[QUOTE=chalsall;379784]Imagine.[/QUOTE]

Not hard to imagine at all. However, the deed can't be undone. A complete non-starter.

Get out of the blame game and into the solution game.

[QUOTE=Prime95;379785]Get out of the blame game and into the solution game.[/QUOTE]

What, then, is the solution?

[QUOTE=chalsall;379787]What, then, is the solution?[/QUOTE]

I already stated I don't have one. One may not exist. If one does exist, I believe it will take generations to successfully implement.

My main point was that both sides are still caught up in a pointless "who's more at fault" game rather than working toward a real long-term solution.

[QUOTE=Prime95;379790]I already stated I don't have one. One may not exist. If one does exist, I believe it will take generations to successfully implement.

My main point was that both sides are still caught up in a pointless "who's more at fault" game rather than working toward a real long-term solution.[/QUOTE]

Sorry. I don't actually have any "skin in this game", beyond the deaths which endanger everyone.

Why Israel Lies -by Chris Hedges
 

[URL]http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/why_israel_lies_20140803[/URL]

[QUOTE]The Big Lie destroys any possibility of history and therefore any hope for a dialogue between antagonistic parties that can be grounded in truth and reality. While, as [URL="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arendt/"]Hannah Arendt[/URL] pointed out, the ancient and modern sophists sought to win an argument at the expense of the truth, those who wield the Big Lie “want a more lasting victory at the expense of reality.” The old sophists, she said, “destroyed the dignity of human thought.” Those who resort to the Big Lie “destroy the dignity of human action.” The result, Arendt warned, is that “history itself is destroyed, and its comprehensibility.” And when facts no longer matter, when there is no shared history grounded in the truth, when people foolishly believe their own lies, there can be no useful exchange of information. The Big Lie, used like a bludgeon by Israel, as perhaps it is designed to be, ultimately reduces all problems in the world to the brutish language of violence. And when oppressed people are addressed only through violence they will answer only through violence.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Prime95;379785]
Get out of the blame game and into the solution game.[/QUOTE]

During the Cold war (1946-1989) the Germans used to say 'the shorter the range of the missiles, the more dead amongst the Germans.' Likewise both the Palestinian people and the Israelis are sick and tired of this conflict. Both people have no problems with each others existence and peacefully cooperate with each other on a day to day basis. Plans for a two state solution have been worked out, approved by both sides and are kept maintained.

However, a peaceful solution would have profound effects on the rest of the Middle-East. So, the billions that are needed to maintain a continuous state of war keep flowing in. As long as Europe and the US are not prepared to be as ruthless as Iran and others in their interference the problem is going to remain.

You state you are afraid the current Gaza war approach does not help to increase the Palestinian people to tolerate Israel. Did you notice the people on the West Bank did not go out on the streets like the Arabs in Europe? Did you notice they spent their time in restaurants complaining about Hamas? Maybe they know something we don't.

[QUOTE=tha;379818] Did you notice the people on the West Bank did not go out on the streets like the Arabs in Europe? Did you notice they spent their time in restaurants complaining about Hamas? Maybe they know something we don't.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps.

I believe that as an American citizen I am responsible for the actions of
my government. Even if I did not vote for those currently in power.
I believe this to be true universally.

Hamas was put in place by the citizens of the West Bank. If they disapprove
of their government, it is their responsibility to get rid of Hamas.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379837]Perhaps.

I believe that as an American citizen I am responsible for the actions of
my government. Even if I did not vote for those currently in power.
I believe this to be true universally.

Hamas was put in place by the citizens of the West Bank. If they disapprove
of their government, it is their responsibility to get rid of Hamas.[/QUOTE]

I subscribe to your statement about people being responsible for their government. As far as the citizens of the West Bank are concerned, they did not vote for Hamas, the people of Gaza did. Before those elections, the Iranians, through Hamas, handled out all kind of social welfare goodies. Including many fashionable clothes that women are forbidden to wear in Iran itself. Once they won the elections they kicked Fatah out at the cost of quite some lives. By no means are the people of Gaza able to influence their fate unless they wage a very bloody war against their patrons and their henchman.

Europeans and Americans underestimate the infrastructure that is needed to support a democracy. Elections are only a minor part of the process. It was easy for the ayatollahs to detail the process.

The people in the West Bank know this very well, they know that they are targeted by Iran as well and therefore do not support the actions of Hamas against Israel.

[QUOTE=tha;379841]
Europeans and Americans underestimate the infrastructure that is needed to support a democracy. .[/QUOTE]

It isn't the infrastructure. It is the mindset of the population.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379845]It isn't the infrastructure. It is the mindset of the population.[/QUOTE]

I found [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etXAm-OylQQ"]this interesting[/URL].

Again, I have no skin in this game. I'm simply trying to understand what is actually going on.

ISIS Kills 2,000 Yazidis in One Day
 

[url]http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/25186-isis-kills-2000-yazidis-in-one-day[/url]

The above is horrible beyond imagining. It does not diminish the horrors in Gaza. Terrible things happening in one place do not make terrible things elsewhere any less terrible.

[QUOTE=kladner;379898][url]http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/25186-isis-kills-2000-yazidis-in-one-day[/url]

The above is horrible beyond imagining. It does not diminish the horrors in Gaza. Terrible things happening in one place do not make terrible things elsewhere any less terrible.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

However, it may suggest that Muslims do not value each other's lives
which in turn makes their complaints about Gaza into a farce.

Oh, wait! Its OK if they do it to each other, but not OK for the hated
Jews to do it......

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379915]

However, it may suggest that Muslims do not value each other's lives
which in turn makes their complaints about Gaza into a farce.[/QUOTE]
By the same argument, WW2 suggests that Christians do not (or did not) value each others lives.

I don't find your argument very convincing.

[QUOTE=xilman;379916]By the same argument, WW2 suggests that Christians do not (or did not) value each others lives.
[/QUOTE]

I would say that that is an accurate statement.
[QUOTE]

I don't find your argument very convincing.[/QUOTE]

I didn't expect that it would.

[QUOTE=kladner;379898][url]http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/25186-isis-kills-2000-yazidis-in-one-day[/url]

The above is horrible beyond imagining. It does not diminish the horrors in Gaza. Terrible things happening in one place do not make terrible things elsewhere any less terrible.[/QUOTE]

That is correct. It for sure however exposes the western press, public and politicians as very hypocrite and very ill informed.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379915]However, it may suggest that Muslims do not value each other's lives which in turn makes their complaints about Gaza into a farce.

Oh, wait! Its OK if they do it to each other, but not OK for the hated
Jews to do it......[/QUOTE]

Mr. Silverman...

Would you agree with the statement that humans killing other humans is ill-advised?

[QUOTE=chalsall;379940]Mr. Silverman...

Would you agree with the statement that humans killing other humans is ill-advised?[/QUOTE]

Your question is too wide open.

It is not ill advised in all circumstances.

Not in self defense, for example.

Not if done by request, for purposes of euthansia, as another example.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379943]Your question is too wide open.

It is not ill advised in all circumstances.

