Yahoo: Israel vows no let-up, Hamas defiant, as Gaza toll tops 120

[Larry]

Pointing out that, years ago, I started a thread, titled "What is Terrorism?"

It was a multiple-choice poll, with like 10 scenarios that I invented, so people could vote for the one(s) that they thought was terrorism.

I was really surprised at the lack of consensus. Granted, I intentionally picked things that I thought were close to the dividing line. But, still. When I started the poll, I assumed that we'd have like 80 or 90% agreement on almost all of them.

Instead, I don't think any of them had a consensus bigger than like 66-33%, one way or the other.

(In short, it seems to be a label that gets thrown around a lot, at people whom the speaker doesn't like.)

[mistertim]

I think what Larry ended with above is a pretty interesting and valid overall point. It seems that, in many cases, the "terrorists" are whoever "we" happen to not like or be against or allied against, and with the sort of mindset it becomes easy for people to convince themselves that they're good and the other side is evil. Kind of like the situation in the 80s with Central America and the Contras. We were funding them and were on their side, so they were "freedom fighters" while the other side were terrorists, etc. even though both sides committed horrible atrocities. 

 

Though I'd also note that more powerful forces tend to back each other up and smaller forces do the same, as far as ideological feelings about who is the "terrorist", etc in a conflict. For example, the US and other large, powerful, or industrialized nations generally consider another "big guy" in a conflict with insurgents or a smaller force as simply being a military force, or conducting military operations to eradicate terrorists/insurgents, whatever. While the other side sees the opposite. The insurgents or whatever you'd want to call them in smaller groups will see each other as fighting large oppressive or evil empires/regimes who they see as the terrorists for various reasons. 

 

Nobody wants to have to point the mirror back at themselves, after all. That could be quite...uncomfortable. 

[Kilmer17]

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

 

Hamas has "dipped it's toe" into terrorism?

 

Good lord.......

[Larry]

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

Good Lord......

(I do agree with your point, though.)

[The Caretaker]

I think what Larry ended with above is a pretty interesting and valid overall point. It seems that, in many cases, the "terrorists" are whoever "we" happen to not like or be against or allied against, and with the sort of mindset it becomes easy for people to convince themselves that they're good and the other side is evil. Kind of like the situation in the 80s with Central America and the Contras. We were funding them and were on their side, so they were "freedom fighters" while the other side were terrorists, etc. even though both sides committed horrible atrocities. 

 

I appreciate discussions like this where we can analyze the grey of any situation, the constant good vs. evil discussion goes in circles and just ends in a shouting match till one side loses it's voice, like this:

 

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

 

Hamas has "dipped it's toe" into terrorism?

 

Good lord.......

I should've used more harsh language, for that I apologize, but to be fair, I can list all the civilian atrocities that israel was responsible for too but that again, would do nothing to provide some actual depth into this discussion. 

[Kilmer17]

The problem with the discussion is the refusal of either side to acknowledge that they hold responsibility for whats happening there.

 

There is no solution. 

 

There is only sustained war, which in turn, brings both sides what they really want, MONEY from the rest of the world.

[The Caretaker]

The problem with the discussion is the refusal of either side to acknowledge that they hold responsibility for whats happening there.

 

There is no solution. 

 

There is only sustained war, which in turn, brings both sides what they really want, MONEY from the rest of the world.

True, there may not be a clean cut solution. I don't think this will get resolved in any capacity with only the parties directly involved. Third parties have to get involved or there will eventually be no Palestine to attack. Which, may be a solution to some that follow a more draconian mindset but not one that I can personally accept or anyone in the middle east which will almost certainly set off many more violent acts towards israel from other entities. 

Complex situation, a sad one at that. I certainly don't have a flawless answer, nor does anyone else. All I know is, the current trend will never be the answer. 

 

[Kilmer17]

I think other entities are too scared of the US potential response to ever attack Israel in any capacity.  It would mean a swift and punishing response from the US.

 

But I also dont think ANYONE really gives two ****s about the issue.  The US govt (meaning multiple leaders and parties and branches) pay it lots of lip service, but we're pretty well content as long as it remains the way it is.  A month long skirmish every few years that never stray outside of that area.

