Israeli Palestinian Conflict Thread

[hayroob]

I am declaring davenj the Dana perino to ehud olmerts George bush.

[DaveNJ]

Originally Posted by hayroob

I am not going to address DaveNJ's argument.

Fixed.

Argue the points, not the person. Everyone saw this coming, but you're applying a false causality with no proof.

[hayroob]

My assertion was and continues to be that you are a person who subscribes to a heavily spun perspective on this conflict.

This is a conflict that was intended from the outset to be highly aggressive and short term in order to incur maximum impact before the regime change in the united states. Israel moved to lock out international media, UN aid and escape into egypt (a US friendly state.) This enabled an incursion externally positioned as an assault against hamas to show utter disregard for civilian casualties.
Israel moved in with the understanding that the US would move to hinder any UN interference while they ran rough shod over the gaza strip. In this time, while out of the watchful eye of the international media there have been numerous war crimes alleged and several confirmed such as firing white phosphorous into civilian occupied areas (a violation of the geneva convention) and the refusal to allow sufficient aid into mitigate civilian casualties. I won't assert that israel intended to maximize civilian casualties but they certainly didn't do anything to minimize it. Shelling UN aid workers during self imposed cease fires (of an unacceptable 3 hours) and shelling a clearly marked UN school show how little control the IDF had over their troops. Israel has every right to defend itself, but absolutely no right to do it at the cost of thousands of innocent lives. Especially those who did not need to die except for the impatience and ineptness of the IDF and the Israeli government. These deaths are murder and many of them are war crimes.

Now I have debated both the man and the issue. If you refuse to see the travesties of this conflict then you are either blind or choosing to live your life with your eyes closed.

[DaveNJ]

Originally Posted by hayroob

My assertion was and continues to be that you are a person who subscribes to a heavily spun perspective on this conflict.

This is a conflict that was intended from the outset to be highly aggressive and short term in order to incur maximum impact before the regime change in the united states. Israel moved to lock out international media, UN aid and escape into egypt (a US friendly state.) This enabled an incursion externally positioned as an assault against hamas to show utter disregard for civilian casualties.
Israel moved in with the understanding that the US would move to hinder any UN interference while they ran rough shod over the gaza strip. In this time, while out of the watchful eye of the international media there have been numerous war crimes alleged and several confirmed such as firing white phosphorous into civilian occupied areas (a violation of the geneva convention) and the refusal to allow sufficient aid into mitigate civilian casualties. I won't assert that israel intended to maximize civilian casualties but they certainly didn't do anything to minimize it. Shelling UN aid workers during self imposed cease fires (of an unacceptable 3 hours) and shelling a clearly marked UN school show how little control the IDF had over their troops. Israel has every right to defend itself, but absolutely no right to do it at the cost of thousands of innocent lives. Especially those who did not need to die except for the impatience and ineptness of the IDF and the Israeli government. These deaths are murder and many of them are war crimes.

Now I have debated both the man and the issue. If you refuse to see the travesties of this conflict then you are either blind or choosing to live your life with your eyes closed.

1. You assert incorrectly. I read Al Jazeera just as much as I read Haaretz just as much as I read Yediot Ahronot. Don't presume to know me.

2. Your argument is laden with holes. Step by step, here we go:

a. You just described a deterrence action. What's your point? Yeah, a military operation aimed at deterrence is ideally going to be hard and fast.

Of course, you ignore the fact that Hamas rejected a renewed cease-fire offered by Israel in mid-December. This operation was in the hands of Gaza's elected government. They gambled that they could get away with intense rocket fire, wait for Obama to become president and hopefully be a gamechanger, and get more of their demands.

They gambled incorrectly. The timing of this operation has much more to do with the truce than anything in US politics.

b. Egypt locks out Gaza for its own reasons. They hate Hamas, an offshoot of the local Islamist movement the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt is complicit with Israel because both of them regard Gaza as an enemy entity, Israel moreso than Egypt, but neither are fans. Egypt dicked around for a bit because they enjoyed seeing Israel get flustered by Hamas, but once Hamas started embarrassing them diplomatically by torpedoing their efforts to reconcile them with Fatah and ensure a new 6 month cease fire (two diplomacy fiascos in Egypt) any love faded. Egypt locks out Hamas and Gaza because those same operatives who overthrew the PA may one day overthrow Hosni Mubarak, and Egypt has no desire for that.

As for the international lockout? That is in part due to American support and in part because nobody really gives a fuck about Gaza. Its become such an Iranian proxy that even countries like Saudi Arabia aren't fans. All America did was mitigate the amount of resolutions, none of which did anything anyway.

c. No substantial evidence has been mounted to claim that Israel has used white phosphorus illegally. In fact, the International Committee of the Red Cross confirmed this on the 13th, two days after allegations surfaced.

