Gaza school strike 'criminal' - UN

[dr_lucas]

You had said no nation would put up with indiscriminate weapons fired at civilian areas

I believe that I said, thousands of rockets, which no country on earth would put up with. We have already discussed this ad nauseam, but this articles addresses your claims very realistically.

Hamas is not the IRA

By contrast, the ideology of Hamas is defined in absolutist religious terms, that of a radical version of Islam, which is not open to influence or change. The political vision and religious belief of Hamas are one and the same; therefore, change is unlikely.

At the core of this belief is the desire to create an Islamist state based on Islamic law over all the land, not just the West Bank and Gaza, but Israel as well. There is no acceptance of the notion of coexistence, no support for the idea of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace, but an exclusive demand, based on fundamentalist interpretations of religious texts, for control of the entire territory.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/31/opinion/31iht-edevrony.1.7331274.html?_r=0

Without wishing to pettifog back about the danger of large bombs versus small rockets UG, it sounds as though the religious background is justifying disproportionate collective punishment for you.

Although the Palestinian efforts have historically not proved very dangerous statistically (no consolation if you happen to have one of their lumps of pipe hit you in the head of course), it seems to me that your justification for indiscriminate attack is little different to theirs.

I do not understand how it cannot be as clear as a bell that israeli policy has for years been "If they get out of hand we'll crush them so brutally (whilst making a PR show at carefully selecting targets and making phone calls) that the message will be clear. Stay in your place or your whole people will suffer."

What religious background? Where did he write anything about religion in the post you quoted?

What indiscriminate attacks are you referring to?

What is a proportionate response for you for thousands of rockets that are being shot to your territory, endangering civilians, killing other civilians, damaging property and terrorizing the lives, work, study of innocents?

P.S.S Your biased opinion what Israeli policy is has been noted.

[dr_lucas]

You mean just like for the last 100 years?

Keep saying "the last 100 years" the way you frequently do here - and when you are attacking someone's historical accuracy, for Buddha's sake- and you'll finally be right 34 years from now.

For Buddha's sake... (and just when I thought you are more knowledgeable...)

A few examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Palestine_riots

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

And UG was actually inaccurate, as it goes back to long before that:

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

Edited August 23, 2014 by dr_lucas

[Jingthing]

Now try to claim that MOSQUES are not valid military targets ...

http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/IAF-pounds-Gaza-as-rockets-target-southern-communities-372003

The IDF also hit three mosques used for terrorist activities. One target was used for meetings between members of Hamas's military wing in southern Gaza; a second mosque was used to store terrorist infrastructure in southern Gaza, while a third in the north was used as a meeting point for Hamas members.

The IDF isn't an army of war criminals. It is a defense force against openly genocidal terrorists. It's a pity much of the world has been snookered into the Israeli demonization camp ... but that doesn't mean Israel can or should stop its DEFENSE of the Jewish nation.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Jingthing

[tpazzi]

it might be said in hindsight that Oslo ultimately failed because ... they did not establish mechanisms for monitoring violations or ensuring that claims of violations could be arbitrated and corrections could be guaranteed.

Ben-Ami further explained:

But in the end, after eight months of negotiations, I conclude that we are in conflict with a national movement that has severe pathological elements.

At the end of the process it is impossible not to be impressed by the fact the more than Palestinians want a solution, they want to sit in Israel in the court's dock. More than they want their own country, they want to condemn our country.

Personally, I have no short term hopes for peace. I believe that eventually, one day, peace will have to be based on something similar to Olmert's map and peace plan.

Thanks dr_lucas for your serious and through response. I appreciate the time you put into replying.

I assure you I completely agree with your point that the failures of the three peace initiatives cited were two-sided. I apologize I didn't make that clearer as I was simply rebutting an earlier claim by Ulysses that the fault was entirely on the side of the Palestinians. I didn't feel it was necessary to lengthen the response since that side of the argument was previously expressed (although without any supporting explanation which I can't help but notice you failed to correct. I'll assume that was an oversight on your part since you seem to have a balanced view of the history between Israel and Palestine and probably simply didn't see the post I was responding to.)

