Slaughter in Gaza

[kladner]

There are very many assertions in Krauthammer's piece. Just in the first paragraph:

Israel accepts an Egyptian-proposed Gaza cease-fire; Hamas keeps firing. Hamas deliberately aims rockets at civilians; Israel painstakingly tries to avoid them, actually telephoning civilians in the area and dropping warning charges, so-called roof knocking.

Leaving aside the deliberate targeting of buildings which contain more people than the alleged target, where are these so-helpfully alerted persons to flee?

On the whole, I am far more persuaded by Judge Goldstone's investigative results than I am by Krauthammer's "everyone knows" claims.

Yet we routinely hear this Israel-Gaza fighting described as a morally equivalent “cycle of violence.” This is absurd. What possible interest can Israel have in cross-border fighting? Everyone knows Hamas set off this mini-war. And everyone knows the proudly self-declared raison d’etre of Hamas: the eradication of Israel and its Jews.

The interest of Israel is in taking more and more of the remains of Palestinian land, and in such things as water rights. This is a situation of extremely unsymmetrical warfare. How is it that one Israeli prisoner of war (they called it kidnapping), offsets hundreds or thousands of Palestinians, including children, rounded up and imprisoned? Would you not fight back with whatever was available?

If Israel is being so careful, how is it that they manage to kill so many? Is destruction of sanitation, water, and food-related facilities being careful?

Finally, do you remember how the modern State of Israel came to be? Do you remember the Nakba? Do you remember terrorists like David Ben Gurion and other "heroes," who bombed, slaughtered, and drove out the inhabitants of land they wished to seize? This state exists on stolen land, and is constantly stealing more with settlement construction, wall building, Jewish-only road building, and on and on.

I abhor warfare. I don't want anyone shooting at anyone else. I am ashamed of the United States' history of slaughter and dispossession. I am even more ashamed that my country supplies horrific weapons like white phosphorus shells and cluster bombs to the government of this oppressive rogue state.

None of this is intended as an assault on a religion. It is observing the acts of a nominally secular, democratic state, which is in fact a theocracy. It is observing a state that is heavily armed with modern weaponry taking revenge on a whole population for the acts of a few.

If there were real Israeli concern for the "success" of a Palestinian state, as Krauthammer claims, the state would not continue to appropriate land from the tiny portion still inhabited by Palestinians.

[xilman]

https://twitter.com/kncukier/status/...586497/photo/1

No comment

[tha]

Originally Posted by xilman

https://twitter.com/kncukier/status/...586497/photo/1

No comment

Well, here is my comment:

Every Israeli death is a win for Hamas. Every Palestinian death is a win for Hamas. So, if you are not observing what is happening over there it looks like Hamas has scored a total of 525 points vs. 0 for the Israeli Army.

Actually it is a bit cynical that the misunderstanding of the conflict in Europe and to a lesser extent America encourages Hamas to put extra civilians in the fire zone. The people die to get us involved and stop the shooting.

There are two things different this time from previous wars with Hamas. First, Europe has just spent more than two years of Syrian towns being bombed on a massive scale by its own government and doing nothing. Oh, and there was/is Iraq and Libya and there was turmoil in Egypt and elsewhere. By now, many people either got used to it or started to get the point that western Israel may not be the cause of the conflict.

Second, apart from Qatar and a government in Ankara that shows some internal cracks, all Arab countries support Israel this time, and not the Palestinians. So maybe Hamas is doing something wrong.

On the other hand, so far the war is going pretty much as Hamas had planned it. There are still difficult weeks ahead for the Israeli people, and hence for the people of Gaza.

[garo]

I think you are the one being cynical with a comment like that. And if every Palestinian death is a win for Hamas why does Israel continue to bomb areas where they know there are civilians. Does the Israeli Army want Hamas to win?

