Israel prepares for ground military operation, 98 dead in Gaza Strip airstrikes

[Pattszero]

 

They are appalled at the actions of Israel.  

 

I can understand that. It is natural for Jews to care about Israel, whether supporting or opposing current government policy. I would say to them if they don't live in Israel with the rockets and the terror tunnels maybe they should consider why it is that the vast majority of Israelis DO support the current military action. It's easy to be a liberal from afar, not so easy up close.

 

 

They live in Israel. 

[Morch]

 

 

 

Again, there are forces on both sides that really don't want peace or aren't willing to pay the price of peace anyway. It is total idiocy to solely blame either side. But for now, Israel really must do what they must do to repel the terrorist Hamas threat in Gaza. 

 

 

 

Ah yes. The "terrorist threat".  You can't have a constructive discussion unless you acknowledge that there are other items on the agenda.
 

 

 

Coming from someone who insists that the paramount issue is real estate rights, while paying cursory attention to other problematic issues, this is quite rich.
 

 

 

LoL. You talk like East Jerusalem, E1, and the countless other Israeli Govt Endorsed settlements aren't the key issue. 

 

 

Not at all, and I have repeatedly said that I see the illegal settlements in the West Bank as something that would

have to go. On East Jerusalem - I actually think this is not a big issue as it is made to seem by those seeking to

fan the flames. Something accommodating both sides there is not beyond the realm of possibility.

 

I was referring to another post by CBR250 over which we had some words.

 

Saying that THIS or THAT are the main issues and sidelining others is just a very simplified version of the situation.

Most of this issues bear different importance to each side and most are interrelated.
 

[Jingthing]

 

 

They are appalled at the actions of Israel.  

 

I can understand that. It is natural for Jews to care about Israel, whether supporting or opposing current government policy. I would say to them if they don't live in Israel with the rockets and the terror tunnels maybe they should consider why it is that the vast majority of Israelis DO support the current military action. It's easy to be a liberal from afar, not so easy up close.

 

 

They live in Israel. 

 

OK.

Of course, anyone can say anything on the internet.

I am sure there are many such people in Israel.

But there is a war on now. 

[simple1]

@Morch/JT:

 

I read today an article that claims eleven of the current Israeli Cabinet Ministers (not including Deputy Ministers) are against a Two State Solution. If this is factual how can a Two State Solution, even if current hostilities cease, be agreed by the Israeli Cabinet in negotiations with the Palestinians?

 

Example positions on the issue by Israeli right wing at:

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israeli-right-says-no-to-two-states-yes-to-greater-israel/2013/11/05/aa9068ee-454d-11e3-95a9-3f15b5618ba8_story.html

 

[Morch]

@Morch/JT:

 

I read today an article that claims eleven of the current Israeli Cabinet Ministers (not including Deputy Ministers) are against a Two State Solution. If this is factual how can a Two State Solution, even if current hostilities cease, be agreed by the Israeli Cabinet in negotiations with the Palestinians?

 

Example positions on the issue by Israeli right wing at:

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israeli-right-says-no-to-two-states-yes-to-greater-israel/2013/11/05/aa9068ee-454d-11e3-95a9-3f15b5618ba8_story.html

 

 

I'm not sure about the tally, but generally speaking the current government is not a pro-peace one at all.

The last elections in Israel and resulting coalition government made for some strange bed mates - so while some

official voices keep carrying out about negotiations etc., right wing elements within the coalition speak differently.

So far, it would seem that the right wingers hold more sway, which is especially true in times of war - moderates

are afraid to appear soft and lose some future voter support.

 

So no great expectations from this government on this front, and not many hopes of seeing much backbone from

the center/moderate elements in it. Sadly, the opposition leadership is as uninspiring as can be and not likely to

pose much of a challenge for the government.

 

The Israeli government is helped a lot by the Palestinians. While Abbas manages to come out as pro-peace, it is

anyone's guess how long he'll carry on and what actual level of support he can muster from the public when push

comes to shove. Many of the people surrounding him are more interested in making themselves rich on PA funds

and foreign aid budgets, which does not go well with the economically challenged population. Abbas & Co. were

pretty careful not to make any bold moves on peace or independence declaration, and again - this too has to do

with approval rating and possible economic consequences. The Hamas does their best to kick the bucket at each

and every turn, just playing the perfect villain for the Israeli right wingers to point and say "See? We told you, didn't

we?". The reconciliation agreement was a good example of how not to do things in a beneficial way for prospects

of peace.

