So that ceasefire didn't last long.
- Thread starter mccardey
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,313
- Reaction score
- 569
- Location
- MA
- Website
- eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
I'll be over here shaking my head at everything going on over there. They couldn't even last a couple of damn hours! If the UN wags its finger at anyone this time- I'm past careing which one of them said finger is wagged at- I'm going to scream.
Last edited:
I know.
Mostly children and babies again, so far, according to reports we're hearing down here.
And it looks like Hamas took a soldier captive during the ceasefire.
Combined with the track records of the other ceasefires and the UN's record on Israel, if not in general, I'm not sure when the next one will happen. If the soldier is retrieved, then it might be when all the tunnels are destroyed. If not, then this war is going to get uglier.
This is not going to end well.
Combined with the track records of the other ceasefires and the UN's record on Israel, if not in general, I'm not sure when the next one will happen. If the soldier is retrieved, then it might be when all the tunnels are destroyed. If not, then this war is going to get uglier.
This is not going to end well.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2009
- Messages
- 6,902
- Reaction score
- 3,781
- Age
- 50
- Location
- MA
- Website
- www.rebeccaburrell.com
The UN is wagging their finger (rightly) at both:
http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/gaza-conflict-un-official-says-both-sides-committing-war-crimes-2
It's so awful. The civilians needed that ceasefire, dammit.
I just heard Wolf Blitzer interviewing an Israeli military guy (I forget his name offhand, but the one who was been giving the majority of quotes/interviews, a higher-up). Interestingly, it might not have been Hamas who took the soldier, although the military guy leaned that way. But Hamas isn't taking credit, Wolf noted.
I need to research other militants in the fighting, in case they are playing a big role here. That would indeed be a very big role to capture an Israeli soldier during* a ceasefire.
*During used tentatively because the whole timing/cause of the cease-fire break is difficult to pin down again. The capturing of the soldier may not have been the incident that broke it, so war may have been full on again by then.
I just heard Wolf Blitzer interviewing an Israeli military guy (I forget his name offhand, but the one who was been giving the majority of quotes/interviews, a higher-up). Interestingly, it might not have been Hamas who took the soldier, although the military guy leaned that way. But Hamas isn't taking credit, Wolf noted.
I need to research other militants in the fighting, in case they are playing a big role here. That would indeed be a very big role to capture an Israeli soldier during* a ceasefire.
*During used tentatively because the whole timing/cause of the cease-fire break is difficult to pin down again. The capturing of the soldier may not have been the incident that broke it, so war may have been full on again by then.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ed-in-tunnel-attack-by-militants-9642469.html
It's Lieutenant-Colonel Peter Lerner, a military spokesman, who is the 'military guy' in the Wolf interview I mentioned above.
It was a tunnel attack. Unfortunately, I can't pick a clear side about those tunnels in this war at the moment regarding ceasefires
The Israelis have had the ceasefires include the stipulation that they can continue their campaign against the tunnels 'cease-fire or no cease-fire', Netanyahu said. I thought it was clear someone would die at some point in the tunnel 'clearings' during a ceasefire. It looks like now it was Israelis who did, and one captured.
But if one side continues an operation like the tunnel destruction/clearing and another side also continues the tunnel fighting, isn't that what would be expected? I understand that Israel wouldn't agree to stop their part, but I figured it was a given then that the militants wouldn't stop that part either.
I think I put that under the category of 'cease-fire except the tunnels'. I honestly can't blame the other side for continuing that aspect of the war if their enemy continues it during a cease-fire, except for the obvious repercussions it brings, of course
It's Lieutenant-Colonel Peter Lerner, a military spokesman, who is the 'military guy' in the Wolf interview I mentioned above.
It was a tunnel attack. Unfortunately, I can't pick a clear side about those tunnels in this war at the moment regarding ceasefires
The Israelis have had the ceasefires include the stipulation that they can continue their campaign against the tunnels 'cease-fire or no cease-fire', Netanyahu said. I thought it was clear someone would die at some point in the tunnel 'clearings' during a ceasefire. It looks like now it was Israelis who did, and one captured.But if one side continues an operation like the tunnel destruction/clearing and another side also continues the tunnel fighting, isn't that what would be expected? I understand that Israel wouldn't agree to stop their part, but I figured it was a given then that the militants wouldn't stop that part either.
I think I put that under the category of 'cease-fire except the tunnels'. I honestly can't blame the other side for continuing that aspect of the war if their enemy continues it during a cease-fire, except for the obvious repercussions it brings, of course
And a bit more on that subject, by Amos Yadlin, a former chief of Israel’s military intelligence directorate:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/w...n-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 9,251
- Reaction score
- 7,297
Currently trending on Twitter
The paper hastily withdrew the article, but someone had their finger on the button and managed to save it for grim posterity.
The paper hastily withdrew the article, but someone had their finger on the button and managed to save it for grim posterity.
