Gaza

[MrGongGong]

Hamas may be less corrupt, be supported by a majority of Palestinians, involved in social welfare scheme &c &c - but it still believes that the mass killing of its people is a necessary lever to force the 'international community' to act. In a moral sense, that is complicity. If the blockade were lifted, essential supplies could reach the people.
.

If you really believe that the apartheid regime in Israel will somehow start to obey international law and stop killing innocent people if Hamas stops firing rockets then I think you are more than a little naive.
Israel doesn't really want peace because that would mean handing back land that they have been building on and water they have stolen. If I was a Palestinian in Gaza I would see that this is a war to try and drive an oppressor out of my country.

[amateur51]

'We' don't come into it. How is Hamas benefiting its own people? They obstruct any chance for peace.

The first priority is to stop the violence in Gaza; Hamas has the means to achieve that if it stops firing rockets. Then there can be international talks about the rights of the Palestinians, in Gaza and Israel.

Hamas is not the Palestinian people: Hamas is complicit in the deaths along with the Israelis. Supporting Hamas is not supporting the Palestinians.

Dunno where this 'we' came from. I was commenting on why Palestinians might be supporting Hamas.

[amateur51]

'We' don't come into it. How is Hamas benefiting its own people? They obstruct any chance for peace.

The first priority is to stop the violence in Gaza; Hamas has the means to achieve that if it stops firing rockets.

I wish I could agree with you. I'm not so sure that the IDF will be called off before they have destroyed all the Hamas tunnels.Today Israel has called up thousands of reservists.

[ahinton]

God knows I'm no fan of Dawkins (smiley) but I know exactly what he means when he refers to grades of sexual offences. The same generally applies to any type of offence including civil ones breaking the speed-limit in a restricted area. So many of us can well understand that slapping someone on the face is of a quite different order from, say, shooting him/her in the head.

The problem with this is that their sheer blinding obviousness makes his statements on such subjects either patronising or self-incriminating or both; of course raping someone ten times is worse than doing it once and of course driving at twice the speed limit is worse than exceeding it by a few kph, but the point is, of course, that serious criminal offences are serious criminal offences.

As to the subject here, of course there will be no progress until both sides agree to a cease-fire and maintain it indefinitely and that's unlikely to occur until each side is prepared to discuss, agree, implement and maintain the location of the border as well as agree thereafter to live in peace as neighbours on the grounds that to do otherwise will be contrary to the interests of both; that this situation sadly looks increasingly remote does not undermine its fundamental necessity.

[amateur51]

As to the subject here, of course there will be no progress until both sides agree to a cease-fire and maintain it indefinitely and that's unlikely to occur until each side is prepared to discuss, agree, implement and maintain the location of the border as well as agree thereafter to live in peace as neighbours on the grounds that to do otherwise will be contrary to the interests of both; that this situation sadly looks increasingly remote does not undermine its fundamental necessity.

America and UN need to get on Israel's case and start making life difficult for the politicians. Irrespective of the merits of their justification of this round of terror, israel has been behaving like a rogue state. Such behaviour must be seen to have serious consequences, consequences that will hurt Israel and its citizens. To equate what Israel's citizens have been through with Hamas' rockets with what has been inflicted by Israel on Palestinian citizens is simply disingenuous and grotesque.

[french frank]

Dunno where this 'we' came from. I was commenting on why Palestinians might be supporting Hamas.

Strictly, I should have said 'our' rather than 'we', as in "they may be bastards but at least they're our bastards".

When the blockade is lifted, the tunnels won't be needed.

[ahinton]

America and UN need to get on Israel's case and start making life difficult for the politicians. Irrespective of the merits of their justification of this round of terror, israel has been behaving like a rogue state. Such behaviour must be seen to have serious consequences, consequences that will hurt Israel and its citizens. To equate what Israel's citizens have been through with Hamas' rockets with what has been inflicted by Israel on Palestinian citizens is simply disingenuous and grotesque.