[Larry]

Complex situation, a sad one at that. I certainly don't have a flawless answer, nor does anyone else. All I know is, the current trend will never be the answer.

Pointing out that one side seems to be doing just fine with the current trend.

[The Caretaker]

I think other entities are too scared of the US potential response to ever attack Israel in any capacity.  It would mean a swift and punishing response from the US.

 

But I also dont think ANYONE really gives two ****s about the issue.  The US govt (meaning multiple leaders and parties and branches) pay it lots of lip service, but we're pretty well content as long as it remains the way it is.  A month long skirmish every few years that never stray outside of that area.

I should clarify, I don't think any islamic "nation" would do a direct attack towards Israel, but other militant groups like Hezbollah would not hesitate to strike in some capacity. And surely many riots and domestic violence towards jews and consequently muslims would take place thereafter. 

[Larry]

Yeah, there's lots of people out there who believe in violence without responsibility.

(Including, in many cases, us.)

Was it Lincoln who said "If you want to test a man's character, give him power"?

I suspect there are few powers that are more testing than the power to perform violence on somebody, with impunity. (Or with the expectation of impunity.)

[The Caretaker]

The U.S could use a humbling experience, perhaps then we could use our resources more intelligently versus pumping up an already monstrously large military. The United States has done great innovative things in it's past, these days it seems they are only interested in chasing ghosts in the middle eastern sand and flexing their arms whilst slowly gaining the disdain from the rest of the world. No empire lasts forever. 

[The Sisko]

Well yes. Black and white is always easier to be sure. However, things are rarely that simple. Hamas is a pretty broad organization. From what I've read it has 3 distinct wings: Social Services/Humanitarian, Political, and Military. 

 

Do you honestly think the main reason that the Palestinian people voted Hamas into power was because they were all like "lol **** Israel, I'm voting for whoever wants to shoot at them most!". Hamas had long been supplying humanitarian aid and social services to the people there before they were elected. They were very popular for that and that's the main reason they came into power.

Well, that and the complete and utter corruption of Fatah. Unfortunately for the Gazans and everyone else, Hamas clearly had no idea how to govern. I heard one of their spokesmen on the radio the other day. When asked what they really wanted and what their vision/goals were to end the current fighting with Israel, he was clearly at a loss.

 

The problem with the discussion is the refusal of either side to acknowledge that they hold responsibility for whats happening there.

 

There is no solution. 

 

There is only sustained war, which in turn, brings both sides what they really want, MONEY from the rest of the world.

The truth is, Hamas is fighting with the tools they have at their disposal just as the Israelis are. Unfortunately one of those tools is civilian casualties. It's a desperate and sad strategy but one of the only ones they have available to them. They know it just like the Israelis and everyone else does so there's not much need to acknowledge it.

As for how this ends, I dont' think it will be sustained war. Without Egypt and Iran, Hamas has no friends left and their current resources won't be replenished. Therefore, if Israel holds to the goal of destroying their tunnels and arsenal, Hamas has no reason to not fight to the very last man. They're done and they know it. Unfortunately for Israel, it may end up being something of a pyrrhicc victory. Without Hamas (and a mostly impotent Fatah) they have no "partner" to run Gaza for them. They'll be left with the prospect of occupying it or risk a worse group like AQ, ISIS or something similar taking root.

 

I think the best solution from our standpoint would be for us to nuke both of them and forget about it. I'm totally sick of both sides.

[Special K]

 

(I'll let you in on a secret.  They're both.) 

 

Thank you for your very helpful, smart ass response, Larry.  You never disappoint.

 

I just want to point out that If you had bothered to read my next post that was made prior to your response, I acknowledged Hamas has supplied humanitarian aid to Palestinians and I even placed their actions in historical context with similar actions by similar extremist organizations...

[Special K]

This is not a damn story book, be curious about the cultures and views of other nations and you can begin to understand the situation more. Those of you sitting from your armchairs, touting your 100% approval of the collateral homicides, I challenge you to imagine staring into the eyes of a Palestinian and taking their life, destroying their family, their ambitions, their loved ones ambitions and dreams. Hamas has plently of blame on their end too, they are foolish to not recognize obvious defeat and instead work to preserve the lives of the Palestinian people, they are foolish to continue to shoot futile rockets into israeli territory, among others. 