It is illegal to use Willy Pete as an incendiary weapon. It is not illegal to use it as a smoke cover to mask troop movements. Thus far there have been no substantial reports of intentional WP use as a means to attack military or civilian targets directly.

d. Shelling UN institutions is bad, very bad. Some have been chalked up to misfires, and others to militant use of these institutions. Unfortunately, misfires do happen in war, but the issue is INTENT. If it can be proven that Israel intentionally targeted these institutions to inflict civilian casualties show me the info. I've yet to see it.

UN facilities are deemed a safe haven in Gaza, but unfortunately Hamas tends to use safe havens to their advantage. Their leaders tended to hide at Shifa Hospital, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if they used UNRWA facilities the way they used the UN-affiliated Beit Hanoun School for Boys (since a mortar pad).

e. The three hour ceasefires were rarely reciprocated by Hamas. Israel ought to do its best to get humanitarian aid into Gaza, but only so long as it goes to the civilian populace. Hamas ransacking of these materials during these ceasefires was rampant, and even now they're appropriating a good deal of the humanitarian aid.

Israel's obliged to help the civilian populace, but not at the price of bolstering a group devoted to its destruction.

3. Of course I see the humanitarian tragedy here. However, like many humanitarian tragedies, at the core this centers on poor government. Gaza elected and supported Hamas, knowing their goal is "resistance". This resistance is nothing but petty terrorism. It serves no end but to make monstrous the lives of those Israelis in the Southern Negev and to make ever person in favor of further settlement withdrawals (me!) look like a fucking 'tard.

If you elect terrorists and give them a mandate to practice terrorism eventually the results are going to suck, because Hamas doesn't care if a ton of civilians in Gaza die. It's why they booby-trapped schools, fired from wherever they wanted to, and are to this day killing and torturing Fatah activists in "detention camps" all over Gaza.

I wish it didn't have to be like this, but no country can or would tolerate eight years of terrorism. Gaza's already been "liberated", but the idea that firing crude rockets and generally fucking with people's daily lives is going to achieve anything but destruction is stupid.

Gaza let itself become Iran's bitch, and now they're paying the price of being under the thumb of a foreign power that doesn't value a single one of their lives. Hopefully they cast off their true foreign oppressor and work to improve life in Gaza.

If they don't this will just happen again. That's not cynicism, nor a threat, nor a desire of mine. It's just a fact.

[Zim]

Originally Posted by DaveNJ

1. You assert incorrectly. I read Al Jazeera just as much as I read Haaretz just as much as I read Yediot Ahronot. Don't presume to know me.

2. Your argument is laden with holes. Step by step, here we go:

a. You just described a deterrence action. What's your point? Yeah, a military operation aimed at deterrence is ideally going to be hard and fast.

Of course, you ignore the fact that Hamas rejected a renewed cease-fire offered by Israel in mid-December. This operation was in the hands of Gaza's elected government. They gambled that they could get away with intense rocket fire, wait for Obama to become president and hopefully be a gamechanger, and get more of their demands.

They gambled incorrectly. The timing of this operation has much more to do with the truce than anything in US politics.

b. Egypt locks out Gaza for its own reasons. They hate Hamas, an offshoot of the local Islamist movement the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt is complicit with Israel because both of them regard Gaza as an enemy entity, Israel moreso than Egypt, but neither are fans. Egypt dicked around for a bit because they enjoyed seeing Israel get flustered by Hamas, but once Hamas started embarrassing them diplomatically by torpedoing their efforts to reconcile them with Fatah and ensure a new 6 month cease fire (two diplomacy fiascos in Egypt) any love faded. Egypt locks out Hamas and Gaza because those same operatives who overthrew the PA may one day overthrow Hosni Mubarak, and Egypt has no desire for that.

As for the international lockout? That is in part due to American support and in part because nobody really gives a fuck about Gaza. Its become such an Iranian proxy that even countries like Saudi Arabia aren't fans. All America did was mitigate the amount of resolutions, none of which did anything anyway.

c. No substantial evidence has been mounted to claim that Israel has used white phosphorus illegally. In fact, the International Committee of the Red Cross confirmed this on the 13th, two days after allegations surfaced.

It is illegal to use Willy Pete as an incendiary weapon. It is not illegal to use it as a smoke cover to mask troop movements. Thus far there have been no substantial reports of intentional WP use as a means to attack military or civilian targets directly.

d. Shelling UN institutions is bad, very bad. Some have been chalked up to misfires, and others to militant use of these institutions. Unfortunately, misfires do happen in war, but the issue is INTENT. If it can be proven that Israel intentionally targeted these institutions to inflict civilian casualties show me the info. I've yet to see it.

UN facilities are deemed a safe haven in Gaza, but unfortunately Hamas tends to use safe havens to their advantage. Their leaders tended to hide at Shifa Hospital, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if they used UNRWA facilities the way they used the UN-affiliated Beit Hanoun School for Boys (since a mortar pad).

e. The three hour ceasefires were rarely reciprocated by Hamas. Israel ought to do its best to get humanitarian aid into Gaza, but only so long as it goes to the civilian populace. Hamas ransacking of these materials during these ceasefires was rampant, and even now they're appropriating a good deal of the humanitarian aid.

Israel's obliged to help the civilian populace, but not at the price of bolstering a group devoted to its destruction.

3. Of course I see the humanitarian tragedy here. However, like many humanitarian tragedies, at the core this centers on poor government. Gaza elected and supported Hamas, knowing their goal is "resistance". This resistance is nothing but petty terrorism. It serves no end but to make monstrous the lives of those Israelis in the Southern Negev and to make ever person in favor of further settlement withdrawals (me!) look like a fucking 'tard.

If you elect terrorists and give them a mandate to practice terrorism eventually the results are going to suck, because Hamas doesn't care if a ton of civilians in Gaza die. It's why they booby-trapped schools, fired from wherever they wanted to, and are to this day killing and torturing Fatah activists in "detention camps" all over Gaza.

I wish it didn't have to be like this, but no country can or would tolerate eight years of terrorism. Gaza's already been "liberated", but the idea that firing crude rockets and generally fucking with people's daily lives is going to achieve anything but destruction is stupid.

Gaza let itself become Iran's bitch, and now they're paying the price of being under the thumb of a foreign power that doesn't value a single one of their lives. Hopefully they cast off their true foreign oppressor and work to improve life in Gaza.

If they don't this will just happen again. That's not cynicism, nor a threat, nor a desire of mine. It's just a fact.

amen

* puts royalty check in the mail to Roxy

[Cretaceous Bob]

Everyone should disregard anything DaveNJ has to say.

All you're here to do is bludgeon us with your side, nothing more. There is no point in anyone ever getting in a discussion with you, because you are a coward who hides, emerging only in defense of his cause when he is certain he can win, not when he is certain his cause is strong.

If ignoring the opposition works for DaveNJ, it can work for everyone that disagrees with him. As long as hayroob does not respond to DaveNJ, hayroob can never be wrong.

[Mikey]

War, what is it good for?

[motownguy]

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Everyone should disregard anything DaveNJ has to say.

All you're here to do is bludgeon us with your side, nothing more. There is no point in anyone ever getting in a discussion with you, because you are a coward who hides, emerging only in defense of his cause when he is certain he can win, not when he is certain his cause is strong.

If ignoring the opposition works for DaveNJ, it can work for everyone that disagrees with him. As long as hayroob does not respond to DaveNJ, hayroob can never be wrong.

That's an awfully relativistic definition of "never be wrong." By that standard, you will never die of cancer if you just quit breathing.

[DaveNJ]

Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob

Everyone should disregard anything DaveNJ has to say.

All you're here to do is bludgeon us with your side, nothing more. There is no point in anyone ever getting in a discussion with you, because you are a coward who hides, emerging only in defense of his cause when he is certain he can win, not when he is certain his cause is strong.

If ignoring the opposition works for DaveNJ, it can work for everyone that disagrees with him. As long as hayroob does not respond to DaveNJ, hayroob can never be wrong.

On a side note, I'm not disputing any citational evidence DaveNJ presented, nor his logical deductions. I'd rather just attack a person than an argument, because it's so much easier and requires little to no effort.

Fixed

I'll respond to any post I deem worth responding to, barring personal insults like this, which I'll weigh case by case.

You can feel free to disregard my opinion if you want to, I could care less. I'm making a logical, reasoned case based on the facts as we know them. You're contributing nothing of worth by failing to address any of my points (I think there are nearly a dozen).

So how about you step the fuck off and try that again, except this time you go after my argument.

[Cretaceous Bob]

Originally Posted by motownguy

That's an awfully relativistic definition of "never be wrong." By that standard, you will never die of cancer if you just quit breathing.

Yes, genius, that logic is fucking retarded. It's good to see you can't see a train of mocking tone barreling towards your face.

Originally Posted by DaveNJ

Fixed

I'll respond to any post I deem worth responding to, barring personal insults like this, which I'll weigh case by case.

You can feel free to disregard my opinion if you want to, I could care less. I'm making a logical, reasoned case based on the facts as we know them. You're contributing nothing of worth by failing to address any of my points (I think there are nearly a dozen).

So how about you step the fuck off and try that again, except this time you go after my argument.

No, dude. I had a logical, reasoned case twice against you, and twice you ignored it.

Twice you started an argument, and twice you refused to acknowledge my counterpoints.

You even ignored my calls for rebuttal, and this very thread citing the points you ignored.

You argue what you want, not what is reasoned or logical. You are hammering a point, not participating in a fair discussion. This point is proven by your absolute refusal to address paragraphs worth of points against you.

Incidentally, your cute little edit? Yeah, when I post with a non-belligerent, reasonable argument, you are nowhere to be found. I have a counterpoint, AND YOU REFUSE TO RESPOND. I call for you to respond, AND YOU STILL REFUSE. There's no point. You won't respond to it.

There is absolutely no point in moving onto a third argument when this very thread started about two AS YET UNFINISHED arguments.