 

Bottom line is that leadership on both sides is at a low, and peace will just have to wait a while longer.

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

Keep in mind he is a Jew.

The old, "THIS Jew agrees with me" trick. How about the millions that don't?

[Asiantravel]

 

 

 

Oh we can have open season with videos and images that will show the zionists for what that are. Notice how the apologists for the killers of 1300 civilians have nothing to say other than the same government line. defend your buddies they will need it.Go sign up with the IDF

By Zionists, meaning JEWS. 

 

 

what do you think of this Israeli citizen ?

 

"He was once brainwashed by Zionist propaganda. He learned the truth about the Zionist entity that is israel and now speaks about the truth of israel. In this lecture he clears up myths about israel and exposes israel. Keep in mind he is a Jew. "

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKGA48MptIY&feature=player_detailpage

 

 

I think it goes to show that Israel allows for a plurality of views.

Ilan Pappe is far left wing, as Israeli politics go, and is part of the New Historians thing.

Having Israelis and Jews express dissent and criticism of Israel and its government is hardly a new phenomenon,

a rare occurrence, or even news. When one manages to find a Palestinian expressing similar dissent of his own

side - now, that's interesting.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilan_Papp%C3%A9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Historians

 

 

 

 

oh come on as well as Ilan Pappe you have the likes of former Israeli minister Shulamit Aloni and then you have Mordechai Vanunu , who was imprisoned by Israel for 18 years and then you have most of the members of  the United Nations itself.

 

[CBR250]

 

Your interpretation of Israel's long term goal doesn't go hand in hand with the fact that Israel has made great concessions and withdrawals for peace and to advance peace talks , including the withdrawals from Sinai, Southern Lebanon and Gaza.

You keep accusing Israel of "stealing" land in the west bank. I wonder what, in your view, is Israel's interest in "stealing" Palestinian land? Which land precisely does it "steal"?

 

 

Where has Israel made concessions or tried to advance peace in the past few years? I think there was some hope for a negotiated solution in the time of Arafat and Rabin. But various vested interests resisted this, then the domination of right-wing Zionist politics in Israel derailed all hopes. The continuing conflicts with, and petty oppressions of, Palestinians pushes hope for peace further and further into the future. This suits no one other than those wanting to obtain more of the West Bank for the Zionist project. Israel's Prime Minister makes no secret of the fact that he supports the theft / annexation of more Palestinian lands. (see e.g http://www.yesh-din.org/userfiles/file/Reports-English/Yesh%20Din%20-%20Chasar%20Takdim%20English%20-%20Web-%2016_6.pdf)

 

Which land precisely does Israel want to steal you ask? Well, Netanyahu probably has a map with all of the areas he intends to take over coloured in. But he doesn't share it with me. However, if we look at the recent past, it is abundantly clear that Palestinian land is being stole constantly. There have been numerous maps showing the decrement in Palestinian lands since 1947 - you must have seen some on Thai Visa, there have been many!  I'll reproduce one of them below.

 

And you could also check out this site:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/maps.html

It gives only brief information, but is a good starting point for examining the issue of land theft and annexation.

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 2014 by CBR250

[Ulysses G.]

However, if we look at the recent past, it is abundantly clear that Palestinian land is being stole constantly.

Maybe the Palestinians should have signed at least one of the peace deals that they have been offered repeatedly for the last 100 years and given up terrorism - it isn't helping their situation.

[up-country_sinclair]

 

Again, there are forces on both sides that really don't want peace or aren't willing to pay the price of peace anyway. It is total idiocy to solely blame either side. But for now, Israel really must do what they must do to repel the terrorist Hamas threat in Gaza. 

 

 

 

Ah yes. The "terrorist threat".  You can't have a constructive discussion unless you acknowledge that there are other items on the agenda.
 

 

 

Have you noticed that the Israeli propagandists have added a new item to their lexicon:  "terror tunnels". 
 

[Morch]

 

 

 

what do you think of this Israeli citizen ?

 

"He was once brainwashed by Zionist propaganda. He learned the truth about the Zionist entity that is israel and now speaks about the truth of israel. In this lecture he clears up myths about israel and exposes israel. Keep in mind he is a Jew. "

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKGA48MptIY&feature=player_detailpage

 

 

I think it goes to show that Israel allows for a plurality of views.

Ilan Pappe is far left wing, as Israeli politics go, and is part of the New Historians thing.

