Israel starts Gaza ground offensive

TheMathematician · Jul 24, 2014

Lillith1991 said:
Nothing can justify the killing of innocents, by either side. The fact remains that if Hamas didn't hide munitions in schools, moseques, and hospitals, Israel would have not even a semi legit reason to target them. And that is what gets me, Israel is using a proven military tactic. If you can you try to wipe out any enemy weapons stores you know of, and that is what they do buy bombing such places. I don't defend they're killing the innocents they have, but to speak out against what they're attempting to do in reality feels disingenuinous to me. The killing hurts my heart, and I can't help but think the deaths are just as much the fault of Hamas as they are the fault of Israel.

Historically speaking, those kinds of tactics don't work on terrorists (ample evidence of that from the responses due to the IRA in the UK and ETA in Spain) because it's pretty much impossible to get them all. Even if Israel basically destroyed every single building in Gaza, the terrorists would come back in a few years after re-arming themselves. And you'd be right back to square one.

What's worse though, is that by killing so many civilians, you pretty much guarantee that a new crop of Hamas terrorists will rise up against you. So basically this is a terrible long-term strategy.

rugcat · Jul 24, 2014

TheMathematician said:
I think the people who push back against the Israel defenders fully realize that Hamas is a terrorist organization who does terrible things, but the seemingly blind, unquestioning support for Israel and the incessant defending and rationalization of their also terrible actions leads people to argue from the other side, without intending to defend the actions of Hamas.

This is true, but there really isn't a whole lot of blind unquestioning support for Israeli actions -- except for the neocons in this country and the Christian Evangelists, for different reasons.

In the rest of the world, support for Israel is lukewarm at best, and hostile for most.

And although I don't see a lot of support for Hamas, I do see characterizations of Israel as a apartheid, fascist, brutal oppressor., esp on the left, sad to say.

And the corollary then becomes that even though Hamas is a terrible group, they were created out of frustration by the policies of Israel, and thus, bad though their actions may be, they are understandable as a reaction to an evil oppressive regime. A further corollary is that Israel is simply reaping what they sowed.

I'm afraid I don't buy that. The destruction of Israel as a desired goal long precedes the formation of Hamas. Israel is in a complicated and difficult position, surrounded by enemies who would wipe them off the face of the earth is they were able. But recognizing that fact does not equate to blanket approval of their policies, nor is it in any way "blind unquestioning support" for her actions.

frimble3 · Jul 24, 2014

"A plague on both their houses".

robeiae · Jul 25, 2014

rugcat said:
This is true, but there really isn't a whole lot of blind unquestioning support for Israeli actions -- except for the neocons in this country and the Christian Evangelists, for different reasons.

In the rest of the world, support for Israel is lukewarm at best, and hostile for most.

And although I don't see a lot of support for Hamas, I do see characterizations of Israel as a apartheid, fascist, brutal oppressor., esp on the left, sad to say.

And the corollary then becomes that even though Hamas is a terrible group, they were created out of frustration by the policies of Israel, and thus, bad though their actions may be, they are understandable as a reaction to an evil oppressive regime. A further corollary is that Israel is simply reaping what they sowed.

I'm afraid I don't buy that. The destruction of Israel as a desired goal long precedes the formation of Hamas. Israel is in a complicated and difficult position, surrounded by enemies who would wipe them off the face of the earth is they were able. But recognizing that fact does not equate to blanket approval of their policies, nor is it in any way "blind unquestioning support" for her actions.

Agree.

In particular, the disparate characterization of the two sides irks me. Israel--for many--is the only "side" that is an active player; the Palestinians/Hamas/the PLO (in the past) only react, never actually act.

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robeiae said:
Agree.

In particular, the disparate characterization of the two sides irks me. Israel--for many--is the only "side" that is an active player; the Palestinians/Hamas/the PLO (in the past) only react, never actually act.

Huh? Isn't the favored narrative that Israel is only 'reacting' to Hamas's rockets?

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

Good article by Janine Zacharia on coverage of the war in the Israeli media.

It helps explain why Israel and the world see the war in Gaza so differently. With their country under fire by rockets and with soldiers fighting and now dying on the battlefield, the Israeli journalists’ role transforms from dogged inquirer to purveyor of piecemeal information provided by the military. Patriotism suddenly trumps any duty to report impartially. That leaves Israelis—many of whom even in this global media age turn exclusively to Hebrew-language news sources—an incomplete and skewed picture of what is happening. Public support for the war is bolstered. And the narrative put forth by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about Gaza and Hamas simply becomes the consensus.

We all know how well that worked out for the US in 2002/3...

eta: Zacharia also has an excellent list of unasked questions:

s it for this limited tactical achievement—destroying some of the tunnels—that the IDF is killing so many Palestinian children and so many young Israeli soldiers are dying?

I know Hamas rejected the original cease-fire plan. But if you are acknowledging that this could be resolved diplomatically, why didn’t Israel continue to negotiate the terms of the cease-fire and try to avoid this escalation?

If Israel weakens Hamas too much, are Israelis going to actually regret this when al-Qaida*–type groups gain more of a footing there?

How long will it take for Hamas to build new tunnels?

robjvargas · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
Huh? Isn't the favored narrative that Israel is only 'reacting' to Hamas's rockets?

Based on...?

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robjvargas said:
Based on...?

The stated Israeli rationale for the war, for starters.

robeiae · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
The stated Israeli rationale for the war, for starters.

Sure, that's what Israel says. And the Palestinians say the opposite. That's understandable.

I'm talking about people outside opining on all of this. What I see is that many of those arguing predominantly against Israel, who allow that yes Hamas and others in Palestine may be doing bad things but Israel is the big meanie, have a world-view wherein only the Israelis are truly active; everyone else is reactive (aside from the US, which like Israel is an active player in a world full of reactionary ones).

Imo, it's a subtle kind of superiority complex, wherein groups like the Palestinians can't help but react the way that they do because they are not capable of doing anything else, because they are somehow less capable, less sophisticated, etc.

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robeiae said:
Sure, that's what Israel says. And the Palestinians say the opposite. That's understandable.

I'm talking about people outside opining on all of this. What I see is that many of those arguing predominantly against Israel, who allow that yes Hamas and others in Palestine may be doing bad things but Israel is the big meanie, have a world-view wherein only the Israelis are truly active; everyone else is reactive (aside from the US, which like Israel is an active player in a world full of reactionary ones).

Imo, it's a subtle kind of superiority complex, wherein groups like the Palestinians can't help but react the way that they do because they are not capable of doing anything else, because they are somehow less capable, less sophisticated, etc.

I see exactly this same mindset, but the pro-Israel side is equally guilty of it, IMO.

Interesting perspective on the idea here: (note: Hasbara is a Hebrew word for education. It can also mean propaganda) Is Israel Finally Winning the Hasbara Battle

So why do so many in the pro-Israel camp stick to the narrative that “the whole world is against us”? In part, it’s reflex—they’ve become accustomed to having to justify even the most basic right of Israel to defend itself, and have been conditioned to expect one-sided or incompetent reports on Israel. Part of it is self-justification: The images on television of mourning Palestinians and mangled children are tragic and horrifying, and defenders of Israel are desperate to counter any perception that Israel has ceded the moral high ground.

robjvargas · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
The stated Israeli rationale for the war, for starters.

How does that make it "favored"?

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robjvargas said:
How does that make it "favored"?

I was questioning robvowel's assertion to the contrary. If you're going to seriously argue that there's a split on this point, I'd invite you to have a look back through the thread.

robjvargas · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
I was questioning robvowel's assertion to the contrary. If you're going to seriously argue that there's a split on this point, I'd invite you to have a look back through the thread.

Context: At time you posted that, most of the discussion was on the global perspective via media. Not just attitudes in this thread.

So be it.

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robjvargas said:
Context: At time you posted that, most of the discussion was on the global perspective via media. Not just attitudes in this thread.

So be it.

Attitudes in this thread reflect the global perspective though, don't they, at least in microcosm? In any case, whether here or globally, you're not going to get two people on opposite sides to agree as to whether Israel or Hamas is the aggressor, and getting annoyed that someone else doesn't see it your way doesn't seem productive to me. YMMV.

