestinian concessions, and play nice with Israel neighbors (bombs & bullets aren't going to win friends, except American).
Push for unity of Israel & Palestinian as a single identity instead of Separatist/Zionism ideal.
Return the lands that was taken from the Palestinians, and media/political campaigning for unity might work (if only Israels take a stance against Nazi extreamist Jews).
Fair treatment and supports for Palestinian as equal.
 
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

 
Originally posted by: poohbear
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

That is what they have been doing, albeit slowly. (which is what they should be doing) However, I find it kind of hard to believe that all the rockets are being shot at settlements instead of just the nearest target of convenience (i.e. city) in Israel. If the settlements just dissapeared overnight, do you really think the attacks would cease?
 
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Originally posted by: poohbear
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

That is what they have been doing, albeit slowly. (which is what they should be doing) However, I find it kind of hard to believe that all the rockets are being shot at settlements instead of just the nearest target of convenience (i.e. city) in Israel. If the settlements just dissapeared overnight, do you really think the attacks would cease?
The rocket might not stop right away, but it have a chance to stop if Israelis kick extreamist out of office and that might give the Palestinians the will to kick their own extreamist out of government.

 
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Originally posted by: poohbear
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

That is what they have been doing, albeit slowly. (which is what they should be doing) However, I find it kind of hard to believe that all the rockets are being shot at settlements instead of just the nearest target of convenience (i.e. city) in Israel. If the settlements just dissapeared overnight, do you really think the attacks would cease?

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Israel withdrawing from Gaza settlements was comparatively easy, from a logistical standpoint. Gaza is about the size of my pinky-toenail, and all the settlements were very close to the Israel-proper/Gaza border. Withdrawing from there just gave them a nice buffer zone to the border.

Settlements in the West Bank, on the other hand, are far too entrenched into WB infrastructure. Text Everything that's blue on that map is Israeli controlled, dark blue means it's a settlement, light blue basically means DMZ. A two state solution would carve the West Bank up, providing Israel with extremely difficult borders to control, and leaving too many Palestinians further enraged over illegal theft of their land. Combine that with how well countries split by another country shoved in between them have done (Kashmir anyone?) and you've got a recipe for disaster.

The only solution is a one secular state solution. It's absurd to suggest that 5 million Jews who now live in the region or 4 million Arabs holding onto what's left or 1 million Jewish settlers in the West Bank or any large number of people should just pick up and leave at this point. Depose the corrupt leadership both in the PA and Israel, tell everybody to kiss and make up, and most importantly, give both the Arab and the Jew EQUAL HUMAN RIGHTS. That includes the right of return to any unused land lost by '48 or '67 refugees (Israel calls it "state land") and also includes the rights of everyone to peacefully stay where they are.

You'd be surprised, a one state solution is completely plausible to everyone but diehards like Hamas and warmongers like some of the Israeli leadership.
 
Originally posted by: NoShangriLa
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Originally posted by: poohbear
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

That is what they have been doing, albeit slowly. (which is what they should be doing) However, I find it kind of hard to believe that all the rockets are being shot at settlements instead of just the nearest target of convenience (i.e. city) in Israel. If the settlements just dissapeared overnight, do you really think the attacks would cease?
The rocket might not stop right away, but it have a chance to stop if Israelis kick extreamist out of office and that might give the Palestinians the will to kick their own extreamist out of government.

The rocket fire provides an interesting conundrum. Many of the Hamas in Gaza firing rockets are firing them into what was THEIR LAND half a century ago. The majority of Gaza's refugee population come from cities like Ashkelon (Arabic: Askalan) which also happens to be a frequent target of rocket fire.
 
Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Originally posted by: poohbear
im just answering the OPs question as to what should israel do in the face "endless" rocket attacks..... pull out the illegal settlements. They're the ones bearing the brunt of rocket attacks, but they shouldnt even be there in the first place.

These jewish extremists that insist on making settlements on palestinian territory have the IDF to protect them, who do the palestinians have? before the PLO emerged, what was the fate of palestinians in the 50's and 60's? nada, they were complety ignored. they were bloody refugees. its an unfortunate fact that the world started paying attention when they took up terrorism, for better or worse. Israel would have never made any concessions to the palestinians if it was'nt for the intifadah. they had to fight for everything they were promised.

That is what they have been doing, albeit slowly. (which is what they should be doing) However, I find it kind of hard to believe that all the rockets are being shot at settlements instead of just the nearest target of convenience (i.e. city) in Israel. If the settlements just dissapeared overnight, do you really think the attacks would cease?

I'm going to have to disagree with you there. Israel withdrawing from Gaza settlements was comparatively easy, from a logistical standpoint. Gaza is about the size of my pinky-toenail, and all the settlements were very close to the Israel-proper/Gaza border. Withdrawing from there just gave them a nice buffer zone to the border.

Settlements in the West Bank, on the other hand, are far too entrenched into WB infrastructure. Text Everything that's blue on that map is Israeli controlled, dark blue means it's a settlement, light blue basically means DMZ. A two state solution would carve the West Bank up, providing Israel with extremely difficult borders to control, and leaving too many Palestinians further enraged over illegal theft of their land. Combine that with how well countries split by another country shoved in between them have done (Kashmir anyone?) and you've got a recipe for disaster.

The only solution is a one secular state solution. It's absurd to suggest that 5 million Jews who now live in the region or 4 million Arabs holding onto what's left or 1 million Jewish settlers in the West Bank or any large number of people should just pick up and leave at this point. Depose the corrupt leadership both in the PA and Israel, tell everybody to kiss and make up, and most importantly, give both the Arab and the Jew EQUAL HUMAN RIGHTS. That includes the right of return to any unused land lost by '48 or '67 refugees (Israel calls it "state land") and also includes the rights of everyone to peacefully stay where they are.

You'd be surprised, a one state solution is completely plausible to everyone but diehards like Hamas and warmongers like some of the Israeli leadership.

Actually, I do see your point there. However, why is Gaza the one reacting to rockets over settlements in the West Bank? Why isn't the West Bank the ones reacting? If we are going to have a multi-state solution, why do we keep insisting on having to link these two geographically separate areas?

I do agree that the best possible solution would be the 1-state solution that you mention, but hatreds and tensions are too high for me to expect to see it in my lifetime, unfortunately.
 
Back
Top