Not in self defense, for example.

Not if done by request, for purposes of euthansia, as another example.[/QUOTE]

Very clever. I would expect nothing less from you.

Taking your first example, self defence...

I have been in such situations, and although I could have, I didn't kill.

I certainly didn't kill many hundreds for everyone I knew who died.

May we live in interesting times....

[QUOTE=chalsall;379947][SNIP]May we live in interesting times....[/QUOTE]

I fear your words are already fulfilled, and getting fuller* all the time.

*i.e., our cup runneth over.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379915]However, it may suggest that Muslims do not value each other's lives which in turn makes their complaints about Gaza into a farce.[/QUOTE]

False reasoning - you conflate "ISIS does not value the lives of those who do not agree with its narrow view of Islam" with "Muslims do not value each other's lives."

That sort of overgeneralization is the basest kind of stereotyping.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;379967]False reasoning - you conflate "ISIS does not value the lives of those who do not agree with its narrow view of Islam" with "Muslims do not value each other's lives."
[/QUOTE]

Hmm, not just ISIS I am afraid. Just about every ruler in the Middle East with the exemption of the king of Jordan and of course that small country that in every aspect looks like a northwestern European country but has a mediterranean climate. But indeed, that does not constitute -muslim-.

Europe and the US coerced Israel into releasing 1.000 prisoners, many of them with blood on their hands for killing Israelis. Such a first step was necessary they said to get the Palestinians to do a step as well. Europe and the US were a bit surprised to find out that that step turned out to be the replacement of a Palestinian government that recognizes Israel with a Palestinian government that is ambivalent about that and ended the 'negotiations'.

Next, Israel did not reinvade Gaza when the number of rockets originating from Gaza and aimed at Israeli villages and towns surrounding Gaza went up a bit. Israel did not reinvade Gaza when three teenagers were brutally murdered in what was obvious an invitation to do so, a clear escalation of the conflict. Israel did the reinvading of Gaza after Hamas extended the range of its missiles to about all of Israel and increased the amount of missiles to exceptional numbers.

The 72 hour cease fire started with the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the Gaza strip and a volley of missiles from Gaza to Israel so close to the begin of the ceasefire start that the normal return of fire to originating positions was impossible without passing the official time of the cease fire begin. Israel did choose to ignore that last volley.

Did everyone notice who started firing today after the cease fire ended and did every one notice who was willing to extend the cease fire?

[QUOTE=tha;379987]Hmm, not just ISIS I am afraid. Just about every ruler in the Middle East with the exemption of the king of Jordan and of course that small country that in every aspect looks like a northwestern European country but has a mediterranean climate. But indeed, that does not constitute -muslim-.[/QUOTE]

Add to this the culture, pervasive throughout the Muslim world
of "honor killings", executions for "blasphemy", "infidelity", and other
minor crimes, rape of women under the badge of law for imagined
offenses, female circumcision, etc. etc., and I think that is clear
that as a culture Muslims do not respect other people who differ from
them.

Not "all" Muslims? Certainly, not "all". But the attitude is pervasive throughout
Muslim teachings. Kill the infidel.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379995]Not "all" Muslims? Certainly, not "all". But the attitude is pervasive throughout Muslim teachings. Kill the infidel.[/QUOTE]Go read Surah 109, Al-Kafirun. This quote from the Wikipedia article may be informative.
[QUOTE]
English Translation by Muhammad Shameem, Mohammad Wali Raazi and Muhammad Taqi Usmani:
[1] Say, "O disbelievers,
[2] I do not worship that which you worship,
[3] nor do you worship the One whom I worship.
[4] And neither I am going to worship that which you have worshipped,
[5] nor will you worship the One whom I worship.
[6] For you is your faith, and for me, my faith."

...

[Qur'an 109:1-6]
1. 1Say, "O you disbelievers/unbelievers [who knowingly cover up the truth, who obstinately reject faith, disbelievers in Allah, in His Oneness, in His Angels, in His Books, in His Messengers, in the Day of Resurrection, and in Al-Qadar (Predestination, Fate, Destiny), etc.],2
1. Surat Al-Kafirun: The Disbelievers. This surah of six verses was revealed in Makkah. It takes its name from the word al-kafirun in the first verse. Kafir means one who rejects faith in one, some, or all the principles of faith that must be believed in by a believing Muslim. The surah tells the Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, and all other Muslims to be sure, determined, and steadfast in their faith against the unbelievers, [b]and that they should not compel the unbelievers to accept faith. It defines the right attitude to those who reject Faith: in matters of Truth we can make no compromise, but there is no need to persecute or abuse anyone for his faith or belief.[/b]
The man of Faith holds fast to his faith, because he knows it is true. The man of the world, rejecting Faith, clings hard to worldly interests. Let him mind his worldly interests, but let him not force his interests on men sincere and true, by favor, force or fraud.
The Prophet mentioned that this surah is disassociation from shirk (worship of anything other than Allah) for him who recites it. (Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi.)
2. Faith is a matter of personal conviction, and does not depend on worldly motives. Worship should depend on pure and sincere Faith, but often does not: for motives of worldly gain, ancestral custom, social conventions or imitative instincts, or a lethargic instinct to shrink from enquiring into the real significance of solemn acts and the motives behind them, reduce a great deal of the world's worship to sin, selfishness, or futility. Symbolic idols may themselves be merely instruments for safeguarding the privileges of a selfish priestly class, or the ambitions, greed, or lust of private individuals. Hence the insistence of Islam and its Teacher on the pure worship of the One True God. The Prophet firmly resisted all appeals to worldly motives, and stood firm to his Message of eternal Monotheism.
2. I do not worship what you worship.1
1. This verse is a declaration that there can be no reconciliation between faith in God and other so-called, invented deities.
3. Nor are you worshippers of what I worship.1
1. The unbelievers to whom the verse is addressed, or whom God's Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, is addressing are those who are so obstinate in rejecting the faith that God informed His Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, that they would never believe.
4. Nor will I be a worshipper of what you worship.
5. Nor will you be worshippers of what I worship.
6. You have your religion/faith/way (atheism, agnosticism, deism, theism, paganism, idolatry, polytheism, henotheism, pantheism, animism, reincarnation, etc., with whatever it will bring you), and I have a religion (Islamic Monotheism, with whatever it will bring me)."[/quote]
Emphasis mine.

[QUOTE=xilman;379999]Go read Surah 109, Al-Kafirun. This quote from the Wikipedia article may be informative.

Emphasis mine.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. IN THEORY.

There is a big difference between practice and theory.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;380004]Agreed. IN THEORY.

There is a big difference between practice and theory.[/QUOTE]True in every religion I've yet studied.

[QUOTE=xilman;380005]True in every religion I've yet studied.[/QUOTE]

The biblical old testament - most of which is derived from the Judaic holy texts - is filled with "righteous slaughter of the infidels" by God's self-anointed chosen people, the Jews.

Not terribly long ago in the context of the judeochristian religious history the Christians were regularly invading the holy lands and committing "righteous slaughter of the infidels".