Having Israelis and Jews express dissent and criticism of Israel and its government is hardly a new phenomenon,

a rare occurrence, or even news. When one manages to find a Palestinian expressing similar dissent of his own

side - now, that's interesting.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilan_Papp%C3%A9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Historians

 

 

 

 

oh come on as well as Ilan Pappe you have the likes of former Israeli minister Shulamit Aloni and then you have Mordechai Vanunu , who was imprisoned by Israel for 18 years and then you have most of the members of  the United Nations itself.

 

 

 

Not quite sure what you were trying to say or how it says anything different from what I posted.

There is a quite vocal radical left wing in Israel, and it does have much electoral success, especially in recent years.

So that there are representative of the radical left wing having their say is not exactly a rare thing nor big news.

 

If and when you manage to find a Palestinian expressing similar level of dissent, while living in country (or even, as per

one of the examples you used - holding a senior political position) - that would be considered news.

 

I am not sure that the late Shulamit Aloni (passed away January this year) would actually endorse all of Pappe's ideas.

There are some differences between left wing group and beliefs in Israel, hardly a unified front (not to mention rife with

personal agendas and power plays). Vanunu's case is somewhat different, not really much to do with the Palestinians

to begin with, and arguably got a lot to do with betrayal of trust etc (which makes for interesting discussion, but will lead

us to Snowden territory, and quite off topic).

What does the UN have to do with Pappe?

[Morch]

 

 

Your interpretation of Israel's long term goal doesn't go hand in hand with the fact that Israel has made great concessions and withdrawals for peace and to advance peace talks , including the withdrawals from Sinai, Southern Lebanon and Gaza.

You keep accusing Israel of "stealing" land in the west bank. I wonder what, in your view, is Israel's interest in "stealing" Palestinian land? Which land precisely does it "steal"?

 

 

Where has Israel made concessions or tried to advance peace in the past few years? I think there was some hope for a negotiated solution in the time of Arafat and Rabin. But various vested interests resisted this, then the domination of right-wing Zionist politics in Israel derailed all hopes. The continuing conflicts with, and petty oppressions of, Palestinians pushes hope for peace further and further into the future. This suits no one other than those wanting to obtain more of the West Bank for the Zionist project. Israel's Prime Minister makes no secret of the fact that he supports the theft / annexation of more Palestinian lands. (see e.g http://www.yesh-din.org/userfiles/file/Reports-English/Yesh%20Din%20-%20Chasar%20Takdim%20English%20-%20Web-%2016_6.pdf)

 

Which land precisely does Israel want to steal you ask? Well, Netanyahu probably has a map with all of the areas he intends to take over coloured in. But he doesn't share it with me. However, if we look at the recent past, it is abundantly clear that Palestinian land is being stole constantly. There have been numerous maps showing the decrement in Palestinian lands since 1947 - you must have seen some on Thai Visa, there have been many!  I'll reproduce one of them below.

 

And you could also check out this site:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/maps.html

It gives only brief information, but is a good starting point for examining the issue of land theft and annexation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, the distinction between the late Rabin and Zionists is in your mind only. I doubt very much that Rabin ever perceived

himself as anything other than a staunch Zionist. Domination of the right wing in Israeli politics was actually evident even at

the time - one of the reasons Rabin managed to get elected was precisely because he was seen as one of the right-most on

the left wing. The parliamentary majority of his coalition was quite marginal when it came to certain key votes.

 

Of course, looking at the negotiations without considering the actions of the Palestinians during this time leads to a rather

narrow vision of events. Hardly the case that the Palestinians were ready and willing to shake hands and make peace, and

quite convenient to overlook the level terrorist attacks reached during this time. The rise of the right wing in Israel was not

out of context with Palestinian actions as well.

 

The first link provided gets me to the 404 page, so can't comment on that.

 

Posting maps from a biased website which presents facts in a less than candid manner is one way to go about proving a

point. Just as an example, the UN partition plan does seem to give the future Israel large tracts of land. In effect, most of

the southern part is desert, and was sparsely populated, with the main indigenous population being Bedouin rather than

Palestinian (well, they weren't called that at the time, but even today Arabs are very conscious of such differences). That

peace of real estate which made for at least half of the future Israel was not, for the most part, a place where Palestinians

"lived and farmed for centuries".  In the same way, there is hardly any mention (other than that the Palestinians rejected

the partition plan) of a certain war being fought and it just presented as if Israel took over Palestinian lands out of the blue.

 

More of the same follows, but this has been pointed out and visited numerous times on these topics,

[Morch]

 

 

Again, there are forces on both sides that really don't want peace or aren't willing to pay the price of peace anyway. It is total idiocy to solely blame either side. But for now, Israel really must do what they must do to repel the terrorist Hamas threat in Gaza. 

 

 

 

Ah yes. The "terrorist threat".  You can't have a constructive discussion unless you acknowledge that there are other items on the agenda.
 

 

 

Have you noticed that the Israeli propagandists have added a new item to their lexicon:  "terror tunnels". 
 

 

 

Well, they weren't really used as such previously. Seems like the Hamas actually got one over the IDF.

With five or six attacks being carried out within Israel via these tunnels during the fighting it is certainly a threat.

A lot of criticism in Israeli media over government and IDF handling of this issue - turns out they were aware to

a degree (perhaps not with regard to the scope), but either wrongly did not consider it a serious threat or did not

have proper means to deal with them. Talk about an investigation into this after the fighting is over makes a quite

a few politicians and generals worry for their careers.

 

So, not exactly a new thing - and the IDF main task now is to expose and blow tunnels leading into Israel from the

Gaza Strip.
 

[Asiantravel]

 

 

 

Again, there are forces on both sides that really don't want peace or aren't willing to pay the price of peace anyway. It is total idiocy to solely blame either side. But for now, Israel really must do what they must do to repel the terrorist Hamas threat in Gaza. 

 

 

 

Ah yes. The "terrorist threat".  You can't have a constructive discussion unless you acknowledge that there are other items on the agenda.
 

 

 

Have you noticed that the Israeli propagandists have added a new item to their lexicon:  "terror tunnels". 
 

 

 

Well, they weren't really used as such previously. Seems like the Hamas actually got one over the IDF.

With five or six attacks being carried out within Israel via these tunnels during the fighting it is certainly a threat.

A lot of criticism in Israeli media over government and IDF handling of this issue - turns out they were aware to

a degree (perhaps not with regard to the scope), but either wrongly did not consider it a serious threat or did not

have proper means to deal with them. Talk about an investigation into this after the fighting is over makes a quite

a few politicians and generals worry for their careers.

 

So, not exactly a new thing - and the IDF main task now is to expose and blow tunnels leading into Israel from the

Gaza Strip.
 

 

 

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

 

Israel claims that it is merely exercising its right to self-defense and that Gaza is no longer occupied. Here’s what you need to know about these talking points and more.

 

 

1. Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.
2. Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.
3. This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.
4. Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians
5. Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

 

 

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

 

Edited August 1, 2014 by Asiantravel

[ggold]

 

 

 

 

 

Ah yes. The "terrorist threat".  You can't have a constructive discussion unless you acknowledge that there are other items on the agenda.
 

 

 

Have you noticed that the Israeli propagandists have added a new item to their lexicon:  "terror tunnels". 
 

 

 

Well, they weren't really used as such previously. Seems like the Hamas actually got one over the IDF.

With five or six attacks being carried out within Israel via these tunnels during the fighting it is certainly a threat.

A lot of criticism in Israeli media over government and IDF handling of this issue - turns out they were aware to

a degree (perhaps not with regard to the scope), but either wrongly did not consider it a serious threat or did not

have proper means to deal with them. Talk about an investigation into this after the fighting is over makes a quite

a few politicians and generals worry for their careers.

 

So, not exactly a new thing - and the IDF main task now is to expose and blow tunnels leading into Israel from the

Gaza Strip.
 

 

 

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

 

Israel claims that it is merely exercising its right to self-defense and that Gaza is no longer occupied. Here’s what you need to know about these talking points and more.

 

 

1. Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.
2. Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.
3. This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.
4. Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians
5. Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

 

 

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

 

 

 

This article was written by Noura Erakat is a Palestinian American and a contributing editor of Jadaliyya which is an Arab news site, so hardly a neutral view of what is happening.
 

[Ulysses G.]

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

"Debunked" by an anti-Israeli, Palestinian political activist. Who is listening to that malarkey?  

[CBR250]

 

 

Again, the distinction between the late Rabin and Zionists is in your mind only. I doubt very much that Rabin ever perceived

himself as anything other than a staunch Zionist. Domination of the right wing in Israeli politics was actually evident even at

the time - one of the reasons Rabin managed to get elected was precisely because he was seen as one of the right-most on

the left wing. The parliamentary majority of his coalition was quite marginal when it came to certain key votes.

