-
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 Negotiates with Hamas--reaches truce
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
QuantumPion
Diamond Member
It seems as if midnight comes before predawn.
Also, the West Bank was not included in the initial truce. It was to come after both sides kept their word.
You would think that Hamas had plenty of time to get the factions to back them.
As I predicted on 6/17 when this was announced.
1) To do so, would condem the soldier.
2) Given the flak over Lebanon last year, they do not need this again
3) Operating on the assumption that Hamas is not serious, the current incidents will provide enough justification that if Israel chooses to flatten Gaza to remove Hamas, they will have shown that it is Hamas and their militants not Israel that are not interested in peace.
Israel may show restraint w/ respect to Gaza, but they will not hold back actions on the West Bank.
Both side knew that going into the room; the way the language of the truce was created.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
Not at all. Bush told Sharon back in 2005 that Israel has to stop building settlements in Palestine for peace to ever be achieved. Unfortunately, the Israeli leadership has always favored expanding their colonization of the West Bank over peace.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../A43682-2005Apr11.html
m1ldslide1
Platinum Member
I'm sure that you're right, at least to a large degree. So what's the solution? Should Israel start rouding up muslims in cattle cars and delivering them to concentration camps where they can be exterminated?
I know this is hyperbole to an extent, but if you set that option at the extreme, isn't every other alternative preferable? Even if those alternatives include repeated failed cease-fires, dozens of Israeli civilian casualties, etc and so on for decades, isn't that still better than mass extermination of the enemy holocaust style?
And those of you who think that Hamas can be beaten militarily, please explain how this would be accomplished, and how things would be better for it. Are there any whackjobs left who still think that terrorists fight pitched battles and that blowing up their towns Vietnam-style discourages others from becoming extremists?
They (Israel or the World) can allow the Arab nations that agreed to be responsible for the Palestinians to actually do so. If the Palestinians can not select a government that wants to be a government, then let them be absorbed and accept the consequences of their actions.
This can be done by removing all the Palestinians out of Gaza and/or the West Bank.
It is extreme, but Israel has put up with this headache for 60 years, let the Arab nations see if they can do any better.
Although, I do not know of any Arab nation that would want them back.
Extermination does not need to be an option; just displacement. When a child misbehaves, you put them in their room, not send them to the yard with all their toys.
Israel has tried to options that are different. With the West Bank, they have isolated with the wall.
w/ Gaza, they tried to allow land for peace that worked with Egypt and Jordan.
The Gaza experiment w/ the Palestinians has failed.
1) A scorched earth policy could work.
2) It is apparent that the extremists care nothing for the pain that they cause to be inflicted and the population will not eliminate the extremists.
So either the status quo exists or selective pruning of the extremists & sponsors will have to happen. Political capital will have to be expended and the sponsors will have to be aware that they will have no place to run&hide if they continue to support the extremists.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
The Arab states can't rightly take "back" people who were born in Palestine and, in the vast majority, have never even been anywhere but Palestine. Surely you can see how a more reasonable solution would be for Israel to withdraw their civilian population from the Palestinian territories, maintaining only a security perimeter as necessary? Granted, that is only a solution for those of us who want to see peace. If your goal is for Israel to continue colonizing Palestine, you've obviously got clear the area of Palestinians one way or another.
Zebo
Elite Member
No - like the brown shirts it's a minority that causes a problem. Most Muslims are good people like Germans were but we are easily controlled by a fanatical minority. Due to 'electing' Hamas (Muslim brown shirts aka jihadists) there should be a collective price to pay. Like Israel not give an inch and retaliate each rocket with one of their rockets. Israel should not be forced back by the international community but allowed to respond in kind. Israel shouldnt give an inch of territory since all the rules of warfare and postwar settlement dictate they got it fair and square with Israels victories in the Six Day War and various intifada. These same rules entitled Italy to keep the Algo Adige despite being 97% ethnic German after World War I. These same rules allowed the French to incorporate, once and for all, Alsace-Lorraine. And the United States to incorporate those western States. These rules shouldn't suddenly cease to apply when it comes to Israel and Israel could do itself a favor by defending their rights with firepower if needed not chamberlain overtures.
In '48 the Arabs were not supposed to take in Palestinians but to administer them. If the Arabs want to use the Palestinians so badly, them let them actually be responsible for them.
Why should Israel be forced to have a dissident population that is determined to exterminate them. w/ other countries (USSR, Balkans, etc), the population wanted to be free of the existing government and setup their own. The Palestinians do not seem to want that (based on their choice of leadership).
I agree a reasonable solution would be for Israel to release territory as it is shown to not be not necessary.
The problem is the definition of "as necessary". If there is violence being targeted toward Israel at the present; should Israel withdraw, hope for the best and then come back in with malice if attacks still continue?
You should not expect Israel to sit back and allow attacks to continue if they withdraw as what happened in Gaza.
For the West Bank, if Israel withdraws in stages as it is shown that violence will not occur, people will not be happy because it is not being done all at once.
When it happened in Gaza, it accomplished nothing for Israel, except exposed actual Israeli territory to attacks.
And as we see now, Hamas does not seem to really want to crack down on the other militant groups. They were willing to make excuses/justification for what happened.
Have you heard what Hamas is preaching?
They share the same ideology as Al Qaeda. They want all non-believers to die.
When an innocent Jew dies to go to the streets cheering.
They send their children to Israel with bombs strapped to their bodies and tell them to press the button. The only reason you don't hear about it anymore is because Israel put an end to it with their wall and tighter checkpoints/restrictions on travel.
Hamas is a horrible ""organization"" and Israel should take them out.
Has Hamas ever apologized for an innocent Israeli killed? Even using the words "we regret" is good enough.
They share the same ideology as Al Qaeda. They want all non-believers to die.
When an innocent Jew dies to go to the streets cheering.
They send their children to Israel with bombs strapped to their bodies and tell them to press the button. The only reason you don't hear about it anymore is because Israel put an end to it with their wall and tighter checkpoints/restrictions on travel.
Hamas is a horrible ""organization"" and Israel should take them out.
Has Hamas ever apologized for an innocent Israeli killed? Even using the words "we regret" is good enough.
Isreal is not interested in nuking the ME.
They just want to fill in the snake pit and let the mongoose loose.
It is the US that is preventing that.
lupi
Lifer
Isreal screwed up after the last war. Once they had taken all that territory, instead of just giving it back they should have gathered all those claiming to be palastenian, taken them to the sinai, and then declared they were ceding the territory for creation of the palastenian state and let the arabs then just fight among themselves.
I notice you did not answer my post, which took your comments seriously and said the logical conclusion from them. Obviously you did not mean what you said.
Whether an 'extremist' is launching the rockets, or organizing the groups who do, or funding the groups who do, or voting for the violence by his government, it's the same.
You said people can be killed for not 'eliminating the extremists' in their society. You are an extremist, supporting massive violence against others.
You ask for me to eliminate you, and say that if I let you continue to vote for the bad extremist policies - like, say, unnecessarily invading a nation - that *I'm* in danger.
So, buck up and stand by your words, since you so casually condemn the civilians of other nations to be killed for not 'eliminating the extremists', you are somehow different?
Tell me how the 'extremists' who invade Vietnam and kill millions for *no good reason* but our own domestic politics are a problem, while other 'extremists' are.
Or perhaps you want to reconsider your double standard that says you are not ok to kill, but other civilians are, for the same basic wrongs.
No, I'm being too hard on you, actually holding you logically accountable for your reckless, immoral advocacy of violence with a double standard. You want to armchair murder people.
Eliminate can be act of removing or preventing them from operating. It does not mean that the civilian population has to kill them.
As has been shown, the authorities in the Palestinian community are not willing to stop the tit for tat exchange - it actually strenghtens their position for the continuing conflict to simmer.
Therefore it becomes up to the civilian population if they are going to allow the extremists to be the source/justification of retaliation by the opponent.
kylebisme
Diamond Member
I didn't suggest anything of the sort.
The difference here is that the existing government in Palestine is the Israeli military occupation; they make the rules, they collect the taxes, and the Palestinians don't have any choice in that.
I suggested Israel should remove it's civlian population from the Palestinian terrotories. Are you attempting to argue that it is necessary for them to contenue doing the opposite?
Fatah cracked down on other milltant groups and all that got them was Israel taking control of yet more of what little land the Palestinians have left, for which the Palestinians voted Fatah out of power. What benift could you even expect Hamas to find in doing the same?
When one chooses to declare war, then one must also accept the results of it.
You have the sponsors that are sending arms and $$ into the Palestinian areas. These are not to encourage stability or peace, but to encourage war. If those people were to become a target, they may have second thoughts about the cause they are supporting.
When the US goes to war, it is understood, that those whom are attacked may retaliate. They may do on the are of conflict and/or attempt to attack oiur homes.
At present, those that are sponsoring terrorism, do not have or care for that understanding. If the results of their actions came home to roost, they may have a different story.
As Craig has stated, being an armchair warrior is different than being out in the field.
And some warriors are now confined to a chair because of age.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