Now followers of these 2 religions say "we are no longer so", but since their own holy texts apparently permitted (and in the case of the shared older texts even laud) such atrocities, one must reject either the holy texts as being atrocity manuals or the "we done changed our ways" promises of their adherents as being hollow, yes?

[QUOTE=ewmayer;380026]The biblical old testament - most of which is derived from the Judaic holy texts - is filled with "righteous slaughter of the infidels" by God's self-anointed chosen people, the Jews.

Not terribly long ago in the context of the judeochristian religious history the Christians were regularly invading the holy lands and committing "righteous slaughter of the infidels".

Now followers of these 2 religions say "we are no longer so", but since their own holy texts apparently permitted (and in the case of the shared older texts even laud) such atrocities, one must reject either the holy texts as being atrocity manuals or the "we done changed our ways" promises of their adherents as being hollow, yes?[/QUOTE]

yes.

[QUOTE=xilman;379999]Go read Surah 109, Al-Kafirun.[/QUOTE]

I've not made a study of this, so my understanding may be severely flawed. I was under the impression this section was superseded by the infamous "sword verse." Could you comment on that?

[QUOTE=ewmayer;380026]The biblical old testament - most of which is derived from the Judaic holy texts - is filled with "righteous slaughter of the infidels" by God's self-anointed chosen people, the Jews.

Not terribly long ago in the context of the judeochristian religious history the Christians were regularly invading the holy lands and committing "righteous slaughter of the infidels".

Now followers of these 2 religions say "we are no longer so", but since their own holy texts apparently permitted (and in the case of the shared older texts even laud) such atrocities, one must reject either the holy texts as being atrocity manuals or the "we done changed our ways" promises of their adherents as being hollow, yes?[/QUOTE]

Army surgery manuals of the American Civil war included detailed descriptions of how to get the patient drunk and how to saw off the limb in the most efficient methods. Doctors of the time subscribed to the brutal methods described.

Now doctors claim that such brutal methods are very rare and that such atrocity manuals should be rejected because "we done changed our ways."

I only point this out because you are only making a argument (and not a particularly compelling one) against the kind of static fundamentalism inherent in small sections of the adherents of those particular religions.

It might also be understood that a living god, note I don't subscribe to such a silly notion, might treat society in the same way that parents teach children, first as they are very young "because I said so" and then later, "because it is better for you," and later "because it is better for all."

we could talk at length in another forum about the many Christians stuck in the child learning section. But others are not immune, see also objectivists and libertarians.

[QUOTE=wblipp;380082]I've not made a study of this, so my understanding may be severely flawed. I was under the impression this section was superseded by the infamous "sword verse." Could you comment on that?[/QUOTE]Can but, perhaps, should not. As I've made clear on numerous occasions, I am not a Muslim and although I have read almost all the Qu'ran (some of it many times) I am not qualified to make definitive judgements as to its meaning.

Despite the above misgivings I will comment, but only to the extent that in my opionion the two appear to be in conflict. Not that there is anything unusual about that --- they may each be appropriate in different circumstances.

Compare the two English proverbs: "Look before you leap" and "He who hesitates is lost".

[QUOTE=chappy;380084]Army surgery manuals of the American Civil war included detailed descriptions of how to get the patient drunk and how to saw off the limb in the most efficient methods. Doctors of the time subscribed to the brutal methods described.

Now doctors claim that such brutal methods are very rare and that such atrocity manuals should be rejected because "we done changed our ways."

I only point this out because you are only making a argument (and not a particularly compelling one) against the kind of static fundamentalism inherent in small sections of the adherents of those particular religions.[/QUOTE]

What an inane analogy - surgery manuals are not immutable holy texts, and are presumably generally based on the best science of the day. Which in the above case predated modern anesthesia and surgical hygiene based on the revolution known as microbial science.

Now about your recent set of edits to the Old Testament...

and my point is that most Christians don't see the Bible as an immutable set of texts. Not even the ones that claim they do actually do.

Mostly it's just the loud ones. As with many belief systems, the loud ones don't necessarily represent the majority view.

And I'd disagree with you, in fact, about the level to which Civil War doctors on both sides adhered to the texts. They were fanatic in their loyalty and it took decades to overcome the bad practices engendered in a few leather-bound pages.

[QUOTE=chappy;380098]and my point is that most Christians don't see the Bible as an immutable set of texts. Not even the ones that claim they do actually do.[/QUOTE]
Ah, OK - that I can more easily agree with.

[QUOTE]Mostly it's just the loud ones. As with many belief systems, the loud ones don't necessarily represent the majority view.[/QUOTE]
The problem is that the loud ones (conflating 'influential' and 'loud', which is not entirely precise but will serve) are the ones that start crusades and pogroms. The existence of the "silent majority" which allegedly disagrees with the extreme practices is of little comfort to the victims of same.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;379764]Relevance?

I'm having brain damage. Carthage was destroyed.......[/QUOTE]

Right! And Palestine in being destroyed too. Little by little. It is the stated and unstate" policy for large parts of the Israeli political spectrum and indeed its government. It is not too much of a reach to imagine Netanyahu or Lieberman to finish their meetings with such a statement.

George's posts have been the most sensible in this thread so far. I do not have anything to add to his proposals/comments.

PS: This Chomsky piece makes a good argument as to why the Israelis are bombing Gaza now. [url]http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/25227-focus-the-nightmare-in-gaza[/url]

[QUOTE=garo;380128]PS: This Chomsky piece makes a good argument as to why the Israelis are bombing Gaza now. [url]http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/25227-focus-the-nightmare-in-gaza[/url][/QUOTE]

I read it. Can mr. Chomsky explain how the releasing of 1.000 prisoners, many of them with blood on their hands, in batches spanning a number of months leading up to the present conflict, fits in this scheme? Or does his scheme then suddenly fall apart? The piece is ridden with other false statements too, some of them pointed out in the comments on that page.

Dennis Ross disagrees with Chomsky. He also comes up with some suggestions along the line of thinking of mr. Woltman earlier in this thread.

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hamas-could-have-chosen-peace-instead-it-made-gaza-suffer/2014/08/08/eefd2b48-1d83-11e4-82f9-2cd6fa8da5c4_story.html?hpid=z3"]opinion written in the washington post[/URL]

[QUOTE=garo;380128]Right! And Palestine in being destroyed too. Little by little. It is the stated and unstate" policy for large parts of the Israeli political spectrum and indeed its government. It is not too much of a reach to imagine Netanyahu or Lieberman to finish their meetings with such a statement.[/QUOTE]

Opening statement from Wikipedia on "Final Solution":

[QUOTE]The [B]Final Solution[/B] ([URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language"]German[/URL]: [I](die) Endlösung[/I], German pronunciation: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_German"][ˈɛntˌløːzʊŋ][/URL]) or [B]Final Solution to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Question"]Jewish Question[/URL][/B] ([URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_language"]German[/URL]: [I]die Endlösung der Judenfrage[/I], German pronunciation: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_German"][diː ˈɛntˌløːzʊŋ deːɐ̯ ˈjuːdn̩ˌfʀaːgə][/URL]) was [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany"]Nazi Germany[/URL]'s plan during [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II"]World War II[/URL] to systematically [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judenfrei"]rid[/URL] Europe of its [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews"]Jewish population[/URL] through [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide"]genocide[/URL].[/QUOTE]"Palaestina delenda est." anyone?