I particularly like your points which I bolded above. The mechanisms for claiming, verifying and resolving disputes are essential to any future agreement. And I think the fact that both the Israeli and Palestinians are multi-faceted groups with lots of moving parts gets lost in the shuffle. And the extremists on both sides make it harder to reach a compromise.

Two minor points on your critique:

Regarding the Rabin assassination as a factor to the collapse of Israeli follow thru on the Oslo Accords and Netanyahu's intentions: You are right that it is an opinion, but is not mine (at least not as an original - although I must confess it resonated quite strongly with me when I read it). It came from an Op-ed by Avi Shlaim. I probably should have quoted him directly but I chose to paraphrase it to the point I didn't feel comfortable putting quotes on it. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/12/oslo-israel-reneged-colonial-palestine

Regarding the map incident, according to this Jerusalem Post article, Abbas had to hand-draw it from memory. http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Details-of-Olmerts-peace-offer-to-Palestinians-exposed-314261 I apologize if this is in fact inaccurate but I tried to go to a reasonable Israeli-based source for the information. And since it was Olmert who was blaming his own cabinet officials, I think it is fair to point that out as something beyond public forum democracy at work. Rice certainly suggests she was influenced by their appeals.

But all of that is simply tit-for-tat and distracting from the real issue of where do we go from here? I share your pessimism regarding the short-term prospects. (And thank you for taking on the question directly even though it was meant specifically for Ulysses.)

My frustration is amplified by the fact I think Israel's actions are making the long term problem worse, not better, by planting the seeds of future anti-Israel violence for the next generation to endure.

I would feel more confident we were on the right path if there were some affirmation from the Israeli Government that they were working towards a a two state solution even without specifying where those lines might be drawn. But I seem to find only the opposite from members of the current Likud government:

http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/netanyahu-palestinian-state.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/18/benjamin-netanyahu-palest_n_5598997.html

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/naftali-bennett-i-will-do-everything-in-my-power-to-prevent-a-palestinian-state.premium-1.489509

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/24/a-refreshingly-open-call-for-ethnic-cleansing-of-palestinians-from-an-israeli-deputy-speaker/

I'd also like to see the discussion include the possibility of an armed 3rd party force to police both sides. Preferably from a non-Christian, non-Jewish, or non-Islamic nation. I would expect it to be a long term engagement measured in decades.

I also don't want to overlook the fact that Palestine may prove to be the least of Israel's problems in the long run given the Hamas supporters in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. I may be seeing ghosts here, but it seems to me they will simply recruit another proxy force if the issue in Palestine is ever put to rest.

[CBR250]

Some parts deleted to allow ease of reading!

My frustration is amplified by the fact I think Israel's actions are making the long term problem worse, not better, by planting the seeds of future anti-Israel violence for the next generation to endure.

I'd also like to see the discussion include the possibility of an armed 3rd party force to police both sides. Preferably from a non-Christian, non-Jewish, or non-Islamic nation. I would expect it to be a long term engagement measured in decades.

I also don't want to overlook the fact that Palestine may prove to be the least of Israel's problems in the long run given the Hamas supporters in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. I may be seeing ghosts here, but it seems to me they will simply recruit another proxy force if the issue in Palestine is ever put to rest.

Quote: My frustration is amplified by the fact I think Israel's actions are making the long term problem worse, not better, by planting the seeds of future anti-Israel violence for the next generation to endure.

Unfortunately, I believe that this is spot on. I met a grandmother (Palestinian) in Nablus who wears the key to her families long-ago stolen house in Haifa. She tells the story of the ownership of this house by her family for generations, and says she will pass on this key to her grandchildren. Fair enough. But what of those grandmothers who have lost more than a house, who have seen loved ones killed? I imagine that they will pass on their grief and anger to their grandchildren. And this partly accounts for why I insist that Israel bears the responsibility for the first sincere moves to peace - there are many may more Palestinians who have lost a family member than there are Israelis. There is far more grief on the Palestinian side. And grief, loss and anger are closely aligned psychologically. Ball is in Israel's court without a doubt. Throwing responsibility back at the Palestinians is a flawed and dishonest tactic.