Originally Posted by tha

Well, here is my comment:

Every Israeli death is a win for Hamas. Every Palestinian death is a win for Hamas. So, if you are not observing what is happening over there it looks like Hamas has scored a total of 525 points vs. 0 for the Israeli Army.

Actually it is a bit cynical ...

[Brian-E]

I am at a loss to understand the motivations of the two sides.

Right now there is a ceasefire. A twelve-hour version has just expired, but hefty negotiations seem to have "bought" another four hours. If that is possible, why isn't it possible to have an indefinite ceasefire while the negotiations continue.

I know I'm naive. I have poor understanding of the history and injustices that have occurred and I know it's offensively glib to talk like I just have. But can anyone explain in simple terms why an indefinite ceasefire (and further negotiations without fighting) is so difficult at the moment?

[Nick]

Try "A History of the Arab-Israeli Conflict" by Bickerton & Klausner.
http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/jsp/...=9780205968138

(or earlier versions)

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

I know I'm naive. I have poor understanding of the history and injustices that have occurred and I know it's offensively glib to talk like I just have. But can anyone explain in simple terms why an indefinite ceasefire (and further negotiations without fighting) is so difficult at the moment?

Equally naive. But my guess is it is a combination of ideology (read: "My God is bigger than your God"), and money (read: "I can make more money than you can sending our young (along with some very expensive hardware) to kill and die").

Sorry... That might come across as cynical....

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Sorry... That might come across as cynical....

I think it's really hard not to be cynical. I certainly am. But cynicism from an ignorant starting point is rarely helpful, and that's something I am guilty of.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by chalsall

But my guess is it is a combination of ideology ... and money

I think a more practical explanation is that one side feels that a threat of the ceasefire ending will spur the other side to negotiate in ernest. For example, Israel may feel that the Palestinians are tired of the slaughter but Israel wants either more tunnels emptied or destroyed. By placing a four-hour limit on the ceasefire, Israel keeps pressure on the Palestinian negotiators to give some on the tunnels. Israel can always grant more extensions if progress is being made but a final agreement has not been reached.

[tha]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

I am at a loss to understand the motivations of the two sides.

But can anyone explain in simple terms why an indefinite ceasefire (and further negotiations without fighting) is so difficult at the moment?

Simple terms may be asked too much. We (all western countries) are already throwing tremendous resources in at dealing with this conflict and if it was simple it for sure would have been resolved by now. It is known how it needs to be done, but accomplishing it is very hard, even harder than trying to explain the conflict. I remain optimistic in the long term, but many dangerous times lie just ahead of us.

We know a thing or two about math here, so I guess most people here have an understanding of how a computer model of the weather works and how computers can make pretty reliable forecasts. Could we make a model of the world as a whole and predict conflicts which end up in wars and how they might end and could such a 'turned into numbers and formulas' model focus on the Middle East in detail?
The answer is more or less yes, but for an understanding of the conflict it is enough to understand the main mechanisms. The common views held in Europe on the conflict is totally distorted by our own experiences and lack thereof. A computer model based of the grasping of the conflict as put forward by western newspaper articles and other reporting would go wrong at the very first iteration.

Each person or group of people, large or small, attempts to maintain and expand its base of power. Not necessarily the best practice in each and every circumstance but it is what best explains history in general. If you want to have a grasp of the Middle-East make sure you know about 120 influential groups, like goverments, tribes, religions, bussinesses, cultures and so on. Try to figure out what base of power each has, how the mechanisms work to maintain those bases, and make sure you now the geography and history of the Middle-East. Also understand that a desert culture is very different from those in a rain water engulfed Europe. For centuries it has been OK to kill other people or complete tribes to ensure exclusive access to drinkable water. There was not enough for all to survive.

Also understand all powers outside the Middle East, their interests and perceived so, and their misunderstandings of the region, particular when democracies are involved.

Now, for a moment divide the world in two regions. There where the industrial revolution took place before energy resources were found if any, and where no industrial revolution took place or only after massive energy resources (OK, oil) were discovered.
Where are the main international conflicts? Where those two regions border each other. The eastern Ukraine and Israel are two good examples of today.