[url=www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39367.htm]The Root Cause of the Never-Ending Conflict in Palestine; and How to Fix It[/url] -- by a Dutch Jewish WW2 survivor
[quote] By Palestinians, I mean all those who inhabited this region in the centuries during which it was under Turkish rule (1517-1917). Some of those people were Jewish. I include these Jews among the Palestinians, since they took no part in the Zionist colonization of Palestine from about 1890 onwards.

Palestine could be defined as the entire region that the League of Nations assigned to Great Britain by mandate in 1923. This included present-day Jordan, to the east of the river Jordan. Here, however, I am using Palestine to mean the entire British mandate territory with the exception of present-day Jordan. For about the past hundred years, this Palestine, excluding Jordan, has been regarded as an emigration destination for people calling themselves "Zionists." These are people originating from a large number of countries where Jews have lived and still live today. I regard this emigration as unlawful, since it was forced on the local population by foreign powers. The people who lived in this region did not have any resources either to repel this flow of emigrants or to conclusively disprove the political and ideological justifications that were presented for it.

The 1917 Balfour Declaration is regarded as one of these justifications. However, no one maintains that the then government of Great Britain had any authority to assign the land of Palestine to anyone other than the people who were living there. Similarly, although the United Nations assigned a portion of Palestine to the immigrants in the so-called Partition of Palestine in 1947, its own Charter stated that it had no right to do so without obtaining the consent of the mandate territory's population.[/quote]

Let My People Go -by Chris Hedges
 

[URL]http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/let_my_people_go_20140810[/URL]
[QUOTE]Why does God weep in the Promised Land?
God weeps because families, huddled in terror in their homes, are dismembered and killed by Israeli bombs. God weeps because mothers howl in grief over the bodies of their children in [URL="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/07/gaza-un-school-hit-201473041918975321.html"]U.N. schools hit[/URL] by Israeli shells. God weeps because the old and disabled, who could not flee the deadly Israeli advance, died helpless and afraid. God weeps because the powerful, here and in Israel, lie and dissemble to justify murder. And God weeps for all those who stand by and do nothing.

God weeps because the assault on Gaza is not about Israel’s right to self-defense or about removing Hamas from power. It is not about achieving peace. God weeps because the assault on Gaza is about the decades-long campaign to destroy and ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people from their land. God weeps because Israel is constructing squalid, lawless and impoverished ghettos where life for Palestinians is barely sustainable. God weeps because Israel restricts or shuts off movement, food, medicine and goods to accentuate the human misery. God weeps because Israel has turned Gaza, now largely without power, running water and sewage [systems], into a vast gulag.

God weeps because the failure to condemn Israeli war crimes by our political establishment and our compliant media betrays the memory of those killed in other genocides, from the Holocaust to Cambodia to Rwanda to Bosnia. God weeps because we have failed to learn the fundamental lesson of the Holocaust, which is not that Jews are unique or eternal victims, but that when you have the capacity to stop genocide, and you do not, you are culpable. And we [Americans], who provide 95 percent of Israel’s weapons, are very culpable.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;380210][url=www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39367.htm]The Root Cause of the Never-Ending Conflict in Palestine; and How to Fix It[/url] -- by a Dutch Jewish WW2 survivor[/QUOTE]

Well, then surely this easily translates into a call for descendants of European colonists to leave the territory they occopied from the native American people. Welcome back to Germany mr. Mayer.

Mayer by the way is a German name transcribed from the Hebrew Meir.

[QUOTE=tha;380276]Well, then surely this easily translates into a call for descendants of European colonists to leave the territory they occopied from the native American people. Welcome back to Germany mr. Mayer.

Mayer by the way is a German name transcribed from the Hebrew Meir.[/QUOTE]Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Herr Mayer comes from Österreich and not from das Vierte Reich.

[QUOTE=xilman;380280]Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Herr Mayer comes from Österreich and not from das Vierte Reich.[/QUOTE]

Typically of trolls, when their 'arguments' run headlong into contrary and better-founded counterarguments and/or facts, they resort to ad hominems. It's even funnier when the latter are as ill-conceived as the arguments.

You'll have to forgive tha, he's probably still smarting from having his recent claim to the effect of "US never aided the Syrian rebels" demolished over in the NMET2014 thread.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;380312]
You'll have to forgive tha, he's probably still smarting from having his recent claim to the effect of "US never aided the Syrian rebels" demolished over in the NMET2014 thread.[/QUOTE]

I never stated that the US never aided the Syrian rebels and I was fully aware of the training being given to them in Jordan and the US strategy for the area around Dera'a. I stated that the US aid to the FSA was insufficient and that as a result groups like ISIS had come in much stronger. I still maintain that the current administration has a bad track record and that the lack of support to allies will hunt the US for the next decades.

The quote you gave is so plainly wrong and ridiculous that you practically asked for a reply like I gave you.

I am happy to let the other readers decide just how 'ridiculous' my paraphrase of what you said is:

[QUOTE=tha;380141]The main conflict going on in the Middle East is still Sunni-Shi'i (Saudi-Arabia vs. Iran). Syria is currently the main battlefield together with Iraq. The current Obama administration has been very appeasing towards Iran, but with nothing to show for in return.

Some of the Gulf states have provided backing for what is now ISIS. (or IS or ISIL). [u]When the Obama administration turned down requests for help[/u] as he failed to see the existential threat from Teheran they organized it themselves, as simple as that. [u]We don't want Iran to use Syria as a staging ground for terror on scales never seen before and we don't want ISIS to do that. So, my suggestion is we get into the game ourselves.[/u] Next best is to work with the guys available that best suit our interests and views. If that support is mediocre at best these guys will be forced to cooperate at some level with the guys we don't like at all.[/QUOTE]

Now, if you genuinely believe that "running an illegal covert weapons pipeline to Syrian rebels" is compatible with "turning down request for help from/for Syrian rebels", then there's no point arguing with you. Have a wonderful day, and please consider getting up from behind your keyboard and going to volunteer to do some of the "our-interest-serving fighting of the good fight" you so love to advocate. Wouldn't want others to accuse you of being a "proud member of the 51st chairborne" keyboard-warrior chickenhawk now, would you?

[url=http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/without-approval-bombshell.html]Israel got tank shell that killed 20 at UN school from US without Obama’s approval — WSJ bombshell[/url]
[quote]When Walt and Mearsheimer published their book on the Israel lobby in 2007, I thought, they’ve scratched the surface, we don’t know the half of it. Well here you go, friends. The Wall Street Journal reports today that even as Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were trying to brake Israel during the slaughter in Gaza, Israel relied on its “allies” in “Congress and elsewhere in the administration” to dip into American weapons stocks to refill its guns, without Obama’s approval.

