Thousands march for Gaza in London, clashes in Paris over Israeli onslaught

[DPIZZA]

 

 
If memory serves, growth of support for Hamas had more to do with PA corruption and inability to get anywhere with the
peace negotiations. Support for Hamas was going down some recently - mostly due to economic factors. This occured
in the past, and one Hamas tactic to deal with that is bringing out the old aggro vs. Israel - nothing serves better to
divert attention and unite the people.

 

And the Israeli government played right into their hands and is doing the job for them; hence the rise in support for Hamas.

 

Casualty lists on the Israeli side are not as high as in Gaza Strip. That does not mean that there are no damages or that the Israeli civilians (especially at the south of Israel) are not running in and out of shelters quite often. They are lucky to have a country that places some importance on their protection and survival. Seeing the scope of Hamas underground construction projects, they could have provided ample protection for at least some of the Gazans. Same goes for telling civilians to disregard Israeli warnings about impeding attacks, and using densely populated residential areas and public building for military purposes.
 
What would constitute a proportional military response from Israel, in your opinion?

To be honest, I don't know.

What I do know is that Israel's tactics have never worked.

The German bombing of British cities in WWII was designed to demoralise the civilian population and sap their will to fight; as was the Allied bombing of German cities in the same war; as was the American bombing of North Vietnam in that war.

All that was achieved was that civilian resolve was strengthened and the will to fight on increased.

 

We are seeing the same now in the rising support for Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank.

 

At least you are honest when you say you dont know what is a proportional military response.

 

You also forget that it shouldn't only be proportionate, but it should stop the aggressors from continuing the attacks, or be a step in the direction...

 

So after all the words and efforts you invested in this forum, when we finally say: ok, lets hear what is your solution to the problem, you just say: i dont know...

 

I am sorry, but Israel cant afford to listen to such clueless opinions, when the life of its citizens are in danger.

Israel doesnt have the luxury of burying its head in the sand, and say: "gee wees, i dont know what to do, so lets just ignore this situation, and trust the kindness of Hamas..."

 

So if you dont have anything to offer to make the situation better, please at least dont be a factor that makes it worse!

[Morch]

 

 

So the protests have finally helped lead to a new cease fire in Gaza. Let us hope the slaughter has finished. Gaza has lost nearly two thousand people, including over 400 children. The scene Brian Eno wrote of - a young Palestinian father weeping, holding a plastic carrier bag full of meat - which was his 4 year old son who had been torn to shreds by an Israeli "fletchette" bomb - stays with me. As does the picture of the destruction of thousands of homes, roads, dozens of schools, hospitals, health centres. All of the essential infrastructure for a normal life. The rest of the world will pick up the tab for Israel's wanton destruction of Gaza. And they won't be happy about it.

 

Israel has won the battle, but lost the war - it has been a total PR disaster. The images of disproportionate destruction have circulated the world. The inhumanity and war crimes of the IDF have been exposed in a previously sympathetic international press. The young Gazans who have witnessed the killing and destruction will be radicalised for life, and they will pass on the grief and anger to their children. Hamas will be able to find many new members. The more calming voice of Fatah has been silenced. Well done, Netanyahu. You have sold out the peace of your people for generations to come for the opportunity to keep stealing land - the number one priority of Israel's internal politics.

 

The ceasefire is a result of the protests?

 

The number one priority in Israeli domestic politics is to get re-elected and stick the boot to politicians from your own party

which endanger your position. Support for the illegal settlements effort is not something all Israeli parties and politicians go

for - but indeed, this doesn't sound as definitive and simple as the last line of your post.
 

 

 

Please note I said "helped" to lead to a new ceasefire, not "caused". Not "resulted in". Not "was the inevitable outcome of". Just - "helped".

And it was not just protest on the streets that helped, but in the corridors of many governments, in mass media, in every forum imaginable. MPs who couldn't care less about Israel 2 months ago were running around pulling serious faces as journos questioned their stance on Gaza. Previously sympathetic nations were demanding responses about Gaza from Israeli Ambassadors. So, I will reiterate. Protests. Helped.

Or do you think that Bibi and his entourage stopped simply because he was feeling magnanimous????

 

Yes, I agree with your cynical evaluation of Israeli politics. It is probably a bit worse than many other countries because the peculiar environment gives greater opportunities for the seriously deranged to rise to power. As we have seen.

 

And of course the land theft is central to the issues in Palestine and Gaza. Maybe in the internal head-kicking of Israeli politics it gets put aside occasionally. But never forgotten. Eretz Israel - the ownership of Palestine, Gaza and the Golan Heights - drives every party in some way. What political party currently has a platform for returning the stolen land on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem to Palestine? What political party promises to not allow any more "encroachments" by Zionist supremacists? What political party wants to move the Apartheid Wall back onto neutral boundaries? Israel's reluctance to engage in a meaningful peace process - I should say its contempt for the peace process - since the year 2000 is best explained by its intent to take more and more land. 

 

 

 

I think that as far as ceasefires went this time, Israel was overall quite responsive in general to requests.

Can't recall similar amount of ceasefires in previous clashes. No, never suspected they had anything to

do with altruism or being magnanimous, mostly a PR and diplomatic leeway effort by Israel. Kindness

and similar notions rarely play a part in politics, regional and otherwise. Not sure the motivation is that

paramount, as long as the fire stops. And unless mistaken, most refusals for ceasefires and breaking of

ceasefires this time around can be chalked up to Hamas.