Quote: I'd also like to see the discussion include the possibility of an armed 3rd party force to police both sides. Preferably from a non-Christian, non-Jewish, or non-Islamic nation. I would expect it to be a long term engagement measured in decades.

It would be great, but extremely unlikely. Aside from the fact that no nation on earth would want this role, I don't believe that the current leaders of Israel want peace. They will sink any move that leads to peace - unless that peace (at present) includes taking over large swathes of Palestine, and having total control of the Palestinian population and borders.

Quote: I also don't want to overlook the fact that Palestine may prove to be the least of Israel's problems in the long run given the Hamas supporters in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. I may be seeing ghosts here, but it seems to me they will simply recruit another proxy force if the issue in Palestine is ever put to rest.

I agree 100% with your concern. Israel thought the PLO was bad, and kept stuffing them about rather than arrive at some accommodation with them. And then along came Hamas, and many sensible Israelis are no doubt shaking their heads over the lost opportunities with Arafat and Abbas. If some accommodation had been reached at that time, those 60+ dead IDF soldiers from the Gaza incursion would still be with us. And those ones we don't hear about - the IDF soldiers who will live their lives with profound disabilities resulting from injuries - would still be able to live normal lives. A much more productive and secure life would have been available for so many more Israelis and Palestinians.

So what next? Netanyahu et al nullified the more moderate voice of Fatah by pushing the Gazans into the arms of Hamas - the future reading of Israeli politicians has not been all that confidence inspiring. Will Israelis in 10 years time look back on this era of Hamas and think - "if only it was still so easy"? Unless there is a radical shift in Israeli policy, I suspect that they will. And still be blaming someone else for their troubles,

[tpazzi]

For Buddha's sake... (and just when I thought you are more knowledgeable...)

Well, I'm the son of a Christian minister, turned atheist. Saying "For Buddha's sake" doesn't feel quite as blasphemous as the two other alternatives that come to mind.

And UG was actually inaccurate

Ah, I see you got the point.

[Ulysses G.]

And UG was actually inaccurate

Ah, I see you got the point.

His POINT is that I ONLY went back 100 years.

[7by7]

Zion Evrony, who was Israeli ambassador to Dublin when he wrote the article 7 years ago, has his opinion. As shown to you repeatedly in other threads, many others have the opposite view.

As shown to you repeatedly in other threads, many others have the same or similar view:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/752179-what-israel-must-do-now/page-8#entry8259275

The UK also insisted on conditions for formal talks with the IRA, so this is nothing new.

I refer you to the posts I have made on this before; this one, for example.

Though I see, Ulysses G, that you now accept that talks between the British government and the IRA without preconditions took place before the formal talks!

As I said elsewhere, unless anyone has anything new to add about this comparison, I see no point in simply repeating the same old arguments.

Edited August 23, 2014 by 7by7

[Ulysses G.]

Though I see, Ulysses G, that you now accept that talks between the British government and the IRA without preconditions took place before the formal talks!

The same old BS. They had "contacts" to settle on the conditions for the actual negotiations. That is not "talks with no preconditions."

[7by7]

So, according to your logic, talks without preconditions to agree the conditions for formal negotiations are not talks without preconditions!

[Ulysses G.]

You keep insisting that Israel should agree to "talks without preconditions" with Hamas and insisting that the UK did it with the IRA. Telling some guy the conditions for negotiations on a peace treaty is not "talks without preconditions" and Israel has told Hamas their conditions already.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[chuckd]

Zion Evrony, who was Israeli ambassador to Dublin when he wrote the article 7 years ago, has his opinion. As shown to you repeatedly in other threads, many others have the opposite view.

As shown to you repeatedly in other threads, many others have the same or similar view:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/752179-what-israel-must-do-now/page-8#entry8259275

The UK also insisted on conditions for formal talks with the IRA, so this is nothing new.