That last line!!! I'm gobsmacked.
How are their "Ops & Blogs" done? If this is like iReporters on CNN, that's important, I think. Was this writer vetted in any way, does anyone know?
There are already updates on that op-ed:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/whoa-times-of-israel-op-ed-advocates-genocide-against-gazans/
So that's good, anyway!
http://www.mediaite.com/online/whoa-times-of-israel-op-ed-advocates-genocide-against-gazans/
So that's good, anyway!
good for them for pulling this knuckledragger's op-ed and banning him from further print-vomit.
someone please let me know when anyone, anywhere in gaza (or among western enablers) condemns this...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=12218
someone please let me know when anyone, anywhere in gaza (or among western enablers) condemns this...
http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=12218
Oh, Hamas is vile. I said I loathed them and I meant it. Maybe that does need to keep being repeated, especially in the media, but I'm never surprised by their rhetoric. I (perhaps wrongly) assume the media is doing what I'm doing and no longer find it newsworthy to find examples of their hateful talk.
I do think it's very important to show examples of what they've done in war, like video of where they may be firing from, etc. That helps find the truth of the military/war situation, imho. But they are already very much on record about their feelings
I do think it's very important to show examples of what they've done in war, like video of where they may be firing from, etc. That helps find the truth of the military/war situation, imho. But they are already very much on record about their feelings
Oh, Hamas is vile. I said I loathed them and I meant it. Maybe that does need to keep being repeated, especially in the media, but I'm never surprised by their rhetoric. I (perhaps wrongly) assume the media is doing what I'm doing and no longer find it newsworthy to find examples of their hateful talk.
I do think it's very important to show examples of what they've done in war, like video of where they may be firing from, etc. That helps find the truth of the military/war situation, imho. But they are already very much on record about their feelings
Yes, but the problem is that it's not Hamas that's being bombed out of existence. I really don't see how it ends, but I think the solution was only possible through dialogue for a short time quite a long time ago.
Hamas' statement is vile, no doubt about it.
And the US does not give them arms and financial support for that reason.
But peace will never come from the end of a gun. One cannot beat the opposition into submission and then expect a lasting peace. Only when cheeks are turned is peace achieved.
And the US does not give them arms and financial support for that reason.
But peace will never come from the end of a gun. One cannot beat the opposition into submission and then expect a lasting peace. Only when cheeks are turned is peace achieved.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2009
- Messages
- 6,902
- Reaction score
- 3,781
- Age
- 50
- Location
- MA
- Website
- www.rebeccaburrell.com
From the articles I've been reading yesterday and today, it seems to me like there's a sense settling in that 'this one is different' - at 4 weeks, this is running longer than either of the last two offensives, there's a sense of mission creep setting in (first it was about stopping the rockets, then it was getting most of the tunnels, now it's about getting all of the tunnels, etc).
My *guess* is that the more hawkish members of Netanyahu's cabinet are going to get their wish and this is going to end up a larger scale ground invasion. As far as an end to that, god knows.
My *guess* is that the more hawkish members of Netanyahu's cabinet are going to get their wish and this is going to end up a larger scale ground invasion. As far as an end to that, god knows.
I do think the Palestinians need to get rid of Hamas, because Hamas isn't going to work out for them unless Hamas gets great military might. Even then, the US would step in if it ever came to really trying to obliterate Israel. It's a ridiculous end-goal that way.
But I think the Israelis are making the same sort of mistakes the US made for all of those years (and European imperialists like the UK and French made all those centuries, down to drawing many of the 'protectorate' lines that caused most of the current Mid-East problems we are seeing). If you rain terrible grief and death upon the civilians in the areas you are fighting, they will hate you and go to great lengths to see that you pay.
I hope that's not too controversial to say. I mean it in a more nuanced way, not in a purely Black Hat/White Hat way. But it remains true as an overall truth, I think.
But I think the Israelis are making the same sort of mistakes the US made for all of those years (and European imperialists like the UK and French made all those centuries, down to drawing many of the 'protectorate' lines that caused most of the current Mid-East problems we are seeing). If you rain terrible grief and death upon the civilians in the areas you are fighting, they will hate you and go to great lengths to see that you pay.
I hope that's not too controversial to say. I mean it in a more nuanced way, not in a purely Black Hat/White Hat way. But it remains true as an overall truth, I think.
I don't think that's too controversial - we're seeing it play out both ways, after all. Whether it's rockets to Israel or bombs to Gaza, it clearly isn't working well as a step on the road to a peaceful existence.
Thank you
and it does go both ways, I agree.In case anyone wants to read up on the imperialism history that I summarized too briefly and poorly in my last post, this is great reading, and free!
http://books.google.com/books?id=Me...orate" "French protectorate" mid-east&f=false
It gets long, but it's worth a read for lots of folks out there, imho. Or use a similar source, of course.