This is not a war, this is a humanitarian crisis that needs to be stopped. Shame on the surrounding arab nations for not taking further action for peace,  shame on Israel for it's flippant warfare, and shame on the people shouting anti-sematic or anti-muslim statements.

While I appreciate your unique viewpoint being from the middle east (although I will note there are some of us who have relatives living in or from the ME who aren't as daft about the situation over there as you make us out to be ), I don't see a lot of people here proclaiming their "100% approval" of collateral deaths of innocent civilians.  I believe many reasonable people are understanding of the fact that this is a very convoluted war that has been waged throughout history with horrors committed by both sides. 

[Special K]

This time, Gaza fighting is 'proxy war' for entire Mideast

The conflict raging in Gaza is different this time.

While Hamas' rocket attacks and Israel's military actions may look familiar, they're taking place against a whole new backdrop.

"This is unprecedented in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict," says CNN's Ali Younes, an analyst who has covered the region for decades. "Most Arab states are actively supporting Israel against the Palestinians -- and not even shy about it or doing it discreetly."

It's a "joint Arab-Israeli war consisting of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia against other Arabs -- the Palestinians as represented by Hamas."

As the New York Times put it, "Arab leaders, viewing Hamas as worse than Israel, stay silent."

 

More at link

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/31/world/meast/israel-gaza-region/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

 

*** Kind of an interesting piece about the "terrorism" discussion and who is and who isn't considered extremist by many Arab nations.  Like I said earlier in this thread, the fact that many Arab nations who are typically supportive of the Palestinians are taking a more hands-off approach in this most recent flare-up speaks volumes...

[mistertim]

 

This time, Gaza fighting is 'proxy war' for entire Mideast

The conflict raging in Gaza is different this time.

While Hamas' rocket attacks and Israel's military actions may look familiar, they're taking place against a whole new backdrop.

"This is unprecedented in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict," says CNN's Ali Younes, an analyst who has covered the region for decades. "Most Arab states are actively supporting Israel against the Palestinians -- and not even shy about it or doing it discreetly."

It's a "joint Arab-Israeli war consisting of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia against other Arabs -- the Palestinians as represented by Hamas."

As the New York Times put it, "Arab leaders, viewing Hamas as worse than Israel, stay silent."

 

More at link

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/31/world/meast/israel-gaza-region/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

 

*** Kind of an interesting piece about the "terrorism" discussion and who is and who isn't considered extremist by many Arab nations.  Like I said earlier in this thread, the fact that many Arab nations who are typically supportive of the Palestinians are taking a more hands-off approach in this most recent flare-up speaks volumes...

 

Interesting article. From what I can tell it mostly speaks volumes about those in power wanting to stay in power and feeling threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood and, hence, victories by Hamas. As the article mentioned, the Arab Spring showed that the Muslim Brotherhood and others affiliated could definitely take power in some circumstances. Seems that woke up those in power to that fact and now they're being much more pragmatic about who to publicly back in these circumstances. "My enemy's enemy is my friend" and all. Obviously I can't know for sure (maybe there are up to date studies or polls out there), but I sorta doubt that the actual public sentiment in those countries has changed that much from what it was before as far as anger at Israel over the situation there. 

 

Though it also shows how amazingly effective the term terrorism is and how easily the word is manipulated to a certain goal. The now pragmatic leaders of some Arab countries who are worried by the power threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood, etc are now using the term on them. I'm sure to great effect. It makes them some friends over here and in Israel, even if it is just in a cursory way. And with that comes a certain level of extra comfort for staying in power. Seeing a theme here.

[Special K]

Interesting article. From what I can tell it mostly speaks volumes about those in power wanting to stay in power and feeling threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood and, hence, victories by Hamas. As the article mentioned, the Arab Spring showed that the Muslim Brotherhood and others affiliated could definitely take power in some circumstances. Seems that woke up those in power to that fact and now they're being much more pragmatic about who to publicly back in these circumstances. "My enemy's enemy is my friend" and all. Obviously I can't know for sure (maybe there are up to date studies or polls out there), but I sorta doubt that the actual public sentiment in those countries has changed that much from what it was before as far as anger at Israel over the situation there. 

