Israel - Palestine discussion thread

[VolkswagenX]

I

Apology accepted.

Now, to the question of why Israel would take land by force, give it back, support the land's claim to sovereignty and self-determination and help make it illegal to occupy it if what it really wanted was the land.

The zionist regime occupying palestine will give you an answer that will be more satisfying to you. Ask them.

Peace.

 

[Danoff]

Iron dome takes out 15 rockets. Fantastic engineering on display there.

 

[Dennisch]

It is indeed a formidable piece of defence weaponry. Incredible to see.

 

[SalmanBH]

It is indeed a formidable piece of defence weaponry. Incredible to see.

Which is exactly why the threat that Hamas poses to the existence of Israel and the US's national security is grossly exaggerated by mainstream media.

Hamas is a small and puny organisation with radical principles, and their actions are constantly being used by the Israeli government as an excuse to expand their illegal settlements at the cost of human lives (mostly Palestinian).

Yes, Hamas won the elections in a landslide. But don't you think that if you were in the Palestinians' shoes, you would do the same out of desperation?

Yes, Hamas attacked Israel (although who started it may be a topic of debate), but wouldn't you do the same if a group of people took away your land very suddenly?*

Again, the military wing of Hamas is extremist and relies on fear and revenge as a tactic to persuade Gaza residents to allow them to carry out rocket launches. But really, what else can they do when they are facing a US-backed and funded nation that is determined to bring Palestinian existence to a halt through blockades, sanctions and the weakening of infrastructure.

Israel is obviously the one with industrial, economical and military might in this battle that it can't even be called a war anymore. It's all out genocide.

 

[Dennisch]

My opinion on the whole Israel vs Palestina matter is quite simple. One of the fighting parties needs to go. One way or another. There is no middle ground. There is no peaceful solution.

I also pretty much gave up on caring about dead Israelis or Palestinians. But I do enjoy videos as the one Danoff posted. That's proper use of tax money.

 

[BobK]

Which is exactly why the threat that Hamas poses to the existence of Israel and the US's national security is grossly exaggerated by mainstream media.

Hamas is a small and puny organisation with radical principles, and their actions are constantly being used by the Israeli government as an excuse to expand their illegal settlements at the cost of human lives (mostly Palestinian).

Yes, Hamas won the elections in a landslide. But don't you think that if you were in the Palestinians' shoes, you would do the same out of desperation?

Yes, Hamas attacked Israel (although who started it may be a topic of debate), but wouldn't you do the same if a group of people took away your land very suddenly?*

Again, the military wing of Hamas is extremist and relies on fear and revenge as a tactic to persuade Gaza residents to allow them to carry out rocket launches. But really, what else can they do when they are facing a US-backed and funded nation that is determined to bring Palestinian existence to a halt through blockades, sanctions and the weakening of infrastructure.

Israel is obviously the one with industrial, economical and military might in this battle that it can't even be called a war anymore. It's all out genocide.

So wait a minute. You're saying it's fine for Hamas to shoot rockets at Israeli targets because the Israelis can shoot them down anyway?

 

[VolkswagenX]

So wait a minute. You're saying it's fine for Hamas to shoot rockets at Israeli targets because the Israelis can shoot them down anyway?

So wait a minute. You're saying it's fine for the lunatic state (how Norman Finkelstein describes Israel) to illegally occupy Palestine, build illegal settlements on Palestinian land, put a blockade on Gaza, build an apartheid wall in the West Bank and basically robs the Palestinian people of a chance of a normal life to just accept this? And when they react to the lunatics state's aggression the lunatic state starts crying and use force backed by 3 billion in us aid a year. OCCUPATION!

The Palestinians made one of the 2 choices they really have: to die standing on their feet or to live on their knees.

 

[SalmanBH]

So wait a minute. You're saying it's fine for Hamas to shoot rockets at Israeli targets because the Israelis can shoot them down anyway?

When did I say that?

I'm saying that with the technology, training and equipment that Israel have, people should not be victimising Israel with Hamas being the oppressor when all Hamas have are AK-47s and flimsy home-made Qassam rockets that usually never reach the ground due to the Iron Dome system.

Fine, Hamas are radicals. But wherever you go, if the conditions were just right, i.e. poverty, hunger, lack of education, lack of sanitation and adequate sewage systems, lack of any significant trade because of the blockade, then you are bound to get groups like Hamas forming up and taking power since the people are weak and are easier to manipulate.

 

[BobK]

So wait a minute. You're saying it's fine for the lunatic state (how Norman Finkelstein describes Israel) to illegally occupy Palestine, build illegal settlements on Palestinian land, put a blockade on Gaza, build an apartheid wall in the West Bank and basically robs the Palestinian people of a chance of a normal life to just accept this? And when they react to the lunatics state's aggression the lunatic state starts crying and use force backed by 3 billion in us aid a year. OCCUPATION!

No, I asked a simple question. Please work on your reading comprehension skills, they appear to be seriously deficient.

I'm saying that with the technology, training and equipment that Israel have, people should not be victimising Israel with Hamas being the oppressor when all Hamas have are AK-47s and flimsy home-made Qassam rockets that usually never reach the ground due to the Iron Dome system.

Fine, Hamas are radicals. But wherever you go, if the conditions were just right, i.e. poverty, hunger, lack of education, lack of sanitation and adequate sewage systems, lack of any significant trade because of the blockade, then you are bound to get groups like Hamas forming up and taking power since the people are weak and are easier to manipulate.

Is that a "yes" or a "no", then?

 

[SalmanBH]

Is that a "yes" or a "no", then?

No, it is not fine. Both parties are to blame im this conflict, but no one is abusing their power carelessly more than Israel.

The reason why I did not give you a yes or no answer is because I inferred that you were trying to victimise Israel.

 

[BobK]

No, it is not fine. Both parties are to blame im this conflict, but no one is abusing their power carelessly nore than Israel.

The reason why I did not give you a yes or no answer is because I inferred that you were trying to victimise Israel.

Thank you very much for your answer.

 

[Stylel_Code]

To respond to Famine's post, The old 1988 chart is not used anymore by the Hamas. The only condition they now impose is to respect the borders, give back every prisoners.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/meshal-hamas-seeks-palestinian-state-based-on-1967-borders-1.275412


http://www.haaretz.com/news/hamas-pm-haniyeh-retreat-to-1967-borders-will-bring-peace-1.188440

The roquet against the nuclear place in israel is not a valid argument. A roquet like this will never hurt high technology infrastructure like this. It is just to signify in some way that "we are there and if you do not let us tranquil we will respond".

 

[Tornado]

To respond to Famine's post, The old 1988 chart is not used anymore by the Hamas.

The second linky only went so far to say that the Prime Minister deliberately refused to talk about it:

The prime minister wouldn't discuss the Hamas charter, which reject Israel's existence, saying, "Leave Hamas aside now - I am speaking to you as the leader of the Palestinian government, the government of all the Palestinians, and not as the leader of a movement."

The first link stopped just short of reaffirming the charter:

Meshal vowed Hamas would not recognize Israel's right to exist, arguing that this was an error committed in negotiations held by Fatah leaders with Jerusalem over the course of the Oslo Accords.

So where does either say anything about how the charter isn't still Hamas' raison d'être?

 

[Famine]

The roquet against the nuclear place in israel is not a valid argument. A roquet like this will never hurt high technology infrastructure like this. It is just to signify in some way that "we are there and if you do not let us tranquil we will respond".

I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that it's perfectly safe and indeed acceptable to fire rockets at a nuclear facility before. Impressive.

 

[Dennisch]

I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that it's perfectly safe and indeed acceptable to fire rockets at a nuclear facility before. Impressive.

But they fail at pretty much every attempt to make the rockets even hit the ground. So it's okay for Hamas to keep shooting them into Israel.

Makes perfect sense to me!

Edit. Perfect illustration of the situation.

 

[Tornado]

I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that it's perfectly safe and indeed acceptable to fire rockets at a nuclear facility before. Impressive.

He meant to say "croquet":

 

[Stylel_Code]

The second linky only went so far to say that the Prime Minister deliberately refused to talk about it:


The first link stopped just short of reaffirming the charter:




So where does either say anything about how the charter isn't still Hamas' raison d'être?

The link just says that Hamas's goal is not to go and occupy Israel though it is impossible, they want Israel to respect borders and give back every prisoners. Here is a quote from Mishal himself, because you talked about him. It is from 2006 february to a russian journal:
"If Israel recognizes our rights and pledges to withdraw from all occupied territories, Hamas, and with it the entire Palestinian people, decide to put an end to the armed resistance."

I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that it's perfectly safe and indeed acceptable to fire rockets at a nuclear facility before. Impressive.

It is war. Huh, I have never understood how can someone give reason to Israel's side while they continuously bomb Palestine everywhere. Palestine has right to defend in my honest opinion.

 

[Famine]

It is war.

Is it?

Huh, I have never understood how can someone give reason to Israel's side while they continuously bomb Palestine everywhere.

I've never understood how someone can support either side while they continuously bomb each other. Hamas is targetting civilians, Israel is simply not avoiding them.

Palestine has right to defend in my honest opinion.

Targetting a nuclear facility is not defence - it's insanity. It's not an act of defence. It's not even an act of war. It's an act of psychopathy. The consequences are catastrophic.

But what do you expect when Hamas are killing their own people for objecting to having rockets fired from near their home, on the charge of "collaboration"? Hamas wants a pile of dead Palestinians so large you could use it as a bridge from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip, whether it's Israel that kills them indiscriminately or they have to get in and murder them themselves.

Why? Because it helps turn public opinion against Israel. The charter calls for the murder of Jews and the destruction of Israel - but it doesn't say anything about not martyring every last Palestinian in the process...

 

[SalmanBH]

Is it?I've never understood how someone can support either side while they continuously bomb each other. Hamas is targetting civilians, Israel is simply not avoiding them.Targetting a nuclear facility is not defence - it's insanity. It's not an act of defence. It's not even an act of war. It's an act of psychopathy. The consequences are catastrophic.

But what do you expect when Hamas are killing their own people for objecting to having rockets fired from near their home, on the charge of "collaboration"? Hamas wants a pile of dead Palestinians so large you could use it as a bridge from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip, whether it's Israel that kills them indiscriminately or they have to get in and murder them themselves.

Why? Because it helps turn public opinion against Israel. The charter calls for the murder of Jews and the destruction of Israel - but it doesn't say anything about not martyring every last Palestinian in the process...

It seems like you're only focusing on one side of the story. Why is that, if I may ask?

 

[Stylel_Code]

Is it?I've never understood how someone can support either side while they continuously bomb each other. Hamas is targetting civilians, Israel is simply not avoiding them.Targetting a nuclear facility is not defence - it's insanity. It's not an act of defence. It's not even an act of war. It's an act of psychopathy. The consequences are catastrophic.

But what do you expect when Hamas are killing their own people for objecting to having rockets fired from near their home, on the charge of "collaboration"? Hamas wants a pile of dead Palestinians so large you could use it as a bridge from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip, whether it's Israel that kills them indiscriminately or they have to get in and murder them themselves.

Why? Because it helps turn public opinion against Israel. The charter calls for the murder of Jews and the destruction of Israel - but it doesn't say anything about not martyring every last Palestinian in the process...

You've got to be kidding me about Hamas targetting civilians and their own! How can I discuss if you believe something such false and absurd? I can not even show you what Hamas wants and what they do, you will still believe in your these incredible prejudices. Thus, I will let you saying whatever you want there, I know other people who come up with links and other proofs to answer, but this I can not even believe it isn't a joke

 

[Danoff]

 

[Famine]

It seems like you're only focusing on one side of the story. Why is that, if I may ask?

I'd have to say it's because of one of two reasons. Either I'm part of the pro-Zionist conspiracy or whenever I type something like:

I've never understood how someone can support either side while they continuously bomb each other. Hamas is targetting civilians, Israel is simply not avoiding them.

You read:

Palestinians are killing Israelis. Palestine is evil. Yay Israel!

It's probably the first one though. I wouldn't worry about it.

Israel say they aren't [killing civilians on purpose], but they don't really care all that much either way, which just makes them very unpleasant.

I think [Israel]'re quite precise - they're just not bothered about who else they kill in order to kill their targets. Again, this merely makes them quite unpleasant.

Oooh, snap.

You've got to be kidding me about Hamas targetting civilians and their own! How can I discuss if you believe something such false and absurd?

No idea. Your most recent gambit was that firing rockets at a nuclear facility is a perfectly acceptable act in self-defence and yet I'm still discussing with you...

In other news:
Hamas executes 18 Palestinian 'collaborators' (I pulled this one from Al Jazeera so you wouldn't blame pro-Zionist Western media)

 

[Tornado]

Here is a quote from Mishal himself, because you talked about him. It is from 2006 february to a russian journal:
"If Israel recognizes our rights and pledges to withdraw from all occupied territories, Hamas, and with it the entire Palestinian people, decide to put an end to the armed resistance."

I talked about him because he was who was talked about in the article you linked. The article, incidentally, which was written three years after that apparent quote from a Russian journal where it was said

Meshal vowed Hamas would not recognize Israel's right to exist, arguing that this was an error committed in negotiations held by Fatah leaders with Jerusalem over the course of the Oslo Accords.

 

[SalmanBH]

I'd have to say it's because of one of two reasons. Either I'm part of the pro-Zionist conspiracy or whenever I type something like:You read:It's probably the first one though. I wouldn't worry about it.Oooh, snap.No idea.

Apologies, haven't been active on this thread for a while and I didn't read those posts.

Thanks for that.

 

[Stylel_Code]

I'd have to say it's because of one of two reasons. Either I'm part of the pro-Zionist conspiracy or whenever I type something like:You read:It's probably the first one though. I wouldn't worry about it.Oooh, snap.No idea. Your most recent gambit was that firing rockets at a nuclear facility is a perfectly acceptable act in self-defence and yet I'm still discussIn other news:
Hamas executes 18 Palestinian 'collaborators' (I pulled this one from Al Jazeera so you wouldn't blame pro-Zionist Western media)

They were collaborators, and have been judged by Gaza's courts. Your own given link says that. Betrayers. They do not kill their own people, fortunately they are not gone crazy until now and probably won't, whole population hates Israel.
I also highly suggest you to check some links I have given in an older post, there:

Israel continuously bombed Palestine at the beginning. The 3 days "cease-fire" can not exist if Israel continued their embargo on Palestine. Sources:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/17/israeli-military-calorie-limit-gaza

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_gaza_blockade_map_june_2012_english.pdf

http://www.haaretz.com/print-editio...music-and-clothes-from-entering-gaza-1.276147

Hamas and its people has all the rights to defend themself. As well, Hamas responded by shooting on israel with their low quality roquets which do not kill anyone. Their aim is not to kill civilians as suggest some people, this is not their aim. They propose self defence against Israel, which means that it is a war, and Hamas responds to Israel. They first of all want to destroy Israel's infrastructure, not the civilians, for example when they tried to shoot the Ben Gourion Airport. Although civilians can die, but that isn't their aim, and in a war if an ennemy kills civilians intentionally, the opposite group has all the rights to do the same. While for Israel, while claiming they want to destroy the pseudo terrorists of Hamas, they actually don't. Here are some instructive sources for this:

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/GazaCrisisAtlas_2014.pdf

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=722484

http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-fired-rockets-for-first-time-since-2012-israeli-officials-say/

http://m.thenation.com/article/180783-five-israeli-talking-points-gaza-debunked

http://m.forward.com/articles/201764/how-politics-and-lies-triggered-an-unintended-war/?p=all

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/18/o...l-the-road-to-war-paved-by-the-west.html?_r=1

Hamas already said that they do not intend to walk through Israel, but they would like Israel to stop their colonisation in the west bank for example. The people of hamas agreed on the cease fire : http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4558451,00.html

But in my opinion, a cease fire can not exist if Israel continues its occupation in Palestine and in Gaza. Israel also broke their own cease fire: http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=720294

Definition of terrorism:
"Collective fear that rules a population to break its resistance; political regime based on fear, on the use of emergency measures "

Terror can be used as a form of government, "allowing the power to break up, by dint of extreme measures and collective fear, those who resist it. "

A terrorist state is a territorially distinct political entity that uses force and violence against other States or their citizens with the intent to intimidate or coerce fully accept its ideology, and thus achieve a dominant position in the world or permanent residence in power in their own country.


The Dahiya Doctrine is a military doctrine formulated by the Israeli General Gadi Eizenkot (in) that relates to the context of asymmetric warfare in urban areas, and prone use of force "disproportionate" in retaliation against civilian areas as a basis enemy attacks, the purpose of deterrence.

This doctrine is named after the Shiite neighborhood of homes of Beirut that housed a Hezbollah stronghold before being razed by Israeli warplanes during the Israeli-Lebanese conflict in 2006.

The first public formulation of this doctrine took place in October 2008, in an interview with Reuters in which General Eizenkot says:

"What happened to the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village used as a basis to fire against Israel. [...] We will use the disproportionate strength [in these areas], and it will cause great damage and destruction. From our point of view it is not civilian villages but military bases. [...] This is not a recommendation, but a plan, and it was approved. [...] To attack the population is the only way to retain Nasrallah1,2. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dahiya_doctrine

Richard Falk wrote that under the doctrine, "the civilian infrastructure of adversaries such as Hamas or Hezbollah are treated as permissible military targets, which is not only an overt violation of the most elementary norms of the law of war and of universal morality, but an avowal of a doctrine of violence that needs to be called by its proper name: state terrorism."
http://richardfalk.wordpress.com/2011/01/07/israel’s-israeli-violence-against-separation-wall-protests-along-the-road-of-state-terrorism/


"The number of incidents, in addition to the large number of civilian deaths, cancel the finding [Israeli] that all necessary precautions have been taken to protect the lives of civilians."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2702485/Israel-investigated-war-crimes-Gaza-UN-says.html

"The strategies used by Israeli forces in the Gaza offensive are consistent with previous practices, as most recently during the Lebanon war in 2006, the concept known as the Dahiya doctrine emerged then, involving the use of disproportionate forces, resulting in huge damage, destruction of property and infrastructure of civilians, as well as suffering of civilians. Having reviewed and verified the facts on the ground force, the Mission finds that it is obviously exactly what has been put into practice. "
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf


Terror. Civilians, particularly the kids have always been at the center of Israeli terrorism policy. This is to deter and punish by all means Palestinians of all political or military action. Acceleration of colonization, arbitrary arrests, blind killings, daily humiliation, expropriation, military and judicial cover disgusting abuses by settlers and the army in Palestine.

This policy therefore has two aspects:

A passive aspect of keeping the Palestinians under conditions of appalling life. This is a situation naturally pushes them in the violence as a last resort, violence which is operated diplomatically and militarily against them by the regime of tel aviv.

An active aspect of pushing the army and settlers to decay civilians through provocations, harm to the physical, moral and territorial integrity of the Palestinians. With this in mind the fact to target particular children is an attractive option since the attacks made on them are those that undermine the morale of more civilians. The war that israel leads against the Palestinian population is not only physical and material it is also moral.

This policy allows israel to maintain a diplomatic status that (in the name of war against terrorism, the right to defend themselves and other crap) allowing it to continue quietly settlement with the obvious aim of annexing what remains of Palestine while preventing all his might the creation of a sovereign state.
It also allows the Israeli government in place to maintain itself. Terror is also exerted against Israelis so that they must really believe in death threats and invasion by Hamas.

 

[Carbonox]

@Stylel_Code, have you yet paid attention to the post where I pointed out why your source about Hamas not shooting rockets at Israel for over a year is incorrect?

Immediately upon looking at the first link, guess what jumped in front of my eyes? Appeal to emotion.

Sorry, but it's rather hard to argue irrationality with reason.

One link was so blatantly wrong that I can't help but condemn you for finding biased sources without looking information up yourself:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-fired-rockets-for-first-time-since-2012-israeli-officials-say/ is what you showed...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2014

...are what I throw back at ya.

 

[Famine]

They were collaborators, and have been judged by Gaza's courts. Your own given link says that. Betrayers.

Ah, so when I said they execute their own population on the charge of 'collaboration' and you said that was absurd, what you actually meant was that it wasn't.

Gotcha.

They do not kill their own people

Except when they do, of course. Like just up there where we agree that they executed 18 people rounded up the previous day on the charge of 'collaboration'. My Gaza's Hamas-led courts work quickly on Hamas-led charges that lead to the execution of Palestinians.

Gosh, it's not like they've got a track record of extra-judicial beatings and executions on charges of 'collaboration' or anything. They've certainly never killed any Fatah supporting Palestinians, held public executions of Palestinians they accuse of supporting Fatah or Israel without trial and dragged their corpses through the streets behind a motorbike.


Oh wait, I'm thinking of someone else.

 

[zzz_pt]

But they fail at pretty much every attempt to make the rockets even hit the ground. So it's okay for Hamas to keep shooting them into Israel.

Makes perfect sense to me!

Edit. Perfect illustration of the situation.

Perfect? Not even close.

 

[Stylel_Code]

Ah, so when I said they execute their own population on the charge of 'collaboration' and you said that was absurd, what you actually meant was that it wasn't.

Gotcha.Except when they do, of course. Like just up there where we agree that they executed 18 people rounded up the previous day on the charge of 'collaboration'. My Gaza's Hamas-led courts work quickly on Hamas-led charges that lead to the execution of Palestinians.

Gosh, it's not like they've got a track record of extra-judicial beatings and executions on charges of 'collaboration' or anything. They've certainly never killed any Fatah supporting Palestinians, held public executions of Palestinians they accuse of supporting Fatah or Israel without trial and dragged their corpses through the streets behind a motorbike.


Oh wait, I'm thinking of someone else.

Have you gone a little bit emotional in the last part? You see yourself they kill collaborators, not other people. You mention bad things Hamas did, which in fact actually aren't. But you do not talk about what Israel does, considering they beeing more cruel, and the list of their actions against humanity is very long.

 

[Akira AC]

Perfect? Not even close.

Still lacks additional Israeli beehives where Palestine used to be.