So that ceasefire didn't last long.

William Haskins

poet
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
29,097
Reaction score
8,846
Age
58
Website
www.poisonpen.net
And the US does not give them arms and financial support for that reason.

the US has continued to provide aid to the palestinian gov't and recently recognized a fatah-hamas unity government that slyly skirts the issue by claiming the hamas-linked ministers are merely technocrats and that they will watch closely and recalibrate as needed.

sources:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/06/palestine-unity-deal-20146595813966105.html

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2014/06/227036.htm#PALESTINIANS

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.596621

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4526668,00.html

meanwhile the money flows in and, if you think it's not supporting hamas, you're wrong.
 

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
Hamas officials continue to deny knowledge of a captured soldier. A deputy said earlier Friday, “Even if it was true, the military leadership are the only ones authorized to report such an event”:

on the other hand

Al Qassam says West Bankers must express their rejection for the Israeli aggression, and to launch al-Quds Intifada against the occupation.

so whether Hamas took the soldier or not, things are going to get worse for the Palestinians. Again. Because the Israeli leadership and the Hamas leadership are continuing to lead.

ETA: Both links from Guardian
 
Last edited:

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
One cannot beat the opposition into submission and then expect a lasting peace. Only when cheeks are turned is peace achieved.
Like how WWII ended in the Pacific? We've had to go to war with Japan how many times since then?

I'm not saying peace through peaceful means is a bad thing or a bad idea. Just noting that this idea--often tossed out like it's the unvarnished truth--that peace (lasting or otherwise) can never be achieved by force of arms is simply not true.
 

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
Like how WWII ended in the Pacific? We've had to go to war with Japan how many times since then?

I'm not saying peace through peaceful means is a bad thing or a bad idea. Just noting that this idea--often tossed out like it's the unvarnished truth--that peace (lasting or otherwise) can never be achieved by force of arms is simply not true.

God, that's a depressingly valid point.
 
Last edited:

Xelebes

Delerium ex Ennui
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
14,205
Reaction score
884
Location
Edmonton, Canada
True. But a peace through force of arms usually has a choice put before the one being suppressed: accept peace and prosper or be annihilated. There doesn't appear to be that option for the Palestinians.
 

Magdalen

Petulantly Penitent
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
6,372
Reaction score
1,566
Location
Insignificant
True. But a peace through force of arms usually has a choice put before the one being suppressed: accept peace and prosper or be annihilated. There doesn't appear to be that option for the Palestinians.

Or this: become a martyr for Allah. That seems to be a popular choice among some ranks.
 

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
Or this: become a martyr for Allah. That seems to be a popular choice among some ranks.

I don't see becoming a martyr for Allah as a very big step on the road to peace, though...
 

onuilmar

(w)ride like the wind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
928
Reaction score
137
Location
deep in rural Western NY
Like how WWII ended in the Pacific? We've had to go to war with Japan how many times since then?

I'm not saying peace through peaceful means is a bad thing or a bad idea. Just noting that this idea--often tossed out like it's the unvarnished truth--that peace (lasting or otherwise) can never be achieved by force of arms is simply not true.


But how we made the peace mattered. Unlike the end of WWI, which led to II.
 

onuilmar

(w)ride like the wind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
928
Reaction score
137
Location
deep in rural Western NY
the US has continued to provide aid to the palestinian gov't and recently recognized a fatah-hamas unity government that slyly skirts the issue by claiming the hamas-linked ministers are merely technocrats and that they will watch closely and recalibrate as needed.

sources:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/06/palestine-unity-deal-20146595813966105.html

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2014/06/227036.htm#PALESTINIANS

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.596621

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4526668,00.html

meanwhile the money flows in and, if you think it's not supporting hamas, you're wrong.

You are a purist in what you demand of the opposition.

Peace will not come by trying to smash the Palestinians.

And Israel has its own weasel words and sleights of hand. The refusal to stop settlements is high provocation.

But enough. My point only is that the Palestinians have a right to exist in peace and security as well. And so long as that is not permitted, they will be driven into the arms of Hamas.

The PLO, under Arrafat, who it seems was assassinated, did acknowledge, formally, the right of Israel to exist. Would that the favor were returned.

And I'm done for today.
 

Prozyan

Are you one, Herbert?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
2,325
Reaction score
657
Location
Nuevo Mexico
But how we made the peace mattered. Unlike the end of WWI, which led to II.

By dropping two atomic bombs and forcing Japan to accept an unconditional surrender or face annihilation as a nation?

By that logic, Israel should just nuke the strip and be done with it.
 