 

Though it also shows how amazingly effective the term terrorism is and how easily the word is manipulated to a certain goal. The now pragmatic leaders of some Arab countries who are worried by the power threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood, etc are now using the term on them. I'm sure to great effect. It makes them some friends over here and in Israel, even if it is just in a cursory way. And with that comes a certain level of extra comfort for staying in power. Seeing a theme here.

I see a theme as well, with the theme being more that these nations in power are feeling increasingly threatened by the rising level and prevalence of extremism in the militant wings of these Islamic groups.

[mistertim]

I see a theme as well, with the theme being more that these nations in power are feeling increasingly threatened by the rising level and prevalence of extremism in the militant wings of these Islamic groups.

I dunno, to be honest I really see it as more of a pure self preservation power thing rather than concern about the "level of extremism"; there have always been super extreme elements in these groups (a fact that many of these countries have counted on that in the past).

 

Generally people in power want to stay in power; that is the first priority above all else. Before, these countries could stoke the fires of certain groups, fund them, publicly endorse them and scream death to Israel or whatever and have either their ideological beliefs flexed or some other goal gained without having to actually worry about losing their own power. Now that they've seen that these groups can actually take over power in certain circumstances they have gone into self preservation mode and changed their tune (publicly). 

 

It's certainly not an unsound strategy in this case. They have little to lose; it's not like they were planning on coming in and helping Hamas or taking Palestinian refugees or anything anyway so at this point it's all lip service so they can be on the "winning" side.

[LVSkinz]

I agree that Hamas has supplied humanitarian aid to people in Gaza, as have many other radical or terrorist organizations who ingratiate themselves to the populace they are working in (see Taliban, see Al Qaeda, see radical elements of the Muslim Brotherhood, etc.). That's very tried and true tactic used to gain acceptance and support in war torn areas where there is a leadership vacuum. So, I'm not going to argue that Hamas has not provided help to Palestinian people and promised to defend them against Israel. But I'm also not going to just gloss over the fact that they do actively participate in terrorism activities against Israel and spend hundreds of millions of international humanitarian aid dollars to build tunnels for terrorism purposes.

As far as intellectual honesty goes around here, have I said the Palestinians voted Hamas into power to say a big "F you" to Israel? Absolutely not. Have I once stated this is a black and white issue? No. In fact, I've specifically stated both sides have blame laying at their feet. So actually reading my posts might be of benefit.

War torn is a very convenient way to discribe their situation isn't it.

[Special K]

War torn is a very convenient way to discribe their situation isn't it.

Hmm, I guess I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.  Maybe if you elaborate a bit more about your rhetorical question I'd be able to better answer you...

 

I wasn't intentionally trying to put a political spin on it; that entire region has a long-running history of conflict and violence, so I thought I was giving a pretty factually-accepted description of the region.  In addition, I sought to provide some context by giving some of the most recent examples of how extremist people and organizations are typically able to insert themselves into positions of power.

[alexey]

What is the Israeli end-game here? How do they know when they've won?

for right wing Israeli politicians, the end game is this: there is no Palestinian state with stable borders, and there is sufficient support for right wing politics from moderate Israelis due actions of angry violent Palestinians.

(Note: Israel is a democratic country. Some Israelis want two states, some Israelis want all the land. Ongoing conflict allows ongoing land grabs)

[TradeTheBeal!]

Sooooooo, the soldier was never "kidnapped" and Israel has now declared him Killed in Battle?

[visionary]

http://www.ibtimes.com/gaza-young-womans-resistance-hamas-israel-comes-music-1647092

In Gaza, A Young Woman's Resistance To Hamas And Israel Comes In Music

 

Mariam Abuamer, 21, sat back in a chair in one of the beach cafes in Gaza Saturday. With a flip of her lighter, she ignited her second Marlboro of the afternoon, and adjusted her '80s vintage sunglasses. In comparison to most women her age in Gaza, Abuamer is an anomaly: a self-proclaimed atheist, the daughter of a prominent intellectual and politician, a soft-rock singer, a smoker and a resistor to the government of radical Islamist movement Hamas.

 

“I hate them, actually,” she said, adding the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip has passed laws that limit women’s ability to express themselves. And for her, that means a ban on practicing what she says is the only thing that makes her happy: singing. Pulling out her phone, she runs through the list of her favorite music, a mixture of rock and classical. One of them is Mohammed Assaf, a 24-year old Gazan who turned into a Palestinian hero when he won the second season of Arab Idol last year.

 

“Girls can’t really sing here. It is forbidden. You will be arrested.” Yet Abuamer sings, either in her room, at a friend’s house or at the French Institute, a cultural center run by the French government. “It is the only time I am happy, it empties me of all the negativity and sadness I have inside of me,” she said.

 

Abuamer performed on Palestinian national television in 1999, when she was just 6, singing “My Heart Will Go On” by Celine Dion. Last June, she had her first show open to the public, at the French cultural center. Singing, she explained, is her form of resistance -- not against Israeli occupation, though she is vocal about that, too, but against Hamas rule.

 

Hamas, she said, limits public gatherings in general because it does “not want girls and boys together in one space.” Couples who are not married are forbidden from going to the beach together, she said.

 

Abuamer is one of the few women here who have spoken out in public against Hamas, and is visibly fighting cultural norms. She refuses to wear a hijab and dresses in what would pass as “hipster” clothing in New York. Although she does not proclaim it publicly, she became an atheist in 2012, when she said she “discovered things about religion that no one likes to talk about. The dark things -- like how the religion is set up to support a man, not a woman.”

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/03/us-mideast-gaza-idUSKBN0G008720140803?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Soldier feared abducted is dead, Israel says

 

 Israel on Sunday declared dead a soldier feared abducted by Hamas Islamist militants in the Gaza Strip and said it would continue to fight even after the army completes destroying cross-border tunnels used by Palestinian fighters to attack its territory.

 

As Israeli television showed live footage of some tanks withdrawing from Gaza in an apparent winding down of the 26-day campaign, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Hamas would pay an "intolerable price" if it continued to attack Israel.

 

It was determined that Hadar Goldin, 23, the soldier Israel had feared Hamas militants abducted on Friday, was killed in action during an operation in the southern Gaza Strip, an army statement said.

 

"A special committee led by the Israel Defence Forces Chief Rabbi, announced the death of the IDF infantry officer of the Givati Brigade, Lieutenant Hadar Goldin, who was killed in battle in the Gaza Strip on Friday, August 1, 2014," part of the army statement said.

 

Hamas' armed wing said on Saturday it had no clear indication on Goldin's whereabouts and that he may have been killed during an ambush in the southern Gaza Strip in which two other Israeli soldiers were killed.

 

Israel began its air and naval offensive against Gaza on July 8 following a surge of cross-border rocket salvoes by Hamas and other guerrillas, later escalating into ground incursions.

 

Shelling exchanges continued on Saturday, pushing the Gaza death toll given by Palestinian officials to 1,675, most of them civilians. Israel has confirmed that 64 soldiers have died in combat, while Palestinian shelling has also killed three civilians in Israel.

[visionary]

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/230160.htm

UNRWA School Shelling

 

The United States is appalled by today’s disgraceful shelling outside an UNRWA school in Rafah sheltering some 3,000 displaced persons, in which at least ten more Palestinian civilians were tragically killed. The coordinates of the school, like all UN facilities in Gaza, have been repeatedly communicated to the Israeli Defense Forces.

 

We once again stress that Israel must do more to meet its own standards and avoid civilian casualties. UN facilities, especially those sheltering civilians, must be protected, and must not be used as bases from which to launch attacks. The suspicion that militants are operating nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians. We call for a full and prompt investigation of this incident as well as the recent shelling of other UNRWA schools.

 

We continue to underscore that all parties must take all feasible precautions to prevent civilian casualties and protect the civilian population and comply with international humanitarian law.

Again?  Really Israel?

 

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/03/us-mideast-gaza-un-ban-idUSKBN0G30JR20140803

U.N. chief calls Gaza school attack a 'criminal act'

 

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described a deadly attack on a U.N. school on Sunday as a "moral outrage and a criminal act" and called for those responsible for the "gross violation of international humanitarian law" to be held accountable. 

 

In a statement, Ban strongly condemned the shelling of the school in Rafah in southern Gaza that killed at least 10 civilians. The school was sheltering 3,000 displaced persons and Ban said the "Israel Defense Forces have been repeatedly informed of the location of these sites."