Israeli Air Strike

[archibaldcrane]

See Residue, and correct me if I'm wrong here:

Clearly Hamas has rockets. Clearly they had the rockets during the 6-month cease-fire. Unless I'm mistaken, that cease-fire completed successfully, right? No cross-border attacks, right?

You argue that if the blockade is lifted then weapons will come into the country and be used against Israel, right? But...they had weapons, and were still respecting the ceasefire for the period that it was in place. How long would Hamas have to stop firing on Israel in order for you to think that the blockade should be lifted?

And how long should Hamas put up with the blockade before they start to fight back? I'm curious as to both your answers to these questions.

[Elvis]

Not sure if you're aware of the facts Arch. Those questions can't be answered unless one assumes the premise.

The rocket fire was going on during the truce, but the terms of the truce were not being followed - by Israel.

I just posted a couple of sources, BBC and Israel's Haaretz newspaper, covering this.

Repost since we're on a new page:

* Gaza faces a humanitarian "catastrophe" if Israel continues to prevent aid reaching the territory by blocking crossing points, the head of the main UN aid agency for the Palestinians said on Friday ... Israel had restricted goods into Gaza despite the truce, which calls on militants to halt rocket attacks in return for Israel easing its embargo on the territory ... Israel also held up deliveries of European Union-funded fuel for the power plant, which generates about a third of the electricity consumed by Gazans... Ailments associated with insufficient food were surfacing among the impoverished coastal strip's 1.5 million population, including growing malnutrition.

UNRWA chief: Gaza on brink of humanitarian catastrophe - Haaretz - Israel News

The UN in the Gaza Strip says it will run out of food aid in two days unless Israel's blockade - which it describes as "shameful and unacceptable" - eases. The UN refugee agency UNWRA, which distributes food to half of Gaza's 1.5m people, called the blockade "a physical as well as a mental punishment". Israel is now allowing a limited amount of fuel across the border, but it is still blocking food deliveries ... In a statement, UNWRA spokesman Christopher Gunne said food distribution operations would end on Thursday unle Israeli authorities allowed deliveries of wheat, luncheon meat, powdered milk and cooking oil without delay. "This is both a physical as well as a mental punishment of the population - of mothers and parents trying to feed their children - who are being forced to live hand to mouth," he said ... "It is a further illustration of the barbarity of this inhuman blockade." ... "It is also shameful and unacceptable that the largest humanitarian actor in Gaza is being forced into yet another cycle of crisis management," Mr Gunne added.

UN warns over Gaza food blockade - Nov. 11, 2008

International aid agencies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, have said virtually no medical supplies were reaching Gaza.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html

[Meat]

See Residue, and correct me if I'm wrong here:

Clearly Hamas has rockets. Clearly they had the rockets during the 6-month cease-fire. Unless I'm mistaken, that cease-fire completed successfully, right? No cross-border attacks, right?

You argue that if the blockade is lifted then weapons will come into the country and be used against Israel, right? But...they had weapons, and were still respecting the ceasefire for the period that it was in place. How long would Hamas have to stop firing on Israel in order for you to think that the blockade should be lifted?

And how long should Hamas put up with the blockade before they start to fight back? I'm curious as to both your answers to these questions.

come again?

[Elvis]

The basic idea is that the terms were violated by BOTH sides. I don't want to imply I'm equating Hamas to Israel - it's still Israel's fault by and large. It's a technicality.

Israel did not ease the blockade as promised. Hamas did not stop firing. Who did what first? I haven't found out yet.

But Israel ends up punishing 1.5 million people as opposed to those fucking shitty rockets that people in the MSM keep bringing up.

Since June 2007, Israel has allowed little more than basic humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip. Many there hoped that policy would change, five months ago, when Hamas and Israel agreed to a truce. But while there were some increases in the amount of aid allowed in, Israel's strict restrictions on the movement of goods and people into and out of Gaza largely remained... Serious fuel shortages have led to widespread power cuts acro Gaza City. That, in turn, has caused problems in pumping water to homes, and sewage to treatment plants. Israel is preventing many aid workers, and all journalists from entering Gaza too ... "I never thought we would see days like this," says Monther Shublak, head of Gaza's water authority. "The water system was severely stretched even before this crisis, but now, things are much worse. For the last four days, around 40% of people in Gaza City have had no acce to running water in their homes at all." ... "But we are putting all of our resources into sewage pumping. The health consequences of that system totally failing are too worrying to think about, but it could happen unle things change."

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Gazans despair over blockade

[archibaldcrane]

Ah, ok - I was under the mistaken impression that the cease-fire was "successful", meaning that ...well...there was no firing.

Carry on. I thought that the 6-month term had a sort of sunset clause after which both sides would discuss if they wanted it to continue. I wasn't aware that there was still cross-border military attacks during the cease-fire.

This page: http://antiisrael.blogspot.com/2009/...ease-fire.html has a bunch of legit news source quotes about this ceasefire, which apparently was broken during violence on November 5th...but that makes me think that before November 5th, there WAS a successful ceasefire in effect for the preceding 5 or 6 months.

The Israeli Haaretz, November 5, 2008: “Israel Defense Forces troops yesterday killed a Hamas gunman and wounded two others in the first armed clash in the Gaza Strip since a cease-fire was declared there in June. […] An Israeli army spokeswoman said troops had entered the territory.”

Is that correct or no? Were any rockets fired into Israel beteween June and November?

[Elvis]

Yep, but one must also state that Israel did not comply with it's bargain - to ease the blockade sufficiently.

* At least six Hamas militants have been killed after Israel's first incursion into the Gaza Strip since June's truce. Israel said its troops had uncovered a tunnel along central Gaza's frontier which had been dug by militants intending to abduct Israeli soldiers. Clashes ensued when troops were sent to thwart the threat, Israel said. One militant died, Palestinian reports say. A subsequent Israeli air strike on Hamas positions in southern Gaza killed at least five fighters, medics said. An Israeli army spokeswoman said the air strike targeted militants who had fired mortars at Israeli forces... Tuesday evening's fighting broke out after Israeli tanks and a bulldozer moved 250m into the central part of the coastal enclave, backed by military aircraft, says the BBC's Aleem Maqbool in Ramallah. Residents of central Gaza's el-Bureij refugee camp said a missile fired from an unmanned Israeli drone flying over the area injured another three Hamas gunmen. A truce between the two sides had held since it was declared on 19 June. Israel said the raid was not a violation of the ceasefire, but rather a legitimate step to remove an immediate threat.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Rockets fired after Gaza clashes

This is where the escalation and inevitable unraveling of the ceasefire began. "Despite the intense blockade against Gazan civilians, the cease-fire held until November 4, 2008. On that date, the Israeli military made an incursion into Gaza and killed six Palestinians. The Israeli government sought to justify these actions, saying that they suspected these Palestinians of plotting to kidnap Israeli soldiers. Palestinian fighters responded to the attack by launching rockets into Israel." (Adam Sheets, The Facts about Israel's War on Gaza)

@Arch
Hmm, actually now I don't know if the rocket fire began on Nov. 4th or was going on the entire time. It may be that Hamas began rocket fire after Nov. 4th in response to the bombing of the tunnels. These tunnels are used to smuggle weapons - I'm sure. However, they are also used to smuggle food/water/etc. due to the blockade. And once again, Israel did not comply with the terms of the truce to allow sufficient humanitarian aide into Gaza.

[Elvis]

Yep, just found a source to confirm.

http://www.israelpolitik.org/wp-cont...fact_sheet.pdf

Scroll down to the monthly rocket fire graph.

Hamas virtually complied with the truce - Israel did not.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...Rocketfire.jpg

*Notes:
On November 4th, Israel broke the truce by destroying tunnels they claim, Hamas was planning on using to abduct Israeli soldiers. Not sure what evidence they have to support that assumption.

The source is from the Israeli Embassy. It does not specify how many rockets were fired in the month of June, PRIOR to the truce agreement.

The rest of the source is full of POV. For example, it does not accept that the rocket fire restarted after Israel bombed the tunnels. So the figure of 242 rockets during the "lull" is not honest.

Hamas was willing to extend the truce but wanted new terms:


From The Independent:
Johann Hari: The true story behind this war is not the one Israel is telling - Johann Hari, Commentators - The Independent

'Yuval Diskin, the current head of the Israeli security service Shin Bet, "told the Israeli cabinet [on 23 December] that Hamas is interested in continuing the truce, but wants to improve its terms." Diskin explained that Hamas was requesting two things: an end to the blockade, and an Israeli ceasefire on the West Bank. The cabinet – high with election fever and eager to appear tough – rejected these terms. '

[Suited Aces]

Hamas virtually complied with the truce - Israel did not.