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
By dropping two atomic bombs and forcing Japan to accept an unconditional surrender or face annihilation as a nation?

No - that was how the war ended. Making the peace is a different challenge - one that was severely botched after WWI is Onu's point, I think.

Both Israel and Palestine leaderships could call for a cessation of bombing right now - but the fear is that that wouldn't make for peace - not for a lasting peace, anyway. Something has been unleashed and allowed to grow so violently and for so long that I do start to wonder if it can ever be healed.
 

onuilmar

(w)ride like the wind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
928
Reaction score
137
Location
deep in rural Western NY
By dropping two atomic bombs and forcing Japan to accept an unconditional surrender or face annihilation as a nation?

By that logic, Israel should just nuke the strip and be done with it.

No, the peace was very generous, just like the Marshall Plan in Europe. The US made Japan the economic powerhouse it is today. That was the peace made. Dropping the bomb ended the war.

And the men who made that peace did not want to repeat the end of WWI.

The war that ended with the occupation of the West Bank occurred in 1967. And the Israelis have never had a lasting peace.
 
Last edited:

Lhipenwhe

Moving with my soul, step by step
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
745
Reaction score
94
Location
Saint Paul
No, the peace was very generous, just like the Marshall Plan in Europe. The US made Japan the economic powerhouse it is today. That was the peace made. Dropping the bomb ended the war.

And the men who made that peace did not want to repeat the end of WWI.

The war that ended with the occupation of the West Bank occurred in 1967. And the Israelis have never had a lasting peace.

And the PLO was formed to fight Israel in 1964, 3 years before the occupation began. The occupation is incredibly problematic, but it wasn't the start of the conflict, and I doubt that all the forces would be placated if it ended. But that's a historical and theoretical discussion for another thread.

Israel has had a lasting peace with Egypt and Jordan; although their relations are hardly what I'd call friendly, the three parties have kept their agreements with each other. And to add fuel to the "peace through victory/force of arms" argument, Israel has had a long period of quiet with Lebanon since 2006, and the border between it and Syria has likewise remained calm.

I'm not an advocate of such an approach, my biggest problem with it being the horrific human suffering it could entail. I hope that cooler heads prevail, but if either side sees a clear victory through victory, then they'll probably take it over a hypothetical peace.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
I think the Israelis feel like they did try the more reasonable sort of tactics recently (Disengagement in 2005), and that it was very hard for them because of how they had to remove the settlers and because of fears of retaliation by the Palestinians. Then the disengagement turned into the Palestinian Civil War, including the rockets raining down across the border, as the Israelis had feared would happen.

On the other side, (most?) Palestinians felt that Israel retained too much control over Gaza and that it was still occupation, just without the settlements. Israel did still keep control over all borders, airspace, waters, infrastructure, power, trade, etc.

It also wasn't the civilians' fault that civil war broke out; it was bound to, probably, as factions fought to decide which Palestinian force was now in control of what was given back by the Israelis.

But Israel has cracked down more and more in Gaza since then, and they are going to keep the 2005 withdrawal in their minds as a lesson about what happens when groups like Hamas end up being the ones greatly in control there. Hamas did take the opportunity to launch big initiatives against Israel. Really bad move, imho :(
 

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
3,781
Age
50
Location
MA
Website
www.rebeccaburrell.com
And the PLO was formed to fight Israel in 1964, 3 years before the occupation began. The occupation is incredibly problematic, but it wasn't the start of the conflict, and I doubt that all the forces would be placated if it ended. But that's a historical and theoretical discussion for another thread.
It's a pretty tangled set of circumstances - Hamas is very much a creation of Israel's, intended to deal with the rise of the PLO - the WSJ has a good history here: http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB123275572295011847?mobile=y
 
Last edited:

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
Everyone has an opinion, but this one at least has some hope attached. From David Grossman in the NYTimes

There are many who still “remember the future” (an odd phrase, but an accurate one in this context) — the future they want for Israel, and for Palestine. There are still — but who knows for how much longer — people in Israel who understand that if we sink into apathy again we will be leaving the arena to those who would drag us fervently into the next war, igniting every possible locus of conflict in Israeli society as they go.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
Everyone has an opinion, but this one at least has some hope attached. From David Grossman in the NYTimes

That is a really, really great article, I think. It covers the real threat posed by militant groups in the region even though it leans towards understanding the Palestinians' grievances.

Raburrell, really great article, too. I don't know how the past would have gone if Israel tried to crush any more movements, but fiercely crushing one while allowing another to flourish can also upset the natural balance very much.

