Israeli soldiers admit 'shoot first' policy in Gaza

12357

Comments

  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I wonder what the numbers would be if those 2500 rockets hit their targets
    here you go again with your "if" statements.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    _outlaw wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I wonder what the numbers would be if those 2500 rockets hit their targets
    here you go again with your "if" statements.

    were those 2400 or so rockets fired into Israel with the intention to kill?
  • BRMLAW
    BRMLAW Posts: 153
    And this all goes back to the original issue. Why does Israel close borders and seas. Because Hamas is an Iranian agent. Iran is a nation with the goal of destroying Israel. Hamas shoots everything they can get their hands on at non-military targets and still.....Israel is the villain. I suppose do nothing and let Iran move in ballistic missiles or nukes.....Sorry about the civillians, but those who cast stones......Hamas is a shiite gang. When they go there will be peace. And the international community besides you two all agree Iran and its agents must be stopped. The only issue subject to debate is proportionality of response. Otherwise the world is on the same page about Hamas. Even Russia is coming around. Like I said, there is something else going on here.
  • BRMLAW
    BRMLAW Posts: 153
    are you serious?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ro ... el_in_2008

    rapidly escalating attacks by Hamas on Israel. Until the ceasefire in June 19 2008 2378 rockets and mortars were launched. This is more than the 1,639 attacks launched in all of 2007, the rate of fire per month had increased more than 240%.[/quote]


    i'm just going by what Israel has on their own website

    now, where's the numbers on the deaths to back up the massacre??[/quote]


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_a ... he_Israeli–Palestinian_conflict

    i like Israel's response of:
    "The deaths of children are a regrettable consequence of war"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2 ... Casualties

    not including unexploded ordinace and other causes:

    from 2000-2004
    3196 Palestinians were killed 620 being under 18
    946 Israeli's were killed 112 being under 18

    2005-2008

    1753 Palestinians were killed 309 under 18
    117 Israeli's were killed 12 being under 18

    odd BRMLAW thinks the far smaller figures are the massacre and the much larger numbers are what?[/quote]

    Yeah war is hell. Stop shooting Qassams from your own civillian areas. Problem solved
  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    BRMLAW wrote:
    When they go there will be peace.
    Well then, how come there was no peace before Hamas existed?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    jlew24asu wrote:
    _outlaw wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I wonder what the numbers would be if those 2500 rockets hit their targets
    here you go again with your "if" statements.

    were those 2400 or so rockets fired into Israel with the intention to kill?

    I had a feeling you would dodge this question.
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    BRMLAW wrote:
    Yeah war is hell. Stop shooting Qassams from your own civillian areas. Problem solved


    it seems like the only one justifying civilian deaths is you.

    where there vastly disproportionate deaths before the rockets?

    i wonder if any of those rockets were part of the many shipments Israel helped sell to Iran during the Iran/Contra affair?
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    jlew24asu wrote:
    _outlaw wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I wonder what the numbers would be if those 2500 rockets hit their targets
    here you go again with your "if" statements.

    were those 2400 or so rockets fired into Israel with the intention to kill?


    killing an innocent civilian is always wrong but if Mexico or Canada was occupying your town illegally and illegally destroying american homes to build even more illegal homes while pretty much putting you on reservations with jack shit while the children in those areas suffered from acute malnutrition because while they just continue killing 25.75 minors and 14.98 adults for every 1 Mexican or Canadian would there ever come to a point you would react?

    they have continued to be massacred for years, eventually people get tired of living underneath someone's boot
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118

    killing an innocent civilian is always wrong but if Mexico or Canada was occupying your town illegally and illegally destroying american homes to build even more illegal homes while pretty much putting you on reservations with jack shit while the children in those areas suffered from acute malnutrition because while they just continue killing 25.75 minors and 14.98 adults for every 1 Mexican or Canadian would there ever come to a point you would react?

    they have continued to be massacred for years, eventually people get tired of living underneath someone's boot

    there are no buts. those rockets are fired into Israeli towns with the intention to kill innocent civilians everytime. you want to post death ratios for what? all you are proving is that Hamas is less efficient at killing then Israel. they are not any less innocent.
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    jlew24asu wrote:

    killing an innocent civilian is always wrong but if Mexico or Canada was occupying your town illegally and illegally destroying american homes to build even more illegal homes while pretty much putting you on reservations with jack shit while the children in those areas suffered from acute malnutrition because while they just continue killing 25.75 minors and 14.98 adults for every 1 Mexican or Canadian would there ever come to a point you would react?

    they have continued to be massacred for years, eventually people get tired of living underneath someone's boot

    there are no buts. those rockets are fired into Israeli towns with the intention to kill innocent civilians everytime. you want to post death ratios for what? all you are proving is that Hamas is less efficient at killing then Israel. they are not any less innocent.


    true but has it occurred to you that maybe if they didn't massacre so many Palestinians perhaps the attacks would lessen? see, people don't like being treated like less than human and slaughtered while they expand illegal settlements. maybe it's not that they hate the jews but they hate been treated like this by them?

    you dodged my question, by the way
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118


    true but has it occurred to you that maybe if they didn't massacre so many Palestinians perhaps the attacks would lessen?

    yes! absolutely. but that doesn't mean its ok for them to fire rockets. Israel needs to stop too
    see, people don't like being treated like less than human and slaughtered while they expand illegal settlements. maybe it's not that they hate the jews but they hate been treated like this by them?

