BF2S Forums Apparently Palestinian Babies Are Now Terrorists

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 272329.stm
More proportional response. At least half of the casualties were civillians.

Shadowolf wrote:

Before Hamas there were other terrorist organizations....
And "protecting" the Palestinians from Hamas is stupid, they themselves chose Hamas in the Palestinian democratic elections.

Don't blame me, I didn't write the fourth Geneva convention or force Israel to militarily occupy Palestinian territories.

If we were to leave Gaza alone they would just re-arm themselves and become stronger.
Just like Hezbollah did when the IDF pulled out of south Lebanon.

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

So why should the innocent children suffer because of Hamas's crimes (collective punishment). Why should the populace of Palestine suffer each and every day?

Then how about the Palestinians get their collective shit together and prevent Hamas from doing what they are doing?

Thier collective shit is currnetly being devoted to preventing a complete humanitarian disaster thanks to the Israeli blockade.

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Israel is an occupying army who's responsability under the Geneva convention is to protect the people of Palestine from Hamas and from their own forces. You seem to think that any action done against the palestinian populace is justifiable.

Israel only occupies Gaza when forced to by Hamas militant action. Up until recently, the IDF had pulled out of Gaza completely. Then Hamas decided it was too quiet so they started lobbing rockets at civilians.

BBC wrote:

The strategy of the Palestinian militants is also becoming clearer. They are well aware of the Israeli military's capabilities. Their goal appears to be to establish a balance of deterrence with each significant Israeli incursion or targeted killing meeting a significant response; one that they hope will encourage the Israeli government to restrain its own forces.

Who is responding to who?

FEOS wrote:

And please point to any statement I have made saying that "any action done against the Palestinian populace is justifiable". I'd say you are the one who has stated that Hamas actions against purely civilian targets in Israel is justified. It simply isn't. And if Israel were specifically targeting civilians (a la Hamas), then there would be no justifying their actions, either.

PureFodder wrote:

Your argument is that all of that is justified.

No. It's not.

PureFodder wrote:

It then goes on to talk about the other crimes comitted by Israel primarily on the civillian populace of Palestine. They say both sides show little regard for civillian life, with Israel killing far more people. Israel also commit a catalogue of other crimes from collective punishment to home demolition and illegal settlements.

We're not talking about "other crimes". We're talking about the difference between targeting militants who hid in their own civilian populations (Israel) and targeting civilians for the sake of targeting civilians (Hamas).

Ignoring the vast provication on Israels behalf would be cutting out most of the reality. Israel has imposed apartheid upon the Palestinian civillian populace. Human rights watch say Israeli forces attack civillians, they also say Hamas do. Isreal kill vastly more civillians than Hamas do. Assuming nobody here knows more than human rights groups in the area, then we have to accept that both sides target civillians, but Israel kills far more civillians.

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Hamas are awful, Israel are at least as bad and certainly kill way more people, plus Israel has a great big pile of crimes that don't involve killing people.

So you would have Israel sit back and do nothing while their civilians (and not their military, generally) are targeted and killed indiscriminantly by Hamas? What is your solution for Israel's response to indiscriminant attacks against their civilian populace?

Investigate the crimes, and take their complaints to the UN and if necessary the internatinal court. Nobody's forcing Israel to kill anyone. Busting Hamas in the UN would obviously be easy for anyone who wasn't comitting vast violations in the region themselves. Accept the overwhelming world concensus on a two state solution a la the Taba negotiations that Israel pulled out of despite it's apparent success for both sides.

After 40 years of desperate poverty, overwhelmingly more devastating attacks on their civillian populace, military occupation, removal of basic human rights, detentions of civillians often without charge, stealing of land, buldozing of homes, cutting off of basic supplies, destroying ariable lands etc. etc. with little hope for a diplomatic solution. What should Palestinians do who have lived their entire lives under these conditions? They are quite aware that they can't rely on the UN due to reflexive US vetoes of any resolutions against Israel.

PureFodder wrote:

san4 wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

... Gazans were suffering before Hamas existed, there's no reason to believe that Israel will stop if Hamas do.

Finally you're making sense, except you're exactly wrong. Israel will stop if Hamas does because Israel has accepted a two-state solution. It's fine with them if Gaza and the West Bank are under Arab control.

The point is that both sides accept a two state solution, but their two state solutions are different. There's lots and lots of details over borders, rights, resetlements, refugees, military status, political status etc. etc. that can make two different solutions completely different.

For an extreme example, if Palestine offered to give Israel a 1 square meter plot of land and Palestine would get to keep the rest, that would technically be a two state solution.

Post links to where Hamas has expressed acceptance of any two-state solution. Same for Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran.

PureFodder wrote:

Thier collective shit is currnetly being devoted to preventing a complete humanitarian disaster thanks to the Israeli blockade.

Then perhaps they would be better suited to devoting their efforts to helping their own people rather than trying to kill Israeli civilians?

PureFodder wrote:

Who is responding to who?

It's cyclical. However, I'm willing to bet that if Hamas quit shooting rockets at the Israelis and quit sending suicide bombers into cafes and buses, targeting civilians, the Israelis would likely lay off militarily. Maybe even help the Palestinians that actually want help.

PureFodder wrote:

Ignoring the vast provication on Israels behalf would be cutting out most of the reality. Israel has imposed apartheid upon the Palestinian civillian populace. Human rights watch say Israeli forces attack civillians, they also say Hamas do. Isreal kill vastly more civillians than Hamas do. Assuming nobody here knows more than human rights groups in the area, then we have to accept that both sides target civillians, but Israel kills far more civillians.

Why has that apartheid been imposed? Is it because the Israelis just don't like the Palestinians...or is it because the Palestinians keep sending rockets and suicide bombers into Israeli civilian areas?

And again, there is a VAST difference between intentionally targeting civilians with the intent to kill them and targeting militants who have attacked you, but killing civilians in the process. It certainly doesn't make it any less painful for those who have lost loved ones, but it makes a huge difference in how each side's actions are viewed. While any killing of innocents is unfortunate and to be avoided if at all possible, the intentional targeting of civilians is utterly reprehensible and completely indefensible.

PureFodder wrote:

FEOS wrote:

So you would have Israel sit back and do nothing while their civilians (and not their military, generally) are targeted and killed indiscriminantly by Hamas? What is your solution for Israel's response to indiscriminant attacks against their civilian populace?

Investigate the crimes, and take their complaints to the UN and if necessary the internatinal court. Nobody's forcing Israel to kill anyone. Busting Hamas in the UN would obviously be easy for anyone who wasn't comitting vast violations in the region themselves. Accept the overwhelming world concensus on a two state solution a la the Taba negotiations that Israel pulled out of despite it's apparent success for both sides.

Yep. Leave it to the UN. They have such an excellent track record of fixing ethnic strife that reaches back thousands of years.

So you are saying that Israel should just sit back and let their civilians be killed by Hamas until the UN decides to do something? Unbelievable.

PureFodder wrote:

After 40 years of desperate poverty, overwhelmingly more devastating attacks on their civillian populace, military occupation, removal of basic human rights, detentions of civillians often without charge, stealing of land, buldozing of homes, cutting off of basic supplies, destroying ariable lands etc. etc. with little hope for a diplomatic solution. What should Palestinians do who have lived their entire lives under these conditions? They are quite aware that they can't rely on the UN due to reflexive US vetoes of any resolutions against Israel.

The attacks aren't against the civilian population...they are against specific Hamas elements responsible for the attacks against Israel. There is a clear and distinct difference that you simply refuse to acknowledge.

And right here you contradict your earlier statement. If the Palestinians can't count on the UN when they're so CLEARLY the aggrieved party , then how can you expect the UN to do anything on behalf of Israel? So...since you've as much as admitted that the UN can't do anything about the situation, but you have said Israel shouldn't respond but rather wait and bring it before the UN...you clearly believe the Israelis should sit there and let their civilians be intentionally targeted and killed without seeking some recourse. Again...unbelievable.

Bulldozing existing homes, displacing Palestinian families to make room for Israeli settlements...those are all horrible things and Israel shouldn't be doing them. But they are not the topic under discussion.

PureFodder wrote:

I'd be willing to bet that if Israel stopped bombing Palestinians Hamas would stop firing rockets. again, the reports are indicating that it is Hamas responding to massive Israeli attacks. Again in the last 9 months the death tolls are 4 : 232 Israeli agression is vastly larger. The vast majority of the Palestinians are not firing rockets at Israel, yet they bear the brunt of Israeli punishment.

This is where you are confused. Are you aware that the official position of Hamas is that Israel should be wiped off the map? Why do you think they would stop taking violent action against Israel if Israel just let them alone? You have no basis for that statement whatsoever, and it is directly contradicted by Hamas' official position.

PureFodder wrote:

Again, in the Taba talks both sides agree that there was a genuine sight of an agreement and a solution to the situation. Israel pulled out. Which side wants peace? Israel clearly is gaining from the continued struggle, while Palestinians suffer.

So Taba is the source of your delusion that Hamas accepts a two-state solution? Who was the Hamas representative there? What were the positions of Iran, Syria, etc.?

Jordan, Egypt, the PLO and, to a limited extent, Saudi Arabia have recognized Israel and formally expressed support for a two-state solution. There are no hostilities between Israel and any of those parties. The only remaining hostilities are between Israel and the organizations that say they want to destroy it.

PureFodder wrote:

I'd be willing to bet that if Israel stopped bombing Palestinians Hamas would stop firing rockets. again, the reports are indicating that it is Hamas responding to massive Israeli attacks. Again in the last 9 months the death tolls are 4 : 232 Israeli agression is vastly larger. The vast majority of the Palestinians are not firing rockets at Israel, yet they bear the brunt of Israeli punishment.

Don't you think that if Hamas stopped all attacks against Israel, they would have more of a case against Israel if they were to attack Palestinian areas? Hamas is the Palestinians' worst enemy.

Right now, because of Hamas' targeting of civilians--whether you like it or not--Israel has the relative moral high ground with regard to strikes against Hamas. They are defending themselves from terrorist attacks. If Hamas would stop, then Israel wouldn't have that advantage/excuse to strike Palestine. Then Israel would either have to stop or be ostracized by even the US for their actions.

PureFodder wrote:

Because Israel wants the aquifers and ariable land from Palestinians, remember that every month that goes by, more and more illegal settlements are built on Palestinian soil. Israel hopes to destroy the Palestinians into becoming a refugee state and abandoning the place. Success through mass opression. Again, Isralei attacks on Palestine are vastly disproportionate to the number of deaths suffered by Israelis, PLUS all of the rest of the catalogue of suffering imposed on Palestinians over the last 40 years regardless of the actions of Palestine.

One could argue that the land Israel is settling on is rightfully theirs...gained as spoils of war when they were attacked on all sides. And won. Granted, the view that they should have ceded the land after the war is valid as well. It just depends on whether you believe Israel was wronged when they were attacked or not.

PureFodder wrote:

And as the human rights groups are saying, Israel and Hamas both do this, but Israel kill far more civillians. Plus there's the collateral kills which are far greater than the intentional killings.

As I said, any civilian deaths are horrible. But those that result from the intentional targeting and attacking of civilians, regardless of number, are morally worse.

PureFodder wrote:

Hamas should sit back and watch Israel indiscriminantly bomb their civillians? Unbelievable.

Both sides are wilfully killing civillians, Israel kill vastly more civillians. It won't end until BOTH sides stop it.

There's only one side that's willfully and/or purposefully targeting and killing civilians...and it ain't Israel.

PureFodder wrote:

There's good reason why Israel can go to the UN but Palestine can't. The US veto that will reflexively be used to kill any resolution against Israel. Palestine however has no superpower with a veto to prevent resolutions against them. There have been 68 resolutions against Israel and 32 US veto'd resolutions. So far there have been no resolutions brought against Palestine. Clearly the overwhelming consesus of the world is that Israel are the prime culptits here.

Yep. There is good reason...Palestine isn't recognized by the UN, at least as a member. If it were, then they would likely face resolutions against them for intentionally targeting and attacking civilians. Since Israel is the only UN member of the two, they are the only ones complaints can be lodged against with the UN. So of course it will seem overwhelmingly against Israel...there's no mechanism for lodging complaints or enacting resolutions against Palestine.

But there would be if they would accept a two-state solution...maybe that's part of their calculus for objecting to it.

PureFodder wrote:

Saying that Israel is the aggrieved party is amazingly insulting to the endlessly suffering Palestinian populace. Palestine has been devastated by the conflict, Israel hasn't.

Did I say that Israel was the aggrieved party and that Palestine wasn't? No.
Israel is just as aggrieved as Palestine when it comes to civilian deaths...maybe more so, since Israel doesn't purposefully target civilians. Again, intent is very important here...something you keep dismissing.

PureFodder wrote:

Again, in the Taba talks both sides agree that there was a genuine sight of an agreement and a solution to the situation. Israel pulled out. Which side wants peace? Israel clearly is gaining from the continued struggle, while Palestinians suffer.

Who has reached out to whom absent a specific peace conference? Israel did, and it very nearly cost the PM his job. You can't ignore Israeli actions to improve relations with the PA.

Last edited by FEOS (2008-03-01 15:54:57)

PureFodder wrote:

Ok, we're just arguing different things here, I'll repeat the human rights watch report

HRW wrote:

Israeli soldiers repeatedly used indiscriminate and excessive force, killed civilians willfully and unlawfully, and used Palestinian civilians as human shields

Isreali forced do willfully kill civillians according to human rights groups.

I'm sorry, but human rights groups are hardly objective when it comes to this. They view any act of violence as wrong and some violation of someone's rights.

Palestinian babies aren't terrorists, but they do make excellent firelogs.

-- This message brought to you by the Israeli government.

lowing wrote:

Hmmmm, unless I missed it, 7 pages now, and no acknowledgement that the Palestinians uses civilians as shields while attacking from behind them. I guess such an admittance would be pretty inconvenient to your argument huh?

So do the Israeli. It's abhorrent either way.

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

Hmmmm, unless I missed it, 7 pages now, and no acknowledgement that the Palestinians uses civilians as shields while attacking from behind them. I guess such an admittance would be pretty inconvenient to your argument huh?

So do the Israeli. It's abhorrent either way.

Israelis use civilians as shields? Got a source for that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEuKnJ54DUI, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6432133.stm, among many others. It's disgusting.

FEOS wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

Ok, we're just arguing different things here, I'll repeat the human rights watch report

HRW wrote:

Israeli soldiers repeatedly used indiscriminate and excessive force, killed civilians willfully and unlawfully, and used Palestinian civilians as human shields

Isreali forced do willfully kill civillians according to human rights groups.

I'm sorry, but human rights groups are hardly objective when it comes to this. They view any act of violence as wrong and some violation of someone's rights.

The other sources in the area are Palestinians and and Israelis who aren't exacty the models of objectivity. Remember, most Palestinian militants have had no trial and no proof is offered of their guilt before they and the surrounding populace get bombed.