Unfortunately, in some places in the world, there are no good alternative movements that have matured enough to be a legitimate 'side' to take, imho. It's a huge problem for Western minds, where we think that we can turn folks into Thomas Jefferson and the boys (with an armed fighting force like the American Revolutionaries, as is necessary). I don't know what the answer is, but I have a feeling that it needs to be more organic to the individual cultures than we tend to recognize.

Israel doesn't seem to be acting with much foresight at all that way right now, though, so any improvement (like the philosphy in mccardey's article) would probably be better.
 
Last edited:

mccardey

Self-Ban
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
19,212
Reaction score
15,812
Location
Australia.
Another school hit?
Dr.Bassel Abuwarda ‏@DrBasselAbuward 1h
URGENTTTT FROM GAZA : 7 KILLED IN NEW ISRAELI ATTACKT TO ANOTHER UN SCHOOL IN RAFAH #GAZA
I hope that's not right.


ETA: Oh, I think it is right.
An Israeli air strike has killed at least 10 people and wounded about 30 others in a UN-run school in the southern Gaza Strip, witnesses and medics said, as dozens died in renewed Israeli shelling of the enclave.

The Israeli military declined immediate comment on the attack, the second to hit a UN school in less than a week.
 
Last edited:

ShaunHorton

AW's resident Velociraptor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
511
Location
Washington State
Website
shaunhorton.blogspot.com
Well, if they're going to say the schools were being used to store weapons, they must also have the opinion that the UN is helping Hamas as well.

As despicable as it is, during war, attacking a country's civilians is an old tactic, meant to break an enemy's will and lower their ability to replace casualties. If anything, I'm surprised Israel is trying to make excuses for it.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
Well, if they're going to say the schools were being used to store weapons, they must also have the opinion that the UN is helping Hamas as well.

As despicable as it is, during war, attacking a country's civilians is an old tactic, meant to break an enemy's will and lower their ability to replace casualties. If anything, I'm surprised Israel is trying to make excuses for it.

That's the question, isn't it? Now that targeting civilians is a war crime, excuses would have to be made. Is Israel running an olden style war or not? It's not impossible that there are folks around who still see it as a legitimate way to run a war. That causes great controversy to say, but WWII wasn't really that long ago. Maybe Israel is old school??

Obviously Hamas is.

I'm not trying to call them anything for certain at all, btw. But I don't understand why we know for a fact that Israel wouldn't use old tactics. Just because Europeans/ Commonwealth countries and now the US have grown to despise those kinds of wars doesn't mean that folks in the Mid-East have our ways of thinking about war. That really varies by culture and history, I think. I'd hate to project my culture onto someone elses, so I do consider that maybe we think differently about war, if that makes sense.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC

Yep, I just heard that on the news on CNN, too, that the Israelis were targeting 3 militants spotted on motorcycles, so that's why the entrance to the school was hit. It is really, really bad news to happen to be out in public anywhere near where any militant shows his face, apparently (no matter what he is actually doing at the time) :(

That's just so sad because of the lack of control the civilians have over that, imho. There are so many militants in Gaza that being near one in public has to be fairly common, I'd think. OTOH, it would be easy enough for militants not to ride by the schools, too, you'd think!
 
Last edited:

ShaunHorton

AW's resident Velociraptor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
511
Location
Washington State
Website
shaunhorton.blogspot.com
Yep, I just heard that on the news on CNN, too, that the Israelis were targeting 3 militants spotted on motorcycles, so that's why the entrance to the school was hit.

Really? An air strike big enough to blow away part of a school was meant for three people on motorcycles?

Overkill much?
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
Really? An air strike big enough to blow away part of a school was meant for three people on motorcycles?

Overkill much?

I think the US State Department agrees with you:

The State Department also condemned what it called “today’s disgraceful shelling” outside the school in Rafah. Witnesses near the school, where about 3,000 Palestinians had sought shelter, said that those killed or hurt were waiting in line for food supplies when a missile hit. A State Department spokeswoman, Jen Psaki, said that “the suspicion that militants are operating nearby does not justify strikes that put at risk the lives of so many innocent civilians.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/04/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-conflict.html?_r=0

ETA: Oh, and the UN definitely does; sorry for not pointing that out!

The growing death toll has stirred outrage in Europe and large parts of the Arab world, and combined with Sunday’s strike near the Rafah school, prompted Secretary General Ban Ki-moon of the United Nations to call the attack a “moral outrage and a criminal act” and to demand that those responsible for the “gross violation of international humanitarian law” be held accountable.
 
Last edited: