Israeli forces kill dozens in Gaza as U.S. Embassy opens in Jerusalem

[Chomper Higgot]

Let’s take these excuses at face value:

 

How many of the 58 dead and 2,500 injured were carrying/throwing/using IEDs or fire arms?

 

Where were these people with respect to the ‘fence’ when they were killed injured?

 

What specific threat did the individual in a wheel chair present?

 

Who gave the order to use live rounds and what were the rules of engagement?

 

Where is the evidence of IEDs

 

Where is the evidence of fire arms being used by the Palestinians?

 

Where is the evidence that the Israeli violence was proportional and consistent with a real or perceived to be real threat?

 

 

 

[Morch]

8 hours ago, Thorgal said:

 

There were no Iranians involved. So that's off topic.

Even so, the demonstration is a civil Gaza demonstration.

Hamas has little or nothing to do with it. The military wing of Hamas are actually the Qassam brigades, which didn't fire any round since IDF incursion of summer 2014.

 

The shoot-to-cripple policy of the Israeli "army at Gaza border is aimed at Palestinian "civilians".

 

Try harder.

 

Lame deflection. Your original comment was general in nature:

 

Quote

Yes.

Since when do religions own countries, capitals, etc...

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1038253-israeli-forces-kill-dozens-in gaza as-us-embassy-opens-in-jerusalem/?page=14&tab=comments#comment-12988410

 

The protests were initially (quite a while back) envisaged as non-partisan and peaceful - an initiative headed mainly by several non-aligned activists. By the time the show got on the road, they were sidelined, and Hamas pretty much took over both organization and the tone.

 

That you try to claim Hamas "has little or nothing to do with it" is a flat out lie. The Hamas military wing actions against Israel are not limited to rocket launches, and never were - just another pointless obfuscation.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Seems like some posters cannot be satisfied no matter what. There's a development which may lead to the bloodshed being stopped - not good enough. Yeah, much better to keep things up, because....?

 

There is nothing wrong with carrot and stick. As for "collective punishment" - both sides cease hostilities, and some respite given to the people of Gaza. Not good enough as well, apparently. Obviously, not a word regarding the Hamas policies effectively contributing to the ongoing situation, and no mention of Egypt's role in maintaining the blockade. For some posters, its all about Israel no matter what.

Again excuses, hypothetical outcomes and no evidence.

[farcanell]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Relevance?

Perhaps the relevance is to the lethality of a slingshot?

 

In that, we must remember that the most famous episode of single combat in our collective history, involved a giant of a man, opposed by a Shepard with a slingshot.

 

david v Goliath.... get yer popcorn here.

[farcanell]

11 hours ago, Thorgal said:

Yes.

Since when do religions own countries, capitals, etc...

I’m sure someone would have answered this by now....

but..... the Vatican City and the city of Mecca, spring to mind, when reading this question

[carmine]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Lame deflection. Your original comment was general in nature:

 

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1038253-israeli-forces-kill-dozens-in gaza as-us-embassy-opens-in-jerusalem/?page=14&tab=comments#comment-12988410

 

The protests were initially (quite a while back) envisaged as non-partisan and peaceful - an initiative headed mainly by several non-aligned activists. By the time the show got on the road, they were sidelined, and Hamas pretty much took over both organization and the tone.

 

That you try to claim Hamas "has little or nothing to do with it" is a flat out lie. The Hamas military wing actions against Israel are not limited to rocket launches, and never were - just another pointless obfuscation.

 

 

Women, children wheelchair bound civilians, some carrying stones i grant you,  being taken out by IDF snipers!!!  What do you take us all for?

 

As said, there is most definitely Hamas involvement but nothing even approaching the murderous brutality of response.  I never thought i'd see IDF soldiers commanded to carry out such actions.  Attempts by IDF spokesmen thus far have been nothing short of pitiful.  

 

And the Gaza blockade is a flagrant abuse, its illegal and must be in breach od articles of the Geneva Convention.

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, CharlesSwann said:

Here's the path of peace: give Palestine independence, unconditionally, right now.

If it doesn't work, if Palestinians still attack Israel after that with no provocation, then by all means Israel can call the initiative a failure, march in and take the whole territory for good. I would not object and I doubt the rest of the world would either.

 

Well, it won't happen because Israel does not want even the chance of peace. It wants East Jerusalem and the West Bank at any price. The strategy of stoking resistance while they take over the whole territory bit by bit is quite transparent.

 

 

It's hard to tell if some posters are actually unaware of relevant positions held by different parties, simply make things up or engage in intentional creative deception.

 

That you decree the simplistic version above to be "the path of peace" does not make it so, and there's little to recommend the merits of your unilateral approach or its prospects of success. A limited version of such efforts in two instances didn't exactly lead to positive results.

 

There is no feasible way for Israel to unilaterally, unconditionally "give Palestinians independence" without general chaos and mayhem ensuing.

 

And lets point out again - this topic isn't about the West Bank, but the Gaza Strip. It isn't about illegal settlements, as there are none in the Gaza Strip. And it isn't about Palestinians and peace, as it involves the Hamas.

 

That some still try to ignore Hamas positions or paint them as irrelevant is bizarre.

[carmine]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let me ask you a direct question Mitch.

 

The Israeli forces responded to this incident by killing 58 people and injuring 2,500 others. There were zero Israeli casualties.

 

Howm many more people would The Israeli forces have to have killed before you would start asking if the killings were excessive?

And not one Israeli soldier injured.....is this right.

 

Theres zero chance of any type of peace deal under Netanyahu, just increased persecution.  The only one backing them up is Trump.....so they must be then!!!!  I'm starting to feel ashamed i ever lived there with what i see happing and Trump's response in backing them up is even more depressing.

Edited May 16, 2018 by carmine

[carmine]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

It's hard to tell if some posters are actually unaware of relevant positions held by different parties, simply make things up or engage in intentional creative deception.

 

That you decree the simplistic version above to be "the path of peace" does not make it so, and there's little to recommend the merits of your unilateral approach or its prospects of success. A limited version of such efforts in two instances didn't exactly lead to positive results.

 

There is no feasible way for Israel to unilaterally, unconditionally "give Palestinians independence" without general chaos and mayhem ensuing.

 

And lets point out again - this topic isn't about the West Bank, but the Gaza Strip. It isn't about illegal settlements, as there are none in the Gaza Strip. And it isn't about Palestinians and peace, as it involves the Hamas.

 

That some still try to ignore Hamas positions or paint them as irrelevant is bizarre.

Would like to respond to any one of my posts.  You seem out of touch and furnished with one sided blinkered information that many Israelis don't even believe.

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let’s take these excuses at face value:

 

How many of the 58 dead and 2,500 injured were carrying/throwing/using IEDs or fire arms?

 

Where were these people with respect to the ‘fence’ when they were killed injured?

 

What specific threat did the individual in a wheel chair present?

 

Who gave the order to use live rounds and what were the rules of engagement?

 

Where is the evidence of IEDs

 

Where is the evidence of fire arms being used by the Palestinians?

 

Where is the evidence that the Israeli violence was proportional and consistent with a real or perceived to be real threat?

 

 

 

 

More trolling.

 

The protests began mid-end of April. You seem to repeatedly ignore that in your posts and focus on whichever bits fit your narrative.

 

Why is it that you do not bother looking up any such "evidence", nor provide anything concrete of your own?

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Again excuses, hypothetical outcomes and no evidence.

 

Yet another bizarre comment. What does it even have to do with the post replied to?

 

You find fault with a possible cessation of hostilities and bloodshed, without providing any reasonable explanation or alternative. 

 

As for "hypothetical outcomes" - said in the original post, those are initial reports, and it remains to be seen how things develop. You, on the other hand, are quick to cry "collective punishment", without it even being clear how it applies. As for the trolling "evidence" bit - if this applies to the reports themselves - some of us are not limited to English language sources, which were sparse at the time this was originally posted. If it was in reference to results - see above, it's remains to be seen how things unfold.

[simple1]

5 minutes ago, carmine said:

He can post as many times as he wishes, its not as if theres anything to back up in what he says.  Its easy to see when someone simply doesn't know whats going on here or just won't accept it.

Morch is very knowledgeable regards Israeli policies, IDF and the M.E. in general. Even though I strongly disagree with what I see as an OTT response by the IDF, I do respect Morch's experience and his search for balance.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Yet another bizarre comment. What does it even have to do with the post replied to?

 

You find fault with a possible cessation of hostilities and bloodshed, without providing any reasonable explanation or alternative. 

 

As for "hypothetical outcomes" - said in the original post, those are initial reports, and it remains to be seen how things develop. You, on the other hand, are quick to cry "collective punishment", without it even being clear how it applies. As for the trolling "evidence" bit - if this applies to the reports themselves - some of us are not limited to English language sources, which were sparse at the time this was originally posted. If it was in reference to results - see above, it's remains to be seen how things unfold.

When I challenge you for offering up ‘hypothetical outcomes’ as justification for the Israeli forces killing 58 people and injuring 2,500 you call me a troll.

 

When you make statements as excuses for the Israeli forces comitting a mass killing and I then ask you for evidence to back up your statements, you call me a troll.

 

You are  offering excuses for the killing of 58 people and injury of 2,500 and clearly object to others challenging you over your defense of this obscene violence.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Morch is very knowledgeable regards Israeli policies, IDF and the M.E. in general. Even though I strongly disagree with what I see as an OTT response by the IDF, I do respect Morch's experience and his search for balance.

I’ll accept his search for balance when I see evidence of it.

[Morch]

26 minutes ago, carmine said:

Women, children wheelchair bound civilians, some carrying stones i grant you,  being taken out by IDF snipers!!!  What do you take us all for?

 

As said, there is most definitely Hamas involvement but nothing even approaching the murderous brutality of response.  I never thought i'd see IDF soldiers commanded to carry out such actions.  Attempts by IDF spokesmen thus far have been nothing short of pitiful.  

 

And the Gaza blockade is a flagrant abuse, its illegal and must be in breach od articles of the Geneva Convention.

 

Who in his right mind brings "Women, children wheelchair bound civilians" to a violent protest? What responsible leadership allows and promotes this?

 

I'm not claiming the Israeli response is to be commended, or that it was balanced. It isn't and it wasn't. The point I'm trying to make is that, IMO, there are no "good" ways of dealing with such circumstances, and that things would have been worse had a violent Palestinian mob managed to charge or breach the fence.

 

The Gaza blockade is enforced by both Israel and Egypt. It is directly related to Hamas policies and stance. There wasn't always a blockade on the Gaza Strip. There were many instances in which Hamas, through agenda or action rejected solutions which would have made life easier for the populace (such as refusing oversight on funds and goods entering the Gaza Strip, or the way energy supplies are delivered to the Gaza Strip).

[Morch]

43 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Perhaps the relevance is to the lethality of a slingshot?

 

In that, we must remember that the most famous episode of single combat in our collective history, involved a giant of a man, opposed by a Shepard with a slingshot.

 

david v Goliath.... get yer popcorn here.

 

That's more to do with optics, rather than relevance.

[carmine]

17 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Morch is very knowledgeable regards Israeli policies, IDF and the M.E. in general. Even though I strongly disagree with what I see as an OTT response by the IDF, I do respect Morch's experience and his search for balance.

I'm saying i don't lack any respect to what he says i just don't think he's offering anything that approaches a balanced arguement.

Edited May 16, 2018 by carmine

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Morch said:

 

Who in his right mind brings "Women, children wheelchair bound civilians" to a violent protest? What responsible leadership allows and promotes this?

 

I'm not claiming the Israeli response is to be commended, or that it was balanced. It isn't and it wasn't. The point I'm trying to make is that, IMO, there are no "good" ways of dealing with such circumstances, and that things would have been worse had a violent Palestinian mob managed to charge or breach the fence.

 

The Gaza blockade is enforced by both Israel and Egypt. It is directly related to Hamas policies and stance. There wasn't always a blockade on the Gaza Strip. There were many instances in which Hamas, through agenda or action rejected solutions which would have made life easier for the populace (such as refusing oversight on funds and goods entering the Gaza Strip, or the way energy supplies are delivered to the Gaza Strip).

Victim blaming.

 

Who in the right mind gives an order to fire live ammunition into a protest crowd?