 

I do not believe that the protests by themselves had much of an effect on either Israel's or the Hamas's

decision making regarding the ceasefires. The Hamas because they simply don't care about this sort of

thing, and Israel because the current government's arrogance is such that many in it choose to ignore

the roundabout implications of these protests on Israel's foreign relationships with certain countries. If

the criticism does not actually come from heads of state etc. it is usually shelved and tagged as, well,

not sure what the accepted term is this far down the topic. As for Egypt, which took the the mediator

role - the protests had little to do with them directly.

 

The protests might have an effect later on, for sure. When pressure comes to bear on local politicians

and make its way upward. So far, the tide of consequences is still a possibility rather than reality, as 

far as most Israelis go.

 

Israeli domestic politics are not much different from many other places. Less direct violence, perhaps.

But then, living in Thailand can sure erode one's standard on accepted conduct and norms among

politicians. With the Palestinian reconciliation thing maybe going back on track, we might get a nice

glimpse at how things are done over the fence - and they are quite lively. Same holds true for Abass's

expected retirement.

 

There are plenty of parties which are pro-peace and willing (to differing degrees) to make the necessary

concessions and compromises, 6 of them for sure, 2 maybes (38 seats and 21 seats, respectively). As

pointed out in another post, Israel could have had, under slightly different conditions, a center-left coalition.

There is no party, to my knowledge, that included anything about assuming control of the Gaza Strip again

in its manifest. My standing objections to your terminology aside, the assumption that Zionism is somehow

in disparity with parties being pro-peace is quite off mark. For most Israelis Zionism does not mean what

you seem to think it means.

 

The peace process stalling have many underlying reasons (as with most issues), and again, pinning it all

on Israeli expansionism is both unsupported by recent historical events and ignores some of the realities

relevant to the uneasy neighborhood between Israelis and Palestinians. In my opinion this is more to do

with lack of trust and and security fears, rather than with territorial gains per se.

[DPIZZA]

 

 

Humanitarian supplies and some essential medical supplies donated by the International community has arrived in Gaza during 27th / 28th July. Credit where it's due - Israel is fulfilling at least its obligations under Humanitarian Law in this regard. Supplies will be allocated and delivered as conditions allow.
 
Sadly, WHO updates suggest that Health Care facilities are unable to adequately utilise supplies, as they have lost staff to death and injury, and many more who cannot work as they are fully engaged in tending to their own families. The other concerns for health are the loss of power and water supplies. You can't really run a hospital without power and water. Ambulances are not able to work - many have been destroyed, and some areas are so badly damaged by Israeli shelling that they cannot move around. Ambulances clearly marked with the Red Crescent have had their staff shot, apparently by snipers. These shootings occurred even after obtaining permission from the IDF to rescue injured people in precise locations.
http://www.emro.who.int/images/stories/palestine/documents/WHO_Sitrep_on_Gaza__5_-_July_28.pdf?ua=1
 
 
 

Would they be the same ambulances that Hamas terrorists routinely use as transport, taking the obligatory cargo of children with just in case.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

 

 

Credibility online.

Steely Dan & dr lucas vs World Health Organisation and the International Red Cross. Who do you believe???
 

 

You want credibility?

 

ok! 

 

WHO and the international Red Cross organization all hire Palestinian crews in the Gaza strip.

They dont even bother to check if they are a member of a terror organization (that is the definition of Hamas under US law), and by that, they are breaking the US law of financing and supporting terror groups.

 

It is not a new fact that Hamas, Hezbollah and other terror organizations use civilians and civilian institutions for their purposes, in this case propaganda.

Please watch this video:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS2Cmvy4V6o&feature=related

 

[fasteddie]

A very interesting video by a Jewish American lady about how Palestinians are forced to live, on their own land.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch5XlEZoi1c&feature=share

[Ulysses G.]

 

The ceasefire is a result of the protests?

 
Please note I said "helped" to lead to a new ceasefire, not "caused".

 

Yes, I noticed that bit of spin. The anti-Semitic protests had pretty much nothing to do with the ceasefires - the ones that Hamas violated - but at least the claim keeps your post on topic. 

[CBR250]

 

There are plenty of parties which are pro-peace and willing (to differing degrees) to make the necessary

concessions and compromises, 6 of them for sure, 2 maybes (38 seats and 21 seats, respectively). As

pointed out in another post, Israel could have had, under slightly different conditions, a center-left coalition.

There is no party, to my knowledge, that included anything about assuming control of the Gaza Strip again

in its manifest. My standing objections to your terminology aside, the assumption that Zionism is somehow

in disparity with parties being pro-peace is quite off mark. For most Israelis Zionism does not mean what

you seem to think it means.

 

The peace process stalling have many underlying reasons (as with most issues), and again, pinning it all

on Israeli expansionism is both unsupported by recent historical events and ignores some of the realities

relevant to the uneasy neighborhood between Israelis and Palestinians. In my opinion this is more to do

with lack of trust and and security fears, rather than with territorial gains per se.

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

I believe that the trust and security issues are important, and that they have been caused by and now amplified by the issue of land. There are other substantive issues - such as the "right of return" and/or compensation for land appropriated over time. But I believe land is crucial in itself, and as a means to begin to build trust.