 

Posting maps from a biased website which presents facts in a less than candid manner is one way to go about proving a

point. Just as an example, the UN partition plan does seem to give the future Israel large tracts of land. In effect, most of

the southern part is desert, and was sparsely populated, with the main indigenous population being Bedouin rather than

Palestinian (well, they weren't called that at the time, but even today Arabs are very conscious of such differences). That

peace of real estate which made for at least half of the future Israel was not, for the most part, a place where Palestinians

"lived and farmed for centuries".  In the same way, there is hardly any mention (other than that the Palestinians rejected

the partition plan) of a certain war being fought and it just presented as if Israel took over Palestinian lands out of the blue.

 

More of the same follows, but this has been pointed out and visited numerous times on these topics,

 

 

I agree totally - Rabin was not an angel. But he was a hell of a lot closer to being one than the leaders inflicted on Israel since those more hopeful times. I don't think that Avigdor Lieberman could have been an MP, never mind a Foreign Minister, back then. And I am not aware of Israel using any underhanded strategies (some would say that Israel is quite sophisticated at such stratagems) to push promising Palestinian leaders forward. Such as MUstafa Baghuti, whom we have discussed briefly in the past. He is a committed peace activist, and enjoys a reasonable level of popularity amongst Palestinians. He gained about 20% of the vote in the 2005 Presidential elections. May have got even more, but he claims that Israel covertly supported Abbas throughout the Presidential campaign. This was not a case of "sour grapes", as he is not that sort of person, and he raised these accusations during, not after, the campaign.

 

In fact - and I happily acknowledge that this is purely opinion, albeit expressed by many commentators -  that Netanyahu was so peed off with Fatah and Hamas becoming a single voice he was desperate for a war. Yet Fatah was clearly to be the senior partner, which would have boded well for trying to deal with a single voice (and one a little more moderate). He also - according to some commentators, so again only opinion - was furious that Palestine recently sought to sign up to some International Conventions. Yet, in the interests of peace, surely one would want Palestine to tie itself into the constraints of the international community? All of Netanyahu's responses seem nonsensical - unless one tries them out through the lens of more land theft. Then they fit quite neatly. Divide (Fatah and Hamas) and conquer. Approve a huge increase in the expansion of settlements in the West Bank while supposedly engaged in a peace process. Whip up the fervor of war amongst the population. Treat the representatives of your greatest ally - the USA - with disdain, if not contempt. It fits. And the parsimonious explanation is traditionally the one preferred by both philosophy and science when faced with an array of facts.
 

And if you don't like the map I provided, please accept my invitation to use more neutral sources to post maps of the spread of illegal settlements, the "administrative" and "legal" theft of privately owned Palestinian lands, the land grab of the Apartheid Wall, the annexation in East Jerusalem etc etc.

[Kalebiran]

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

"Debunked" by an anti-Israeli, Palestinian political activist. Who is listening to that malarkey?  

The only good that will come from Israels killing spree is that they are losing friends. Today trigger happy tank commanders firing direct shells when he will see who is in his sights and seeing civilians .War crimes /genocide, Not my words,but "former "gullible friends of them. Edited August 1, 2014 by Kalebiran

[Ulysses G.]

Certain posters remind me why so few wild-eyed Palestinian fanatics are allowed on discussion shows on TV. They make their own side look bad with all the crazy accusations and harebrained rhetoric.
The shows usually have to book some Western useful idiot to parrot the Palestinian talking points instead. At least they can control themselves and tone it down a little bit for an educated audience. 

Edited August 1, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Kalebiran]

You remind of something that if I posted the words I would be banned, but they would be entirely suited to one who supports every last deed of the terrorist state of Israel Edited August 1, 2014 by Kalebiran

[ggold]

You remind of something that if I posted the words I would be banned, but they would be entirely suited to one who supports every last deed of the terrorist state of Israel

 

So you are OK with Iran burning the lips of an Iranian Christian because he did no fast during Ramadan? Is Iran more democratic than Israel? And maybe you agree with the deaths in Syria where Iran is using Hezbolah to save Assad's regime? Arab Killing Arab.

 

To the mods. I would hope that you do not delete, and allow Kalebiran to answer my questions. I would argue that as Iran sponsors Hamas and supply them with Rockets. It would be useful to know what an Iranian thinks.  And maybe try to justify Iran's behaviour towards it's own citizens and the wider Middle east. It has relevance IMO.   

[Morch]

 

 

 

Have you noticed that the Israeli propagandists have added a new item to their lexicon:  "terror tunnels". 
 

 

 

Well, they weren't really used as such previously. Seems like the Hamas actually got one over the IDF.

With five or six attacks being carried out within Israel via these tunnels during the fighting it is certainly a threat.

A lot of criticism in Israeli media over government and IDF handling of this issue - turns out they were aware to

a degree (perhaps not with regard to the scope), but either wrongly did not consider it a serious threat or did not

have proper means to deal with them. Talk about an investigation into this after the fighting is over makes a quite

a few politicians and generals worry for their careers.

 

So, not exactly a new thing - and the IDF main task now is to expose and blow tunnels leading into Israel from the

Gaza Strip.
 

 

 

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

 

Israel claims that it is merely exercising its right to self-defense and that Gaza is no longer occupied. Here’s what you need to know about these talking points and more.

 

 

1. Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.
2. Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.
3. This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.
4. Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians
5. Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

 

 

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

 

 

 

And pray tell, how is the above opinion column anything to do with post?

 

Noura Erakat is entitled to her opinion, which is far from objective, and can make any odd claim she wishes.

The points are not even debunked (a waste of boldface and font size), they are just reviewed from a single

dimension set of mind.
 

[Kalebiran]

You remind of something that if I posted the words I would be banned, but they would be entirely suited to one who supports every last deed of the terrorist state of Israel

 
So you are OK with Iran burning the lips of an Iranian Christian because he did no fast during Ramadan? Is Iran more democratic than Israel? And maybe you agree with the deaths in Syria where Iran is using Hezbolah to save Assad's regime? Arab Killing Arab.
 
To the mods. I would hope that you do not delete, and allow Kalebiran to answer my questions. I would argue that as Iran sponsors Hamas and supply them with Rockets. It would be useful to know what an Iranian thinks.  And maybe try to justify Iran's behaviour towards it's own citizens and the wider Middle east. It has relevance IMO.   

what is this to do with Iran? you speak the same as Israel spokesman on TV and failing to justify their country's actions by not answering the questions.

[uptheos]

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

"Debunked" by an anti-Israeli, Palestinian political activist. Who is listening to that malarkey?  

 

 

He fell for it 

[ggold]

 

 

You remind of something that if I posted the words I would be banned, but they would be entirely suited to one who supports every last deed of the terrorist state of Israel

 
So you are OK with Iran burning the lips of an Iranian Christian because he did no fast during Ramadan? Is Iran more democratic than Israel? And maybe you agree with the deaths in Syria where Iran is using Hezbolah to save Assad's regime? Arab Killing Arab.
 
To the mods. I would hope that you do not delete, and allow Kalebiran to answer my questions. I would argue that as Iran sponsors Hamas and supply them with Rockets. It would be useful to know what an Iranian thinks.  And maybe try to justify Iran's behaviour towards it's own citizens and the wider Middle east. It has relevance IMO.   

what is this to do with Iran? you speak the same as Israel spokesman on TV and failing to justify their country's actions by not answering the questions.

 

 

So are you afraid to answer my questions? In case SAVAK want to ask you questions? I was curious how you feel about the questions I asked you. Your choice if you don't. But I am sure we would all have been interested in your answers.

 

after all you can't really claim Israel is a terrorist state, when Iran is exporting terrorism? Iranian rockets being fired by Hamas into Israel must make you happy, Do Arab deaths in Syria make you equally Happy?

[Kalebiran]

I know that 1500 killed and another child every hour killed by Israel. So many turning against the terrorist state if Israel

[Morch]

 

 

 

Again, the distinction between the late Rabin and Zionists is in your mind only. I doubt very much that Rabin ever perceived

himself as anything other than a staunch Zionist. Domination of the right wing in Israeli politics was actually evident even at

the time - one of the reasons Rabin managed to get elected was precisely because he was seen as one of the right-most on

the left wing. The parliamentary majority of his coalition was quite marginal when it came to certain key votes.

 

Posting maps from a biased website which presents facts in a less than candid manner is one way to go about proving a

point. Just as an example, the UN partition plan does seem to give the future Israel large tracts of land. In effect, most of

the southern part is desert, and was sparsely populated, with the main indigenous population being Bedouin rather than

Palestinian (well, they weren't called that at the time, but even today Arabs are very conscious of such differences). That

peace of real estate which made for at least half of the future Israel was not, for the most part, a place where Palestinians

"lived and farmed for centuries".  In the same way, there is hardly any mention (other than that the Palestinians rejected

the partition plan) of a certain war being fought and it just presented as if Israel took over Palestinian lands out of the blue.

 

More of the same follows, but this has been pointed out and visited numerous times on these topics,

 

 

I agree totally - Rabin was not an angel. But he was a hell of a lot closer to being one than the leaders inflicted on Israel since those more hopeful times. I don't think that Avigdor Lieberman could have been an MP, never mind a Foreign Minister, back then. And I am not aware of Israel using any underhanded strategies (some would say that Israel is quite sophisticated at such stratagems) to push promising Palestinian leaders forward. Such as MUstafa Baghuti, whom we have discussed briefly in the past. He is a committed peace activist, and enjoys a reasonable level of popularity amongst Palestinians. He gained about 20% of the vote in the 2005 Presidential elections. May have got even more, but he claims that Israel covertly supported Abbas throughout the Presidential campaign. This was not a case of "sour grapes", as he is not that sort of person, and he raised these accusations during, not after, the campaign.

 

In fact - and I happily acknowledge that this is purely opinion, albeit expressed by many commentators -  that Netanyahu was so peed off with Fatah and Hamas becoming a single voice he was desperate for a war. Yet Fatah was clearly to be the senior partner, which would have boded well for trying to deal with a single voice (and one a little more moderate). He also - according to some commentators, so again only opinion - was furious that Palestine recently sought to sign up to some International Conventions. Yet, in the interests of peace, surely one would want Palestine to tie itself into the constraints of the international community? All of Netanyahu's responses seem nonsensical - unless one tries them out through the lens of more land theft. Then they fit quite neatly. Divide (Fatah and Hamas) and conquer. Approve a huge increase in the expansion of settlements in the West Bank while supposedly engaged in a peace process. Whip up the fervor of war amongst the population. Treat the representatives of your greatest ally - the USA - with disdain, if not contempt. It fits. And the parsimonious explanation is traditionally the one preferred by both philosophy and science when faced with an array of facts.
 

And if you don't like the map I provided, please accept my invitation to use more neutral sources to post maps of the spread of illegal settlements, the "administrative" and "legal" theft of privately owned Palestinian lands, the land grab of the Apartheid Wall, the annexation in East Jerusalem etc etc.

 

 

There were other right wing MPs at the time, spewing off pretty much the same ideology as Lieberman does today. Rabin's

coalition did not include the right wing parties, hence having someone as Lieberman as a minister was never an option.

 

So, now it is Israel's responsibility to shape Palestinian leadership? There were a few attempts at that prior to the Oslo

accords, didn't go to well for those involved or for Israeli interests. And of course, then the almost certain claim would be

that such leaders are doing the will of Israel etc. Can't force leaders on people, and Israel's ability to manipulate domestic

politics of Palestinians and neighboring countries is seriously questioned.

 

Mustafa Barghouti does not represent anything but fringe. His party won less than 3% of the votes on the last election, and

that was when running in a joint list with like-minded groups. The 20% vote on the 2005 presidential elections was when the

Hamas did not participate. It was interpreted as a vote against corruption and Abbas, rather than expressed support for the

relatively moderate views presented by Barghouti. As a rule, almost any political failure by Palestinian leader is traditionally

attributed to Israel, these are not cases of "sour grapes" - it's almost expected.

 

As for the Palestinian reconciliation effort - Not a Netanyahu fan to say the least, and do not suspect him of any intentions

of getting ahead with the peace process. That said, one have to apply some selective reading in order to accommodate the

views presented.

 

The reconciliation agreement was far from a done deal. There were numerous issues that were put aside, and there were

serious issues which were never agreed upon, and which by themselves make the deal a non-starter, even if photo-ops and

ceremonies were held.

 

Speaking as a single voice? Hamas did not commit to stopping the armed struggle, nor did Hamas say it will take part in any

negotiations. What it did say, in a very generalized way and not through main leaders is that it will let the PA get on with it,

but keep options open. At the same time, Hamas refused to hand over control over its military wing in any way or form, and

the same goes for weapons. On the other hand, Hamas did expect the PA to immediately pick the tab for Hamas official's

salaries (including some of the military wing). The PA, naturally, was not that keen on the prospect - both because this was

to lose leverage over Hamas and also due to trust issues dating back a few years.

 

There were elections in the deal as well. Now, the elections are a bit tricky for the PA, as Hamas does garner electoral

support even in the West Bank. How much is anyone's guess, but conceivable  Hamas could win the elections. What

then? Who is the senior partner and who's voice is dominant?

 

Hamas never changed its position regarding recognizing Israel or reaching a permanent solution of the conflict through

diplomacy. In fact, it is committed to a long term vision of freeing all the land through the destruction of Israel. Under these

conditions, and without renouncing this aim - what grounds are there for negotiations?

 

Personally, I do not care much whether the Palestinian apply (and accepted) to various international bodies. Carries very

little meaning when most countries already recognize them. Israel insistence on this is indeed silly. As far as I understand

the basis for this resistance has to do with the the agreements in which such things as international status etc. should be

determined through consultation rather as a one sided action. Note that the PA does not go the full mile with this yet, as

it would certainly be a clear breach of agreements and would give Israel a wonderful excuse to pull back on all things

agreed so far (not that little as some may think). Would also make things tricky for some of its foreign backers (mostly the

USA and the EU).

 

Netanyahu is not germane to this conflict. He is just another mediocre leader which exemplifies the leadership crisis that

plagues both sides for quite a while now. Place any of the other relevant leaders under the same magnifying glass and 

the all look the same - petty, self serving and short sighted.

 

As for the site linked - not about "like" or "not like". I have no problems (and I usually do not post a rebuttal) to things I do

not contest or find factually incorrect. My comment was that the map itself was correct, and the accompanying text was

misleading, in case this was hard to follow. My opinion on the terminology you keep on using is known.

[ggold]

I know that 1500 killed and another child every hour killed by Israel. So many turning against the terrorist state if Israel

Well I hope life is good for you in the terrorist exporting state of Iran. Salam.

[CBR250]

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

 

Israel claims that it is merely exercising its right to self-defense and that Gaza is no longer occupied. Here’s what you need to know about these talking points and more.

 

 

1. Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.
2. Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.
3. This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.
4. Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians
5. Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

 

 

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

 

 

 

This article was written by Noura Erakat is a Palestinian American and a contributing editor of Jadaliyya which is an Arab news site, so hardly a neutral view of what is happening.
 

 

 

Oh, and the views of an obviously emotive anonymous poster on Thai Visa are more credible than Ms Erakat's???

Or perhaps only the Jerusalem Post will do? Or maybe just those sections of US / European media that demonstrate George Orwell's "Newspeak" is alive and well and living in Israel.

 

I totally understand why you object to this article, as it is much more than an opinion piece. It is literate and logical. It provides facts and analysis to support the arguments. It demands a considered response from anyone with any shred of objectivity.

 

You would be doing very well if you could respond half as succinctly as she expresses her points. She offers a much higher level of debate than is found amongst the majority of TV apologists for the Israeli invasion. Thankyou OP for drawing this article to my attention.
 

[ggold]

 

 

Five Israeli Talking Points on Gaza—Debunked

 

Israel claims that it is merely exercising its right to self-defense and that Gaza is no longer occupied. Here’s what you need to know about these talking points and more.

 

 

1. Israel is exercising its right to self-defense.
2. Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005.
3. This Israeli operation, among others, was caused by rocket fire from Gaza.
4. Israel avoids civilian casualties, but Hamas aims to kill civilians
5. Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

 

 

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

 

 

 

This article was written by Noura Erakat is a Palestinian American and a contributing editor of Jadaliyya which is an Arab news site, so hardly a neutral view of what is happening.
 

 

 

Oh, and the views of an obviously emotive anonymous poster on Thai Visa are more credible than Ms Erakat's???

Or perhaps only the Jerusalem Post will do? Or maybe just those sections of US / European media that demonstrate George Orwell's "Newspeak" is alive and well and living in Israel.

 

I totally understand why you object to this article, as it is much more than an opinion piece. It is literate and logical. It provides facts and analysis to support the arguments. It demands a considered response from anyone with any shred of objectivity.

 

You would be doing very well if you could respond half as succinctly as she expresses her points. She offers a much higher level of debate than is found amongst the majority of TV apologists for the Israeli invasion. Thankyou OP for drawing this article to my attention.
 

 

 

who rattled your pram?

I totally understand why you object to this article,

 

All I said was that it was far from neutral. That doesn't constitute as an objection does it.  I wonder why you are on Thai visa, surely you weren't expecting serious debate by any chance?