The comparative statistics for loss of life alone demonstrate the veracity of what you write here. I no more offer any defence of Hamas's actions against Israel than I imagine you do, but it's clear that Israel has vastly greater resources for use against Palestinian citizens, both civilian and military, than has Hamas to deploy against Israel, the tunnels et al notwithstanding. The trouble is that, as Israel can and does also rely upon a certain amount of US support (however covert some of that is lately becoming as a matter of cynical convenience for US), the likelihood that US will break ranks and "get on Israel's case", as you put it, strikes me as pretty remote, so it will have to be down to UN and anyone else with sufficient clout to try to bring Israel into line. After all, were the current situation to be left to fester and perhaps escalate for a few years unchecked, the sheer numbers of people on both sides will dwindle alarmingly and, based upon present statistics, possibly even to the point at which there will eventually be hardly any Palestinians left.

[aeolium]

Hamas may be less corrupt, be supported by a majority of Palestinians, involved in social welfare scheme &c &c - but it still believes that the mass killing of its people is a necessary lever to force the 'international community' to act. In a moral sense, that is complicity. If the blockade were lifted, essential supplies could reach the people. Would Hamas then increase its rocket attacks, given that its primary concern is not, apparently, the 'welfare' of the people?

But the blockade has not been lifted in eight years - if anything it has intensified. And it has intensified irrespective of whether Hamas has or has not been firing missiles (in some cases rockets have been fired not by Hamas but by other Islamic groups outside its control). Hamas' claim has consistently been that a condition for a cessation of hostilities is that the blockade should be lifted but Israel, not trusting Hamas, refuses to lift it. A cynical view as to why Hamas continues to fire rockets even though they are ineffectual and result in reprisals might be that only a really horrendous Israeli assault with bombs and shells and tanks will bring home to the international community what the real condition of Palestinians in Gaza is - when people are dying of starvation or due to lack of medical supplies, it doesn't tend to get in the papers or on TV.

The key fact is: is the international community more likely to act if Hamas continues with its violence; or is it more likely to act if Hamas renounces violence? Because I also can't see that a solution will be achieved without the international community taking the Israelis by the metaphorical throat.

I don't think it's likely to act in either situation. The only important 'actor' is the US and due to the pro-Israeli lobby and electoral arithmetic no government there will take the strong action that is needed. I think the Palestinians are resigned to the fact that they will get no help from the international community (except perhaps from fellow-Muslims) and that their fate is dependent on changes in the region. Other revolutions in the Middle East in recent decades, and particularly the Arab Spring, have been achieved not because of the US but in spite of it (it supported the regime of the Shah, and other dictatorial regimes like Mubarak's).

[amateur51]

Strictly, I should have said 'our' rather than 'we', as in "they may be bastards but at least they're our bastards".

When the blockade is lifted, the tunnels won't be needed.

I hope that's true but ...

[MrGongGong]

I hope that's true but ...

Sadly I think you are right
they lift the blockade and then give the land back ?
Stop building illegal settlements ?
Stop killing children who throw stones at soldiers?
Stop stealing water ?

I don't think so (sadly) :-(

[Ferretfancy]

I was talking the other day to a friend who is a secular jew, and he told me that he had spoken to jews of his acquaintance here in London, some religious, some not.

Their attitude seems to be " Yes, it's terrible, my heart goes out to the suffering children, but the Israelis are not like us, are they ?" They say sheepishly. In other words, they condemn the suffering, but still wish to support Israel, even though " They are not like us "

As long as this attitude continues there is no hope. Hitler must be smiling in Hell.

Of course, we are all "like us", and need to examine ourselves and do something about it.

[jean]

I was talking the other day to a friend who is a secular jew, and he told me that he had spoken to jews of his acquaintance here in London, some religious, some not.

Their attitude seems to be " Yes, it's terrible, my heart goes out to the suffering children, but the Israelis are not like us, are they?" They say sheepishly.

I have no idea what your friend means by this.

Could you ask him to elaborate?

[Ferretfancy]

I have no idea what your friend means by this.

Could you ask him to elaborate?

He meant that his liberal jewish friends, while horrified like the rest of us, somehow managed in their minds to justify inaction by saying that Israelis were not like them. We so often fail to take a real stand, and not just our jewish acquaintances, because we are able in our minds to make the perpetrators as 'other' in some way.

Why are we not expressing national outrage? So far the public reaction outside the media has been muted at best.

[jean]

That argument makes no sense to me at all.

[Ferretfancy]

That argument makes no sense to me at all.

I'm sorry about that, but it doesn't seem obscure to me.