 

My biggest fear at the moment is that Israel's failure to have established a just peace with Palestine opens the doors to ISIS becoming much more involved in Palestine. Imagine if Israel had worked out a deal back in the 90s (or earlier), and been able to help build a productive neighbour. When people are happy and secure, when they have an investment in a peaceful life, they do not become radicalised. Hamas would not exist if Gaza had been  a functioning city-state back in then. And perhaps the biggest danger is idle young men - leave them without work for a few years, without hope for a reasonably comfortable or even prosperous future, and you risk trouble. I don't know what the unemployment rate is in Palestine, but when I visited a few years back there were thousands of late teen / young adult males wandering around aimlessly. Perhaps it is too late now that the dogs of war have been released in Syria and Iraq. But to adopt policies that maintain the anger and hatred between Israel and Palestinians is the most stupid, short-sighted move imaginable. I believe in the laws of karma - or the biblical "you reap what you sow". I really do not want to be writing on here about the tragic loss of hundreds of Israeli children in addition to Palestinian children. Something must change. And quickly.
 

[Ulysses G.]

Imagine if Israel had worked out a deal back in the 90s (or earlier), and been able to help build a productive neighbour.

Imagine if they had a willing partner. Imagine if Arafat had not rejected Barak's peace deal and refused to make a counter-offer. It takes two sides to tango.

 

 

 

Edited August 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Johpa]

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

 

I think the entire discussion would benefit from never using a totally obsolete term such as Zionist or Zionism.  Most Zionists are long dead.  There are few Israelis attempting to create a Jewish homeland. Their homeland exists and Israel is as real to them as Britain is to the POMEs or as real as La France is to the French or Deutschland is to the Germans. The Israelis are not going to go away despite one's antipathy to the equally long dead politicians who fostered the creation of the State of Israel.

 

So although protestors in London and Paris who have no skin in the game might get some self-satisfaction and a sense of post-modernist communal identity by protesting, their protests have no hope of providing peace or justice to the suffering people of Gaza but will only condemn them to further cycles of violence.

[CBR250]

 

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

 

I think the entire discussion would benefit from never using a totally obsolete term such as Zionist or Zionism.  Most Zionists are long dead.  There are few Israelis attempting to create a Jewish homeland. Their homeland exists and Israel is as real to them as Britain is to the POMEs or as real as La France is to the French or Deutschland is to the Germans. The Israelis are not going to go away despite one's antipathy to the equally long dead politicians who fostered the creation of the State of Israel.

 

So although protestors in London and Paris who have no skin in the game might get some self-satisfaction and a sense of post-modernist communal identity by protesting, their protests have no hope of providing peace or justice to the suffering people of Gaza but will only condemn them to further cycles of violence.

 

There are plenty of Israelis / Jews / Zionists / wanting to extend Israel - to create the biblical homeland - eretz Israel. Try reading some of the many documents about the failed peace negotiations since the 1990s. Palestinian land - or rather the theft of it by Israel - has been a central sticking point. The most recent peace process was undermined by Netanyahu's cynical continuation of settlement expansion. So, tell me, how would you prefer I refer to those who support and abet the continuing theft of land in the West Bank and east Jerusalem?

 

And I don't know what far-flung galaxy you hail from, but you seem to suffer from either literacy or comprehension problems. I have never stated, implied, hinted, suggested or in any shape or form argued that there should not be an Israel. Or wished it to go away. In fact, I can't recall ANYBODY suggesting this on here. Other of course than the one-eyed pro-Israelis who use obsolete propaganda to try to defend the indefensible. Jeesh. Next you'll be accusing me of wanting to turn synagogues into brothels, force bacon down your throat, and make you turn on electric lights on sabbath.

 

If you bother to read any of my posts you will see that I am concerned that Israel DOES survive. No, on second thoughts, please don't bother to read my posts. Just ignore them. Thanks.

 

[Scott]

Posts and replies deleted.   Please don't post in colored fonts.   A post and numerous replies using blue and black have been removed.   It is very difficult to read other than the regular font and color.   It is also confusing as to who is saying what to whom.  

[Johpa]

 

 

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

 

I think the entire discussion would benefit from never using a totally obsolete term such as Zionist or Zionism.  Most Zionists are long dead.  There are few Israelis attempting to create a Jewish homeland. Their homeland exists and Israel is as real to them as Britain is to the POMEs or as real as La France is to the French or Deutschland is to the Germans. The Israelis are not going to go away despite one's antipathy to the equally long dead politicians who fostered the creation of the State of Israel.

 

So although protestors in London and Paris who have no skin in the game might get some self-satisfaction and a sense of post-modernist communal identity by protesting, their protests have no hope of providing peace or justice to the suffering people of Gaza but will only condemn them to further cycles of violence.

 

There are plenty of Israelis / Jews / Zionists / wanting to extend Israel - to create the biblical homeland - eretz Israel. Try reading some of the many documents about the failed peace negotiations since the 1990s. Palestinian land - or rather the theft of it by Israel - has been a central sticking point. The most recent peace process was undermined by Netanyahu's cynical continuation of settlement expansion. So, tell me, how would you prefer I refer to those who support and abet the continuing theft of land in the West Bank and east Jerusalem?