Torgo · Jul 25, 2014

Lillith1991 said:
Nothing can justify the killing of innocents, by either side. The fact remains that if Hamas didn't hide munitions in schools, moseques, and hospitals, Israel would have not even a semi legit reason to target them. And that is what gets me, Israel is using a proven military tactic. If you can you try to wipe out any enemy weapons stores you know of, and that is what they do buy bombing such places. I don't defend they're killing the innocents they have, but to speak out against what they're attempting to do in reality feels disingenuinous to me. The killing hurts my heart, and I can't help but think the deaths are just as much the fault of Hamas as they are the fault of Israel.

I always think that if people are using human shields, then that is a sufficient reason not to target them. Especially when the munitions in question are caches of very ineffective rockets. If Israel were able to blow up all of Hamas's rockets, and prevent them from replenishing their supplies, they'd save two Israeli lives a year on average. Seriously, is that actually worth killing the hostages for? And radicalising the survivors?

Shadow Dragon · Jul 25, 2014

Torgo said:
I always think that if people are using human shields, then that is a sufficient reason not to target them. Especially when the munitions in question are caches of very ineffective rockets. If Israel were able to blow up all of Hamas's rockets, and prevent them from replenishing their supplies, they'd save two Israeli lives a year on average. Seriously, is that actually worth killing the hostages for? And radicalising the survivors?

To play devil's advocate, what about the family and friends of those Israeli deaths then? Would you tell them that their daughter/son/brother/sister/father/mother/etc was just an acceptable sacrifice due to other side using human shields?

Lillith1991 · Jul 25, 2014

Torgo said:
I always think that if people are using human shields, then that is a sufficient reason not to target them. Especially when the muniin question are caches of very ineffective rockets. If Israel were able to blow up all of Hamas's rockets, and prevent them from replenishing their supplies, they'd save two Israeli lives a year on average. Seriously, is that actually worth killing the hostages for? And radicalising the survivors?

To me that sounds like Israel doesn't have the right to defend herself. Rockets aren't the only means that Hamas uses to kill Israeli people, they also use tactics such as suicide bombers. Israel can't know before hand who those bombers will be, but knows where the other side stores their weapons. To me it seems obvious that they feel the need to control the fight by getting rid of the nonhuman weapons.

That Hamas feels it is right to deliberatly lead to the death of its nations people disgusts me just as much as Israel killing said people does. But that doesn't change the fact that Hamas handed Israel a reason to target those places, even if I don't think it is a good enough reason for Israel to do so. This isn't like shooting an unarmed noncombatant, which is enitrely different and reprehensible on the part of Israel.

Torgo · Jul 25, 2014

Shadow Dragon said:
To play devil's advocate, what about the family and friends of those Israeli deaths then? Would you tell them that their daughter/son/brother/sister/father/mother/etc was just an acceptable sacrifice due to other side using human shields?

Yes. I'd tell them that it is not possible to hit those weapons caches without killing dozens of children, and so, quite properly, we are not going to do it. And I'd tell them that we would pursue every alternative approach for bringing the people responsible for justice. It wouldn't be a very comfortable interview, but it'd be the right thing to do.

As to what the alternate approach would be, I don't know, but the current approach is achieving nothing for Israel.

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 25, 2014

Torgo said:
I always think that if people are using human shields, then that is a sufficient reason not to target them. Especially when the munitions in question are caches of very ineffective rockets. If Israel were able to blow up all of Hamas's rockets, and prevent them from replenishing their supplies, they'd save two Israeli lives a year on average. Seriously, is that actually worth killing the hostages for? And radicalising the survivors?

Unfortunately that will likely teach all the world's militaries to take hostages and use them as protective cover for their bases, munitions dumps, etc.

Any tactic that causes one's opponents to stop attacking while not impeding one's ability to attack will be adopted.

The cold, hard truth is that war is the fundamental act of inhumanity. To make war is to declare that other people's lives matter less than one's own goals.

Philosophers and ethicists have tried to find manners of war or goals of war that are less inhumane, creating categories of defensive war and just war and so on. There have been cultures that developed ideas of honorable warfare versus dishonorable.