[carmine]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Who in his right mind brings "Women, children wheelchair bound civilians" to a violent protest? What responsible leadership allows and promotes this?

 

I'm not claiming the Israeli response is to be commended, or that it was balanced. It isn't and it wasn't. The point I'm trying to make is that, IMO, there are no "good" ways of dealing with such circumstances, and that things would have been worse had a violent Palestinian mob managed to charge or breach the fence.

 

The Gaza blockade is enforced by both Israel and Egypt. It is directly related to Hamas policies and stance. There wasn't always a blockade on the Gaza Strip. There were many instances in which Hamas, through agenda or action rejected solutions which would have made life easier for the populace (such as refusing oversight on funds and goods entering the Gaza Strip, or the way energy supplies are delivered to the Gaza Strip).

Perhaps for the most part civilians were not looking for violence, but lets be honest, in any event, there was never, ever going to be any conceivable chance of a breach of the fence.  

[farcanell]

34 minutes ago, carmine said:

 

And the Gaza blockade is a flagrant abuse, its illegal and must be in breach od articles of the Geneva Convention.

 

Yes yes... if only those dirty rotten Egyptians would lift the blockade, all would be well. 

 

That said, I’m not sure referencing the Geneva convention will win many points given the multitude of breach’s by the Gazan gubment... breach’s which isreal cite as evidence requiring continuation of the blockade, for its protection, as allowed by article 242 ( well 200 and something) of convention

 

meanwhile, y’all must remember that Gaza was illegally seized by hamas, an anti Semitic organization of islamists, whose founding and ongoing charter calls for the obliteration of a Jewish state

 

you cant be any clearer than that, in a declaration of war

 

so... back to Egypt... if only they would lift their blockade, allowing non combatants to leave the area, such that they can’t be used as shields (oops... breach of Geneva convention.... but a tactic favored by Muslims, as seen in the Iraqi wars as well), then Hamas fighters could have the war they want, in line with their charter mission of obliterating isreal.

 

yet no one is vilifying Egypt.... the only conclusion for that, would be that it’s not really about the blockade... but about anti Semitic rioting, and it’s response... an announced response, in line with the Geneva conventions rules on urban warfare.

[simple1]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’ll accept his search for balance when I see evidence of it.

Looking at the situation with eyes wide open, not with emotion.

[Morch]

44 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let me ask you a direct question Mitch.

 

The Israeli forces responded to this incident by killing 58 people and injuring 2,500 others. There were zero Israeli casualties.

 

Howm many more people would The Israeli forces have to have killed before you would start asking if the killings were excessive?

 

Let me ask you this - where did you get the notion I do not see the casualty figures as excessive?

 

The points made, repeatedly, are that treating all of the casualties as innocent civilians participating in a peaceful demonstrations (or variations of such) is misleading. Also, that the Hamas leadership bears at least some of the responsibility for the death toll. Finally, I do believe that allowing the protests to develop into what some posters term a "direct threat" would imply a whole lot more casualties.

 

I don't know that there's a "good" way of dealing with such a situation, and so far, not many accounts seriously tackle this issue on this topic (and others). There's no wholesale endorsement of IDF actions in my posts - I accept that they are legally and morally questionable. Sometimes there are no perfect choices and what options available all suck.

[farcanell]

8 minutes ago, carmine said:

Perhaps for the most part civilians were not looking for violence, but lets be honest, in any event, there was never, ever going to be any conceivable chance of a breach of the fence.  

Nor was there ever a chance that there would not be violence... take another look at the stated aim of the protests.

[carmine]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Let me ask you this - where did you get the notion I do not see the casualty figures as excessive?

 

The points made, repeatedly, are that treating all of the casualties as innocent civilians participating in a peaceful demonstrations (or variations of such) is misleading. Also, that the Hamas leadership bears at least some of the responsibility for the death toll. Finally, I do believe that allowing the protests to develop into what some posters term a "direct threat" would imply a whole lot more casualties.

 

I don't know that there's a "good" way of dealing with such a situation, and so far, not many accounts seriously tackle this issue on this topic (and others). There's no wholesale endorsement of IDF actions in my posts - I accept that they are legally and morally questionable. Sometimes there are no perfect choices and what options available all suck.

Now thats a far more balances answer i think.  And far more balanced than a certain presidents!!

[Morch]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

When I challenge you for offering up ‘hypothetical outcomes’ as justification for the Israeli forces killing 58 people and injuring 2,500 you call me a troll.

 

When you make statements as excuses for the Israeli forces comitting a mass killing and I then ask you for evidence to back up your statements, you call me a troll.

 

You are  offering excuses for the killing of 58 people and injury of 2,500 and clearly object to others challenging you over your defense of this obscene violence.

 

I call you a troll because you troll.

 

The "hypothetical outcomes" bit was in response to my post detailing initial reports about a possible mediation effort. I cannot provide information about something that didn't take place yet, or ongoing events which may develop this way or that - this was acknowledged and explained.

 

I do not make excuses for all the killings committed by the IDF - the reference was always to some of them. Response regarding the evidence was posted several times, and honestly, it's not really hard to find unless you're trying not to. IMO, your point here is to simply argue the credibility of reports etc. - which was addressed on previous posts.

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Let me ask you this - where did you get the notion I do not see the casualty figures as excessive?

 

The points made, repeatedly, are that treating all of the casualties as innocent civilians participating in a peaceful demonstrations (or variations of such) is misleading. Also, that the Hamas leadership bears at least some of the responsibility for the death toll. Finally, I do believe that allowing the protests to develop into what some posters term a "direct threat" would imply a whole lot more casualties.

 

I don't know that there's a "good" way of dealing with such a situation, and so far, not many accounts seriously tackle this issue on this topic (and others). There's no wholesale endorsement of IDF actions in my posts - I accept that they are legally and morally questionable. Sometimes there are no perfect choices and what options available all suck.

I get the impression you don’t see body count excessive, from the string of excuses you offer.

[farcanell]

17 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That's more to do with optics, rather than relevance.

Great optics too.... the puny wee Jew, beset by the overwhelming military might of its opposition.... yet triumphant, none the less, thanks to the effective use of its primitive weoponry

 

the lesson ( relevance)... never underestimate primitive weoponry, when “will” is in place. That “will” must surely exist, for “Palestinians” to go forth against assault rifles, so therefore, it’s use must not be underestimated.

[carmine]

5 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I call you a troll because you troll.

 

The "hypothetical outcomes" bit was in response to my post detailing initial reports about a possible mediation effort. I cannot provide information about something that didn't take place yet, or ongoing events which may develop this way or that - this was acknowledged and explained.

 

I do not make excuses for all the killings committed by the IDF - the reference was always to some of them. Response regarding the evidence was posted several times, and honestly, it's not really hard to find unless you're trying not to. IMO, your point here is to simply argue the credibility of reports etc. - which was addressed on previous posts.

Yes good point about "some" of the Israeli soldiers.  Soldiers conscripted and doing their annual service might well be thugs in person, not as well disciplined.  If its individuals that have stepped out of line something needs to be done and i do think the actions this past week deserve a major inquiry because i think we can all agree it really hasn't gone as well as it might.

[midas]

18 hours ago, notmyself said:

 

Religion has a veto on it. It would have been solved decades ago if it were just about land.

It's not the religion bit part that I find hard to understand, it's more to do with the absolute duplicity that Israel has the gall to accuse another nation of " crimes against humanity "(when even the victims  of such alleged attack have denied anything took place) . The hypocrisy is too much to take in

 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-condemns-syria-chemical-attack-as-crimes-against-humanity-1.5988849

Edited May 16, 2018 by midas

[carmine]

3 minutes ago, midas said:

It's not the religion bit part that I find hard to understand, it's more to do with the absolute duplicity that Israel has the gall to accuse another nation of " crimes against humanity "(when even the victims  of such alleged attack have denied anything took place) . The hypocrisy is too much to take in

 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-condemns-syria-chemical-attack-as-crimes-against-humanity-1.5988849

IDF also used white phosphorous in recent years but apparently that was ok with the Americans to.

 

But lets make this clear, if its Syria, for example,  and not Israel using weapons outlawed by the Geneva Convention is not ok.  But Israel gets a pass.