And those tank shells were used on a UN school on July 30, killing 20 Palestinian civilians. The US is a partner to this war crime, a Palestinian says in the WSJ article.

It’s a shocking report about Israel’s autonomy inside the US government, in defiance even of the president.
[i]
White House and State Department officials who were leading U.S. efforts to rein in Israel’s military campaign in the Gaza Strip were caught off guard last month when they learned that the Israeli military had been quietly securing supplies of ammunition from the Pentagon without their approval.

Since then the Obama administration has tightened its control on arms transfers to Israel. But Israeli and U.S. officials say that the adroit bureaucratic maneuvering made it plain how little influence the White House and State Department have with the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu —and that both sides know it.

In addition, current and former American officials say, U.S.-Israel ties have been hurt by leaks that they believe were meant to undercut the administration’s standing by mischaracterizing its position and delay a cease-fire. The battles have driven U.S.-Israeli relations to the lowest point since President Barack Obama took office.
...
Today, many administration officials say the Gaza conflict—the third between Israel and Hamas in under six years—has persuaded them that Mr. Netanyahu and his national security team are both reckless and untrustworthy.

Israeli officials, in turn, describe the Obama administration as weak and naive, and are doing as much as they can to bypass the White House in favor of allies in Congress and elsewhere in the administration.
[/i]
Allies [i]elsewhere in the administration[/i]? What’s that mean? The lobby’s moles? The piece explicitly references the power of the Israel lobby:
[i]
American officials say they believe they have been able to exert at least some influence over Mr. Netanyahu during the Gaza conflict. But they admit their influence has been weakened as he has used his sway in Washington, from the Pentagon and Congress to lobby groups, to defuse U.S. diplomatic pressure on his government over the past month.[/i][/quote]
I guess it's not enough that Israel [url=http://www.listosaur.com/politics/top-10-recipients-of-united-states-foreign-aid/]has been the largest cumulative US aid recipient[/url] -- and typically also the largest on a per-annum basis -- since WW2. Of course casting U.S. administrations as helpless bystanders in the thrall of AIPAC is disingenuous, as the relationship is far more active than that, especially on the intelligence front:

[url=https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/08/04/cash-weapons-surveillance/]Cash, Weapons and Surveillance: the U.S. is a Key Party to Every Israeli Attack[/url]
[quote]The U.S. government has long lavished overwhelming aid on Israel, providing cash, weapons and surveillance technology that play a crucial role in Israel’s attacks on its neighbors. But top secret documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden shed substantial new light on how the U.S. and its partners directly enable Israel’s military assaults – such as the one on Gaza.

Over the last decade, the NSA has significantly increased the surveillance assistance it provides to its Israeli counterpart, the Israeli SIGINT National Unit (ISNU; also known as Unit 8200), including data used to monitor and target Palestinians. In many cases, the NSA and ISNU work cooperatively with the British and Canadian spy agencies, the GCHQ and CSEC.

The relationship has, on at least one occasion, entailed the covert payment of a large amount of cash to Israeli operatives. Beyond their own surveillance programs, the American and British surveillance agencies rely on U.S.-supported Arab regimes, including the Jordanian monarchy and even the Palestinian Authority Security Forces, to provide vital spying services regarding Palestinian targets.

The new documents underscore the indispensable, direct involvement of the U.S. government and its key allies in Israeli aggression against its neighbors. That covert support is squarely at odds with the posture of helpless detachment typically adopted by Obama officials and their supporters.

President Obama, in his press conference on Friday, said ”it is heartbreaking to see what’s happening there,” referring to the weeks of civilian deaths in Gaza – “as if he’s just a bystander, watching it all unfold,” observed Brooklyn College Professor Corey Robin. Robin added: ”Obama talks about Gaza as if it were a natural disaster, an uncontrollable biological event.”

Each time Israel attacks Gaza and massacres its trapped civilian population – at the end of 2008, in the fall of 2012, and now again this past month – the same process repeats itself in both U.S. media and government circles: the U.S. government feeds Israel the weapons it uses and steadfastly defends its aggression both publicly and at the U.N.; the U.S. Congress unanimously enacts one resolution after the next to support and enable Israel; and then American media figures pretend that the Israeli attack has nothing to do with their country, that it’s just some sort of unfortunately intractable, distant conflict between two equally intransigent foreign parties in response to which all decent Americans helplessly throw up their hands as though they bear no responsibility.

“The United States has been trying to broker peace in the Middle East for the past 20 years,” wrote the liberal commentator Kevin Drum in Mother Jones, last Tuesday. The following day, CNN reported that the Obama administration ”agreed to Israel’s request to resupply it with several types of ammunition … Among the items being bought are 120mm mortar rounds and 40mm ammunition for grenade launchers.”

The new Snowden documents illustrate a crucial fact: Israeli aggression would be impossible without the constant, lavish support and protection of the U.S. government, which is anything but a neutral, peace-brokering party in these attacks. And the relationship between the NSA and its partners on the one hand, and the Israeli spying agency on the other, is at the center of that enabling.
Tally of UN Vote on July 22, 2014 to investigate violations of international law in West Bank and Gaza (Credit: Ken Roth, Human Rights Watch)[/quote]

Lastly, the opening WSJ piece also explicitly refutes claims by Israel and its apologists of "taking care to minimize civilian casualties":
[quote]White House and State Department officials had already become increasingly disturbed by what they saw as heavy-handed battlefield tactics that they believed risked a humanitarian catastrophe capable of harming regional stability and Israel’s interests.

They were especially concerned that Israel was using artillery, instead of more precision-guided munitions, in densely populated areas. The realization that munitions transfers had been made without their knowledge came as a shock[/quote]

[QUOTE=ewmayer;380327]I am happy to let the other readers decide just how 'ridiculous' my paraphrase of what you said is:

Now, if you genuinely believe that "running an illegal covert weapons pipeline to Syrian rebels" is compatible with "turning down request for help from/for Syrian rebels", then there's no point arguing with you. Have a wonderful day, and please consider getting up from behind your keyboard and going to volunteer to do some of the "our-interest-serving fighting of the good fight" you so love to advocate. Wouldn't want others to accuse you of being a "proud member of the 51st chairborne" keyboard-warrior chickenhawk now, would you?[/QUOTE]

It makes little sense to run a covert weapons pipeline if at the same time you make clear that there are limits to the amount of support you want to give. That makes it easy for the other party to raise the stakes. As far as the rat line is concerned the CIA was late to the party. Most of the weapons that came on the market were already transferred through the Sinaï desert to Gaza and other places in the world. 'The rat line' is a good article. I once had the honor to meet with Seymour Hersh, we discussed the Middle-East and he offered me his email address for exchange of info.

As far as the keyboard chicken hawk remark is concerned, my desert army uniform is still proudly hanging within easy reach, the sand has been washed out of it and my war time badges are sewed on it.

[QUOTE=tha;380971]It makes little sense to run a covert weapons pipeline if at the same time you make clear that there are limits to the amount of support you want to give. That makes it easy for the other party to raise the stakes. As far as the rat line is concerned the CIA was late to the party. Most of the weapons that came on the market were already transferred through the Sinaï desert to Gaza and other places in the world. 'The rat line' is a good article. I once had the honor to meet with Seymour Hersh, we discussed the Middle-East and he offered me his email address for exchange of info.[/QUOTE]
If you still have his e-mail, please be so kind as to forward one question I have for him, namely what he thinks of the shameful non-reporting in the US MSM of the later findings re. the gas attack and the rat line. To hear Hillary tell it, she was blissfully ignorant of the illegal weapons-smuggling even though it occurred on her watch as Secretary of State. Which US executive department is in charge of all of those diplomatic missions and embassies, Hillary?

[QUOTE]As far as the keyboard chicken hawk remark is concerned, my desert army uniform is still proudly hanging within easy reach, the sand has been washed out of it and my war time badges are sewed on it.[/QUOTE]

Then, given the long sorry post-WW2 history of US military "interventions" for the (alleged) purposes of “humanitarian intervention/regime change/spreading-of-freedom-and-democracy”, I am baffled why anyone who participated in one of said misguided, now-clearly-failed operations would be advocating more of the same, or more blindly one-sided US support for a Zionist/racist state of the kind which has turned the entire Muslim world - and increasingly much of the non-Muslim world - against the US.

A friend - who remains a friend even though his perma-hawkish tendencies echo yours - e-mailed yesterday, with these thoughts related to recent events in Iraq:
[quote]My question is who are the idiots who voted in Democrat primaries for people who opposed the surge in Iraq? There's the problem, right there. There can be reasonable disagreement about the wisdom of invading Iraq in 2003 and it is clear that the plan that Iraq would be governed by the INC was a disastrous, idiotic blunder, but the surge was a brilliant success that avoided an far worse outcome that what we have now.[/quote]
As is almost ubiquitous with US military interventions post-WW2, whatever the success of the initial operation (or the followup in this case, as the surge was an attempt to make up for a horribly idiotic and wildly optimistic initial battle plan, predicated on the delusion that air power would allow for quick success with relatively few "boots on the ground", and after the quick success and show of overwhelming might, Iraq would quickly "fall in line" and allow for a smooth transition to 'Merican-style democracy), this was since then entirely undone by political blunders and/or corruption. In Iraq the US supported a known corrupt and Shia-centric poltical bloc, failed to rein the leadership in during the past near-10 years as their corruption and oppression of the other major ethnoreligious groups in the country (Sunnis and Kurds) quickly rivaled the abuses of the Hussein regime, and now acts surprised that pro-Sunni militants - many of whom are US-trained-and-armed former "moderate Syrian rebels" - are running amok.

As with the US support for the Afghan mujahedin in the wake of the Soviet invasion of that country during the Carter presidency, the problem is a combination of lack of follow-through and active support of deeply corrupt but ostensibly "US-friendly" regimes.

Or do you honestly believe that the service or yourself and the millions of others in that region in the past 25 years has been honored by the US political leadership in their decision-making with respect to "nation building"?

On our motorcycle ride today we passed by a church sign that said "PRAY FOR ISRAEL".

As if the citizens there are being besieged or something awful.

We also saw a church sign that said "THE FEAR OF GOD IS THE FIRST STEP TO UNDERSTANDING".

As if we want any interaction we have with anyone to be based on fear.

:mike:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;380987]On our motorcycle ride today we passed by a church sign that said "PRAY FOR ISRAEL".

As if the citizens there are being besieged or something awful.
[/QUOTE]

You may want to use [URL="http://redcolormapweb.azurewebsites.net/english"]this handy web app[/URL] to have an alarm sounded at your desktop every time an air raid siren goes of in Israel and you have 15 seconds or a little more to go to the shelter.
I don't know if you count incoming missiles from Gaza to Israel, but I stopped following the counting at 10,000 and that was already quite some time ago.

[QUOTE=tha;381012]You may want to use [URL="http://redcolormapweb.azurewebsites.net/english"]this handy web app[/URL] to have an alarm sounded at your desktop every time an air raid siren goes of in Israel and you have 15 seconds or a little more to go to the shelter.
I don't know if you count incoming missiles from Gaza to Israel, but I stopped following the counting at 10,000 and that was already quite some time ago.[/QUOTE]

This is such unadulterated bull shit. Remind me again how many Israeli civilians have died in this conflict this year? And how many Palestinian civilians. So spare me the sympathy apps.

An excellent article on Israeli military policy and ethics.

[url]http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/israel-s-assault-on-gaza-is-an-expression-of-the-dahiya-doctrine-1.1902934[/url]

[QUOTE]Surrender or we will keep killing your children.[/QUOTE]

Given that a lot of missiles have been fired into Israel yet there have been very few casualties, do the people there live in constant fear? If they do, is it a rational fear?

Is there a "handy web app" that beeps every time a person in Gaza dies?

[QUOTE=garo;381018]This is such unadulterated bull shit. Remind me again how many Israeli civilians have died in this conflict this year? And how many Palestinian civilians. So spare me the sympathy apps.[/QUOTE]

Once again, this is a very asymmetric war. Very different objectives on both sides, very different values, and very different type of warfare. If this war was about killing as many people as possible, or just removing them from one place to another the entire Gaza strip could be stripped of its population in two to three days. Israel tries to protect its citizens and the civil population of the Gaza strip to a level that no other army in Europe is capable of.

The app is not a sypathy app. It was developed for actual use in Israel itself. (That is why it is in Hebrew). The English version is for relatives and friends abroad. If you have no direct link with the conflict you can use it as an awareness app.

And the link to the newspaperarticle you gave makes me understand your position. It could not be any further from the reality than it is

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;381022]Given that a lot of missiles have been fired into Israel yet there have been very few casualties, do the people there live in constant fear? If they do, is it a rational fear?

Is there a "handy web app" that beeps every time a person in Gaza dies?[/QUOTE]

The very few casualties are because of the actions taken by the Israelis. Like building a shelter in each house and every other building and by making sure that the warnings from the Israeli army are a given in due time. (You got 15 seconds, sometimes more to get into the shelters.) Also, most of the people in the area around Gaza have moved to other places.

There is also a "handy web app" available for the Palestinian people. If the house of your neighbours gets bombed (leveled) you get a number of warnings in advance and you have 5 minutes to take appropiate action. First is the famous phone call by a live operator. (The house of your neighbours will be destroyed in 5 minutes, please leave the area.) Then there are the knocks on the roof, in case there are people without phones present. Palestinians don't need shelters. They usually climb on the roof of their own building, grab their phones and film the bombing of the house of their neighbors.

[QUOTE=tha;381056]Once again, this is a very asymmetric war. Very different objectives on both sides, very different values, and very different type of warfare. If this war was about killing as many people as possible, or just removing them from one place to another the entire Gaza strip could be stripped of its population in two to three days. Israel tries to protect its citizens and the civil population of the Gaza strip to a level that no other army in Europe is capable of.[/QUOTE]

These are just your opinions and you have failed to provide absolutely any evidence to support these claims. The Israeli propaganda that you repeat about asymmetric war are hasbara talking points to distract from the fact that Israel has killed thousands. It requires some chutzpah to claim that the other side doesn't care about its dead so we can kill as much as we want. Disgusting!

