The state of Gaza

Looks like none of us are capable of matching real Israelis:

Israeli army storms Gaza as Palestinian toll passes 500 - World - smh.com.au

500+ Palestinians to 1 Israeli.

Quote from Jaian;359947:
500+ Palestinians to 1 Israeli.

...but there seems to be little outrage shown by the public/media. It's like it just... is.

Horrible, horrible shit.

The Raw Story | LEAKED: graphic, uncensored video shows carnage in Gaza

Heads up though - pretty hardcore badness going on there.

Yeah - war is the answer....

What a clusterf*ck. I hope the west is proud.

The sooner the human race is wiped off the planet, the better. Selfish f*cks.

Israel are outcasts who can't agree on a religion and exercise their military ability whenever possible. And this feud between the two isn't new anyway, it has been raging since the biblical days, and I can almost assure you at times was far more brutal than it is now.

They recently agreed on redefined borders, yes? But it seems they were pressured into doing that by an international audience, unfortunately neither was actually happy with the divides, and thus extremists revolt and chaos ensues once more.

I think the biggest problem is that Israel wants (and currently has) total ownership over Jerusalem - the world's "holy city". Israel is surrounded by Muslim countries entirely, who all want Christians and Jews abolished. It's surprising Israel has lasted this long at all, and that's probably only because of whatever under-the-table support the USA is providing (as they'd hate the middle east to fall into a 100% Muslim demographic, without any presence of Christians or Jews).

Anyway, yes, it all boils down to religion. All those dead bodies scene in that video... just another product of religious war, waged by some of the dumbest people to ever spawn from the gene pool.

But remember people, "God is good. God is great."

I don't see what the West has to do with this. The ruling Hamas brought this on their own people.

The West (USA specifically) are aiding Israel - that's what we have to do with it. Bush wanted oil, he wanted power over people, wanted a Christian presence in the middle east, and Armageddon or the second coming of Christ are things he believes in. Funding Israel could potentially deliver all of these, he thought.

Now though, the Hamas believe that with Bush out and Obama in (on the 20th), the funding of Israel will stop. Thus they basically have a new ally in the USA in consequence of that, whether Obama condones what they're fighting for or not (which of course he wont).

The Hamas aren't willing to co-exist with Israeli state purely due to religious reasons, and if the funding stops, Israel will burn. What a messed up f*cking situation.

Quote from Jaian;359967:
I don't see what the West has to do with this. The ruling Hamas brought this on their own people.

I was going to construct a flowing argument, gently demonstrating why I disagree with you point by point... but instead I'll just say:

F*ck. Off. Idiot.

*bows and backs out of room

Quote from rec;359970:
The West (USA specifically) are aiding Israel - that's what we have to do with it. George W. wanted oil, he wanted power over people, wanted a Christian presence in the middle east, and Armageddon or the second coming of Christ are things he believes in. Funding Israel delivered all of these.

Wow, I can't believe you're actually blaming George W Bush for this. The funding of Israel has been happening for decades before Bush was in power. The funding of Israel does not help the USA get oil, and who does it give him power over? And next are you suggesting that he's trying to start a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East? That's just rabid, nonsensical hatred of Bush there.

Quote:
Now though, the Hamas believe that with Bush out and Obama in (on the 20th), the funding of Israel will stop. Thus they basically have a new ally in the USA in consequence of that.

I disagree. Obama has made some very emphatic statements about his support to Israel:

"Israel is "our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy," Obama said, assuring his audience that "we must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs." Such advanced multi-billion dollar systems he asserted, would help Israel "deter missile attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza.""

His remarks about Israel's right to defend itself couples with visiting Israeli families hit by rockets were published broadly long before he won the elections.

Quote:
The Hamas aren't willing to co-exist with Israeli state purely due to religious reasons, and if the funding stops, Israel will burn. What a messed up f*cking situation.

Not really. Israel, if they were so inclined, could decimate the entire living population of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Who is going to start a war with them? Every Arab country knows NOT to start a conventional war with Israel, after being humiliated in the previous attempts to destroy it. They can only win by funding terrorist organisations while washing their hands of any responsibility to avoid Isreali attacks.

Quote from grandinferno;359971:
I was going to construct a flowing argument, gently demonstrating why I disagree with you point by point...

That would be an astonishing feat for you, on any political thread. When I see it I'll believe it.

Quote:
but instead I'll just say: F*ck. Off. Idiot.

I can certainly see now why you sympathise with Hamas terrorists.

Quote from Jaian;359973:
I can certainly see now why you sympathise with Hamas terrorists.

I sympathise with little kids lying in dirt screaming with their legs blown off...

Quote from rec;359966:
I think the biggest problem is that Israel wants (and currently has) total ownership over Jerusalem - the world's "holy city". Israel is surrounded by Muslim countries entirely, who all want Christians and Jews abolished. It's surprising Israel has lasted this long at all, and that's probably only because of whatever under-the-table support the USA is providing (as they'd hate the middle east to fall into a 100% Muslim demographic, without any presence of Christians or Jews).

Jerusalem has a long history for the Jews, and a very interesting history given the number of times the Jews have been slaughtered and expelled from the city only to return.

According to the Bible David led the ancient Israelites to capture the city maybe three thousand years ago, where the Israelites ruled until about 600 BC where the Bablyonians captured the city off of them and drove the Israelis out of the city to Egypt.

After the Persians captured the city off of the Babylonians, they allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem, after which the Macedonians took over. The Jews overthrew the Macedonians and took the city back. Not long after the Romans took over (not by force). Christ was born, the Romans rebuilt the city three hundred years later into a Christian city, banning Jews from the city. The Jews were back in the city and were given temporary rule of the city by the invading Persians for five years. Then the Arabs invaded and took over Jerusalem, slaughtered the Christians, allowed the Jews back in. Eventually Christians were allowed back in as well.

Eventually the Crusaders invaded and took over Jerusalem again, slaughtering most of the Jews and Christians. When the Muslims took back Jerusalem a hundred years later, killing or expelling all the Christians. In the next Crusade the Christians took it back, before the Ottoman Turks took invaded and took it from them.

The Turks slaughtered every single Jew in the city, and left only 2000 Christians and Muslims alive. Later on, as recently has the 1800s, Jews became the largest religious group in Jerusalem according to Turkish censuses at the time. Later came a flood of Arab Muslims and Jews from other parts of the Middle East, and then a huge influx of European Jews escaping the Nazis (who many Arab leaders had allied with).

Given the long history of Jews and Jerusalem, I can't see them ever giving up Jerusalem until every last one of them is dead. And I can't see any Muslim country nuking the third holiest city in Islam, so Jews are their to stay (for our lifetimes anyway).

... I think this image is a perfect illustration of the situation over there.

[Attachment 5085]

Quote from grandinferno;359976:
... I think this image is a perfect illustration of the situation over there.

[Attachment 5086]

[Attachment 5087]

[Attachment 5088]

Quote from Jaian;359973:
I can certainly see now why you sympathise with Hamas terrorists.

I can certainly see now why you sympathise with American terrorists.

Quote from Jaian;359972:
Wow, I can't believe you're actually blaming George W Bush for this. The funding of Israel has been happening for decades before Bush was in power. The funding of Israel does not help the USA get oil, and who does it give him power over? And next are you suggesting that he's trying to start a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East? That's just rabid, nonsensical hatred of Bush there.

Bush was just another in a long line of enablers. Israel slaughter without reason we'd consider acceptable, just like the Hamas. There is good in the funding of Israel, though. After it all, it stops them getting wiped off the face of the planet as a people which none of us should wish for despite the evils done. But don't think for one second it's not for selfish reasons. The USA have many reasons for funding Israel, all only to benefit themselves.

What I was suggesting is that Bush welcomes Armageddon/the second coming of Christ. Which he suggests himself, by nature of his fundamentalist Christian views.

And yes the funding of Israel does benefit the USA's oil greed, too. Do some Google's for "Isreal oil" and "Israel oil USA". Open your eyes and read between the lines.

Quote from Jaian;359972:
I disagree. Obama has made some very emphatic statements about his support to Israel

You can disagree all you want, that's what the Hamas think. Take up your argument with them. I'm sure they'll be woken up to the fact Obama will probably continue to fund later this year, but in the meantime they feel like they've got some backing, which fuels their desire to bring chaos.

I just hope that Obama's continuation of Israel's funding is for moral and just reasons, as opposed to the reasons used up until now. Of course it's a false hope. Even someone who wants to bring change would bring upon himself political suicide with a rash decision to strip Israel's power, and all the perks the USA has because of it.

Quote from Jaian;359972:
Not really. Israel, if they were so inclined, could decimate the entire living population of the Gaza Strip and West Bank. Who is going to start a war with them? Every Arab country knows NOT to start a conventional war with Israel, after being humiliated in the previous attempts to destroy it. They can only win by funding terrorist organisations while washing their hands of any responsibility to avoid Isreali attacks.

What the f*ck? You surely can't believe that Israel would be a power without US funding? That would be very naive.

Quote from rec;359978:
I can certainly see now why you sympathise with American terrorists.

The difference being the country I live in, the country whose government I pay taxes towards, are allies with the USA and considers them a benevolent state, whereas Australia's official view of Hamas is that it is a terrorist organisation.

But to clarify what you meant to say, I do indeed sympathise with our American ALLIES.

Quote:
Bush was just another in a long line of enablers. Israel slaughter without reason we'd consider acceptable, just like the Hamas. The USA are letting them do it. There is good in the funding of Israel, though. After it all, it stops them getting wiped off the face of the planet as a people which none of us should wish for. But don't think for one second it's not for selfish reasons. The USA have many reasons for funding Israel, all to benefit them.

I partially agree. Yes, the USA have many reasons to fund Israel, most (but not all) of which are beneficial purely to the USA. YOu forget the powerful Jewish lobby in the USA and pro-Israel Christian right voting bloc which are willing to aid Israel at the cost of the USA.

And I don't think at this point Israel would be slaughtered by the Arab countries. They fared brilliantly against the Arabs long before the US began providing direct military aid.

Quote:
What I was suggesting is that Bush welcomes Armageddon/the second coming of Christ. Which he suggests himself, by nature of his fundamentalist Christian views.

That in no way indicates or even hints that Bush would even consider attempting to start this Armageddon as POTUS.

Quote:
And yes the funding of Israel does benefit the USA's oil greed, too. Do some Google's for "Isreal oil" and "Israel oil USA". Open your eyes and read between the lines.

Let's forget about reading between the lines of left wing propaganda and deal with some commons sense:

Arab countries = Insanely rich with oil.
Israel = not a drop of oil.

If Bush craves oil, who should be be buddies with, the Arabs or Israelis?

Common sense, it doesn't hurt.

For the record, I did in fact did Google "Israel oil USA" as you suggested. I read the first link that came up and this is what it says:

"Special legislation was enacted to exempt Israel from restrictions on oil exports from the USA. Moreover, the U.S. government agreed to divert oil from the USA, even if this causes domestic shortages. The U.S. government also guaranteed delivery of oil in U.S. tankers if commercial shippers become unable or unwilling to carry oil from the USA to Israel"

So not only does the US NOT gain oil thanks to it's relationship with Israel, but can in fact lose oil at the cost of the American people.

So no, Bush's alleged greed for more oil is not why he supports Israel.

Quote from Jaian;359979:
But to clarify what you meant to say, I do indeed sympathise with our American ALLIES.

Call them whatever you want, it doesn't change what they are and what they represent.

Quote from Jaian;359979:
That in no way indicates or even hints that Bush would even consider attempting to start this Armageddon as POTUS.

I wasn't trying to say that he would start it. But he might indirectly, without realising it (or realising but not caring) - what I was trying to say is that the course of action taken by his administration (and undoubtedly previous ones too) may lead to the potential of "Armageddon". And I'm going to stick my head out there and make the call that Bush himself would probably consider that eventuality a righteous one - he's that f*cking retarded.

Quote from Jaian;359979:
Let's forget about reading between the lines of left wing propaganda and deal with some commons sense

Or we forget about right wing propoaganda and deal with some common sense? :P

That door swings both ways, matey. Silly way to pose the argument.