I refer you to the posts I have made on this before; this one, for example.

Though I see, Ulysses G, that you now accept that talks between the British government and the IRA without preconditions took place before the formal talks!

As I said elsewhere, unless anyone has anything new to add about this comparison, I see no point in simply repeating the same old arguments.

The only thing I might add is, you have well and truly beaten this horse to death.

How about a break from the off-topic IRA.

[7by7]

The Northern Ireland peace process is a legitimate comparison and example of what can be achieved.

Unfortunately, those here who try to justify bombing, killing and maiming innocent civilians fail to see the similarities and also believe that repeating the same incorrect information again and again will make it true.

So, there is no point in attempting to continue the discussion as those posters don't want peace and so automatically reject each and every suggestion which may bring peace about.

[Jingthing]

Ireland is totally OFF TOPIC to THIS thread.

[7by7]

Isn't that for the mods to decide?

If you feel the posts are off topic, you know where the report button is.

[Steely Dan]

The Northern Ireland peace process is a legitimate comparison and example of what can be achieved.

Unfortunately, those here who try to justify bombing, killing and maiming innocent civilians fail to see the similarities and also believe that repeating the same incorrect information again and again will make it true.

So, there is no point in attempting to continue the discussion as those posters don't want peace and so automatically reject each and every suggestion which may bring peace about.

I can't wait for the progressives to start negotiating with ISIS.

[David48]

Ireland is totally OFF TOPIC to THIS thread.

Actually, I disagree ... it's closer to 'on-topic' then many other things.

IMHO, an example of an 'off-topic' statement is ...

You are just trying to change the topic too ... that Jew haters all over the world feel it is open season on Jews.

It would be a natural discussion of fair minded people to consider that since 2 nations are at conflict then an exit strategy would be a prudent consideration.

Ireland/Northern Ireland and how that conflict was mostly resolved, while not a mirror of the conflict occurring in the conflict zone, it does not only give some indicators as to a path that might be taken but also that two, diagrammatically opposed sides can reach a truce no matter how wide the apparent gulf appears between them.

I'm more interested in dissolving the heat of the conflict and establishing a mutually acceptable solution ... then deciding who is right and who is wrong.

.

[dr_lucas]

Ireland is totally OFF TOPIC to THIS thread.

Actually, I disagree ... it's closer to 'on-topic' then many other things.

IMHO, an example of an 'off-topic' statement is ...

You are just trying to change the topic too ... that Jew haters all over the world feel it is open season on Jews.

It would be a natural discussion of fair minded people to consider that since 2 nations are at conflict then an exit strategy would be a prudent consideration.

Ireland/Northern Ireland and how that conflict was mostly resolved, while not a mirror of the conflict occurring in the conflict zone, it does not only give some indicators as to a path that might be taken but also that two, diagrammatically opposed sides can reach a truce no matter how wide the apparent gulf appears between them.

I'm more interested in dissolving the heat of the conflict and establishing a mutually acceptable solution ... then deciding who is right and who is wrong.

I thought just like you.

There was a similar thread in which a mod forbade this discussion, saying it is off-topic. I contacted him, requesting to continue discussion on the IRA, making very similar arguments to yours .

He objected, saying again that it is off topic.

He is the boss, this is his decision to make and we all must respect the rules.

Then the IRA comparison popped-up again on the other topic "What Israel must do now".

I asked if this is now allowed or still forbidden and he said:

The thread is about What Israel should do now. I think that discussion of the IRA is permissible as would comparisons with other situations.

As long as the posts are used as a comparison, then it is permitted. A discussion of the intricacies of the IRA/British situation would be off-topic and likely to derail the topic.

Since this topic and the first topic are almost identical, I'd assume the IRA discussion here is indeed off-topic, but none of us is a mod or admin so we better ask them, as only they are calling the shots, not us.

7by7 is correct in this case.

[dr_lucas]

For Buddha's sake... (and just when I thought you are more knowledgeable...)

Well, I'm the son of a Christian minister, turned atheist. Saying "For Buddha's sake" doesn't feel quite as blasphemous as the two other alternatives that come to mind.

And UG was actually inaccurate

Ah, I see you got the point.

Yeah, I got the "For Buddha's sake" joke, I often say "oh my Buddha" and similar jokes too in my day to day life.

I was actually using your own phrase, not mocking it.

My reply probably wasn't so clear, so I will rephrase.

For Buddha's sake, I am disappointed, I though you are more knowledgeable.

And then I provided the links that show how far in history the Arab attacks on Jews go, which is much longer than 100 years that UG suggested.

Edited August 24, 2014 by dr_lucas

[Commander Tamson]

I get that Israel enjoy torturing it's next door neighbours.

Disgusting behaviour really from both sides of the fence. Both as pathetic as each other.

I share your disgust at both sides much of the time.

However, I also believe that the responsibility to make peace always rests with the big kid on the block. Israel refuses to play along with the peace emissaries from the USA, the EU, the UN. Israel has undermined every attempt at peace talks. This latest attack on Gaza came less than a month after a temporary Unity government had formed in Palestine that recognised the right of existence of Israel - Netanyahu's claimed central concern. A great opportunity to try to get some positive dialogue - and with 6 months before the next elections in Gaza a positive peace process would have sidelined Hamas effectively. But Netanyahu chose instead to talk up a war. Surely you must ask yourself why he acted in this manner? Why did he so angrily reject this peace overture from Palestine? As one could not say he is a stupid man, one can only conclude that peace is not his agenda. In fact, when you add this to his other actions over the past few years it is abundantly clear that he is deliberately maintaining conflict.

I have no love for Hamas either. The leaders of Hamas are at least as bad as the Israelis. But where I take sides goes back to my first statement - I believe that it is the responsibility of the big kid to force peace along. Without the big kid being interested, peace cannot happen. You just get the little kid kicked around more, and retaliating by throwing more stones. Which means the big kid needs to show who's boss. And so the cycle continues. (And meanwhile, if you are looking for a reason as to why the Big Kid wants to keep fighting - aside from egoism - look at the land. While there is no peace, Israel just keeps on stealing more and more land from Palestinians on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem).

Your analogy sucks; I'm sorry to say. A better one would be a wolf surrounded by zombie sheep - that is they have no agenda or goal other than to destroy the wolf or to change it into the same mindless cretin that they are. Allahu Akbar

[chuckd]

Following is the entire content of the opening post in this thread:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted 2014-08-04 07:04:06

Gaza crisis: Rafah school strike 'criminal' - UN chief

NEW YORK: -- An attack that killed 10 people at a UN-run Gaza school was a "moral outrage and a criminal act", UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has said.

It constituted a "gross violation of international law", Mr Ban said.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the US was appalled by the "disgraceful" shelling.

Israel has declared a "humanitarian ceasefire" in most of Gaza for seven hours on Monday.

Brig Gen Yoav Mordechai said the ceasefire would apply to all of the Gaza Strip except eastern Rafah from 10:00 (07:00 GMT) to 19:00.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/n...e-east-28632287

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am unable to find any reference whatsoever to either a peace process or the IRA.

Anybody?

[Steely Dan]

Following is the entire content of the opening post in this thread:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted 2014-08-04 07:04:06

Gaza crisis: Rafah school strike 'criminal' - UN chief

NEW YORK: -- An attack that killed 10 people at a UN-run Gaza school was a "moral outrage and a criminal act", UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has said.

It constituted a "gross violation of international law", Mr Ban said.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the US was appalled by the "disgraceful" shelling.

Israel has declared a "humanitarian ceasefire" in most of Gaza for seven hours on Monday.

Brig Gen Yoav Mordechai said the ceasefire would apply to all of the Gaza Strip except eastern Rafah from 10:00 (07:00 GMT) to 19:00.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/n...e-east-28632287

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am unable to find any reference whatsoever to either a peace process or the IRA.

Anybody?