 

And I don't know what far-flung galaxy you hail from, but you seem to suffer from either literacy or comprehension problems. I have never stated, implied, hinted, suggested or in any shape or form argued that there should not be an Israel. Or wished it to go away. In fact, I can't recall ANYBODY suggesting this on here. Other of course than the one-eyed pro-Israelis who use obsolete propaganda to try to defend the indefensible. Jeesh. Next you'll be accusing me of wanting to turn synagogues into brothels, force bacon down your throat, and make you turn on electric lights on sabbath.

 

If you bother to read any of my posts you will see that I am concerned that Israel DOES survive. No, on second thoughts, please don't bother to read my posts. Just ignore them. Thanks.

 

 

 

Well pardon me, but there was nothing in my post directly aimed at you or even a single use of the second person pronoun.  The post was about the use of the word Zionism within the larger discussion at hand.  And then my post addressed the original topic, the protestors. I have reread the post and there is nothing what so ever directly responding to you personally or your  personal thoughts. I shall continue to read your posts but please don't read into my posts that which is not there.
 

[CBR250]

Post shortened - but I hope, not taken out of context. (A fate that befalls many rational posters on here!).

 

I also don't think you know my position on the conflict itself, so I will take this opportunity to say it: I am both Pro Palestinian and Pro Israeli. I am Pro Peace. Pro dialogue. Hamas is not. Hamas is pro-terror. Therefore, I am anti-Hamas & anti-terror.

 

I share (and applaud) your laudable commitments to the well-being of both Palestinians and Israelis.  I am also pro-peace, pro-dialogue and "anti-terror". I am not a fan of Hamas either, although perhaps have a more modulated view on them than you.

But this is where part of our thinking starts to diverge, and hopefully we have and will continue to benefit from discussions.

I see Israel as practicing a form of state terrorism in its actions in Gaza. I know people object to having the word "terrorism" associated with Israel, but I don't think one needs to be a military expert to see that the Israeli actions in Gaza recently were totally disproportionate to the preceding - and supposedly causative - events. I condemn the more frequently and openly than I do Hamas - they have a greater responsibility as the occupying power. Hopefully the killing is over now, but the situation in Gaza has a long way to go before it is resolved.

Moreover (and from previous posts by you and I this is another sticking point at present) I believe that one of the major underlying reasons in this conflict is that Israel has studiously avoided or undermined any sincere peace dialogue over the past few decades (albeit abetted at times by the Palestinian leadership and Arab skullduggery) - thereby prolonging war and suffering of some Israelis, and many Palestinians. And yes, I do expect more of the initiative for peace to come from Israel. The ultimate responsibility for a peace process lies with the one who has the most power.

I have for some time now felt that the internal politics of both Palestine and Israel has become so skewed that the first steps are unlikely to come from within. Those on both sides who seek peace have been marginalised by the war mongers and endless propaganda. I think the only way forward is by tough talking and sanctions toward Israel from the US and Europe. This would weaken Israel's position in negotiations, so is undesirable on some levels. But if it is the only way forward.... Clearly, Palestine is not able to be subjected to any more deprivation, they have so little anyway. Their economy is a basket case.

If dramatic change does not occur soon I dread the next round of this conflict. One of my fears being that the more extreme elements of ISIS will appeal to the disenfranchised, unemployed, hopeless, grieving and angry young men in Gaza and Palestine. I think of my son, of his passion and energy for life - and know that if he was facing the death of his family as some are in Gaza, that despite his generous nature he would seek revenge. After what has just occurred in Gaza it is normal if undesirable human behaviour - not terrorism. Past decisions have shaped an horrific present. Let's hope and pray that current decisions don't shape an even more horrific future.

 

[Thorgal]

A very interesting video by a Jewish American lady about how Palestinians are forced to live, on their own land.
 

Thanks for sharing.

For me, on of the best video's.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.  

[CBR250]

 

 

 

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

 

I think the entire discussion would benefit from never using a totally obsolete term such as Zionist or Zionism.  Most Zionists are long dead.  There are few Israelis attempting to create a Jewish homeland. Their homeland exists and Israel is as real to them as Britain is to the POMEs or as real as La France is to the French or Deutschland is to the Germans. The Israelis are not going to go away despite one's antipathy to the equally long dead politicians who fostered the creation of the State of Israel.

 

So although protestors in London and Paris who have no skin in the game might get some self-satisfaction and a sense of post-modernist communal identity by protesting, their protests have no hope of providing peace or justice to the suffering people of Gaza but will only condemn them to further cycles of violence.

 

There are plenty of Israelis / Jews / Zionists / wanting to extend Israel - to create the biblical homeland - eretz Israel. Try reading some of the many documents about the failed peace negotiations since the 1990s. Palestinian land - or rather the theft of it by Israel - has been a central sticking point. The most recent peace process was undermined by Netanyahu's cynical continuation of settlement expansion. So, tell me, how would you prefer I refer to those who support and abet the continuing theft of land in the West Bank and east Jerusalem?

 

And I don't know what far-flung galaxy you hail from, but you seem to suffer from either literacy or comprehension problems. I have never stated, implied, hinted, suggested or in any shape or form argued that there should not be an Israel. Or wished it to go away. In fact, I can't recall ANYBODY suggesting this on here. Other of course than the one-eyed pro-Israelis who use obsolete propaganda to try to defend the indefensible. Jeesh. Next you'll be accusing me of wanting to turn synagogues into brothels, force bacon down your throat, and make you turn on electric lights on sabbath.