The war is not about killing as many people as possible. Simply because if Israel carried out a large scale genocide or forced eviction, even the US public would be revolted and Israel will lose US support. So they calculate how far they can go without losing support and stop at the limit or just beyond it.

Let us forget for a second about your utterly spurious and unproven claims that Hamas doesn't care about its dead. Do the people whose family members are being killed also not care. What about the relatives of the thousands who have died? Hasn't Israel caused far far more suffering than Hamas?

[QUOTE=tha;381061]
There is also a "handy web app" available for the Palestinian people. If the house of your neighbours gets bombed (leveled) you get a number of warnings in advance and you have 5 minutes to take appropiate action. First is the famous phone call by a live operator. (The house of your neighbours will be destroyed in 5 minutes, please leave the area.) Then there are the knocks on the roof, in case there are people without phones present. [/QUOTE]

Leave and go where? Out of Gaza? Because that is what the Israelis want. The "famous" phone calls are just another form of psychological warfare. And in any case, do you have any statistics - not supplied by the Israeli army - that tell us how many bombings are preceded by these terror calls? Yes terror calls because that is what the motive is, to inspire terror in the populace. Like the other infamous "shock and awe".

[QUOTE]
Palestinians don't need shelters. They usually climb on the roof of their own building, grab their phones and film the bombing of the house of their neighbors.
[/QUOTE]

Nice one. Worthy of Goebbels really. The enemy are not like us. They don't need shelters they don't care about their dead. They are less than human. So let us kill them with impunity. Hats off to you tha-Goebbels!

When they were kidnapping slaves from Africa they said: Blacks don't need shelters. They don't care about their lives like we do.

During the second world war they said: The Jews are unter-menschen and dirty. They don't need shelters. They don't care about their lives the same way that we do.

During the Vietnam war they said: The Gooks don't need shelters. They are happy to die. They don't have the same regard for life as we do. So keep killing them.

And now they say: The Palestinians don't need shelters. They usually climb on the roof of their own building, grab their phones and film the bombing of the house of their neighbors.




Anyone else detect a pattern?

[QUOTE=garo;381282]Anyone else detect a pattern?[/QUOTE]
Certainly. The dehumanising tactics which you describe so eloquently are effective and widespread propaganda methods, whether applied to war zones as in the Gaza conflict and other historical wars you mention, or merely to repress whole groups of people in areas of the world where there is no war. The Goebbels reference seems over the top though when applied to people discussing the issues here, I think. I can certainly imagine myself reading one of the many articles you see if you google something like "Palestinians don't need shelters" and then naively repeating what the article says here on this forum.

[QUOTE=garo;381280]Hats off to you tha-Goebbels![/QUOTE]

You have failed to read the text I posted. The rewording of it by you turnes it 180 degrees different and that it what you protest against. Proof that you can read what I posted and you may get a reply.

[QUOTE=tha;381289]You have failed to read the text I posted. The rewording of it by you turnes it 180 degrees different and that it what you protest against. Proof that you can read what I posted and you may get a reply.[/QUOTE]
Well, maybe you didn't make yourself clear enough. Garo is not the only person here who may have misunderstood you.

The fact that Israel has shelters to protect its citizens from bombing whereas Palestinians in Gaza do not, is well documented. But can you justify your statement that Palestinians do not [U]need[/U] shelters?

Throwing this into the mix ...

[url="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28916761"]More than 300 Holocaust survivors and their descendants have issued a statement condemning what they call Israel's "genocide" in Gaza.[/url]

[QUOTE=Brian-E;381292]The fact that Israel has shelters to protect its citizens from bombing whereas Palestinians in Gaza do not, is well documented. But can you justify your statement that Palestinians do not [U]need[/U] shelters?[/QUOTE]

Whether or not the people in the Gaza strip need shelters is entirely up to themselves. They have not build ones, which was either because those who rule the place did not allow them to be build or because no one took the effort to build them. There are many shelters though in Gaza and they are deep underground. Unfortunately they are only available to the Hamas ranks.

Israel has the civilians in the shelters and the army in the fields. In the Gaza strip it just the other way around.

In this war we see that people in Gaza trust the Israeli army to hit the targets with very high accuracy. They do not think they need to go to shelters because they will be warned. You can find a [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdULPgX5mR0"]nice example[/URL] here on youtube. The phone call makes the people in the street go stand on the roof with a mobile phone, rather than get moving.

Tha, I'm just gonna ignore your latest Hasbara propaganda-spew, but I notice you still haven't answered garo's question as to how many Israelis have actually died in the past [pick a time frame] as a result of those "dangerous Hamas terrorist rockets". Surely you must have an app that provides that number?

Also note that Israelis have little need of those bomb shelters you mention, because

[a] The vast majority of Hamas rockets land outside of densely populated areas, and

[b] If Israeli propaganda is to be believed, any that do possess a threatening flight path are promptly neutralized by the miraculous "Iron Dome" defense system.

Lastly, I want to hear some details of that "desert army uniform" of which you are so proud - which installment of "Iraq War theater", where deployed, and what duties? This is a Netherlands army uniform, not IDF, right?

[QUOTE=tha;381289]You have failed to read the text I posted. The rewording of it by you turnes it 180 degrees different and that it what you protest against. Proof that you can read what I posted and you may get a reply.[/QUOTE]

I apologize for the Goebbels remark. It was needless.

I can also see the point you have clarified in subsequent posts that Palestinians don't need shelter because they are warned. So I agree that I misunderstood your statement. However, I still take issue with your statement that the Palestinians don't need shelters. It should be evident from the respective death tolls from both sides - something you continue gloss to over - that the Palestinians need shelters more than the Israelis.

Your apps and your phone calls - tell that to the parents of the hundreds of children that have been killed. And I wonder what the death toll would have been if the Israeli Army was less accurate.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;381312]Tha, I'm just gonna ignore your latest Hasbara propaganda-spew, but I notice you still haven't answered garo's question as to how many Israelis have actually died in the past [pick a time frame] as a result of those "dangerous Hamas terrorist rockets". Surely you must have an app that provides that number?

Also note that Israelis have little need of those bomb shelters you mention, because

[a] The vast majority of Hamas rockets land outside of densely populated areas, and

[b] If Israeli propaganda is to be believed, any that do possess a threatening flight path are promptly neutralized by the miraculous "Iron Dome" defense system.

Lastly, I want to hear some details of that "desert army uniform" of which you are so proud - which installment of "Iraq War theater", where deployed, and what duties? This is a Netherlands army uniform, not IDF, right?[/QUOTE]

Once again, I believe I already stated it a few times before, this is an asymmetric war. If both parties had the same objectives and the same weapons and the same attitudes, than the number of dead may be used as a scoreboard. But then again, if they had they would probably playing football or soccer and not go to war with each other.