    I agree.
    you dodged my question, by the way

    what question?
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    jlew24asu wrote:

    yes! absolutely. but that doesn't mean its ok for them to fire rockets. Israel needs to stop too

    i never said it was ok to fire rockets or mortars or carry out suicide bombings or....i don't think anyone has


    jlew24asu wrote:
    what question?

    if Mexico or Canada was occupying your town illegally and illegally destroying american homes to build even more illegal homes while pretty much putting you on reservations with jack shit while the children in those areas suffered from acute malnutrition because while they just continue killing 25.75 minors and 14.98 adults for every 1 Mexican or Canadian would there ever come to a point you would react?
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I had a feeling you would dodge this question.
    I was considering responding but I think it's nothing but a question that distracts people from discussing the actual issues, i.e. it's irrelevant to any actual discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    _outlaw wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I had a feeling you would dodge this question.
    I was considering responding but I think it's nothing but a question that distracts people from discussing the actual issues, i.e. it's irrelevant to any actual discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    so its irrelevant to discuss the crimes committed by Hamas. nice
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118

    i never said it was ok to fire rockets or mortars or carry out suicide bombings or....i don't think anyone has

    there are some here that support it

    if Mexico or Canada was occupying your town illegally and illegally destroying american homes to build even more illegal homes while pretty much putting you on reservations with jack shit while the children in those areas suffered from acute malnutrition because while they just continue killing 25.75 minors and 14.98 adults for every 1 Mexican or Canadian would there ever come to a point you would react?

    impossible for me to answer unless I was in the situation. but if you're wondering if I would start targeting innocent Mexicans or Canadians living in areas they stole, the answer is no.
  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    jlew24asu wrote:
    _outlaw wrote:
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I had a feeling you would dodge this question.
    I was considering responding but I think it's nothing but a question that distracts people from discussing the actual issues, i.e. it's irrelevant to any actual discussion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    so its irrelevant to discuss the crimes committed by Hamas. nice
    don't put fucking words in my mouth. it is irrelevant to discuss what would happen IF Hamas' rockets hit their intended targets.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    _outlaw wrote:
    don't put fucking words in my mouth. it is irrelevant to discuss what would happen IF Hamas' rockets hit their intended targets.

    we don't have to discuss that, because thats not what I was asking..

    I asked if the rockets by Hamas are fired into Israel have the intention of killing civilians.


    you feel the answer is irrelevant.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    BRMLAW wrote:
    The same way you excuse decades of palestinian massacres of innocent civillians. You ignore decades of their cold blooded murdering of civillians of all nationalities. Whats your excuse there? Maybe Jewish life is unimportant to you and you wonder why you find yourself volunteering to defend yourself as not an anti-semite when you havent even been accused of it??? That and your almost total denial of the impact of the holocaust puts you in a particular class. Doesnt it?


    What does the holocaust have to do with the illegal Israeli occupation?
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    edited July 2009
    BRMLAW wrote:
    Hey genius. Israel gave Gaza back genius and Hamas promptly turned into a missile launching platform. In no time flat.

    Hey genius, can you read?

    Norman Finkelstein:

    'In a study entitled 'One Big Prison', the respected Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem observed that the crippling economic arrangements Israel had imposed on Gaza would remain in place. In addition, Israel would continue to maintain absolute control over Gaza's land borders, coastline, and airspace, and the Israeli army would continue to operate in Gaza. "So long as these methods of control remain in Israeli hands," B'Tselem concluded, "Israel's claim of 'an end of the Occupation' is questionable". HRW (Human Rights Watch) was even more emphatic that evacuating settlers and troops from inside Gaza would not end the occupation: "Whether the Israeli army is inside Gaza or redeployed around it's periphery, and restricting entrance and exit, it remains in control."



    http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/D ... y/4222.htm
    Key Sharon advisor: "disengagement" aims to stop Palestinian state
    By Israel Insider staff and partners October 6, 2004


    'In a stunning admission, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's senior adviser said that the purpose of the Israeli government's policy was to supend diplomatic moves to establish a Palestinian state. "The significance of the 'disengagement' plan is the freezing of the peace process," Dov Weissglas told Haaretz.

    Weissglas, an initiator of the plan, explained that the deep freeze would prevent implementation of the "Road Map" backed by the Quartet of the United States, Russia, EU and UN: "when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress."

    "The disengagement is actually formaldehyde," he said. "It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians."