 

If you bother to read any of my posts you will see that I am concerned that Israel DOES survive. No, on second thoughts, please don't bother to read my posts. Just ignore them. Thanks.

 

 

 

Well pardon me, but there was nothing in my post directly aimed at you or even a single use of the second person pronoun.  The post was about the use of the word Zionism within the larger discussion at hand.  And then my post addressed the original topic, the protestors. I have reread the post and there is nothing what so ever directly responding to you personally or your  personal thoughts. I shall continue to read your posts but please don't read into my posts that which is not there.
 

 

OK, sorry for my running off at the mouth. But as your comments were linked to a quote from me I assumed that you were directing your post at me. In my defence, I am a little tetchy about the oh-so-common misrepresenting of one's points / arguments / thoughts in this and related threads. And yes, my assumption that you had started engaging in similar behaviour was totally unfair, and an error due to the juxtaposition of my quote and your post. Again, my apologies.

[Morch]

 

 

There are plenty of parties which are pro-peace and willing (to differing degrees) to make the necessary

concessions and compromises, 6 of them for sure, 2 maybes (38 seats and 21 seats, respectively). As

pointed out in another post, Israel could have had, under slightly different conditions, a center-left coalition.

There is no party, to my knowledge, that included anything about assuming control of the Gaza Strip again

in its manifest. My standing objections to your terminology aside, the assumption that Zionism is somehow

in disparity with parties being pro-peace is quite off mark. For most Israelis Zionism does not mean what

you seem to think it means.

 

The peace process stalling have many underlying reasons (as with most issues), and again, pinning it all

on Israeli expansionism is both unsupported by recent historical events and ignores some of the realities

relevant to the uneasy neighborhood between Israelis and Palestinians. In my opinion this is more to do

with lack of trust and and security fears, rather than with territorial gains per se.

 

 

I understand that there are multiple varieties of Zionism - I use the term to refer to those who believe that they have a god-given right to land between Jordan and the sea. It is of course incorrect to assume all Israelis or Jews share this vision. Many of those who don't share the Greater Israel vision are often secular or humanist, so I use the term Zionist to refer to that aspect of thought in Israel that drives the land grab. And I accept also that there are many Rabbis and religious Jews who also prefer the path of peace, and fight for justice for Palestinians. But a form of shorthand is needed to encapsulate that portion of Israeli society that shares certain colonialist values and aims.

 

I believe that the trust and security issues are important, and that they have been caused by and now amplified by the issue of land. There are other substantive issues - such as the "right of return" and/or compensation for land appropriated over time. But I believe land is crucial in itself, and as a means to begin to build trust.

 

My biggest fear at the moment is that Israel's failure to have established a just peace with Palestine opens the doors to ISIS becoming much more involved in Palestine. Imagine if Israel had worked out a deal back in the 90s (or earlier), and been able to help build a productive neighbour. When people are happy and secure, when they have an investment in a peaceful life, they do not become radicalised. Hamas would not exist if Gaza had been  a functioning city-state back in then. And perhaps the biggest danger is idle young men - leave them without work for a few years, without hope for a reasonably comfortable or even prosperous future, and you risk trouble. I don't know what the unemployment rate is in Palestine, but when I visited a few years back there were thousands of late teen / young adult males wandering around aimlessly. Perhaps it is too late now that the dogs of war have been released in Syria and Iraq. But to adopt policies that maintain the anger and hatred between Israel and Palestinians is the most stupid, short-sighted move imaginable. I believe in the laws of karma - or the biblical "you reap what you sow". I really do not want to be writing on here about the tragic loss of hundreds of Israeli children in addition to Palestinian children. Something must change. And quickly.
 

 

 

You can use the term anyway you like, but in doing so you misrepresent reality, and make your own argument confusing, to the degree that people familiar with the way the term is actually perceived in Israel, could have some trouble following what you aim for. Example, if all Zionist parties are bad, it basically means that there's hardly any pro-compromise forces in the Israeli parliament (which is, of course, not the case). The waters of the Middle East are muddied enough as it is, no point in adding to the confusion. While shorthand definitions save time, they often make realities harder to understand. Zionism does not exactly encapsulate what you're shooting for.

 

There's always a bogeyman, as far as Israelis go. Not sure that IS would make such a different impression on the public.  If anything, waving the IS threat would cause voters to shift right (or put another way, abandon the left). As pointed out in another post, Israeli leadership is not too great on long term planning and worse on implementation. This focusing on the short term goals and gains is indeed problematic, although, with the way Middle East fortunes shift and change, there might be something to this approach.

 

Would be interesting to see how Hamas will deal with a situation where IS gains a major foothold and support.

[Morch]

A very interesting video by a Jewish American lady about how Palestinians are forced to live, on their own land.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ch5XlEZoi1c&feature=share

 

I think her bio is more interesting than the clip, actually.

One may also choose which version of it is more believable.

 

ISM can also be seen in two very differing ways, easy to

choose one pandering to either view.