We can quote websites all we like, such as this;

Quote:
In reality, the war is being fought to secure oil through Israel. US foreign policy is geared to make Israel its primary transport route for Middle Eastern and Central Asian oil. This also accomplishes two Israeli aims: ending dependence on US aid and toppling uncooperative neighbors.But in the end, all I was asking you to do is think critically.

Quote from rec;359980:
Or we forget about right wing propoaganda and deal with some common sense?

I got that quote by googling the search terms you asked me to, and using a left wing propaganda site to quote a specific law which is factually correct. The same site has articles such as:

"Some pictures of Israel's crimes in Gaza yesterday" and "Israeli Deception and Barbarity"

Very right wing...

Quote:
But in the end, all I was asking you to do is think critically.

Please don't claim critical thinking when you're have an irrational hatred of the USA, support conspiracy thoeries, and in this particular thread, try to suggest that the USA is primarily motivated to help Israel because of their oil greed.

Quote from OverDrive;359961:
The Raw Story | LEAKED: graphic, uncensored video shows carnage in Gaza

Heads up though - pretty hardcore badness going on there.
Yeah - war is the answer....

Quote from grandinferno;359964:
What a clusterf*ck. I hope the west is proud.

Unsurprising of terrorist sympathisers, taking carnage of Palestinian civilians perpetuated by Palestinians themselves and blame Israelis.

"This video is from September 23rd 2005, and was taken in the Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip. A Hamas pick-up truck carrying Qassam rockets detonated by mistake during a Hamas rally, leaving at least 15 killed and dozens more injured.

The pick-up truck in question is visible for a split-second at the start of the video. The section of the video showing the pick-up exploding has been edited out. The large number of Hamas personnel present, the number of injured in military uniform, the large number of civilians and Hamas flags all over the place confirm this."

TW9zc2Fk comments on GRAPHIC Video of Israel Defense Force's attack on Gaza civilian market -- originally uploaded on & banned by YouTube (NSFW)

I must apologise, having just read the Protocols of Zion, I am convinced the Jews are intent on wiping out the Arab people, as well as taking over the world (along with the Freemasons).

Quote from Jaian;359981:
Please don't claim critical thinking when you're have an irrational hatred of the USA, support conspiracy thoeries, and in this particular thread, try to suggest that the USA is primarily motivated to help Israel because of their oil greed.

I never said it the USA is primarily motiviated to help Israel because of oil reasons, I said it's one of many USA-beneficial reasons. You even acknowledged that in a prior post. The USA is playing the oil game there, in one form or another, and to deny it outright would reek of corruption of wallet or mind.

And I don't "hate" the USA. I'd rather call it the despise of their current administration. ;)

It's not irrational despise - by definition it it would only be irrational if I had no reason.

Quote from Jaian;359982:
Unsurprising of terrorist sympathisers, taking carnage of Palestinian civilians perpetuated by Palestinians themselves and blame Israelis.

I'm ****ing what?! I'm a peace sympathiser not a terrorist one, you arrogant arse. Happy to post a vid of the same kind of thing done by the other side and make the same comment.

Quote from rec;359978:
You can disagree all you want, that's what the Hamas think. Take up your argument with them. I'm sure they'll be woken up to the fact Obama will probably continue to fund later this year, but in the meantime they feel like they've got some backing, which fuels their desire to bring chaos.

June 4th, 2008

“Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza.

“The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians,” he said.

“Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and McCain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said.

Front Row Washington Blog Archive Hamas unendorses Obama after speech to pro-Israel lobby | Blogs |

Quote from Jaian;359982:
Unsurprising of terrorist sympathisers...

*takes deep breath

Hey, what separates the Hamas sending rockets into Israel and Israel sending rockets into Palestine? What makes the Hamas terrorists and Israel not? Even more to the point, what makes the US supporting Israel fair? How can you justify the Palestinians as terrorists where as far as I can see, Israel has done all the invading in the last 60 years.

If the US was serious about stopping this, they'd stop supporting Israel. If Israel was serious about stopping this, they'd stop fighting fire with fire and be a bit more tactical about the whole situation. They have access to the technology. The Hamas has rocks, explosives, AK47s and rocket launchers... It's blatantly obvious that both sides just want the other side dead. One side needs to take hold of their resources and use them for the good of the human race... but as if that's going to happen.

Jaian, I'm not anti-US... I just think they're by far the bigger terrorists than anyone you've mentioned. Remember the Afghans were freedom fighters until the US needed to blame them for something. NOW they're terrorists. If you can't see this you're an absolute hypocrite.

I am in NO WAY SAYING that a Palestinian is JUSTIFIED or RIGHT in blowing him/herself up in a crowded market. All I'm saying is when you've driven a people to the stage where they'll stand up against a tank by throwing ROCKS at it. When they'll BLOW THEMSELVES TO PIECES just to make a statement you know that maybe, just maybe... you should rethink how you approach these people. They've got nothing left now... so you can either keep going in the same vain and just blow them off the face of the earth... or you could really think about alternatives that will lead us a away from destroying an entire people.

But instead of being the 'responsible adult' in the situation, the Israelis attack with bombing and tanks, with 1/5 of their victims being children. By now in the current conflict over 100 children are dead (nefarious sources as always in these situations)... what does that say about the Israelis? No matter what 'god' you believe in - I don't think he'd run with that...

So stop telling me I'm a terrorist sympathiser when I just want a better world. I support peace... man. *takes toke on joint. I'm not the one backing the people who are killing women and children en masse at the moment...

I'm anti-war, not anti-US. Watch the Bush speech that he did prior to the 2000 elections (Presidential debates I believe). If he had actually practised what he preached things would be very different. "A humble but powerful America" is NOT what he has produced in his 8 years.

So Jaian, why don't you use your brain to offer solutions instead of blindly defending US foreign policy and bagging out our alleged tin-foil hats...

You seem to be backing war... where I'm trying to back peace. How can you sleep at night?

EDIT: What I'm saying in a nutshell is the West has the power and resources to do something different than just arm Israel. The US speaks of freedom, democracy and peace... then supplies the tools to destroy a people. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.

June 4th eh, Jaian?

...

November 5, 2008
ANSAmed
Quote:
(ANSAmed) - GAZA, NOVEMBER 5 - The election of Barack Obama offers the United States a "chance for a change, after his predecessor, Geroge W. Bush destroyed relations with the external world": this was stated by Hamas' al-Aqsa television by an executive from the movement, Ahmed Yussef. Yussef complained that during the electoral campaign, neither Obama nor his rival john McCain dedicated particular attention to the Palestinian issue. We hope, however - he said - that now Obama will understand the suffering of the Palestinian people and that he changes in United States strategy not only in Palestine, but also in Iraq and Afghanistan". (ANSAmed). November 11, 2008
Pajamas Media ? Reported Obama-Hamas Contacts Bode Ill
Quote:
Yousef added: "The policy Obama will instate in the Middle East will differ from that of his predecessor George W. Bush, although it is clear that the region and the Palestinian issue will not be at the top of his agenda. [Obama] will focus more on the economic crisis, Iraq, and Afghanistan."As mentioned earlier, we can quote websites all we like - you seem persistent to do so.

Heh, you's actually sound like you're from there.

"My ideas are right, you're wrong!".
"No! Mine are right, You're wrong!".

*BLAM* *BLAM*.

Keep talking like that and I'll have you executed and the beheading uploaded to the internet, Milenko.

Quote from Milenko;360034:
Heh, you's actually sound like you're from there.

I can't believe you punctuated "you's". I tip my hat to you sir...

lol

:D

Quote from rec;360005:
As mentioned earlier, we can quote websites all we like - you seem persistent to do so.

We can, and if you apply some of the critical thinking you were mentioning earlier, you'd realise that your quotes are misleading and do not support your claims.

Let me quote you earlier in this thread:

rec: "the Hamas believe that with Bush out and Obama in (on the 20th), the funding of Israel will stop. Thus they basically have a new ally in the USA in consequence of that."

That is absolutely untrue.

To demonstrate this I have quoted both Barack Obama and a senior spokesman of the Hamas:

1.
""Israel is "our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy," Obama said, assuring his audience that "we must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs." Such advanced multi-billion dollar systems he asserted, would help Israel "deter missile attacks from as far as Tehran and as close as Gaza.""

There you have Barack emphasising that he will preserve the US military assistance provided towards Israel. He has stated this outright, in public.

2.
“The Democratic and Republican parties support totally the Israeli occupation at the expense of the interests and rights of Arabs and Palestinians,” he said.
“Hamas does not differentiate between the two presidential candidates, Obama and McCain, because their policies regarding the Arab-Israel conflict are the same and are hostile to us, therefore we do have no preference and are not wishing for either of them to win,” Zuhri said."

There you have a Hamas spokesman specifically saying they think Obama is pro-Israel and hostile to Hamas.

You can quote all the sources you want, that doesn't change the fact that no Hamas member believes that Obama will stop funding Israel and become a Hamas ally. That you believe this not only shows a complete lack of critical thinking, but shows your understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no basis in reality.

As for your latest quote to try and rebutt me...no. It in no way supports, or even hints at supporting your claims regarding Hamas views.

Look, we all have to take a step back and look at the positives of this war... for every human killed, they will stop adding to the greenhouse effect. So every hippy needs to take a side. 1. Pro war, anti-greenhouse, or 2. Anti war, pro greenhouse.

Quote from grandinferno;360003:
Hey, what separates the Hamas sending rockets into Israel and Israel sending rockets into Palestine?

Hamas rocket targets: Israelis, both military and civilian.
Israeli rocket targets: Palestinian militants.

It's all about intention.

It's like talking about the difference between Al Qaeda and the Australian government.

Sure, we have armed fighters engaged in battle, and while it's likely that Australian soldiers have unintentionally killed Afghani/Iraqi civilians, it's not their target, whereas Al Qaeda are more than happy to attack Western civilians.

I've never understood the attempts to equate the two, or the inability of some people to differentiate between targeting combatants and non-combatants. Is a cop trying to shoot an armed robber and accidently killing a passing civilian the same as that armed robber killing random hostages?

Quote:
What makes the Hamas terrorists and Israel not?

See above.

Hamas believes every Israeli is fair play and will actively target them.
Israelis only target militants, the same militants who hide themselves among civilians. Despite Israel attempts to warn civilians to move out of the way of militants (eg. in this latest offensive they phoned thousands of households telling them that their area will be targeted due to militant activity in their vicinity. They also dropped thousands of leaflets in advance warning them.

On the other hand, Hamas sends suicide bombers into Israeli restaurants, family medical centres, universities and takes down as many Israeli civilians as it can.

The fact that you would even ask what the difference between Israelis soldiers and Hamas terrorists indicates that you don't see the difference. Given this, there's little point in us discussing this as there is no way I could equate the intentional targeting of civilians compared with collateral damage.

Quote:
Even more to the point, what makes the US supporting Israel fair?

Um, what? Why is one country supporting another meant to be fair or unfair? Fair to who? Is it fair global hunger exists while people waste food in 1st World countries? Is it fair that the trade balance between China and the USA is lopsided? Is it fair that the currency crisis is affecting some countries worse than others?

Why the **** is the US supporting Israel supposed to be 'fair' or unfair?

I'd support Israel... Hamas sounds to much like a dip.

Quote from Jaian;360049:
if you apply some of the critical thinking you were mentioning earlier, you'd realise that your quotes are misleading and do not support your claims.

Sure they do. Maybe not to the point of Hamas outright believing that Obama in power will mean a cease of Israeli support specifically, but it's suggested in many sources that Hamas think Obama's presidency could be the change of tide they need.

Quote from Jaian;360049:
You can quote all the sources you want, that doesn't change the fact that no Hamas member believes that Obama will stop funding Israel and become a Hamas ally. That you believe this not only shows a complete lack of critical thinking, but shows your understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no basis in reality.

How does Ahmad Yousef (Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's political advisor) not count? And I never said the USA would be an actual ally, just that in consequence of a potential funds-cease, that would in essence be what they are in the Hamas eyes.

While we're talking about reality, you've turned this into an argument about what you believe I believe someone else's beliefs are... which is hilarious. The fact of the matter is there are conflicting reports in every political situation, and as much as you choose not to see one side of it, there are indeed many reports that claim the Hamas want Obama in power or believe Obama's presidency will benefit them, and this has often been backed up with quotes from those involved with Hamas.

Quote from Jaian;360049:
but shows your understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no basis in reality.

Oh and on another note, again touching on true reality, you have no better understanding than anyone else here, despite your deluded self-elevation that reminds you of your superior intellect.

How do I know this? Because you're sitting in a computer chair in Darwin, and know only what's divulged via mediums the public can access. Just like everyone else here.

So before you go and suggest that you're the most knowledgeable person here on the matter, remember that you're simply not. Everyone digests information differently, and that's the only real difference in any argument on a topic of this kind.

Quote from grandinferno;360003:
How can you justify the Palestinians as terrorists where as far as I can see, Israel has done all the invading in the last 60 years.

Goddamn those Israelis. Let's have a look at their history of invading other countries, since as far as you have seen (or so you say), Israel has done all the invading in the last 60 years.

Timeline of Israel's invasion of other countries while no other country invades Israel (credit Wikipedia):

- 14 May 1948 - Israel declares it's independance from the British Mandate and is formed.

- 15 May 1948 - Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon and Iraq invade Israel. Saudi Arabia and Yemen also send troops to help them.

So, in the first 2 days of Israel's existence, they have already been attacked and invaded by seven Arab countries. Strike one for your claim that "Israel has done all the invading in the last 60 years".

Just as a sidenote, the purpose of this invasion was not only to invade and conquer, but "a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades" (Azzam Pasha, the Arab League Secretary).

During this war the Israelis fought back and increase the borders of Israeli so they could better protect themselves.

- 1949 - Israel signs treaties with Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria. The Gaza Strip was taken by Egypt, The West Bank was taken by Jordan. Note that the majority of the Palestinian Mandate under British rule was given to form Jordan, and even today the country of Jordan is most of the Palestinian Mandate.

- 1967 - Arab Nationalists call for the destruction of Israel. Egypt, Syria and Jordan mass soldiers on the border, kick out UN Peacekeepers and blockade Israel. Israel launches a pre-emptive strike against these countries, capturing strategic geographical areas such as the West Bank, Gaza STrip and Golan Heights.

I don't know, Israel did take land from other countries, but would you say they invaded those countries? I'll let you decide, although I already can guess what you'll say.

They took land from Egypt and Jordan. Those countries no longer want that land (or rather, the people in that land) back.

- 1973 - Egypt and Syria invade Israel during an Israeli religious holiday. The Israelis beat them and kick them out.

Another invasion by two Arab countries.

- 1979 - Israel and Egypt sign a peace treaty, and Israel returns the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt.

- 1981 - Israel attacks bases in Lebanon from which Palestinian terrorists are firing missiles at Israel. The Palestinians had occupied Southern Lebanon, the Israelis occupied it instead.

I suppose you could call it invasion, but then the Palestinians were just as guilty. The difference being the Palestinians were attacking Israel from another country, whereas Israel went in to stop those attacks.

Now that we've looked at all this, can you in all honestly say "as far as I can see, Israel has done all the invading in the last 60 years."?

In addition, if you never actually knew that Israel has been constantly attacked and invaded by multiple countries since it's formation, how can you possible comment on the situation in any informed manner?

Quote from Jaian;360051:
Is a cop trying to shoot an armed robber and accidently killing a passing civilian the same as that armed robber killing random hostages

lol... No, it's like the cop firing a rocket launcher into the bank knowing he'll get the robber, but a few civilians too.

...I'll be back later...

Quote from rec;360055:
Oh and on another note, again touching on true reality, you have no better understanding than anyone else here, despite your deluded self-elevation that reminds you of your superior intellect.

On the contrary, I have a better understanding than you. I've made that clear by providing sources to show that your claims are wrong

Quote:
How do I know this? Because you're sitting in a computer chair in Darwin, and know only what's divulged via mediums the public can access. Just like everyone else here.

So while you've preached the use of critical thinking, you've completely misunderstood it.

I can indeed only know what's divulged via mediums the public can access. That's the difference between you and I:
I can have an opinion based on what I read, but unlike you I don't ignore information that doesn't fit my opinion.

It's like your 9/11 conspiracy views, you completely ignore that masses of information that is publically available that discredits your conspiracy theories. I don't ignore all that information, and so don't fall prey to it. That is why I think your opinions on political manners are childish and ignorant.

Quote:
So before you go and suggest that you're the most knowledgeable person here on the matter, remember that you're simply not.

Most likely I am not, and would never say such a thing.

However, I would not hesitate to say though that I am far more knowledgeable than you about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

So, unless you are claiming to be the most knowldgeable person here on the matter, than there is no way for me to be claiming what you say I'm claiming.

Quote from rec;360053:
How does Ahmad Yousef (Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's political advisor) not count?

Because he's already made claims about Hamas's meetings and relationship with Obama that are outright lies (Obamas people confirm this).

So to reiterate, there is no supporting evidence to think that Hamas believe Obama will cut off Israel's funding when he has publically stated that he will continue his relationship with Israel and share technology with them that will protect them from Gazan rocketfire.

It's like picking on an animal, reducing it's habitat, then being all surprised when it then gets pissed off and decides to bite you...

Jaian... wow... just wow. You never cease to dazzle and amaze me with your utter tripe.

1. Your sources don't prove you're right, except to yourself. Your sources don't actually prove anything at all, because they're just sources that may be right, wrong or slanted themselves. Do you even understand that?

2. You are ignoring information that doesn't fit your opinion. You ignore it by discounting it completely, like you've done with the sources I've posted. I thought you were just ignoring that information, but you're you don't even realise you're ignoring it - you're so ignorant that you believe that information you don't agree with actually holds no validity what-so-ever.

3. I don't actually ignore any information, including that reported of 9/11. I take in everything available to me, from varied sources and mediums, process it, and form an opinion. That is by definition "critical thinking", which you have proven you don't have by discounting reports on a whim.

Quote from grandinferno;360003:
If the US was serious about stopping this, they'd stop supporting Israel.

Would that not encourage more attacks on Israel from countries afraid of the USA? If you don't believe this, please explain why.

Quote:
If Israel was serious about stopping this, they'd stop fighting fire with fire

Fight fire with fire? YOu mean target any and all Palestinian civilians?

WIth Israelis firepower, do you really believe that it's possible for them to do this without wiping out every Palestinian?

Or could it be that Israel are not fighting fire with fire?

Quote:
and be a bit more tactical about the whole situation.

How are they going to be tactful when they have their opponents firing rockets at Israeli citizens every single day?

Quote:
They have access to the technology. The Hamas has rocks, explosives, AK47s and rocket launchers...

Israelis have rocks too. And just like Hamas, they don't use rocks.

Quote:
It's blatantly obvious that both sides just want the other side dead.

Bullshit.

If the Israelis wanted the Palestinians dead, there would be none left alive.

Quote:
One side needs to take hold of their resources and use them for the good of the human race... but as if

that's going to happen.

Agreed.

Quote from Jaian;360064:
Because he's already made claims about Hamas's meetings and relationship with Obama that are outright lies (Obamas people confirm this).

And what is to say Obama's people aren't lying? You crack me up.

Quote from rec;360066:
Your sources don't prove you're right, except to yourself. Your sources don't actually prove anything at all, because they're just sources that may be right, wrong or slanted themselves. Do you even understand that?

I'll break it down for you:

rec's claim: "the Hamas believe that with Bush out and Obama in (on the 20th), the funding of Israel will stop."

Jaian's source to counter this claim: ""Israel is "our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy," Obama said, assuring his audience that "we must preserve our total commitment to our unique defense relationship with Israel by fully funding military assistance and continuing work on the Arrow and related missile defense programs." - Barack Obama

There's more to it, but if you had applied some critical thinking to this, logic would conclude that no sane Hamas member, or anyone else for that matter, would think Obama would cut funding to Israel.

You couldn't even provide a source to support your claim, instead you find a quote from a Hamas member saying Obama will be different.

Let's quote Obama again:

"“We must not negotiate with a terrorist group intent on Israel’s destruction,” he said. “We should only sit down with Hamas if they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist and abide by past agreements.”"

Have you shown even a single quote to back up your claim? Not yet, and there are masses of evidence to counter your claim. I think it's clear though by now that no matter what the proof, you can't accept you're wrong.

And with that, I'm gone for tonight. Will finish replying to grandinferno tomorrow night.

I'll break it down for you:

I still think it's super-f*cking amusing that you think the president or his administration wouldn't lie, and that you claim to use critical thinking but believe everything written that backs up your argument and find a way to discount anything that doesn't.

Sorry, one last reply, this was too easy to pass up.

Quote from rec;360069:
And what is to say Obama's people aren't lying? You crack me up.

Common sense.

Obama was trying to get elected while showing to the public he was not sympathic towards terrorists (as McCain's camp and other Republicans alleged).

Obama strikes me as an intelligent man, and an intelligent man running for President and trying to show himself being tough on terrorism will NOT secretly meet with terrorist groups when the USA has a policy of not negotiating with terrorist, especially not right before the election.

Of course, if he is a moron, he might still do it.

I have seen nothing to suggest he is not a highly intelligent man, so common sense dictates that Obama's team is not lying about him meeting with Hamas.

Let me repeat your own words rec:

CRITICAL THINKING

You can repeat it all you like, that doesn't mean it'll be instantly bestowed upon you.

And I never said Obama met with Hamas - that's what a source said. And as I've said numerous times, sources aren't truth... that means yours too.

The start of this discussion was that the Hamas think Obama in power would be good for them. We can't actually prove or disprove that, it's just what we conclude might be true. For the third time, no Jaian; your sources do not actually prove anything.

I personally don't even actually care too what the Hamas think of Obama's entrance into office, because their thoughts alone won't change what is going to happen. Although the chances are, Obama's administration will keep funding Isreal.

For arguments sake, let's say you're right; Hamas does not actually think Obama's presidency will benefit them. Great. Now what? Did you have a point beyond that, because I'm not really sure why you've placed so much importance on it?

Quote from Jaian;360051:
...there is no way I could equate the intentional targeting of civilians compared with collateral damage.

You're off in your own little world.

BOTH sides FIRE ROCKETS INTO RESIDENTIAL AREAS. How is that not the same? ONE SIDE is aided by the world's superpower.The DIFFERENCE is that one probably has the technology to defend themselves a lot better than the other. One is at an obvious advantage... at least in the rocket stakes... but you see one side was displaced from their homes, two or so generations ago. So they're pissed ...a lot of this warring has been going on for a long period of time... back and forth, back and forth. Well, this has already been covered in this thread already...

The thing is now, is that humanity is at a turning point. We have all these amazing technologies that aid the world. Incredible things... but we're still killing each other. The US is at the forefront of a lot of this tech... but they still deal massively in arms which in turn is the origin of this tech boom. Money is at the forefront and the spirit of humanity is lost behind a commercial and media cloud.

It's people like you Jaian who keep us from becoming what we need to be. Where I believe we need to go if we want to survive as a species... not just as a race or side.

I'm so ignorant to the whole situation that I just skip all the discussion and make posts like this one.

Pancakes.

That's why we like you, Sean. :P

Quote from grandinferno;360078:
BOTH sides FIRE ROCKETS INTO RESIDENTIAL AREAS. How is that not the same?

It's very easy.

Hamas fire rockets from residential areas, hiding behind civilians. Essentially they force Israelis to fire rockets into residential areas to protect their people from attack. The Israelis usually give the Palestinians warning before attacking those areas so civilians can leave.

Israeli residential areas are not used to stage attacks on Palestinians. Hamas attack those areas just so they can kill Israeli civilians.

Is it really that hard to understand the difference? I will repeat it for the umpteenth time:

Hamas target Israeli military and civilians.
Israelis target Palestinian militants.

I don't understand why you have difficulty grasping this.

Quote:
It's people like you Jaian who keep us from becoming what we need to be. Where I believe we need to go if we want to survive as a species... not just as a race or side.

It's people like you grandinferno who allow genocide to occur while talking about peace and negotiating and lofty ideals while in the real world people are out there trying to wipe out entire cultures/peoples. Look how well that worked out for Rwanda, with maybe 800,000 Tutsi civilians slaughtered by Hutu militia while the UN could not do shit because they were too busy discussing it.

Now the Israelis, they have no wish to be slaughtered while being attacked by a people bent on the genocide of the Israeli/Jewish people just so they can follow your hippy ideals and make peace with people who want no peace. Then again, there will be peace if one side is wiped out, so maybe you're onto something grandinferno. Let Israel stop attacking Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists, and let them slaughter Israelis at will. When Israel is gone, there won't be anymore Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Brilliant!

[ame=http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=213380]Strip Maul | The Daily Show | Comedy Central[/ame]

Daily Show gold, as per usual.

He's a Jew, and still thinks Israel is not in the right and that America is being brainwashed again by its media and politicians because of the country's current vested interest in Israel.

I also like the fact the issue of the new administration is raised, and the comment that enough might be changing to push Israel to do everything they can while they're still guaranteed US aid. But I'm sure Jaian will discount this as well - it's not quite in line with his opinion. ;)

to quote mel gibson "jews are the cause of all wars"

:P

Quote from Jaian;360085:
Hamas fire rockets from residential areas, hiding behind civilians. Essentially they force Israelis to fire rockets into residential areas to protect their people from attack. The Israelis usually give the Palestinians warning before attacking those areas so civilians can leave.

Only recently have they taken up 'warning people'. I'm sure they warned the UN school they shelled in the last 24 hours... because firing at schools is all good. They must protect themselves. Those pesky children will grow up to be terrorists!!

Quote from Jaian;360085:
Israeli residential areas are not used to stage attacks on Palestinians. Hamas attack those areas just so they can kill Israeli civilians.

Is it really that hard to understand the difference? I will repeat it for the umpteenth time:

Hamas target Israeli military and civilians.
Israelis target Palestinian militants.

I don't understand why you have difficulty grasping that an organised military unit, supported by the US is firing rockets and shells into residential areas. How can you see this as ok?? F*ck, as I've stated before I don't think Hamas firing rockets into residential areas is right or just... so how am I going to run with the Israelis doing it?? Not only that, how am I going to run with Israelis doing it with the backing of the 'world's leading democracy'?

Quote from Jaian;360085:
It's people like you grandinferno who allow genocide to occur while talking about peace and negotiating and lofty ideals while in the real world people are out there trying to wipe out entire cultures/peoples. Look how well that worked out for Rwanda, with maybe 800,000 Tutsi civilians slaughtered by Hutu militia while the UN could not do shit because they were too busy discussing it.

You're a warmongering moron.

It's so clear to me now. You're right. BOTH sides killing each other is so much better than genocide. What a fantastic solution.

What I'm getting at is that there have got to be better ways in this day and age for opposing forces to resolve things. With your state-of-mind we'll just keep warring until the strongest survive. Don't even bring up Rwanda and talk about the UN sitting on its hands... it was the US who sat on their hands and did nothing... They had no problem going into Iraq without UN permission so don't even bring that up as an example. It makes your blind support for the US and their foreign policy even more saddening.

Quote from Jaian;360085:
Now the Israelis, they have no wish to be slaughtered while being attacked by a people bent on the genocide of the Israeli/Jewish people just so they can follow your hippy ideals and make peace with people who want no peace. Then again, there will be peace if one side is wiped out, so maybe you're onto something grandinferno. Let Israel stop attacking Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists, and let them slaughter Israelis at will. When Israel is gone, there won't be anymore Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Brilliant!

I'm sorry for trying to avoid a war. You're right... that's "hippy". I should just go sit under a tree and think of flowers and rainbows. Next time I'm in town and someone is aggressive toward me and pushes me, I'll put my fist through their head... because there's no other way to address the situation. See that's the thing. I KNOW that I can get out of that situation, because I have the skill set and resources to do so. I see the Hamas as the drunken idiot and the Israelis as myself in this analogy. One is a lot better prepared for the conflict and has the power to explore other solutions. The other has just been kicked out of the pub, is intoxicated and just wants to go home.

You can call me a hippy all you like, but I'd like to think that we, as a species, can start looking beyond this eye for an eye shit. I know it's not as easy as that, but I'd rather have the attitude I have than your medieval bullshit.

Enjoy your war. I hope the 40 people killed at the UN school today makes you all warm and fuzzy inside...

quick note about the UN School thingy that's just happened:
AM - Israeli Defence Force defends strike on school

Quote:
But Israel says it was responding to Hamas rocket fire from the school and that despite the Israeli offensive, militants are continuing to fire scores of rockets across the Gaza-Israeli border.

[...]

Now, this is not the first time that Hamas is using children as human shields. We saw it a few months ago in another elementary school. Hamas militants walked in it and actually launched rockets from it and we released this footage to the world.

Quote from grandinferno;360099:
Next time I'm in town and someone is aggressive toward me and pushes me, I'll put my fist through their head... because there's no other way to address the situation. See that's the thing. I KNOW that I can get out of that situation, because I have the skill set and resources to do so. I see the Hamas as the drunken idiot and the Israelis as myself in this analogy.

don't see how you can equate drunkeness with irrational religious fanaticism. they are not the same and can't be handled the same. every jew on the planet could suddenly forswear judaism and convert to islam, commit with every fibre of their being and the islamic fanatics would still want them exterminated.

reasoning with irrational people is simply not possible.

What a great thread of expressive opinion :)

Quote from paladin;360110:
don't see how you can equate drunkeness with irrational religious fanaticism. they are not the same and can't be handled the same. every jew on the planet could suddenly forswear judaism and convert to islam, commit with every fibre of their being and the islamic fanatics would still want them exterminated.

Of course they can't be handled the same, but my analogy still stands IMO. Every conflict has an alternative solution...

Quote from paladin;360110:
reasoning with irrational people is simply not possible.

According to that rational I SHOULD just punch the drunk in the face...

I don't think so...

This is the result of putting the world right into peoples houses. Sides are chosen and opinions are formed.

<QUOTE>It's people like you grandinferno who allow genocide to occur while talking about peace and negotiating and lofty ideals while in the real world people are out there trying to wipe out entire cultures/peoples.</QUOTE>

<QUOTE>You're a warmongering moron.</QUOTE>

The passion is admirable on both sides. I just don't understand why people chose to take such a personal interest in affairs that don't directly affect them.

This is the result of putting the world right into peoples houses. Sides are chosen and opinions are formed.

<QUOTE>It's people like you grandinferno who allow genocide to occur while talking about peace and negotiating and lofty ideals while in the real world people are out there trying to wipe out entire cultures/peoples.</QUOTE>

<QUOTE>You're a warmongering moron.</QUOTE>

The passion is admirable on both sides. I just don't understand why people chose to take such a personal interest in affairs that don't directly affect them.

Quote from grandinferno;360113:
Of course they can't be handled the same, but my analogy still stands IMO. Every conflict has an alternative solution...

According to that rational I SHOULD just punch the drunk in the face...

I don't think so...

if it's an irrational drunk, sure. i'm sorry that it doesn't fit in with your world view but there simply are people, quite a lot of them, that you can't reason with. if you have the skillset to negotiate any potentially violent situation down to an amicable walk away - then perhaps you should approach the UN and offer to mediate a talk session in the middle east?

and in the mean time, while these talks are going on, what is the appropriate method to deal with the continuing violence?

Quote from rec;360088:
I also like the fact the issue of the new administration is raised, and the comment that enough might be changing to push Israel to do everything they can while they're still guaranteed US aid. But I'm sure Jaian will discount this as well - it's not quite in line with his opinion. ;)

This makes sense as to why you'll stick to your opinions regardless of what all news sources indicate...you get your opinions from shows on Comedy Central. Now need to think for yourself or let pesky facts shape your opinion.

That said, Israel will of course try and do their best to cripple Hamas as much as possible before Bush goes out of power. It makes it easier for both them and the Obama administration.

They're not afraid of their aid being cut by the US, since Obama has already assured them that he will continue to provide aid under his administration, and provide them with anti-missile/rocket technology to protect themselves from terrorists in the Gaza Strip.

Quote from paladin;360118:
and in the mean time, while these talks are going on, what is the appropriate method to deal with the continuing violence?

Well the suicide bombings seemed to have died down a bit and the main concern appears to be the rockets being showered into Israeli towns by the Hamas. There are a number of technologies that the Israelis have access to or could have access to...

The Arrow ABM system, which is already installed in Israel, but I'm not sure technically whether this is effective against the smaller mortar type attacks.

The Mk. 15 Phalanx can fire between 3,000-4,500 rounds per minute against anti-ship missiles... I'm sure this could be modified to counter the Hamas strikes.

What I'm saying is that at the moment, the Hamas are firing rockets... which I'm sure can be 'deflected' in many ways using modern tech.

...and as far as talks... well it seems the Israelis are doing a good job of keeping silly little things like food, medicine and the UN out of Gaza... giving the Hamas ammunition they need to be martyrs to their people. What I am saying is that BOTH sides are being IDIOTS and one needs to be the mature adult... and we both know who that should be.

I'll leave you guys with a tidbit from the NY Times I shamelessly picked out of a WIKI article...

Quote:
Opening the routes to commerce was Hamas? main goal in its cease-fire with Israel, just as ending the rocket fire was Israel?s central aim. But while rocket fire did go down drastically in the fall to 15 to 20 a month from hundreds a month, Israel said it would not permit trade to begin again because the rocket fire had not completely stopped and because Hamas continued to smuggle weapons from Egypt through desert tunnels. Hamas said this was a violation of the agreement, a sign of Israel?s intentions and cause for further rocket fire. On Wednesday [24 Dec 08], some 700 rockets hit Israel over 24 hours, in a distinct increase in intensity.

Quote from grandinferno;360099:
Only recently have they taken up 'warning people'.

I have a problem with the use of the word 'recently'. If you're measure 'recently' in terms of decades, I suppose I can't argue it, but it is a very misleading term if that's how you use it. It's as if you're suggesting that Israelis have not been warning Palestinian civilians to evacuate for many, many years now.

Quote:
I'm sure they warned the UN school they shelled in the last 24 hours... because firing at schools is all good. They must protect themselves. Those pesky children will grow up to be terrorists!!

Oh those evil Jews, they target Palestinian children in schools so they can't grow up and fight back. You've worked out exactly why they fired at that school! I bet the Jews also use the blood of Palestinian infants to bake their Passover matsoh.

IDF: UN school used by rocket cell | Confronting Hamas

The school grounds were being used by terrorists to fire mortar shells at troops stationed nearby, and the soldiers responded by firing mortars back, the army said. According to the IDF, the dead included members of the Hamas rocket cell, including senior operatives Imad Abu Askhar and Hassan Abu Askhar.

Defense officials told The Associated Press that booby-trapped bombs in the school had triggered secondary explosions that killed additional Palestinians there.

The army noted that Tuesday was not the first time Hamas had attacked Israel from within a school. The IDF released a video taken by an unmanned aerial vehicle in late 2007 showing terrorists firing mortars from right outside a school.

"Hamas has in the past fired at Israel and at troops from inside schools, [exploiting] civilians, as is proven by UAV footage," the army said."

EXCLUSIVE-Gaza headmaster was Islamic Jihad "rocket-maker" | Reuters

By day, Awad al-Qiq was a respected science teacher and headmaster at a United Nations school in the Gaza Strip. By night, Palestinian militants say, he built rockets for Islamic Jihad.

The Israeli air strike that killed the 33-year-old last week also laid bare his apparent double life and embarrassed a U.N. agency which has long had to rebuff Israeli accusations that it has aided and abetted guerrillas fighting the Jewish state.

Quote:
I don't understand why you have difficulty grasping that an organised military unit, supported by the US is firing rockets and shells into residential areas. How can you see this as ok??

Because they are targetting the sources of rocket fire used against them. What is hard to understand about hitting someone back who is hitting you?

Quote:
F*ck, as I've stated before I don't think Hamas firing rockets into residential areas is right or just... so how am I going to run with the Israelis doing it?? Not only that, how am I going to run with Israelis doing it with the backing of the 'world's leading democracy'?

Or more specifically, tell me how the Israelis are going to stop Hamas from firing rockets into their residential areas? Israelis at least are targetting Hamas military targets. Hamas are aiming for as many civilians as it can get.

So tell me how you think you could do it, without resorting to writing poetry about loving your fellow man or singing hymns and clapping.

Quote:
It's so clear to me now. You're right. BOTH sides killing each other is so much better than genocide. What a fantastic solution.

No it's not a fantastic solution, but there do not appear to be any better options that will appease both sides.

Quote:
What I'm getting at is that there have got to be better ways in this day and age for opposing forces to resolve things.

Such as?

Quote:
Don't even bring up Rwanda and talk about the UN sitting on its hands... it was the US who sat on their hands and did nothing... They had no problem going into Iraq without UN permission so don't even bring that up as an example. It makes your blind support for the US and their foreign policy even more saddening.

What does the US have to do with this? It was UN soldiers who were present in Rwanda prior to and during the early parts of the campaign of the genocide. To the United States credit, they initiated relief campaigns to help the refugees, airlifting food water and aid relief.

I can't believe you're blaming the US now for genocide in a country with which the US had no ties, nor had any soldiers in. A country in which UN soldiers were present.

Here's a news article from 1994 during the early parts of the Rwanda genocide campaign:

"A few yards from the French troops, a Rwandan woman was being hauled along the road by a young man with a machete. He pulled at her clothes as she looked at the foreign soldiers in the desperate, terrified hope that they could save her from her death.

But none of the troops moved. 'It's not our mandate,' said one, leaning against his jeep as he watched the condemned woman, the driving rain splashing at his blue United Nations badge.

The 3,000 foreign troops now in Rwanda are no more than spectators to the savagery which aid workers say has seen the massacre of 15,000 people - mainly from the traditionally dominant Tutsi minority." - UN troops stand by and watch carnage | World news | The Guardian

But it's not the UN's fault, it's America's fault.

You're absolutely right, I blindly support the USA because I don't condemn them for every wrong that occurs around the world, as you do. I will strive to be more like you.

I heard a little girl was killed by dogs earlier today. ****ing Americans, where were they?! Too busy killing Iraqis and gloating at their suffering I bet!

Quote:
I should just go sit under a tree and think of flowers and rainbows.

You don't already?

Quote:
Next time I'm in town and someone is aggressive toward me and pushes me, I'll put my fist through their head... because there's no other way to address the situation.

No no, I think if you offer them to join you under a tree and think of flowers and rainbows, they will no longer be aggressive towards you.

Quote:
See that's the thing. I KNOW that I can get out of that situation, because I have the skill set and resources to do so. I see the Hamas as the drunken idiot and the Israelis as myself in this analogy. One is a lot better prepared for the conflict and has the power to explore other solutions. The other has just been kicked out of the pub, is intoxicated and just wants to go home.

That's it, all the Israelis have to do is talk calmly and peaceful with Hamas, and their will be peace!

Hey, let's look at excerpts from the Hamas Charter:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

Yes grandinferno, the Israelis just have to deal with Hamas as you would with a drunk guy pushing you, and they will be at peace.

Quote:
Enjoy your war. I hope the 40 people killed at the UN school today makes you all warm and fuzzy inside...

I was glad to hear they recovered the bodies of Hamas terrorist who were in the school. Unfortunately so were Palestinian civilians. I think the lesson here is that even if you attack Israelis from within UN-run schools, you won't get away with hiding behind civilians like a coward. And hopefully Palestinian civilians learn to keep their distance from Hamas, although admittedly that is difficult.

Quote from grandinferno;360120:
Well the suicide bombings seemed to have died down a bit and the main concern appears to be the rockets being showered into Israeli towns by the Hamas. There are a number of technologies that the Israelis have access to or could have access to...

The Arrow ABM system, which is already installed in Israel, but I'm not sure technically whether this is effective against the smaller mortar type attacks.

The Mk. 15 Phalanx can fire between 3,000-4,500 rounds per minute against anti-ship missiles... I'm sure this could be modified to counter the Hamas strikes.

What I'm saying is that at the moment, the Hamas are firing rockets... which I'm sure can be 'deflected' in many ways using modern tech.

That's a great idea actually. I'll email the Israeli consulate and suggest it. Just imagine, if they can deflect all the rocket attacks they might not have to counter Hamas so brutally, and many Palestinian lives will be saved!

Quote:
...and as far as talks... well it seems the Israelis are doing a good job of keeping silly little things like food, medicine and the UN out of Gaza... giving the Hamas ammunition they need to be martyrs to their people.

Actually, the point of the blockade is to stop Hamas from smuggling in ammunition and weaponry along the same routes as food and medicine. Just imagine, if Hamas didn't keep smuggling in arms, the Israelis wouldn't have to restrict incoming supplies.

Quote:
I'll leave you guys with a tidbit from the NY Times I shamelessly picked out of a WIKI article...

So even though Hamas did not stop firing rockets at Israel as per their ceasefire agreement (and thus breaking the agreement), they still expect Israel to fulfil their side? Right.

[ame=http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zmXXUOs27lI]YouTube - Mortar Bombs Shot from UN School in Gaza 29 Oct. 2007[/ame]

(Beit Hanoun Elementary School for Boys, Gaza)

Quote from Jaian;360123:
Oh those evil Jews, they target Palestinian children in schools so they can't grow up and fight back. You've worked out exactly why they fired at that school! I bet the Jews also use the blood of Palestinian infants to bake their Passover matsoh.

Your quoted sources a ludicrous Jaian... How can you possibly quote the JERUSALEM POST as your source as to what the Hamas are doing in a UN school in the Gaza strip? I'm sure that's balanced journalism at its finest.

I've got to go out now, but I'll respond to the rest later this evening... or late this evening.

Quote from Jaian;360127:
YouTube - Mortar Bombs Shot from UN School in Gaza 29 Oct. 2007

(Beit Hanoun Elementary School for Boys, Gaza)

Well i usually dont get involved in these long winded threads...
But Jaian do you seriously think that everything you read or see on this conflict is true?
Most of the ppl replying to you are only trying to use a bit of common sense, and at the end of the day... worry about your own country, yourself and your family.
News is mostly BS at any rate as is politics

Quote from grandinferno;360129:
Your quoted sources a ludicrous Jaian... How can you possibly quote the JERUSALEM POST as your source as to what the Hamas are doing in a UN school in the Gaza strip? I'm sure that's balanced journalism at its finest.

Hiding from the facts do not make them go away grandinferno.

But since you believe that Israelis are aiming at Palestinian children to ethnically cleanse them before they can grow up to be terrorists, and not because, as my previous news source has stated as a response to Palestinian terrorists firing from the school, I'll add a few other news sources:

_________________________________________________________
"The Israeli army said its soldiers came under fire from militants hiding in the school and responded. It accused Gaza's Hamas rulers of "cynically" using civilians as human shields. Residents confirmed the account, saying militants were seen staging attacks from the area."

The Associated Press: Israel shells near UN school, killing at least 30
_________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________
"The Israeli Defense Forces said that their troops had fired several mortar shells near the school in response to mortar fire from the school compound.

“They shot back to save their own lives,” said Ilan Tal, an Israeli military spokesman and a brigadier general in the reserves. Among the dead, the military said in a statement, were “Hamas terrorist operatives and a mortar battery cell.”

The military identified two Hamas operatives, Imad Abu Asker and Hassan Abu Asker, as having been killed.

A young witness from Jabaliya, Ibrahim Amen, 16, said that he had seen one of the militants, whom he identified as Abu Khaled Abu Asker, in the area of the school right before the attack.

Ibrahim said he saw the militant after he answered calls for volunteers to pile sand around the camp “to help protect the resistance fighters.” Ibrahim went to pile sand near the school with his brother, Iyad, 20, who was then injured by the Israeli mortar fire."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07mideast.html?em
_________________________________________________________

But of course, I'm sure these sources are also ludicrous and horribly biased. In fact the local Palestinians who confirmed the Israeli account are really Israelis in disguise. I bet any evidence I provide that shows that maybe Israelis aren't horrible blood-thirsty Jews is ludicrous and fake and biased, right?

religion a good excuse to be crap to each other.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
Because they are targetting the sources of rocket fire used against them. What is hard to understand about hitting someone back who is hitting you?

Here lies the problem Jaian, and the massive difference in our points of view of the world. Quite simply, your point of view will continue to breed violence and hatred and only serve to destroy us as a species. The eye for an eye mentality is something from the days of the bible and should have died along with crucifixion. You're finding it hard to grasp that violence just breeds more violence and so on and so forth.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
...or singing hymns and clapping.

It seems you have the views of a religious nut, not me... with your eye for an eye carry on.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
No it's not a fantastic solution, but there do not appear to be any better options that will appease both sides.

Well there seemed that there was a solution. For all intents and purposes Hamas stopped firing rockets... given the massive decrease in attacks. I think you could safely attribute the small number of attacks during the truce to smaller factions not controlled by the governing body of Palestine. Given that this seems pretty obvious, it's a shame that Israel didn't stick to their end of the bargain in any way whatsoever. I'm heading into dangerous ground here as I really don't want to take sides, I just want the party with the most resources to actually try and use them for peace... not to flare an already over-the-top situation.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
What does the US have to do with this?

What? Are you serious? Wake up dude. The US is arming Israel, along with half the warring world.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
It was UN soldiers who were present in Rwanda prior to and during the early parts of the campaign of the genocide. To the United States credit, they initiated relief campaigns to help the refugees, airlifting food water and aid relief.

...but did nothing militarily. Whereas in Iraq, the major source of death prior to the military strikes by the US, were UN sanctions. So nearly a million people killed in a horrible genocide isn't enough for military intervention?

Quote from Jaian;360123:
You're absolutely right, I blindly support the USA because I don't condemn them for every wrong that occurs around the world, as you do.

I don't blame them for everything. I take them for the hypocrites that they are. You can't say on one hand you fight for freedom then on the other hand only fight if your corporations can make some big bucks out of it.

For the protectors of the free world, they're doing a shit job.

Quote from Jaian;360123:
I was glad to hear they recovered the bodies of Hamas terrorist who were in the school. Unfortunately so were Palestinian civilians. I think the lesson here is that even if you attack Israelis from within UN-run schools, you won't get away with hiding behind civilians like a coward. And hopefully Palestinian civilians learn to keep their distance from Hamas, although admittedly that is difficult.

Listen to yourself. How can you seriously justify what you're saying? It's insanity. I'm sure there are nefarious tactics by the Hamas, but justifying shooting rockets in a school just cannot be done by a sane person. I'll use the same analogy I've used previously... it's like a cop firing a rocket into a bank robbery.

Quote from Jaian;360134:
But since you believe that Israelis are aiming at Palestinian children to ethnically cleanse them before they can grow up to be terrorists...

I never said that... well I did, but I was being heavily sarcastic. I was thinking that your mindset was more along these lines after you posted various pictures of children showered in firearms.

Quote from Jaian;360125:
So even though Hamas did not stop firing rockets at Israel as per their ceasefire agreement (and thus breaking the agreement), they still expect Israel to fulfil their side? Right.

Your sources are the Israeli and Western media. I think the fact that the attacks were massively reduced gives an indication of the efforts made by the Hamas to stick to the truce. It appears Israel made little or no effort to keep their side of the bargain.

You can continue quoting Western media... or you can make up your mind for yourself.

Quote from Jaian;360134:
Hiding from the facts do not make them go away grandinferno.

Sorry, I didn't realise that anything that is printed automatically becomes a fact. I must have missed that meeting. Your 'facts' are as good as mine.

Quote from Jaian;360125:
That's a great idea actually. I'll email the Israeli consulate and suggest it. Just imagine, if they can deflect all the rocket attacks they might not have to counter Hamas so brutally, and many Palestinian lives will be saved!

You see, I offer what I see is a valid idea from my own research to try and stop people bombing the shit out of each other and I get met with sarcasm. All you can offer is the lines that are fed to you by the media and politicians.

I've been trying really hard not to resort to name-calling, but you're a disgusting human being.

Quote from Piggy;360132:
Well i usually dont get involved in these long winded threads... But Jaian do you seriously think that everything you read or see on this conflict is true?

Most of the ppl replying to you are only trying to use a bit of common sense...

What he said. Times a hundred. There's those words again Jaian... 'common sense'... yet you continually try to make me look like the nut bag and you the sane one... But it's blatantly obvious that it's the other way around.

I provide my own opinions and reasoning and even offer solutions (hopeless as they may sound)... and you just regurgitate what the media tell you and propagate hatred and bloodshed laced with sarcasm.

All I'm doing is trying to help. All you're doing is feeding the wheel of destruction...

It's the world our kids are going to have to deal with. Do you want them to grow up having more enemies than we do now? I shouldn't think any sane person would want that.

Hamas fire rocks at Israeli.

Israeli launch jets and fight back.

only this time now they have invaded.

Its been going on for years.

the phalanx and C-RAM systems are only good for small area defense unfortunately, as they rely on incoming ordinance being incoming, as opposed to passing 500m south of the system.

but israel has been looking into these technologies for some time. They're actually developing their own, called Iron Dome, which should be complete by 2011. so err.. yes i guess they need to do something in the interim to prevent this stuff being destroyed before the deployment is complete.

Quote from Jaian;360119:
you get your opinions from shows on Comedy Central. Now need to think for yourself or let pesky facts shape your opinion.

You idiot. As previously stated, my opinions are formed after digesting a wide range of sources and information. It just so happens that Jon Stewart and I share a similar sentiment.

I have no doubt you also digest a wide range of information, however you've also made it clear there's a lot you completely disregard without even stopping to truly consider it.

Anyway, as I pointed out earlier, the way we digest and process that information appears vastly different - thus we have conflicting ideas, and that's why we're arguing (I just felt I needed to spell that out for you again, because you clear can't hear very well up on your imaginary high-horse).

Quote from Jaian;360134:
Hiding from the facts do not make them go away grandinferno.

You idiot, x2. Your quoted sources... what you see, read and hear... they're not f*cking facts - for the fifth time! They're reports, and are no more valid than reports you don't agree with, unless of course those reports are debunked by a non-bias third party. But you're yet to deliver anything of that kind.

Just because the people who you believe/listen to said a certain report is untrue, doesn't necessarily make it untrue. Believing that is what we call blind faith, and is as far from critical thinking as it gets. Make up your own f*cking mind for once, and if your mind is perfectly in-line with what the Western media spews out and their corrupt politicians rant about, then you're a lost cause.

Quote from paladin;360110:
don't see how you can equate drunkeness with irrational religious fanaticism. they are not the same and can't be handled the same. every jew on the planet could suddenly forswear judaism and convert to islam, commit with every fibre of their being and the islamic fanatics would still want them exterminated.

reasoning with irrational people is simply not possible.

I just wanted to quote this because DoWhatYouWant loves it when I rant on about crazy religious people.

Quote from grandinferno;360140:
Here lies the problem Jaian, and the massive difference in our points of view of the world. Quite simply, your point of view will continue to breed violence and hatred and only serve to destroy us as a species. The eye for an eye mentality is something from the days of the bible and should have died along with crucifixion. You're finding it hard to grasp that violence just breeds more violence and so on and so forth.

You're being overdramatic.

Eye for an eye didn't kill us in Biblical times' if anything the human species has THRIVED.

2009 - 6,000,000,000+ people on Earth
1900 - 1,650,000,000 people on Earth
1BC - 00200,000,000 people on Earth

The human species is 30x bigger than it was since the birth of Christ. The biggest wars involving the most slaughter of life in human history only occurred in the last hundred years, yet we've massively expanded our population, improved communications between races and cultures, improved technology, knowledge etc.

If we've thrived despite ever increasing violence throughout the world over the last 10,000 years of civilisation, what makes you think all of a sudden one tiny conflict in a small part of the world is going to as you claim 'destroy us as a species?

Quite simply, it won't.

Quote:
It seems you have the views of a religious nut, not me... with your eye for an eye carry on.

Nah, I like the Wiccan threefold law better: you get back three times what you do unto others or some crap like that. Yours seems to be 'Israelis should turn the other cheek no matter what'.

Quote:
Well there seemed that there was a solution. For all intents and purposes Hamas stopped firing rockets...

Um what?! When? When did Hamas stop firing rockets at Israel?

Quote:
What? Are you serious? Wake up dude. The US is arming Israel, along with half the warring world.

The whole world arms each other. Egypt for example is armed by the US, Russia, China, France and Italy. If the US did not arm Israel there would be plenty of other countries willing to do so.

Quote:
given the massive decrease in attacks. I think you could safely attribute the small number of attacks during the truce to smaller factions not controlled by the governing body of Palestine. Given that this seems pretty obvious, it's a shame that Israel didn't stick to their end of the bargain in any way whatsoever.

They stuck to their bargain until the ceasefire was broken (courtesy of wikipedia):

July 8, 2008
After two mortar attacks from Gaza at the Sufa crossing, one fell just inside Gaza and the other at the crossing. Israel closed all the crossing. After an Egyptian request they reopened the crossings. Hours after the crossings opened at noon, militants fired another shell into Israel, causing no casualties or damage, the Israeli military said. Israel kept the crossings open. No Palestinian group immediately claimed responsibility.
In all, 15 rockets and mortars have been fired from Gaza since the truce took effect on June 19. Israel has responded automatically by snapping shut the crossings, which have been closed about half of the time. So far the truce has not eased conditions in Gaza because of the frequent closures

Between October 29th and November 6th 48 rockets and 21 mortars were fired from Gaza into Israel.

November 6-12th
Israel attacks a 250 meter tunnel going from Gaza and under its border, claiming the tunnel is designed to capture additional Israeli soldiers and hold them hostage. Six Gaza fighters are killed and four Israeli special forces wounded. Hamas responds by firing 30 Qassam rockets at Israel. The truce agreed to five months ago is starting to founder.[74] Between November 5th and November 12th, 22 rockets and 9 mortars were fired into Israel.

Aisde from these, there were hundreds of rockets and mortars fired at Israel from Hamas controlled Gaza, most of which were anonymous. No one owned up to it.

Israel kept up their side of the bargain right until the first rockets broke the ceasefire.

But of course, Israel is always to blame, even if the other side breaks the ceasefire agreement, according to you.

Quote:
I'm heading into dangerous ground here as I really don't want to take sides, I just want the party with the most resources to actually try and use them for peace... not to flare an already over-the-top situation.

You're effectively putting all the blame on Israel if they can't make make peace with a people who are bent on their destruction. Right, you're not taking sides at all.

Quote:
...but did nothing militarily. Whereas in Iraq, the major source of death prior to the military strikes by the US, were UN sanctions. So nearly a million people killed in a horrible genocide isn't enough for military intervention?

So you're saying the US have a duty to intefere with every single country where people are murdered? You're saying the US is at fault if they don't go around the world sending in their troops to start fighting murderes and rapists? Wait, does that mean the US should go into Gaza strip and wipe out Hamas and every other terrorist/militant group? The US was justified in invading Iraq because of the genocide committed by Hussein? Should they next invade Iran as well?

Quote:
I don't blame them for everything. I take them for the hypocrites that they are. You can't say on one hand you fight for freedom then on the other hand only fight if your corporations can make some big bucks out of it.

We've discussed this before.

United States sending in troops to Kosovo. This was a humanitarian mission pure and simple. They fought to prevent genocide.

You seem to believe if they don't save the entire world as you see fit they are hypocrites.

Quote:
Listen to yourself. How can you seriously justify what you're saying? It's insanity. I'm sure there are nefarious tactics by the Hamas, but justifying shooting rockets in a school just cannot be done by a sane person. I'll use the same analogy I've used previously... it's like a cop firing a rocket into a bank robbery.

You're right, instead Israelis should run away. Whenever Hamas fire rockets from civilian areas, they should run out of range of the rockets/mortars so they can't accidently kill Palestinian civilians.

Of course, then they'll have to evacuate Israel, as Hamas will start shelling all over Israel from schools and hospitals all over the Gaza Strip. If the Israeli's fire back, it's unjustified or insane according to you.

You honestly believe that you can let a murderous terrorist group like Hamas that are openly bent on genocide to attack you without retaliating?

This is why your hippy ideals are ignored by Israelis. They don't want to die. It doesn't affect you either way sitting in your computer chair at home, but the Israelis actually care about their own lives.

So yeah, when Hamas attack them, they'll attack back.

Quote:
Your sources are the Israeli and Western media. I think the fact that the attacks were massively reduced gives an indication of the efforts made by the Hamas to stick to the truce. It appears Israel made little or no effort to keep their side of the bargain.

The agreement was not to reduce the attacks. But to stop them altogether. Or you think one side (eg. Hamas) can make up whatever terms they want and Israel have to follow them?

Quote:
You see, I offer what I see is a valid idea from my own research to try and stop people bombing the shit out of each other and I get met with sarcasm. All you can offer is the lines that are fed to you by the media and politicians.

No, I was being sarcastic because the Israelis are already trying to get the technologies to do exactly what you were 'suggesting', as Aegis pointed out (I'm guessing he's familiar with it given his username).

Next you can suggest the US try and hunt down bin Laden, or try to reduce the impact of the financial crisis. I mean, I bet they hadn't considering doing that before. Sarcasm again.

I've posted in this thread already, Obama has said he wants to continue working with the Israelis on anti-missile technology as they are already working together on it.

So acting as if the Israelis are doing nothing to find other ways to defend themselves against Palestinian rocket attacks is disingenous at best.

Quote:
There's those words again Jaian... 'common sense'... yet you continually try to make me look like the nut bag and you the sane one...

You support conspiracy theories. Of course I consider you a nutbag.

Quote:
I provide my own opinions and reasoning and even offer solutions (hopeless as they may sound)...

That's the problem, and I've pointed it out repeatedly in this thread. Your solutions are hopeless because they entail virtual suicide by the Israelis.

Quote:
and you just regurgitate what the media tell you and propagate hatred and bloodshed laced with sarcasm.

What media have you been reading? Most news articles I've come across are heavily against Israeli actions.

Quote from rec;360148:
Your quoted sources... what you see, read and hear... they're not f*cking facts - for the fifth time! They're reports, and are no more valid than reports you don't agree with, unless of course those reports are debunked by a non-bias third party. But you're yet to deliver anything of that kind.

The reports describe facts. Events that have happened. My sources are reports on facts. You can get as pedantic as you want with it, but I consider it a fact that Hamas is currently firing rockets on Israel, that Israel has sent ground troops into the Gaza Strip, that Israel fired at UN-run schools this last week, and that dead Palestinian militants have been found.

You can dispute that they are facts if you want.

Quote:
Israel briefly paused its military operations in the Gaza Strip on Wednesday and said it planned to do so for three hours each day to allow for deliveries of humanitarian aid, as the Israeli cabinet met to consider how to respond to an Egyptian proposal for a more lasting ceasefire.

Military officials said operations would stop for three hours, between 1 pm and 4 pm local time each day, to give besieged Gaza residents an opportunity to emerge from their homes to seek food, fuel and other emergency supplies. Israel has allowed some aid deliveries since it began airstrikes Dec. 27 but relief workers said they have been unable to reach much of the population because of heavy fighting.

The opening of "humanitarian corridors" each day is meant to relieve a situation that international aid agencies say has reached crisis proportions.

The militant group Hamas, which is in charge of the Gaza Strip, said it would not launch any missiles during the three-hour pause.

"There will be no missile launching in these three hours," Hamas deputy leader Moussa Abu Marzouk told Dubai-based Al Arabiya television.

washingtonpost.com

Quote from Jaian;360151:
The reports describe facts. Events that have happened. My sources are reports on facts. You can get as pedantic as you want with it, but I consider it a fact that Hamas is currently firing rockets on Israel, that Israel has sent ground troops into the Gaza Strip, that Israel fired at UN-run schools this last week, and that dead Palestinian militants have been found.

You can dispute that they are facts if you want.

In that single paragraph, you claim that your sources are purely factual, twice. Which is delusional - to be as blunt as possible.

But then you back-flipped and said you consider them to be facts, which acknowledges that perhaps not everything that is written or reported is absolute truth. So you're not only delusional, but confused.

In reality, no one was disputing the bare-bones facts. Yes, the fact is there's a war going on - no one disputes that. It's all the finer details that are disputable, and they are the things we're arguing about based on the same information that is available to all of us. So don't try and back pedal with the simplification of a topic you've so dramatically convoluted in a vein attempt to justify what is ultimately your ignorant point of view.

I like the bit where you all stick your fingers in your ears and yell at eachother.

lalalalalalalalalaala palestinians lalalalalalalalalallalala

lalalallalalalalalalla israelies lalalalalalalalalalalallalala

and then I can go to work, and theres people there with their fingers stuck in their ears yelling at eachother.

OMG YOUR TEAM IS CUNCE!!!

NUHUH YOUR TEAM!!!

Your posts "go off twice" because of a bug relating to a VBulletin upgrade. Dan is looking into it.

As for the sticking fingers in ears and yelling at each other - isn't that was internet forums are for? Besides, you've been in your fair share of them, so you can't talk. :P

Quote from rec;360154:
In that single paragraph, you claim that your sources are purely factual, twice.

I don't know where I said my 'sources are purely factual', I specifically said "The reports describe facts. Events that have happened. My sources are reports on facts".

Quote:
But then you back-flipped and said you consider them to be facts, which acknowledges that perhaps not everything that is written or reported is absolute truth. So you're not only delusional, but confused.

Facts are disputed. You of all people should know this. For example, look at this news report from the BBC:

"A sequence of five newly-released pictures shows the moment a hijacked American Airlines plane slammed into the Pentagon on 11 September, 2001." - BBC News | AMERICAS | In pictures: Pentagon crash

Here's a similar entry about the Pentagon on Wikipedia:

"On September 11, 2001, hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 was crashed into the western side of the Pentagon" - [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon]The Pentagon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The first source is a report on an occurrence. A report on a fact that is generally accepted except by a fringe minority of conspiracy theorists.

You're an example of such a person who rejects these facts, despite being commonly accepted. For that reason I specified 'I consider them to be facts'. Let's quote myself again:

"I consider it a fact that Hamas is currently firing rockets on Israel"

I do indeed consider that to be a fact. All the news reports I have read confirm this, it would be unreasonable of me not to consider it a fact. You're saying that it makes me delusional or confused to say this? Does that make sense even to you, or are you just confused and randomly attacking anything I say?

Quote:
In reality, no one was disputing the bare-bones facts. Yes, the fact is there's a war going on - no one disputes that. It's all the finer details that are disputable, and they are the things we're arguing about based on the same information that is available to all of us.

Okay, so who is disputing the facts present in the news articles I quoted to grandinferno? The Israelis say Palestinian militants were firing from the school, the Palestinian militants admit the headmaster of the school was one of their bomb makers, and local Palestinians who were injured during the strike at the school confirm that militants were attacking Israelis from the school. These are from multiple news sources such as The Associated Press and Reuters among others.

Are you disputing it? If so on what basis?

Quote:
So don't try and back pedal with the simplification of a topic you've so dramatically convoluted in a vein attempt to justify what is ultimately your ignorant point of view.

Multiple news reports citing difference first hand sources confirm the same thing. We have video evidence of similar activity taking place in the past. That these reports are reporting correctly is beyond all reasonable doubt, thus it is essentially a fact. Reasonable doubt, however, is where you fail, not just on this topic, but on many political topics.

Unless of course you want to be the sole arbitrator of what is a fact and what is not. Should everything you dispute suddenly not be a fact? Is man landing on the moon decades earlier not a fact because there are still plenty of people today who dispute that it occurred?

Correct, reports on what was originally reality. But even then, sometimes reports are made with information that is completely untrue to begin with. Even when accurate, unfortunately when you combine Chinese whispers with money, power and politics, what we actually read is almost always skewed one way or the other, and is sometimes a blatant lie.

Your reports aren't immune to this, they're not facts (6th time) and anyone who wants to lodge a counter argument with reports from the other side of the fence shouldn't be written off entirely... but you do exactly that. Just because there are more reports supporting one angle most certainly doesn't make it any more factual, especially when most of those reports originate from media organisations renowned for corruption and the perversion of truth, from within a country who are buried deep inside the issue at hand.

And now we're going in circles.

Quote from rec;360148:
... lost cause.

Shocking cynicism of a poisoned homeland - Opinion - smh.com.au

Quote from rec;360174:
And now we're going in circles.

Yeah I noticed.

Quote:
There have been hundreds of articles and reports written from the Erez border crossing falsely accusing Israel of blocking humanitarian supplies from reaching beleaguered Palestinians in Gaza. (In fact, over 520 truck loads of humanitarian aid have been delivered through Israeli crossings since the beginning of the Israeli counterattack.) But how many news articles, NGO reports and special U.N. commissions have investigated Hamas's policy of deliberately placing rocket launchers near schools, mosques and homes in order to use innocent Palestinians as human shields?

Many people ask why there are so few Israeli casualties in comparison with the Palestinian death toll. It's because Israel's first priority is the safety of its citizens, which is why there are shelters and warning systems in Israeli towns. If Hamas can dig tunnels, it can certainly build shelters. Instead, it prefers to use women and children as human shields while its leaders rush into hiding.

Marvin Hier: The Jews Face a Double Standard - WSJ.com

Quote:
At least three rockets have been fired into northern Israel from Lebanon raising fears that the current Israeli offensive in Gaza may spill over.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Rockets hit Israel from Lebanon

Quote from Jaian;360150:
....what makes you think all of a sudden one tiny conflict in a small part of the world is going to as you claim 'destroy us as a species?

You should really learn to read. I said people with an attitude like yours are going to be the end of us. You have heard of biological and nuclear weapons... right?

Quote from Jaian;360150:
Um what?! When? When did Hamas stop firing rockets at Israel?

Well at the beginning of the 'truce' it appeared that rocket attacks were reduced by well over 90%. Common sense would tell you that Hamas told everyone to stop, and the remaining few rockets were fired by other militant groups. That's what common sense should tell you... but I'm sure you'll find some source that somehow makes that not a fact.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
You're effectively putting all the blame on Israel if they can't make make peace with a people who are bent on their destruction. Right, you're not taking sides at all.

No. I'm saying they have the resources and the power to make change. Seeing that they're essentially the invaders (in the present day history of the region), it's the least they could do. THAT'S what I'm saying.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
So you're saying the US have a duty to intefere with every single country where people are murdered? You're saying the US is at fault if they don't go around the world sending in their troops to start fighting murderes and rapists? Wait, does that mean the US should go into Gaza strip and wipe out Hamas and every other terrorist/militant group? The US was justified in invading Iraq because of the genocide committed by Hussein? Should they next invade Iran as well?

You don't pay attention much do you. You do everything you accuse me of. Not even worth an answer genius.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
You're right, instead Israelis should run away. Whenever Hamas fire rockets from civilian areas, they should run out of range of the rockets/mortars so they can't accidently kill Palestinian civilians.

Of course, then they'll have to evacuate Israel, as Hamas will start shelling all over Israel from schools and hospitals all over the Gaza Strip. If the Israeli's fire back, it's unjustified or insane according to you.

What are you talking about? You're rambling man. Try actually reading what I write as opposed to whatever it is you're doing.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
You honestly believe that you can let a murderous terrorist group like Hamas that are openly bent on genocide to attack you without retaliating?

This is a beautiful illustration of your absolute narrow FOV. I really can't be bothered arguing with you any more. You're totally not listening to anything I have to say.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
This is why your hippy ideals are ignored by Israelis. They don't want to die. It doesn't affect you either way sitting in your computer chair at home, but the Israelis actually care about their own lives.

So yeah, when Hamas attack them, they'll attack back.

You. Are. Not. Listening.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
Next you can suggest the US try and hunt down bin Laden, or try to reduce the impact of the financial crisis. I mean, I bet they hadn't considering doing that before.

I'm sorry for offering what I thought were thoughtful suggestions. I'd rather do that than just say kill 'em all. You're such a pompous prick.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
You support conspiracy theories. Of course I consider you a nutbag.

I'll run with nutbag. I'd rather be that than someone who does nothing but regurgitate the same shit, gleaned from the western media.

Quote from Jaian;360150:
That's the problem, and I've pointed it out repeatedly in this thread. Your solutions are hopeless because they entail virtual suicide by the Israelis.

How do you figure that?

Quote from Jaian;360150:
What media have you been reading? Most news articles I've come across are heavily against Israeli actions.

Why are they heavily against Israeli actions Jaian? I wonder...

By the way, I haven't seen this sway by the media.

*taps chin

I'm done arguing with you. You in no way are listening to what I say and all you're doing is being a condescending prick. So you go on giving wonderful solutions of death and destruction, and I'll go on trying to prevent it.

I think you should really go back and read what I've posted again and you'll realise that what I'm saying is quite different to what you obviously think I'm saying.

Aegis, thanks for the info on the Israeli defence plans. It's interesting to say the least...

Funny, they're looking into what I was kinda saying Jaian... maybe it didn't deserve the sarcasm you unleashed on it. Dickhead.

Quote from Harbinger;360155:

OMG YOUR TEAM IS CUNCE!!!

NUHUH YOUR TEAM!!!

lol

The funny thing is, Jaian doesn't realise that I don't really have a team... I just want the shit to stop.

Edit: ... and looks what's happening now... Great.

Israel fires back into Lebanon | World News | News.com.au

Quote from Jaian;360205:
Marvin Hier: The Jews Face a Double Standard - WSJ.com

lol

Quote from grandinferno;360210:
Well at the beginning of the 'truce' it appeared that rocket attacks were reduced by well over 90%. Common sense would tell you that Hamas told everyone to stop, and the remaining few rockets were fired by other militant groups. That's what common sense should tell you... but I'm sure you'll find some source that somehow makes that not a fact.

Then you don't understand the point of the truce.

1. Palestinian rocket/mortar attacks on Israeli towns full of civilians.
2.- Israelis fire back.

- Israelis blockade borders to stop Palestinians from smuggling in more rockets/munitions
3. Palestinians dig tunnels under border to Egypt to smuggle more arms in.
4. Got to step 1.

The problem with this is that the Palestinian civilians are affected by the blockade. They've elected to their government a terrorist organisation which actively targets Israeli children and male/female civilians, and one which is happy to use their own civilians as shields. They have no functioning economy of their own, and they depend on aid. When Hamas and their associated terrorist groups keep firing at Israeli civilian targets, it forces the Israelis to block the borders which severely limits the amount of aid coming in, and thus affects Palestinian civilians.

What happens here? While it's rarely an issue with most people around the world that the Israeli people are being shelled on a daily basis, but when the Palestinians are suffering, there is mass outrage much akin to your own. This forces Israel to try and make a truce with an organisation which is out to destroy them.

This particular truce is purported to stop rocket attacks on Israel in exchange for the easing/lifting of blockades (and some prisoner exchange). It's fairly obvious from the history of Hamas that this truce would only be useful to them in re-arming so they can attack in force once the truce is over, assuming they can even keep the truce.

Isreal knows this, but due to internatioal pressure agrees to this truce. That way when Hamas either breaks the truce or attacks in force as soon as the truce is over, they can point out to the world 'see, we tried, but they're stronger than ever and attacking in force'.

Either way, Israelis want the rocket attacks to stop. If the truce cannot stop rocket attacks on Israel...what do they actually gain from it? Painting a target on their foreheads saying 'Hey, do your worst to me cause I'm not gonna fight back"?

You know why I think you're ludicrously biased and irrational? Because you expect Israel take steps to make peace at the expense of the safety and lives of their own people, when peace cannot be made with Hamas. And Hamas can do what they want with impunity, all the blame seems to be going towards Israel.

Palestinians can be negotiated with. Fatah has shown this. A terrorist group like Hamas cannot when their primary objective is the destruction of Israel. It bewilders me how you can think Hamas can be reasoned with.

Quote:
Seeing that they're essentially the invaders (in the present day history of the region), it's the least they could do. THAT'S what I'm saying.

Egypt and Jordan don't want the land back. So who did the Israelis invade? Do tell.

Quote:
I'm sorry for offering what I thought were thoughtful suggestions. I'd rather do that than just say kill 'em all. You're such a pompous prick.

I'm a pompous prick? Actually, you're probably right.

That said, I don't see how you're any different, with your advice on what the Israelis could be doing to stop the rocket attacks. Maybe you think the Israelis are simpletons or the Middle Eastern equivalent of dumb racist hicks who can't think of what to do without a weapon in their hands. That's what you're saying when you're providing advice on what the Israelis could do when it's something they have already tried/are trying.

Quote:
I'd rather be that than someone who does nothing but regurgitate the same shit, gleaned from the western media.

That's funny, you just ripped into me earlier for quoting Middle Eastern news, and only accepted the information when it came from Western media (Reuters, New York Times). So the Western media is only acceptable when it suits your needs/arguement?

Quote:
Why are they heavily against Israeli actions Jaian? I wonder...

I don't know grandinferno, after all, the media can't be trusted, or they would admit that the Bush administration orchestrated 9/11. If they'll hide the crimes of the Bush administration, then they'll ignore the crimes of Hamas and blame Israel.

Quote:
I think you should really go back and read what I've posted again and you'll realise that what I'm saying is quite different to what you obviously think I'm saying.

It comes down to you expecting Israel to be the one sacrificing the security of their own people to make peace with Hamas, and not acknowleding that Hamas is intent on the destruction of Israel and it's people. Those two factors are essential to understanding the current actions of the Israels, and you seem deliberately oblivious to it.

Quote:
Funny, they're looking into what I was kinda saying Jaian... maybe it didn't deserve the sarcasm you unleashed on it. Dickhead.

Maybe it did deserve it for you being such a condescending prick in assuming the Israeli military had not considering using anti-missile technology to counter incoming rocket/missiles.

It's akin to suggesting to Oscar Dela Hoya that he should either duck or block punches thrown at him during a boxing match so he doesn't get hit.

Quote from grandinferno;360211:
The funny thing is, Jaian doesn't realise that I don't really have a team.

Funnier still I believe you believe that.

While I'd love for there to be peace in the Middle East, I don't see any end of conflict, and am firmly in the pro-Israeli camp (for the most part), and can openly admit that.

I don't know which is funnier, that you believe in your own neutrality on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or that you believe you're unbiased in regards to the US Presidential Elections/Dems vs Repubs. It's been pointed out by others that you are anything but neutral, but you still cling to the notion of your own impartiality.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
Then you don't understand the point of the truce.

Did you actually read the quote that you were responding to? It appears not. The Palestinian government, for all intents and purposes, stopped their attacks IMO.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
You know why I think you're ludicrously biased and irrational? Because you expect Israel take steps to make peace at the expense of the safety and lives of their own people, when peace cannot be made with Hamas. And Hamas can do what they want with impunity, all the blame seems to be going towards Israel.

If you read what I've written you'll see that I am disgusted at BOTH sides actions. It's just that the Israeli's have slowly expanded their borders through aggression since the end of WWII... thus I feel more of the onus is on them to keep the peace - even though day to day the Hamas are more of the aggressors.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
Palestinians can be negotiated with. Fatah has shown this. A terrorist group like Hamas cannot when their primary objective is the destruction of Israel. It bewilders me how you can think Hamas can be reasoned with.

What? Aren't the Hamas the elected 'government' of Palestine? Or am I wrong...? If I'm right then your sentence makes no sense.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
Egypt and Jordan don't want the land back. So who did the Israelis invade? Do tell.

[Attachment 5095]

Quote from Jaian;360218:
Maybe you think the Israelis are simpletons or the Middle Eastern equivalent of dumb racist hicks who can't think of what to do without a weapon in their hands. That's what you're saying when you're providing advice on what the Israelis could do when it's something they have already tried/are trying.

You have a nasty habit of putting words in my mouth. You should stop doing that.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
That's funny, you just ripped into me earlier for quoting Middle Eastern news, and only accepted the information when it came from Western media (Reuters, New York Times). So the Western media is only acceptable when it suits your needs/arguement?

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!?!!?!

For starters, it IS Western media... in essence at least. Geographically it obviously isn't... and seriously... I don't know what you're talking about.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
...not acknowleding that Hamas is intent on the destruction of Israel and it's people. Those two factors are essential to understanding the current actions of the Israels, and you seem deliberately oblivious to it.

Once again, I shall ask you read what I've written again. ONCE AGAIN you're totally missing my point.

Quote from Jaian;360218:
Maybe it did deserve it for you being such a condescending prick in assuming the Israeli military had not considering using anti-missile technology to counter incoming rocket/missiles.

Having no experience in defending a country from rocket attacks I admit my solutions may seem a little simplistic. I don't have that 'life experience'...

Quote from Jaian;360218:
It's akin to suggesting to Oscar Dela Hoya that he should either duck or block punches thrown at him during a boxing match so he doesn't get hit.

HA HA HA HA HA... You're a genius. THAT'S WHAT YOU DO IN A FIGHT SMART GUY!

Quote from Jaian;360219:
I don't know which is funnier, that you believe in your own neutrality on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or that you believe you're unbiased in regards to the US Presidential Elections/Dems vs Repubs. It's been pointed out by others that you are anything but neutral, but you still cling to the notion of your own impartiality.

No, I'm trying to be neutral. I think BOTH sides are in the wrong, but Israel has the greater power to change it. I don't know how much clearer I can be on that. I really don't.

As far as the presidential elections went... ermm... no, I wasn't neutral. At all. Never claimed to be.

I'd really ask you read what I write properly and stop trying to somehow swing what I'm saying to suit your argument.

Quote from Jaian;360219:
While I'd love for there to be peace in the Middle East, I don't see any end of conflict, and am firmly in the pro-Israeli camp (for the most part), and can openly admit that.

I know you are. That's why I'm arguing with you. :grin:

What do you mean 'for the most part'. What part DON'T you agree with. I'd be interested.

BBC just reported that international reporters are being banned from Gaza.

Even if that's true, I can't imagine it's going to keep everyone out. But still, it means even greater restriction on what we hear, read and see.

How convenient.

A marked United Nations aid convoy was just fired upon by Israel. 1 person died, and the UN is pulling all aid out of Gaza in light of this.

With 3000 wounded and now less aid, and reporters being kicked out, it seems like Israel are pulling some real strings to push Gaza into a corner. That's just my opinion of course, make of the above information what you will.

Quote from grandinferno;360221:
Did you actually read the quote that you were responding to? It appears not. The Palestinian government, for all intents and purposes, stopped their attacks IMO.

The point of the truce (from the Israeli side) was primarily to stop rocket attacks on Israel from the Gaza strip. Hamas was required to stamp down on that occurring. It wasn't a ceasefire where rocket attacks were meant to be 'reduced', but to be stopped. The ceasefire did not say 'in exchange for opening up the borders I want you to cut down from over 2 thousand rockets fired on us to over 300 rockets fired on us", it said "n exchange for opening up the borders I want you to completely stop firing rockets on us.

Despite that, the Israelis were fired upon from Hamas controlled Gaza Strip almost every day.

In conclusion, I repeat you do not understand the purpose of the ceasefire. A repeat offender shoplifter who is put on parole on condition that if he shoplifts one more time he goes back to jail, does not get away when caught shoplifting again saying "but I only did it a few times". The parole is pointless if he's just going to be reoffending during this parole period.

And yes, you may claim Hamas can't stop other militant groups from attacking Israel...nonsense. Sure I can understand a handful, but 320 rockets fired during the ceasefire? Look at the last week or so since the ceasefire ended: as a precautionary measure Hamas rounded up a lot of other rival groups and shot them in the legs or broke their hands, or executed them outright (35 Fatah members executed).

Hamas can and does keep tabs on the other militant groups, but only take action when it suits them.

Quote:
If you read what I've written you'll see that I am disgusted at BOTH sides actions. It's just that the Israeli's have slowly expanded their borders through aggression since the end of WWII... thus I feel more of the onus is on them to keep the peace - even though day to day the Hamas are more of the aggressors.

I wrote a timeline showing that the aggression (read invasion) was initiated the majority of the time by the neighbouring Arab countries...did you somehow miss that?

Quote:
palastinianlandloss8tz.gif

Pretty picture, but it doesn't answer my question.

You: "Seeing that they're essentially the invaders (in the present day history of the region), it's the least they could do.
Me: "Egypt and Jordan don't want the land back. So who did the Israelis invade?"

The question still stands, please answer me.

Quote:
Once again, I shall ask you read what I've written again. ONCE AGAIN you're totally missing my point.

I've read what you've written, and my point still stands: you have shown not one sign of acknowledging the conditions faced by Israelis or understanding why they do what they do. You preach on what they should be doing or why what they're doing is wrong, but until you factor in the variables I've listed you can't claim to be impartial.

Quote:
HA HA HA HA HA... You're a genius. THAT'S WHAT YOU DO IN A FIGHT SMART GUY!

That's my point...you suggesting what the Israelis could do by stating the obvious was ridiculously condescending or stupid, take your pick. Suggesting to Oscar Dela Hoya how to block punches by telling him what every boxer (or pretty much anyone in the world) is also ridiculously condescending or stupid. Did you not understand that>

Quote:
What do you mean 'for the most part'. What part DON'T you agree with. I'd be interested.

Read rec's last post for an example.

Quote:
An 18 year-old from Coral Springs was busted for wielding brass knuckles and a pocket knife, a petite middle-aged woman shouted "baby killers!," and a mob of protesters chucked rocks at a cop car. The Israeli-Palestinian protest Sunday on Biscayne Boulevard was a loud, colorful microcosm of hate - with Muslims waving red and green Palestinian flags on one side of the boulevard, and Jews holding hand-penned signs on the other. As the Herald reported yesterday, a dozen people were arrested, mostly for disorderly conduct.

What wasn't mentioned: The most serious charge (a felony battery) came from a bright, well-respected Bonita Springs doctor and director of a non-profit named Riadh Atmani. The Miami police report notes that the 42 year-old - a bearded, six-foot-five, 220 pound bear of a man - grabbed a police officer "and his prisoner," pulled them into a pack of protesters, "hit [the cop] in the face" and "broke the sergeant's glasses." Shortly afterwards, around 3:20 p.m., police described his demeanor as calm and soft spoken. Public records show Atmani runs Bonita Springs Islamic Center on Bonita Beach Road, about which little information is available. (He couldn't be reached at several listed phone numbers for comment.)

Other highlights from police reports include: A 31 year-old from Jordan who allegedly tried to ignite a riot, then called a cop a "nigger"; a 23 year-old car-kicker from Kuwait, and a New Yorker who threw one too many punches in amid a mosh pit of demonstrators.
Miami - Riptide 2.0 - Kicking cars and punching cops: Highlights from Gaza Protest Arrests

Some of the problems trying to organise another ceasefire:

Quote:
Agreeing a ceasefire in Gaza is bedevilled by complications, said diplomats. Two senior Israeli officials arrived in Cairo for talks on a peace plan drafted by Egypt and France. Israel has broadly welcomed the outline of the proposals, but significant hurdles lie before acceptance. Israel wants guarantees that Hamas will not be able to rearm during any ceasefire and assurances that rocket attacks on its cities will cease.

Quote:
Eyewitnesses reported that Israel's F16 jets bombed the tunnels running beneath Gaza's border with Egypt. How to seal the tunnels so that Hamas cannot replenish its missile stocks is one of the most difficult issues facing negotiators.

Israel has demanded that US troops to oversee the effort, while Egypt has proposed using sonar technology. "There are some details needing to be worked out," said Yigal Palmor, a spokesman for Israel's foreign ministry. "We need to work out with Egypt how to prevent the smuggling of weapons through the border. This what needs to be worked out some more."

Gaza ceasefire hopes dashed amid more killing - Telegraph

Less than a couple hours ago a draft proposal by the UN and accompanying bodies was finalised/agreed upon. Apparently it's "the one".