Nope, if you were to pull the IRA out of a hat in order to argue in favour of negotiations with Hamas you could equally compare Hamas to ISIS in order to argue against negotiations. Indeed I believe the situation in Syria and Iraq has far more in common with the current Gaza conflict than Northern Ireland does.

[David48]

@ dr_lucas ... I haven't read any of the Mods directions re this, but I haven't followed this as intensely as others, nor read the other related threads, so I take on-board what you have advised ... appreciated.

Are there any threads which discuss the possible solutions to current conflict?

Thanks.

[dr_lucas]

@ dr_lucas ... I haven't read any of the Mods directions re this, but I haven't followed this as intensely as others, nor read the other related threads, so I take on-board what you have advised ... appreciated.

Are there any threads which discuss the possible solutions to current conflict?

Thanks.

You're welcome, @ David48, I believe there is, but it has been closed already - http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/752179-what-israel-must-do-now/

[simple1]

@ dr_lucas ... I haven't read any of the Mods directions re this, but I haven't followed this as intensely as others, nor read the other related threads, so I take on-board what you have advised ... appreciated.

Are there any threads which discuss the possible solutions to current conflict?

Thanks.

It's been suggested a few times. I am of the view the same posters in the Israeli / Palestinian topics would indulge in the same circular arguments, so really a waste of time.

If you are that interested you could start a topic in the forums function at:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/forum/134-outside-the-box/

[Pakboong]

I have never called anyone an idiot on this forum but I can say with absolutely certainty that anyone who believes that in this century old "Tit for Tat" battle, all the Tits belong to one side and the Tats the other is a complete moron.

Hamas just executed what they believe to be 18 enemy agents operating within Gaza. I can assure you from personal experience that both sides will do everything they can to infiltrate the other. Many things happen which are most likely explained by the use of agents to mold the struggle to their particular liking. As world opinion sways back and forth, so does the activity of these agents.

[7by7]

IRA and Northern Ireland comparisons were first raised, not by me, in this thread in response to

No country on earth would pit up with it and Israel is not going to either.

to show that one country on Earth, at least, did 'pit (sic) up with it' without resorting to the indiscriminate bombing, killing and maiming of civilians.

Later comparisons were made in response to questions about what Israel should do.

I see that the pro Israeli side have now abandoned their attempts to discredit this comparison and are instead now merely resorting to complaining that it is off topic.

If you believe references to the Northern Ireland peace process to be off topic; use the report button.

As previously said, I'm not going to be drawn into repeating, yet again, the comparisons and how a way forward may be for the Israeli government to adopt a similar approach to that of the British government. Those arguments have been done to death and the revenge is preferable to peace brigade wont listen anyway.

[chuckd]

IRA and Northern Ireland comparisons were first raised, not by me, in this thread in response to

No country on earth would pit up with it and Israel is not going to either.

to show that one country on Earth, at least, did 'pit (sic) up with it' without resorting to the indiscriminate bombing, killing and maiming of civilians.

Later comparisons were made in response to questions about what Israel should do.

I see that the pro Israeli side have now abandoned their attempts to discredit this comparison and are instead now merely resorting to complaining that it is off topic.

If you believe references to the Northern Ireland peace process to be off topic; use the report button.

As previously said, I'm not going to be drawn into repeating, yet again, the comparisons and how a way forward may be for the Israeli government to adopt a similar approach to that of the British government. Those arguments have been done to death and the revenge is preferable to peace brigade wont listen anyway.

I've never tried to discredit your argument. I simply believe it has absolutely nothing to do with an Israeli attack on a school in Gaza.

Now you can have the last post on my small part of your argument and I will not counter. You can, thus, get the last word.

[Jingthing]

What the defenders of Israel are dealing with. Watch it and you will understand it's not easy to deal with terrorists who use human shields including children in populated areas:

Not criminal.

WAR.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

I see that the pro Israeli side have now abandoned their attempts to discredit this comparison and are instead now merely resorting to complaining that it is off topic.

The argument has already been "discredited" numerous times with evidence to back it up. The fact that you and dexterm insist on making statements, over and over again, that have already been disproved, says a lot about your point of view.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Ulysses G.