    Asked by Haaretz's Ari Shavit why the disengagement plan had been hatched, Weisglass replied: "Because in the fall of 2003 we understood that everything was stuck. And although by the way the Americans read the situation, the blame fell on the Palestinians, not on us, Arik [Sharon] grasped that this state of affairs could not last, that they wouldn't leave us alone, wouldn't get off our case. Time was not on our side. There was international erosion, internal erosion. Domestically, in the meantime, everything was collapsing. The economy was stagnant, and the Geneva Initiative had gained broad support. And then we were hit with the letters of officers and letters of pilots and letters of commandos [refusing to serve in the territories]. These were not weird kids with green ponytails and a ring in their nose with a strong odor of grass. These were people like Spector's group [Yiftah Spector, a renowned Air Force pilot who signed the pilot's letter]. Really our finest young people."

    Weisglass trumpets that the main achievement of the Gaza plan was the freezing of the peace process in a "legitimate manner."

    "That is exactly what happened," he said. "You know, the term 'peace process' is a bundle of concepts and commitments. The peace process is the establishment of a Palestinian state with all the security risks that entails. The peace process is the evacuation of settlements, it's the return of refugees, it's the partition of Jerusalem. And all that has now been frozen.... [W]hat I effectively agreed to with the Americans was that part of the settlements would not be dealt with at all, and the rest will not be dealt with until the Palestinians turn into Finns. That is the significance of what we did."

    Sharon, he said, could also argue "honestly" that the disengagement plan was "a serious move because of which, out of 240,000 settlers, 190,000 will not be moved from their place."
    Post edited by Byrnzie on
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    BRMLAW wrote:
    Hamas called for a two state solution? Thats astonishing. If you truly believe that you are truly on some kind of mind altering substance and its pointless to engage in discussion with you people. That's delusional. Hamas charter favors the destruction of Israel. Fucking read something besides Al Jazeera. Dont with my uninformed fools.

    I've already quoted what the Zionist leadership believes. Where was your outrage about that?

    And the Hamas charter is irrelevant. Did the communist manifesto prevent peace an eventual peaceful settlement between Russia and the West? No. There's one way to find out if Hamas are serious about peace: abide by resolution 242 and then see what happens.

    http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9917.shtml
    EI interview: Hamas advisor on talking to the US, Fatah and Israel
    Rami Almeghari, The Electronic Intifada, 28 October 2008


    Dr. Ahmed Yousef, senior advisor to Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, the leader of the Hamas government in Gaza:

    Hamas' views on the future

    RA: Hamas has long called for a long-term truce with Israel, an offer that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israel have rejected already. Is there a possibility that Hamas would consider other options?

    AY: We still stick to our political vision which is based on the truce or long-term ceasefire of five, ten or twenty years if Israel accepts to withdraw to the pre-1967 border. This remains our vision of the basis for a peaceful settlement of the conflict.

    RA: Abbas argues that a long-term truce will give Israel a chance to reoccupy the Palestinian territories. How do you view this?

    AY: I don't think that Abbas understands fully what we mean by a truce. The truce means that the Israelis will withdraw in a specified period, maybe six months, from all the occupied Palestinian territories, and they can get a guarantee for security for these ten or twenty years. We think this might set the stage for confidence building. After twenty years maybe the new generation of Palestinians will have different views for how to settle the conflict.

    When you do not have bloodshed maybe that would be a good time to talk about peace, but now while the cycle of death continues and we have daily funerals; I do not think this is a good time to talk about a full peaceful settlement. So we need to have time to heal from the injuries and from the bad memories of bloodshed between Muslims and Jews, between Palestinians and Jews. And after that this new generation will have its own political vision about how to settle the conflict maybe through a binational state or a one-state solution. I am sure they are going to come up with different proposals. But today this is what we can offer. A hudna -- twenty years of peace with the Palestinians having their own independent and free state on the pre-1967 borders.

    RA: There is a lot of talk about the death of the two-state solution and increased activism calling for a one-state solution as in South Africa. How does Hamas relate to these discussions and what are the current trends in thinking about a long-term solution?

    AY: It sounds good to talk about a one-state solution but this will be considered when the two-state solution fails. However, so far we are sticking to our position about a long-term truce. South Africa is a good model for coexistence, reconciliation and atonement. Until now we are still not addressing this issue. But in the future if the world's expectation of a viable independent Palestinian state fails because of expansionist Israeli policies -- already Israel has confiscated and annexed 50 percent of the land in the West Bank -- people will come to this issue and we will address it.

    RA: Who does Hamas look to as a political model from other struggles in history?

    AY: Of course there is Nelson Mandela, and we do look to non-Muslim and non-Arab countries as models. For example, Michael Collins in Ireland [Editor: Collins was one of the key leaders in Ireland's independence struggle]. I do believe that Hamas also looks at Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey as a good model as well. We are not Taliban, we are Erdogan.
This discussion has been closed.