But none of these overcome the reality of being willing to kill for one's own goals.

Furthermore, most of these standards are arbitrary and change with time and culture. Sniping was once considered the most dishonorable of acts. Now snipers are often seen as heroes. Drone operators will likely go the same way.

War pushes some people away from warlike thinking because the horror overcomes them, but it pushes others toward warlike thinking because the horror becomes normal to them.

Wars only end when all sides choose to stop fighting (whether by mutual agreement, outside force, or simply stopping). Only then is a real return to humanity possible.

Torgo · Jul 25, 2014

Lillith1991 said:
To me that sounds like Israel doesn't have the right to defend herself.

No, that's a massive oversimplification. Israel has the right to self-defence, but this doesn't mean carte blanche to do anything at all, however atrocious.

Rockets aren't the only means that Hamas uses to kill Israeli people, they also use tactics such as suicide bombers.

In which case, could people please shut up about the rockets already? And there hasn't been a Palestinian suicide bombing since 2008. There have been Palestinian terrorist atrocities since then - see the timeline - but it's hard to see how any of these shootings or stabbings or bombings could have been prevented by air-strikes.

Torgo · Jul 25, 2014

RichardGarfinkle said:
Unfortunately that will likely teach all the world's militaries to take hostages and use them as protective cover for their bases, munitions dumps, etc.

I'm not saying it's completely unacceptable to carry out a military strike that you know will kill some civilians. But there has to be some kind of a moral calculus involved, and in this particular situation I cannot for the life of me make it balance.

RichardGarfinkle · Jul 25, 2014

Torgo said:
I'm not saying it's completely unacceptable to carry out a military strike that you know will kill some civilians. But there has to be some kind of a moral calculus involved, and in this particular situation I cannot for the life of me make it balance.

That's why using human shields and attacking human shields are both war crimes. But, as I said, war is fundamentally inhumane, and tactics that work are adopted. Nations have a history of ignoring war crimes that they commit, and the international community does not enforce the Geneva Conventions with any rigor at all.

If one takes the moral position that emplacements with human shields will never be attacked than anyone who doesn't give a damn about moral calculus will use human shields to protect their military assets. This will not improve the overall morality of warfare, because it will contribute to the success of the least moral. The strategic lesson will be: use human shields because they work, and the moral lesson will be lost.

robjvargas · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
Attitudes in this thread reflect the global perspective though, don't they, at least in microcosm?

Do they? Based on...?

raburrell said:
In any case, whether here or globally, you're not going to get two people on opposite sides to agree as to whether Israel or Hamas is the aggressor, and getting annoyed that someone else doesn't see it your way doesn't seem productive to me. YMMV.

As I've already said:

robjvargas said:
Yes. It's time to find an answer that works. Figuring out who is to blame only begets more rockets. From both sides.

raburrell · Jul 25, 2014

robjvargas said:
Do they? Based on...?

As I've already said:

Well, we have some in the pro-Israel camp. We have some who are pro-Palestinian. We have some who are neutral, some who fall along the spectrum, and some who just don't care. We don't have any (open) Hamas supporters as far as I can see, so they're the only ones missing a representative from the global debate here.

eta: I'm not sure how figuring out who's to blame 'begets more rockets'. The only thing that begets more rockets is when the people who are firing them actually do so. Debating the wisdom of either side's response isn't an act of war, though given some the heat of the commentary at times, perhaps you'd be forgiven for thinking so.

robjvargas · Jul 25, 2014

raburrell said:
eta: I'm not sure how figuring out who's to blame 'begets more rockets'. The only thing that begets more rockets is when the people who are firing them actually do so. Debating the wisdom of either side's response isn't an act of war, though given some the heat of the commentary at times, perhaps you'd be forgiven for thinking so.

Blame begets revenge.

That's not a rule. That's a description of what's been happening.

Israel starts Gaza ground offensive

Technical Writing Wizard

Lost in the Fog

Heckuva good sport

Touch and go

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Touch and go

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

The Hobbit-Vulcan hybrid

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Nurture Phoenixes

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

Nurture Phoenixes

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee