Part 2: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[AndHarry]

Starting a new thread as the original is almost full.

The original thread is here. It was started on 1st July after three Israeli boys were found murdered, before the murder of the Palestinian boy and the resumption of sustained rocket attacks and Operation Protective edge.

There are lots of excellent posts and links in the original thread showcasing a variety of views. The main consensus was that there is fault on both sides. We also considered various options for people on both sides of the conflict to work towards a lasting peace.

halfdrunkcoffee to an extent the numbers of civilians being killed and the method of killing is irrelevant. The fact is that innocent people are being murdered.

That is (or at least damn well should be) unacceptable.

I cannot for the life of me understand how one of the greatest tragedies in human history cannot be learned from, and we have consistently experienced murder of innocents in the last 70 years. Not just in Palestine/Israel, but all over the world.

I suppose I just despair of humans, particularly when there is such widespread celebration when people are dying needlessly

PJ - the problem with dealing with Hamas is that for them, everything is a victory, especially for the leaders who are safely ensconced in the UAE or deep underground in tunnels, while telling the population that they (the leaders) are beside them.

EG

no invasion - victory! shows Israelis are cowards and afraid of the gallant hamas
invasion -victory! shows Israelis are bloodthirsty warmongers
Few Israeli casulaties - victory! shows how disproportionate the loss of life is
Heavy Israeli casualties - victory! next stop Tel Aviv - Israelis are losing heart
heavy Arab casualties - victory! more future hatred and more martyrs
few Arab casualties - victory! shows that Israel is losing its deterrence
Hamas attempt o massacre kibbutzniks fails - victory! - the tunnels mean no Israeli will ever be safe.

As everything is a victory for Hamas, good or bad, it seems a bit pointless to decide what to do based on how hamas will call it. maybe the citizens will get a bit sick of their absent leaders calling on them to make sacrifices....

regardless of your opinion on Hamas, or their predecessors or future successors, do you take the view that killing 200 people will reduce anti-Israel feelings, and, later, action?

cleanmean -very few casualties, due to the iron dome. But not for want of trying. Would you be happier if it were turned off? Both sides are reckless as to civilian casualties, but at least with the Israelis it is not their official policy.

Can I just ask, if all politics and the Israeli government and Hamas were out of the picture, do you think that ordinary Israelis and Palestinians could live peacefully?

PJ - I think that nothing succeeds like success, and the boost to Hamas for rocketing Israel for 10 days without any response would be greater than the boost from the deaths. As explained above, any action is treated by Hamas as a victory (including its failure to perpetrate the kibbutz massacre yesterday).

Sam - you cannot seriously be telling us that it is not israels policy to kill civilians?

I think the whole world has seen this week that it is exactly what israels policy is. Can you for one moment see past the Hamas hatred and muster just one ounce of feeling for the thousands of palestinians Israel have devastated this week?

And will you ever answer PJ'S question?

If I understand you correctly, your answer to my question is that killing 200 people will reduce anti-Israel feelings, and, later, action, because the friends, neighbours and relations of those who died will not resent and hate Israel, and will be filled with feelings of friendship and peace.

Have I understood you correctly?

I have answered PJ. There will be more ant-Israel hatred, but if the Israelis had done nothing, Hamas would have been hailed as heroes throughout the Arab world for being able to rocket Israel without any response, anti-Israel hatred would have increased even more, and at some point the Israelis would have had to do something.

I don't think the Israelis wanted to invade Gaza, hence the ceasefire offer. The misguided people on the "stop the war" this weekend should really be demonstrating against Hamas, who refused the ceasefire, but of course they won't be.

If I understand you correctly, your answer to my question is that killing 200 people will reduce anti-Israel feelings, and, later, action, because the friends, neighbours and relations of those who died will not resent and hate Israel, and will be filled with feelings of friendship and peace.

Have I understood you correctly?

You have, of course, the option of saying that killing 200 people will not reduce anti-Israel feelings, if that is what seems to you to be more probable, but I can see that this is a question which you find very awkward.

Have you read the news properly? There was no ceasefire 'offered' Hamas were never even consulted. Israel spoke to their ally Egypt and put together a list of demands. Then carried on bombing innocent children.

Calling millions of demonstrators across the world misguided is really disturbing Sam. Perhaps you think we should all be in favour of palestinian civilians being obliterated?

cleanmean - I think you'll find Israel did stop firing for 5 hours, and Hamas then started up again. It was Hamas who put together demands, including a deliberately ridiculous one that the Gazans should be able to go to Jlem, ie an open border with Israel. Note that their Arab neighbours Egypt don;t seem keen on an open border - I wonder why?

It's all very well to ask what is the benefit to Israel, but what is the benefit to Hamas of sending up rockets at civilians that will almost certainly be shot down, and if not will no doubt kill indiscriminately? And won't it increase the Israelis' hatred of the Palestinians? .

Protestors not protectors.

Cleanmean - a very ineffective genocide, if it is - Palestinian population increase has been among the highest in the world. there are 20 times the number of residents in Gaza as there were in 1947. the Israelis also set up the university and built the main hospital, which would be odd if the intention was to commit genocide. Are the Israelis the world's most incompetent ethnic cleansers?

The demonstrators in Tel Aviv are great - if I were Israeli I may well be there, but the difference is that they have skin in the game, so if they say they'd like to live under rocket fire, they can, and they will suffer the consequences. That's completely different from the UK demonstrators....

genocide and ethic cleansing are not at all the same thing.

Annexing and occupying territory are Israel's preferred tools.

there are 20 times the number of residents in Gaza as there were in 1947

Excuse my ignorance, but is this perhaps because Palestinians have been forced out of such a huge area of Palestine?

So, since 1948, numbers of Palestinians have grown exponentially. By contrast, there are no virtually no Jews left in any Arab country. But it's the Israelis who are ethnic cleansing???

I think many refugees went there in 1948 but there is also a lot if population growth as the birth rate is very high.

O4FA - no, I think it's having one of the highest fertility rates in the world - still over 5 per woman (shudders...).

Why are you shuddering Sam? The thought of those awful Palestinians breeding?
Never mind eh, a few less babies and children to worry about now.

Er, and he shudders are - why exactly?

No, I was shuddering at the idea of having 5 kids myself!

In the same way, I might shudder at the idea of multiple wives. That's not to say they shouldn't do it in the islamic world, and it was permitted among some Jews until about 1000 years ago, but I wouldn't want to be one of 3, and I don't think DH would cope, either.