 

 

 

[DPIZZA]

 

 

If one views Israel's military actions as means to contain a threat, they might fare better. It does not

seem to be oriented at achieving much beyond that.

 

 

Well, this is the basis of the accusations of a breach of humanitarian law. If the IDF is only containing a threat from Hamas - its fighters and rockets - they cannot justify so many deaths amongst women and children, health workers and teachers.

 

Hamas I believe had about 25% support of the population a few weeks ago. The IDF has probably achieved the biggest boost in support for Hamas in their history, so they have achieved a lot more than containing a threat. They have increased it, and ensured its continuation into the future. I like to think I would hold onto principles of peace when faced with the situation of many Gazans. But I am not so sure I could if I saw my children killed by sniper fire, or a laser guided missile, or a tank shell. Or found the body of my wife in the rubble of my house. Especially if I had taken them to a "safe place" as designated by UNWRA. It is understandable that such people come to hate, and political parties that prosper on the pillars of hatred, prejudice and revenge come to the fore. Such as Hamas. Such as Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu. We can see how these negative emotions drive hatreds on this forum each day, as some (un-nameable) posters attempt to flood the pages with their skewed justifications for the continuing slaughter of civilians in Gaza.

 

 

 

Yes they can,

 

If Hamas uses the civilians as human shields and shooting from or around civilian centers, like schools, UN facilities, Mosques and Churches, then it is Hamas who breached the humanitarian law.

 

If after all the proof that was presented is not enough, here are foreign news reporters showing just that:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu-e5qWXx-k

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMiG9JD2OxM

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb8BeCfZAko

 

i just wanted to add that the french reporter only published that report AFTER he went out of Gaza, since Hamas is threatening anyone who is considered "enemy of the organization". This "terror control" is also evident in the words of the priest.

 

Many foreign news reporters do not dare to publish reports against Hamas of the fear they will not be allowed to continue reporting in Gaza.

[Ulysses G.]

Thanks for posting the proof. The Hamas apologists were denying all this stuff during the fighting, but more and more evidence is coming out now, of contrived death statistics and the terrorist group using civilians as human shields. 

[Jingthing]

Thanks for posting the proof. The Hamas apologists were denying all this stuff during the fighting, but more and more evidence is coming out now, of contrived death statistics and the terrorist group using civilians as human shields. 

Of course any proof no matter how solid won't be acknowledged. Just more cries for war crimes trials.

[CBR250]

Still trying to defend the indefensible. All of the spin in the world cannot undo the damage now done to Israel's standing. More importantly, rather than try to justify the actions of Israel, what will you do to influence Israel to work toward a just peace that allows Israelis to sleep peacefully?

[Ulysses G.]

All of the spin in the world cannot undo the damage now done to Israel's standing.

The Israel haters have been beating this drum for decades, but they are still there, their economy keeps improving and more and more Arab countries are fed up with Palestinian terrorism and silently - and not so silently - backing Israel. Things are really looking up.

Since the beginning of Israels offensive in Gaza, much of the Egyptian media has laid the blame squarely on the Islamist group Hamas, which controls the tiny Palestinian enclave.

Some journalists have even said that all Palestinians are to blame for their current plight.
http://www.france24.com/en/20140720-egyptian-media-applauds-israel-gaza-offensive/

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmgfce7Kfc8

Edited August 12, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[JDGRUEN]

This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale... most of Europe has moved on to other more pressing concerns... fickle as they are... Or perhaps the HAMAS backers in those oil rich Muslim Nations have run out of their current Euro allotment to fan the fires of Jew Hatred... 

Edited August 12, 2014 by JDGRUEN

[DPIZZA]

 

 

3. Why would Israel deliberately want to kill civilians?

This is the single most important issue that gets everyone riled up, and rightfully so.

Again, there is no justification for innocent Gazans dying. And there's no excuse for Israel's negligence in incidents like the killing of four children on a Gazan beach. But let's back up and think about this for a minute.

Why on Earth would Israel deliberately want to kill civilians?

When civilians die, Israel looks like a monster. It draws the ire of even its closest allies. Horrific images of injured and dead innocents flood the media. Ever-growing anti-Israel protests are held everywhere from Norway to New York. And the relatively low number of Israeli casualties (we'll get to that in a bit) repeatedly draws allegations of a "disproportionate" response. Most importantly, civilian deaths help Hamas immensely.

How can any of this possibly ever be in Israel's interest?

If Israel wanted to kill civilians, it is terrible at it. ISIS killed more civilians in two days (700 plus) than Israel has in two weeks. Imagine if ISIS or Hamas had Israel's weapons, army, air force, US support, and nuclear arsenal. Their enemies would've been annihilated long ago. If Israel truly wanted to destroy Gaza, it could do so within a day, right from the air. Why carry out a more painful, expensive ground incursion that risks the lives of its soldiers?

 

 

It's not so much that the IDF wants to kill civilians. It's just that they act like like they really don't care one way or the other. There certainly is a lack of care in what targets are being hit. Too many are so obviously civilian targets (schools, hospitals etc). And as the UN noted, the schools being shelled were not ones that had been found to be concealing rockets.