The industrial revolution shifted power in Europe and elsewhere from fiefdoms that based their power on the amount of arable land they could defend to access to the workforce. Democracy arose because too many people joined the workforce and took up knowledge jobs to keep any strongly hierarchical system workable. We did not choose to live in a democracy, we forced it upon ourselves.

In the case of the war going on in Gaza today, neither the people in Israel nor the Arabs who live in the former British mandate of Palestine are interested in fighting this war and incurring so many losses. Actually, if you go there you will see that they cooperate very well on a day to day basis. Notice for example that during the cease fire of yesterday the markets in Gaza were displaying abundant supply of fresh foods, merchandisers polishing their tomatoes and other fruits, all of it trucked into the Gaza strip through Israeli border crossings.

The main forces keeping this artificial conflict going are the ayatollahs in Iran and the sheiks in Qatar. Even Saudi-Arabia, Egypt and almost every other Arab country in the Middle East is squarely behind Israel this time and they give full support to them. The reason is their conflict with Iran in Syria and Iraq which they very rightfully consider an existential threat to their being.

There is going to be peace between the people in Gaza, the people in the West bank and the people of Israel. But only after the conlicts between Saudi-Arabia and Iran are resolved. Both the people of Israel and their government and the influential Arabs in the West bank have agreed and committed to the final peace agreements long time ago and maintained them. Copies can be found in each capital city in Europe, the US and elsewhere. They include maps, responsibilities, rights, duties and so on, just like as if it was Europe. In essence Israel, Jordan and the Arabs in former British Palestine will form a unity very similar to and based on the BeNeLux treaty of 1944. (where Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg aligned their common interests)

Right now, if implemented, it would create a Palestinian state with Arabs living in prosperty and freedom, and that would no doubt spill over to other countries in the region of which the governments are much too keen to prevent that from happening.

There are many wars raging in the Middle East right now where so many more people die and human rights are being trampled upon to such horrifying extend that the Gaza conflict looks like a civilized discussion in comparison. Let us focus on those conflicts instead of our Pavlov reactions to this conflict. If we divide up Iraq into three entities (Kurdish, Sunni and Shia with sustainable economies, e.g. oil revenues), create some form of independant enclaves in Syria for minorities etc. we probably do more towards resolving the current Gaza conflict than anything else. Cease fires are for outsiders who panic when something happens that they had not cared about when the conflict was brewing, the rockets were falling by the thousands and they did nothing to stop them.

[kladner]

There are many wars raging in the Middle East right now where so many more people die and human rights are being trampled upon to such horrifying extend that the Gaza conflict looks like a civilized discussion in comparison.

While the first part emphasized above is true, it does not rationalize the second part. This whole situation abounds with false equivalents.

Here is a more detailed analysis than I can muster, with Chapter and Verse of International Law-
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/...fense_20140723

If Israel insists, as the Bosnian Serbs did in Sarajevo, on using the weapons of industrial warfare against a helpless civilian population then that population has an inherent right to self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The international community will have to either act to immediately halt Israeli attacks and lift the blockade of Gaza or acknowledge the right of the Palestinians to use weapons to defend themselves. No nation, including any in the Muslim world, appears willing to intervene to protect the Palestinians. No world body, including the United Nations, appears willing or able to pressure Israel through sanctions to conform to the norms of international law. And the longer we in the world community fail to act, the worse the spiral of violence will become.
Israel does not have the right to drop 1,000-pound iron fragmentation bombs on Gaza. It does not have the right to pound Gaza with heavy artillery and with shells lobbed from gunboats. It does not have the right to send in mechanized ground units or to target hospitals, schools and mosques, along with Gaza’s water and electrical systems. It does not have the right to displace over 100,000 people from their homes. The entire occupation, under which Israel has nearly complete control of the sea, the air and the borders of Gaza, is illegal.