2009-01-04, 01:45 | Link #1 | |
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
Israel, Hamas & the Gaza Strip
Breaking news:
Israeli ground troops enter Gaza Quote:
|
|
2009-01-04, 03:17 | Link #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
This is totally BS.
Why must Israel make that move? To wipe out Hamas? Don't make me laugh. They know they cannot achieve that goal; in fact, they are nowhere remotely close to it. Then for what? To teach them a lesson? But Hamas doesn't learn. To retaliate? That equates to even more violence. To test the nerve of Obama? Hey, this sounds reasonable! I take back the lines before those last two. Everyone loves politics! |
2009-01-04, 03:19 | Link #3 | |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
Quote:
@iLney: You're on the right track. It's more of Israeli politics, though. Ehud Barack is putting his career on the line for this operation.
__________________
|
|
2009-01-04, 06:36 | Link #6 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-01-04, 13:44 | Link #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Quote:
and id just like to remind u guys of 9/11 yes this was 1 if not the biggest act of terrorism and what was the US response an ongoing war... for us it might not be as big as 9/11 but in the years 2000-2003 we had a lot of terrorist acts, muslims blowing up in bus's and near malls... and ppl lived in fear... and in some ways its worse then 9/11 more over let see anyother country live near ppl who want to kill u and send about 300 rockets every day to 1 of our city's. we had to do something this operation is a last resort, we told them again and again that if they dont stop we will atk and we waited for 8-7 years, more over about the death in gaza yes its sad and if it was up to us we wouldnt kill civilians but we cant because the hamas almost use them as a "shield" they put them in harms way so we wont atk... for god sakes they use their shelter for themselfs(hamas) and for ammo. and they actually fake some of the injuries (for baby's) so they would get more sympathy for the world. |
|
2009-01-04, 18:35 | Link #9 | ||
思想工作
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Vereinigte Staaten
Age: 32
|
If Israel was going to send in ground forces they shouldn't have done the airstrike in the first place.
Quote:
If the USA had been supporting Palestine instead for the last 40 years, the Israelis would be in the same situation, launching a few unguided rockets every now and then, and getting their asses blockaded and bombed. Quote:
|
||
2009-01-04, 20:45 | Link #10 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
As for your comparison to 9-11, what the US did wasn't a smart move. The details are best left to another discussion though. Pointing to it doesn't help your case. Also, you can't blame Hamas for the civilians Israeli bombs kill. I don't know about Gaza, but in 2006 during the invasion of Lebanon, Israel used clusterbombs over civilian areas. Not exactly the actions of a nation concerned with avoiding civilian casualties. They might not be using clusterbombs now, in all honesty I haven't heard anything on it, but you have to understand, the civilians have nowhere to go. The border with Israel is obviously closed, as is the border with Egypt. Unless the have a boat, they're not going anywhere. Even if Hamas is using innocent people as human shields, in the end it's the Israelis who make the decision to drop the bombs. It's easy to dismiss Hamas as just a bunch of terrorists, but the Palestinians do have legitimate grievencies with Israel. Instead of blaming each other for everything, Israel and the Palestinians need to realize something. Both of you are wrong. Both sides to stop pointing fingers at each other and come to terms with what they did, then stop doing it again. That's the only way to move forward.
__________________
|
|
2009-01-04, 20:49 | Link #11 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
If you want to go back, a nice place to start would be 1948. The Shoah was probably the single most important event that helped created modern Isarel (which btw is smaller than Israel today). The expulsion of Arabs living in the area is one of many grievances on the list.
__________________
|
2009-01-04, 21:13 | Link #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
|
Disagree. That is a strategic move by Israel. The actions behind the 8 days of air raid was to show the world that Israel is not weak and is not a victim of the Hamas, instead they are the real bad guys who are terrorizing the lives of innocent civilians living in Gaza. Originally, Israel turned to the US for a resolution to deal with the Hamas rockets, but considering what kind of an economic recession that US is facing, they naturally ignored their plea for support. The consequences of the inconsiderate US brought for another military conflict in the Middle East region. Sadly, most people don't really care considering that it occur during Xmas, a time of relax and enjoyment in most nations and places.
|
2009-01-04, 22:31 | Link #14 | |
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 34
|
"Do you hear the people sing? Singing a song of angry men?"
I thought it was incredibly uplifting, until I realized what kind of songs they like to sing. Songs of blame they sing, songs of bloodthirst, songs of war... Nowadays I just laugh at this particular display of homo sapien dead babies comedy (oh sure they faked it) and make crappy poetry to match it. And did I mention it's America's fault? Quote:
|
|
2009-01-04, 23:26 | Link #15 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
@Irenicus: Well, there are signs that the newer generation of Israelis do NOT want to live like their parents did, in a state where security is a "myth", and the war never ends despite successful battles. Hence, the talk of a Palestine state is now quite acceptable.
Hamas, on the other hand, has no reason to exist if peace does come to the land. Also, angry, unemployed, hungry, young men (and women) abound in the area. What better way to keep them in this state than to continue the "war"? State building is all too difficult compared to finding distractions. The solution, as I see it, is a Palestine state, and the acceptance on the part of Arabs that not all (heck, not even the majority) of those who were forced out in '48 can return to Israel. Of course, there's always the "no one gets it" solution, by making the land deader than the moon so that it would be pointless to fight over it. Both sides are pointing at their laundry lists of grievances, where in reality, demographic changes will force change, whether either side finds it agreeable or not.
__________________
Last edited by yezhanquan; 2009-01-04 at 23:37. |
2009-01-05, 01:45 | Link #16 | ||
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
*sigh* No offense to him or her, but, yeah. The Israeli right is strong, and, to be fair, it tends to be ironically enough stronger the stronger and more aggressive Palestinian radicals are, and vice versa. Quote:
It took incredible will and effort for the oft-compared situation in Northern Ireland to finally settle down, and a lot of bombs were still being set off after massive steps were taken towards peace back then. On one hand I perfectly see Israel's point that its citizens are being attacked by terrorists and its very security as a state at risk, on the other hand revenge and retaliation is a common denominator on both sides in the cursed Holy Land, and the deep oppression that exists for the common Palestinians -- whoever is to blame -- does not help... |
||
2009-01-05, 02:59 | Link #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
|
Target?.... What target? If you mean Hamas' hideouts and/or potential bunkers, then one has to level down all buildings in the area, civilian or whatsoever. This is, in fact, a total war, which is to say either one must destroy everything, what Israel has been doing under the disguise of collateral damage, or surrender.
|
2009-01-05, 03:42 | Link #19 |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Nice false dichotomy there. Even if it was a total war, there would be other options than destroy everything or surrender, like say a negotiated settlement. In fact, even if it's not a total war that negotiated settlement thing still sounds like a good idea. Of course to accomplish that, both sides need to admit they share some of the blame and sit down to actually talk.
__________________
|
2009-01-05, 04:58 | Link #20 |
Observer/Bookman wannabe
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 38
|
Aye. That's the "idealistic" way. The other option is, of course, the "wasteland" option.
But, seriously, a Palestine consisting of only the Gaza Strip and West Bank is not a solution. The strip is slightly bigger than half of Singapore, and my country is not well known for its open spaces.
__________________
|
|
|