Do you think if someone enters a shopping mall and starts to shoot an incredible number of bullets in random directions a police officer is going to care about the number of casualties made, if any? The policeman may shoot only one time and still make more casualties, namely one. I still think he should be applauded for doing his duty in the line of fire. He may even kill a bystander, a child used as shield by the shooter. It may still be the best possible outcome.

You may want to use your number of dead policies in the IS-Syria war. Both target each others military and the civilian population alike. Notice that the numbers are staggering high on both sides.

Critics of the present Israeli strategies say that Hamas is 'winning' because it is able to continue its ability to disrupt the Israeli society despite having lost on the battlefield. It will win if it is allowed to shelter behind the civilians of Gaza and at the same time shoot rockets.

How many rockets land in non residential territory is irrelevant. The alarm will go off and you will need to get into the shelters. It is doubted whether Israeli schools will be able to start next week.

The Iron Dome works well, but each anti-missile shot costs a lot of money. It is a purely defensive weapon by nature and cannot be used in an offensive way. I would take Europe a lot more serious if they would offer to pay half of all missiles fired just like the US.

My army uniform is Dutch, but I do value my Israeli patches given. Duties were mostly liaison.

[QUOTE=garo;381313]I apologize for the Goebbels remark. It was needless.

I can also see the point you have clarified in subsequent posts that Palestinians don't need shelter because they are warned. So I agree that I misunderstood your statement. However, I still take issue with your statement that the Palestinians don't need shelters. It should be evident from the respective death tolls from both sides - something you continue gloss to over - that the Palestinians need shelters more than the Israelis.

Your apps and your phone calls - tell that to the parents of the hundreds of children that have been killed. And I wonder what the death toll would have been if the Israeli Army was less accurate.[/QUOTE]

I accept your apologies.

Where-ever the Gaza civilians have taken shelter in the past years, that is where the rockets and multi miles guns were fired from. So best practice would be to disperse as much as possible rather than assemble anywhere. My advice to the people of Gaza would be to stay clear of weapon caches, launch sites (can be set up on location in minutes, so always be aware of your surroundings) and armed fighters. Do not assemble anywhere, just disperse. You are safe from Israeli fire. And actually this is what they do, they figured this out themselves fairly quickly.

Actually a lot of fighting between Hamas and Fatah in the early years was because Hamas used to set up launch sites in areas controlled by other tribes than their own men were from. Gaza is far from a single population. It is an amalgam of tribes.

[url]http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/world/middleeast/israel-claims-nearly-1000-acres-of-west-bank-land-near-bethlehem.html[/url]

The actions of someone who wants peace. Oh yeah! Take that Iran! Landgrabbers r us!

[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29179655[/url]

[url]http://time.com/3571776/icc-israel-2010-gaza-flotilla-raid/[/url]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;387088][url]http://time.com/3571776/icc-israel-2010-gaza-flotilla-raid/[/url][/QUOTE]

Read all the articles about the raid in the press before the raid took place. Over a period of more than three months time and countless delays of the flotilla setting sail the highest level discussions between Turkey and Israel and US brokers clearly indicate why the Israelis entered the main ship with only one soldier initially with no weapons drawn. They promised not to use any violence, as the Turks had too. That promise was brokken by the Turks, not the Israelis. The victims were killed by the Turkish set up, not by the Israeli

The flotilla was needed to break the vast ties between Israel and Turkey, serving Erdohan's plans, They were not designed to help the people of Gaza getting food and medication which flowed in from Israel in abundance. It was also not designed to smuggle in weapons with entered through 1.000 tunnels under the border with Egypt at the time. The funny thing is that when Egypt did cut the flow of weapons Turkey did nothing.

The Israelis have entered so much ships armed to the teeth, all without any casualties. What sets all those raids apart from this one? The fact that there were no extensive negotiations on before they happened.

[QUOTE]Read all the articles about the raid in the press before the raid took place.[/QUOTE]Perhaps you will provide some documentary evidence to support your claims? How about some links?

It must really nice to always have a self-serving explanation for every act of piracy, terrorism, and murder. These crimes took place in international waters.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_flotilla_raid[/url]

[URL]http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/middle-east-unrest/israel-begins-controversial-demolitions-palestinian-suspects-homes-n253506[/URL]

[QUOTE]Rocked by a wave of attacks by Palestinians, Israel has turned to a solution it abandoned a decade ago after it decided it rarely worked as a deterrent and instead inflamed hostilities. It is demolishing the homes of families of men accused of killing and plotting against Israelis.[/QUOTE]

And Netanyahu told us the war would stop the violence.

In Israel, Only Jewish Blood Shocks Anyone
 

[url]http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/27110-in-israel-only-jewish-blood-shocks-anyone[/url]
By Gideon Levy, Haaretz
(The original requires registration.)

[QUOTE]There was [URL="http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.627084"]a massacre in Jerusalem[/URL] on Tuesday in which five Israelis were killed. There was [URL="http://www.haaretz.com/misc/tags/Gaza%20war-1.476998"]a war in Gaza [/URL]over the summer in which 2,200 Palestinians were killed, most of them civilians. A massacre shocks us; a war, less so. Massacres have culprits; wars don’t. Murder by ax is more appalling than murder by rifle, and far more horrendous than bombing helpless people trying to take shelter. Terror is always Palestinian, even when hundreds of Palestinian civilians are killed. The name and face of[URL="http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.612162"] Daniel Tragerman[/URL], the Israeli boy killed by mortar fire during Operation Protective Edge, were known throughout the world; even U.S. President Barack Obama knew his name. Can anyone name one child from Gaza among the hundreds killed?
A few hours after the attack in Jerusalem, journalist Emily Amrousi said at a conference in Eilat that the life of a single Jewish child was more important to her than the lives of thousands of Palestinian children. The audience’s response was clearly favorable; I think there was even some applause.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting that. Gideon Levy is one of a sadly dwindling minority of Israelis who can see that each life is equally valuable. It requires a remarkable amount of bravery to say that in Israel these days. He is under police protection because of the death threats that have been made against him.

Cross-posting this to the "Civil Unrest" thread. Some clear parallels here.

[url]http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/11/14/wine-blood-and-gasoline/[/url]

[QUOTE][SIZE=-1]According to the first police statement, the 22-year old Arab, Kheir a-Din Hamdan, attacked the police with a knife. In self defense, they had no choice but to shoot and kill him.
As so often with police reports, this was a pack of lies.
Unfortunately (for the police), the incident was recorded by security cameras. The pictures clearly showed Hamdan approaching a police car and beating on its windows with something, possibly a knife. When he saw that this had no effect, Hamdan turned around and started to walk away.
At that moment, the policemen got out of the car and immediately started to shoot at the back of Hamdan, who was hit and fell to the ground. The officers surrounded him and, after some hesitation, obviously a consultation between them, started to drag the wounded youngster on the ground towards the patrol car, as if he were a sack of potatoes. They dumped him on the floor of the car and drove away (to a hospital, it appears), with their feet on or near the dying man.
[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

Somewhat late but worth reading away from the heat of the battle.

[url]http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175892/tomgram%3A_noam_chomsky%2C_the_fate_of_the_gaza_ceasefire[/url]