after all that has happen and as the idf had used American bombs to use on Palestine
why did any Arab country come in to stop it. or why did the U.N. never come in between the 2 to stop the idf from going in any further? and emergency crews was stopped from going in
to pick up the injured as some were shot at by the idf. this is what I had heard from what I had been reading>.."Why was there any compassion of the victims felt?
I'm curious, Basil, do you honestly believe that the years of Hamas bombardment of Israeli civilians played no role in what happened? Exactly what responsibility do you apply to the rejectionists trying to destroy Israel in the breakdown of the pece process, and of conditions of the Gazans? Are you aware that tens of thousands of jobs in Israel were lost to Gazans (see Ahmed's posting for the Gazan perspective) because of terrorism and sucide bombings during the Intefada? Despite the Israelis who post here, do you see anything at all from Israel's perspective? The last was me wondering just how effective discusion is here, in terms of people seeing the other's perspective.
Basil, I get that you disapprove of Hamas, suicide bombers, rocket attacks etc, and I always have gotten that. But that wasn't my question, which went to cause and effect, and I think that there we disagree. You so clearly don't see any justification for Israel to protect its citizens, and that's what makes these discussions difficult. I see a direct link. Israel got out of Gaza, Hamas started bombing Israelis from there. They could have built up the wonderful society so many of us were hoping for, but, sadly, that wasn't their choice. The ultimate result was this Gaza attack. it is what any nation would have done way before. Israel initially shot at empty launch sites to make it clear "we can get you", but all warnings were ignored.
Perhaps for you it's an Israel-Hamas thing. In my world both Israelis and Palestinians are on the same side, both victims of those who can't see beyond destroying Israel.
Let me put this to you, Basil. Israel tried to give Gaza to Egypt as part of that peace package, Egypt refused. Israel got out of Gaza unilaterally. It has to be clear that Israel has absolutely no interest in possessing Gaza, which leaves only one possible scenario. If Israeli attacks aren't in order to take Gaza, then they can only be in order to stop attacks on Israeli civilians. Stop the rockets and pece will reign. Perhaps that requires a new election in which Hamas is defeated ... I don't know, that becomes a question for the Palestinians.
Because Hamas use of force and of Palestinians civilians is not accepted by most nations.
Using Iranian 2.5Kg bombs directed on civilians is not accepted by any international law and you cannot demand to be protected by law you do not respect yourself.
You know I am all for Palestine protection of civilians (and I am also see many other good attributes of Hamas).
But if any one want to understand why the support of Hamas can not be matured into world aggression on Israel this is my explanation.
This is not issue of international law, this is an issue of logic and understanding of what is important to the world of our time. and Hamas militants are missing the support. any country who will use force to protect the Palestinians of Gaza will be recognized by Europe, US, Australia, Russia Egypt and many other countries as supporter of terror.
Israel will not intentionally use white phosphorous as it has enough acceptable weapon to use against Hamas militants in Gaza, The focus of Israel crimes will not release the siege on Gaza rather stop of militant action from Gaza will do.
we need to recognize that the Israeli system is different then the Palestinian system, this mean that the way to influence Hamas decisions is different then the way to influence Israeli government.
Israel need to change, and it contribute to the conflict and its violence as the Palestinians. but we have different conditions and different aims so the way Israel contribute to the conflict is different;
while Israel has democratic system it has different ways its extremists as the settlers and Liberman can work to influence the government. this is not issue of majority rather their ability to abuse the law system of Israel for pushing the government to support their interests. This is how they managed the 40 years settlements project and if Israel is attacked they gain political power.
The Palestinians are in a no-law society where the way to influence the Palestinian actions is different, you do not need to be voted to justify violent attack on Israelis.
so Israel need to work for change in the Civilian-law enforcement and political system and Palestine need to work for change their social-political unity to be able to develop united reaction to Israel - if this reaction will not be violent and Israel system will enable "decision" to go with agreement that remove settlements we will have progress toward peace.
The question above is blind to this required dynamics and it see international law as a tool to win over Israel arm strength. sadly our conflict is more complex then that.
The real question is the next government will be able to decide to pull out the settlers and signal the palestinians that Israel is seriously going to support a Palestinian state.
Bibi, Livney or even the less likely Barak as a PM can to lead such decision with the "help" of the US,EU and the American jews. But if we have Liberman in the coalition we will have to wait more time to replace that coalition to one that can take such brave decision.
Israel decision to remove settlements and create the territorial conditions for agreements with the palestinians. is not enough, the Palestinians need to take their act and focus their resources on their Palestine state infrastructure. They need to create new Palestinian social agreement that will include all of them, even the Hamas supporters.
Neri, if we are looking for what will bring about real peace, there is something in what you say, but I believe it misses the main inpediments to peace. Bear with me, as it's difficult to express the complexity. If you've read the Hamas charter, and listened to their speeches, then you will know that Hamas has as little interest in a Palestinian state as it has in an Israeli one. Its ultimate aim is the removal of all nation states from the Middle East, starting with Israel, and the restoration of the Caliphate. Currently Hamas rules Gaza by fear, and I think that if there were elections, Hamas would be gone, but that's no more than my opinion.
What I do know to be true is that if there were no attacks on Israel, there would be no rsponses and people would no longer be dying. So my first point is that the Palestinians need a leadership that is intersted in their welfare, rather than one whose only interest is destroying Israel. They need a government who would have taken econimic advantage of the hothouses Israel left, rather than cut them up for rockets. Only a government interested in Palestinian welfare, and uninterested in destroying Israel will be willing to talk real peace and make the necessary compromises ... true for both sides.
I take what you say, Neri, one step further. It's not for me to tell the Palestinians where their destiny lies, only that I support their wishes to express their unique history and culture. If that choice is an independent state, great, Israel should and I think would support that. If it's a return to pre1967 in an amalgamation with Jordan, also fine, and I'm sure that Israel would support that too.
I truly believe that once there is full mutual acceptance, the rest is simply detail that will be ironed out. From day one, the troubles have always come from rejectionists. Today, I think that groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP etc are too big a luxury for the Palestinians to tolerate. They need these rejectionists gone, and to take their destiny in their own hands. Currently they are dying for those who wish to destroy Israel. It's an unrealistic proposition, as Israel isn't going anywhere, so they are dying for the pipedreams of some fanatics. Israelis are also dying for the same pipedreams. It's time it stopped ... but, like the Iraqis, the real power to stop it lies only with the Palestinians ... with a little help from their friends.
You have asked a very good question.
My knowledge is limited, but there were countries that stood in solidarity with the people of Gaza and Palestine, such as Bolivia and Venezuela, which decided to cut diplomatic ties with Israel, as a result of the violence.
I even made a post about, along with an article. Here is the link to it:
Two points, Basil. There is little point wanting Isrsael "to be a democratic multi-national state like America or Canada" ... it already is. Perhaps it's time you visited Israel with an open mind. Talk to a cross section of Moslem Israelis and ask them if they'd rather be living soewhere else.
My second problem is with "occupation" where Gaza is concerned. When Israel left Gaza it was clear to everybody that this was the Palestinian opportunity to set up a model ministate. Israel had left hothouses that earned hundreds of millions of dollars every year, and the EU and other powers were pouring billions of dollars into this enterprise. The hothouses were dismantled so that the pipes in their construction could be used to make more kassams, even traffic lights were chopped up. Can you truly not see that the ills of both Israel and the Palestinians stem directly from fanatics fighting an impossible war to destroy Israel? Do you believe for a second that if the lives of Israeli civilians were not made totally impossible for years, there would have been a war in Gaza?
Say what you will, Basil, Israel has been trying to give Gaza away since day one, first to the Egyptians who refused it, then to the Palestinians. Israel clearly doesn't want it, and would have loved to see the Palestinians make a success of Gaza ... it would have been a major step in the peace process, indicating that Palestinians were truly more concerned with their future than with destroying Israel, but the rockets began on the very day Israel left. What meesage do you think that sent the Israelis?
Basil I agree as I had stated long back to Paul that there should be a Palestinian state and a Israeli state and the land that was took en given back ...AT the time Israel did or will not to give back land or either make peace cause of the land Sidrot was part of Palestine at one time
as I learned . and that in the 47 war the Palestinians were kicked out and most what was there city was destroyed by The Israeli army. Israel would like all Palestinians to be pushed over the sea.
I my self is for stopping violence and making Israel and Palestine both settlements of a state...
not just one"...as long there will be hatred there will never be peace. ethnic cleansing
death and destruction will continue ..
We all need to have land and water rights we all need to be healthy and not to grow our children to hate the other...We all have the same red blood and a compassion for love.
for me as I say again I am for all to stop the violence and the key point is sharing the
land if any thing to crate peace.
"...and that in the 47 war the Palestinians were kicked out and most what was there city was destroyed by The Israeli army. Israel would like all Palestinians to be pushed over the sea..."
1. Please check and see who accepted partition in 1947, and who rejected it, and who started that "47 war" you mention?
2. There was no Israel or Israeli army in 1947.
3. Until not too long ago, it was Palestinians and Arabs who were threatening to push the Jews of Israel into the sea. (Not the other way around, as you are implying.) This is no secret. It has been the subject of many heated debates between Palestinian activists as to whether that position hurt or helped them. I can provide detail, if you really want. Some of that has already been posted here on mepeace.
I do agree with you about the need to stop the violence, and to start sharing.
That is the key point here. It does apply to both sides.