Is that graph Hamas fired rockets? Firing 11 rockets in 4 months can hardly be called a cease fire.

I mean you could say Israel virtually complied more, they only destroyed some tunnels.

[Elvis]

Is that graph Hamas fired rockets? Firing 11 rockets in 4 months can hardly be called a cease fire.

I mean you could say Israel virtually complied more, they only destroyed some tunnels.

The tunnels were an overt violation of the truce.

Virtually means for 'all practical purposes'.

So I don't mean to say Hamas was perfect. More like, they were sufficient. What counts as sufficient though? That comes down to our own judgment.

I think in the context of the conflict, that this giant decrease in rockets fired by Hamas, in the face of the humanitarian crisis caused by Israel and documented by the UN and the Red Cross, says much more about the integrity of Hamas sadly, than Israel.

Now on Israel's end - like I said and sourced - the UN and Red Cross have overtly condemned the blockade and documented it's effects on 1.5 million Palestinians living in Gaza.

Now, lets again return to the rocket fire. How do we go about judging what is or isn't sufficient? Well, if we decide 0 fired is sufficient then Israel looks even worse doesn't it?

If we give each groups some leg-room considering again, the context of the conflict and the animosities and blah blah, then I think Hamas made huge concessions.

Israel punished 1.5 million people. Hamas fired 11 rockets during 4 months [July to Oct.]. In June, the number fired prior to the truce is not specified, and in November, the number fired before the truce was broken by Israel is not specified -> BUT since the truce was broken on the 4th of November we can assume, judging by the only reliable months (July, August, September and October) that it's highly possible Hamas would have kept the rocket fire down to single digits per month.

Why? Because despite the fact that Israel was not meeting their terms of the truce, Hamas made a huge leap from 197 rockets fired on average monthly to 1 during July, 8 during August, 1 during September and 1 during October.

So if we're being practical (I think I am here) then yes, Hamas virtually complied with the terms of the truce. In spite of the humanitarian disaster perpetrated on the people of Gaza, 1.5 million Palestinians. Obviously, most of them are civilians. What Israel did, I think the word is -> 'collective-punishment'.

[Suited Aces]

The tunnels were an overt violation of the truce.

Virtually means for 'all practical purposes'.

So I don't mean to say Hamas was perfect. More like, they were sufficient. What counts as sufficient though? That comes down to our own judgment.

Rockets aren't overt?

I'm not trying to argue. I'm not even trying to have a discussion. Your last quoted sentence says it all. Hamas wasn't perfect. Neither side is or was. I think its plain silly to put the blame solely on one side or the other, like you seem to want to do.

[Elvis]

Rockets aren't overt?

I'm not trying to argue. I'm not even trying to have a discussion. Your last quoted sentence says it all. Hamas wasn't perfect. Neither side is or was. I think its plain silly to put the blame solely on one side or the other, like you seem to want to do.

Listen, what does virtually mean? For practical purposes.

You have established my premise: neither side was perfect.

Neither HAS to be perfect. Why? I explained already. The context of the conflict should be taken into account. The animosities on both sides and the various moments in the history of the conflict where similar behaviors occurred.

And to be very explicit: Israel's actions were having a direct effect on 1.5 million Palestinians. The humanitarian crisis was confirmed by the UN and the Red Cross. In comparison, the rocket fire during those reliable months was virtually non-existent and cannot even be compared to the profundity of blockading and basically holding 1.5 million people prisoners in their own homes.

HENCE, the rocket fire is only overt when you dismiss the context of the truce/etc.

I'm comparing one group upholding the terms (whether it is sufficient or not) to the other group.

And I made my case.

You want or imply to want this truce to be perfect. It's not going to be. So you have to adjust the standard. I also said it's a matter of perception so one has to explain himself. I think I did.

Sidenote: You mention the blasting of the tunnels as if that were a part of Israel's terms. Well, it's a given. The terms that Israel had to comply with was to ease the blockade - which it did not do sufficiently as documented by various human rights groups but primarily the UN (UNWRA) and the Red Cross.

Blasting the tunnels, in and of itself is another issue. Why did they blast the tunnels? Did they have a good reason? Is there evidence to support their reason? Etc.

[archibaldcrane]

Ok, that explains it better now. Of course, we don't know for certain how many of the rockets fired during the cease-fire were on express orders of Hamas - I doubt they have nearly as good of control over each rocket as Israel does over the IDF, but a cease-fire is a cease-fire and those #s should be 0. Either way, the cease-fire was significantly successful, and it's nice that Israel didn't have a zero-tolerance policy for rockets during it. It's unfortunate that Hamas did have a zero-tolerance policy for IDF blowing up some tunnels and killing 6 Palestinians, but well, Israel shouldn't have been doing that shit either. tl;dr situation is fucked. I was hoping for some sort of moral clarity, at least since June 2008, but found none.

Question: Does Egypt want the West Bank at all? Are the Palestinians interested in Egyptian incorporation at all? Or is Egypt pretty much a non-factor in the plans of the fate of the West Bank, and/or Palestine in general?

[Elvis]

I'd say Hamas has much more patience than Israel. You have to also factor in the humanitarian crisis in Gaza which was Israel's responsibility as per the terms of the truce.

I actually don't think Hamas even fired those 11 rockets during July-Oct. I mean, look how they substantially decreased? That's a very explicit demonstration of the agreement to the terms of the truce.

As to some hard evidence that Hamas wasn't responsible for those 11 rocket attacks spanning 4 months? This is all I have thus far:

Zbigniew Brzezinski Calls Joe Scarborough 'Stunningly Superficial'

Former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski briefly mentions that it was a group related to Hamas but not Hamas directly. I think he does at least. I recall reading or hearing it somewhere, regardless.

John Bolton, the former US Ambassador and resident douchebag, proposed a 3-State solution: Egypt gets Gaza, Jordan gets the West Bank or at least jurisdiction over the West Bank. Whatever that means.

It's a shitty plan and the Palestinians would never agree to it.

So far the only thing they have going for them is there stubbornness in the face of the 4th most powerful military in the world. They have every right to as well. This entire thread hasn't even touched on the human rights abuses and daily life under the Occupation. That's another debate.

[Elvis]

This just in, U.S. Army Speaks Up for Hamas ~!

It's a report just released by the Strategic Studies Institute of the United States Army War College.

HAMAS and Israel: Conflicting Strategies of Group-Based Politics

Excerpt:

Negotiating solely with the weaker Palestinian party-Fatah-cannot deliver the security Israel requires[. . .] The underlying strategies of Israel and HAMAS appear mutually exclusive[. . .] Yet each side is still capable of revising its desired end-state and of necessary concessions to establish and preserve a long-term truce, or even a longer-term peace.

[Meat]

Question: Does Egypt want the West Bank at all? Are the Palestinians interested in Egyptian incorporation at all? Or is Egypt pretty much a non-factor in the plans of the fate of the West Bank, and/or Palestine in general?

West bank=Jordan
Gaza= Egypt

But to answer your question no, no one wants them at all, they're the arab's dirty red-headed stepchild.

[archibaldcrane]

What would your ideal endgame be for the occupied territories?

[Kuya]

they're the arab's dirty red-headed stepchild.

Theirs or yours?

[archibaldcrane]

Theirs or yours?

Yeah, they seem more like Israel's Arab whipping boy than anything, but I was going to let that offensive generalization slide.

[Meat]

Theirs or yours?

Oh man that was so deep, i had to stop and catch my breath.

Fact is the people known as "Palestinians" are nothing more than Jordanian and Egyptian citizens abandoned by their government. Everyone's willing to use them for political gain but no one wants to lift a finger to help them.

[Kuya]

Oh man that was so deep, i had to stop and catch my breath.

Fact is the people known as "Palestinians" are nothing more than Jordanian and Egyptian citizens abandoned by their government. Everyone's willing to use them for political gain but no one wants to lift a finger to help them.

I suppose that assertion would be convenient for the Israeli government. It would allow them to finally do what they obviously want to do, and that is, get rid of all those Palestinians and claim the land as theirs, because then you can say that they're not "Palestinians", they're just invaders from different countries that don't want to go back home!