 

And, sadly, the deaths are in Israel's interests - or at least the interests of Netanyahu, Lieberman and the other war mongers in the Knesset. They are trying to subjugate an occupied people. The best way to do that is by fear. If Israelis ever accept that co-existence is a hell of a lot better for everyone than subjugation, there will be no motive to induce fear. No motive to attack civilian targets like schools and hospitals. In fact, quite the opposite - if you are sincere in accepting people as neighbours for the long haul, you don't try to kill them and preach hatred. And then blame the subjugated people for acting in exactly the same way you do. But if you just want to keep stealing land....

 

 

 

CBR250, 

i guess you never been into a combat situation, and i hope you never have too.  But the fact is that that kind of situation is chaotic and unpredictable.  The IDF can try to take measures to prevent civilian death, but there is no guarantee it can succeed.  Even the numbers that "Hamas estimates" are considered low, if you check other conflicts that are happening around in the same time. ISIS killed 700 people in 1 week and death toll rises every day. the Syrian killed about 180,000 in 2 years, Boko Haram killed thousands in half a year, etc...

 

The hypocrisy here that the world condemns Israel for the killings, only because it is a Jewish state.  The amount of condemnation and attention that Israel receives is not proportionate to the number of deaths relatively to other conflicts.  You claim Israel reacts unproportionately in the conflict, but yet, the world even cant politically react to Israel in the right proportions...

 

Anyway, all the estimation of death tolls, and the number of women and children who died due to the conflict are ALL numbers coming from Hamas officials or collaborators.  All those UN organizations only quote Hamas numbers, and as they did in other instances they are lying this time as well:

 

They count natural deaths, which occur every day, as conflict deaths.

 

They count militants as civilians.

 

They publish pictures of dead children from previous conflicts or from other countries like Syria!

 

While women and children presents 71% of the population, they are only 33% of the death tolls... and so on and on, and you eat their propaganda and spit it out to people who dont know a thing about it, just adding more oil to the fire!

 

read here more about how Hamas uses civilian deaths as a propaganda:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/07/volokh-conspiracy-scoops-the-new-york-times-on-phony-gaza-statistics/

 

Fake pictures:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnO4gy8dQIc&feature=youtu.be

[Thorgal]

This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale... most of Europe has moved on to other more pressing concerns... fickle as they are... Or perhaps the HAMAS backers in those oil rich Muslim Nations have run out of their current Euro allotment to fan the fires of Jew Hatred... 

I'm not a Hamas backer, but I can't accept the injustice done to the Palestinian civilians.

More than 100 one-tons bombs have been used in urban area's killing lot of civilians.
Not really search and destoy missions against Hamas militants.

I can understand the worldwide protests against Israel.

No need to make an European aftermath, this war is sponsored with Iraqi oil revenues...




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[CBR250]

 

CBR250, 

i guess you never been into a combat situation, and i hope you never have too.

But the fact is that that kind of situation is chaotic and unpredictable.

The IDF can try to take measures to prevent civilian death, but there is no guarantee it can succeed.

Even the numbers that "Hamas estimates" are considered low, if you check other conflicts that are happening around in the same time.

ISIS killed 700 people in 1 week and death toll rises every day. the Syrian killed about 180,000 in 2 years, Boko Haram killed thousands in half a year, etc...

 

The hypocrisy here that the world condemns Israel for the killings, only because it is a Jewish state.

The amount of condemnation and attention that Israel receives is not proportionate to the number of deaths relatively to other conflicts.

You claim Israel reacts unproportionately in the conflict, but yet, the world even cant politically react to Israel in the right proportions...

 

Anyway, all the estimation of death tolls, and the number of women and children who died due to the conflict are ALL numbers coming from Hamas officials or collaborators.

All those UN organizations only quote Hamas numbers, and as they did in other instances they are lying this time as well:

They count natural deaths, which occur every day, as conflict deaths.

They count militants as civilians.

They publish pictures of dead children from previous conflicts or from other countries like Syria!

While women and children presents 71% of the population, they are only 33% of the death tolls...

and so on and on, and you eat their propaganda and spit it out to people who dont know a thing about it, just adding more oil to the fire!

 

read here more about how Hamas uses civilian deaths as a propaganda:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/07/volokh-conspiracy-scoops-the-new-york-times-on-phony-gaza-statistics/

 

Fake pictures:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnO4gy8dQIc&feature=youtu.be

 

 

Thanks for your wishes - I too share a desire to never be in combat. It sounds like you have, and for this I offer my respect and sympathy. I do appreciate that it is a chaotic situation, not given to the niceties of considering options before making decisions. I'll also willingly concede that the majority of IDF soldiers would, without a second thought, act ethically even under the stress of combat. I have known a number of IDF soldiers, and have total trust in their morality.

But there are also members of the IDF who harbor hatred and contempt for Palestinians. The abusive graffiti from IDF soldiers in Gazan homes reading "Good Arab = Dead Arab" and in a Gazan girls' school, the threats of rape and death left written in English on a blackboard. Even a senior IDF Officer - Brigadier Commander Colonel Ofer Winter - told IDF soldiers:

"History has chosen us to spearhead the fighting against the terrorist Gazan enemy which abuses, blasphemes and curses the God of Israel's forces". (Reported in Thomas Friedman's column, International NY Times, 7th July, p9).

 

So, you see, inhumane and inexcusable attitudes of ethnic/religious hatred do exist in the IDF, however much we do not want them. And while these attitudes belong to a minority, it is a minority that is heavily armed, and in situations where they will never be accountable for any abuses they decide to commit.

 

And if, as you suggest, Hamas has exaggerated - even doubled - the numbers of deaths of civilians, it is still far too many dead. Especially women and children, who cannot be considered combatants. Reports I read from a volunteer doctor (Norwegian) in a Gazan hospital suggest that the numbers of dead children he alone saw was substantial. The fact that Hamas may have exaggerated the numbers does not excuse the IDF from culpability for those children and other non-combatants who are dead.

 

And you suggest we are paying disproportionate attention to Israel - that "The amount of condemnation and attention that Israel receives is not proportionate to the number of deaths relatively to other conflicts". Morality cannot be simply reduced to a numbers game. Because more people are dying in Syria or Iraq does not excuse the IDF. And I suspect that part of the focus on Israel is that many other people, like me, feel betrayed by the Israel we once so fervently supported. It is not just a news story from somewhere, a connection to Israel is a part of the history of many people in the world. I would equally take a much greater interest in war in Thailand than in Somalia, because of my personal links and history.
 

[fasteddie]

This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale... most of Europe has moved on to other more pressing concerns... fickle as they are... Or perhaps the HAMAS backers in those oil rich Muslim Nations have run out of their current Euro allotment to fan the fires of Jew Hatred... 

 

"This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale"

 

Oh really? and yet more and more people demonstrate!

 

And these people have something to say too.

 

http://ijsn.net/gaza/survivors_and_descendents-letter/

[CBR250]

 

This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale... most of Europe has moved on to other more pressing concerns... fickle as they are... Or perhaps the HAMAS backers in those oil rich Muslim Nations have run out of their current Euro allotment to fan the fires of Jew Hatred... 

 

"This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale"

 

Oh really? and yet more and more people demonstrate!

 

And these people have something to say too.

 

http://ijsn.net/gaza/survivors_and_descendents-letter/

 

 

Thanks so much for the link fasteddie - a really inspiring letter. The website has some other interesting resources, but is a work in progress. Still a recommended link for all with an interest in Gaza.

 

According to JDGRUEN, whose quote I left in quite deliberately, these 247 Jewish survivors and descendents of Jewish survivors of the Nazi genocide - who have signed a letter condemning Israel’s massacre in Gaza - are "HAMAS backers", and are being paid a "Euro allotment" for their views by "oil rich Muslim nations" to "fan the fires of Jew hatred".

In this context, I really don't think I need to say anything much about blinkers, prejudice or cultivated persecution complexes.

[Exsexyman]

 

This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale... most of Europe has moved on to other more pressing concerns... fickle as they are... Or perhaps the HAMAS backers in those oil rich Muslim Nations have run out of their current Euro allotment to fan the fires of Jew Hatred... 

 

"This topic thread title seems a bit old and stale"

 

Oh really? and yet more and more people demonstrate!

 

And these people have something to say too.

 

http://ijsn.net/gaza/survivors_and_descendents-letter/

 

A very impressive open letter from these people, humbling actually. Brave too, because they will undoubtedly be vilified by the Israeli government spin machine, and probably ostracised by many in their community for daring to express these views. Given their backgrounds as representatives of Jewish survivors of the Nazi holocaust, it will be quite difficult to dismiss them as 'Judeaophobes', or Anti Semites. Though doubtless some of the usual suspects will be along soon to have a try!

[DPIZZA]

 

 

 

So both Arabs and Jews are Semites, but being "anti" Semitic refers only to Jews, LOL.

 

 
You couldn't make it up.
 
Oh,wait.  Somebody did.

 

Yeah, The dictionary.

 

 

an·ti–Sem·i·tism noun \ˌan-tē-ˈse-mə-ˌti-zəm, ˌan-ˌtī-\

: hatred of Jewish people



Full Definition of ANTI-SEMITISM
: hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group
— an·ti–Se·mit·ic adjective
— an·ti–Sem·ite noun

 

 

It's a well known fact, that people who don't know the actual definition of Anti-Semitism are of low intelligence and have been brought up from childhood to use other terms such as Jew Hater, so it's difficult for them to understand. Of course there are very intelligent people who do know its meaning and fully endorse Anti-Semtism. It is often these intelligent Anti-Semites who urge their minions on, encouraging them to use other derogatory terms, more in line with their intellect.

 

Dont be so naive my friend,

 

All those people know very well what antisemitism means, but their "lack of knowledge" is just a tool of propaganda.

First, they change historical facts and terms which are not comfortable for them: Antisemitism, Holocaust, Zionism, Pogroms, Nazism etc...

Secondly, they steel those same ideas to be used on the real victim:

 

Antisemitism - hatred towards Arabs, or their favorite: Islamophobia.... 

Holocaust- "the nakba" done to the Palestinians, and every action against them will forever be a holocaust/ massacre/ war crime...

Zionism - from a movement that its objective is to save Jews from antisemitism oops... racism to a racist movement, while the right of return for Palis is exactly the same idea...

Pogroms- those were tricks by the Jews, an earlier attempt to forge the holocaust...

Nazism - or it was justified, or it was in cooperation with the Jews, or it never happened, you pick it, they already said it!

 

I dont blame all people to do it knowingly, some as i said before, are just "useful idiots" by the Muslim propaganda machine, just spitting what other said before....