Jump to content
Moonlight_Graham

Gaza Beatdown

Recommended Posts

Consider this...Hamas is a 2 year old, who knows that it can aggitate the older child for a long time before the child reacts. Then when the child does react parents unfortunately, have to react against the older chold.

Same situation...Hamas fucks with Israel until, Israel finally retaliates...and here's the messed up part... When the stronger, more powerful Israel reacts...the parents in the form of world opinion turn against her. As evidenced in the latest actions in the region...now Lebanon is firing rockets at Israel. Now the more interesting thing here is that this started just as Israel was strongly considering a ceasefire...

 

that analogy would be sound if the "child" were the sole aggressor, or if most of the western world wasn't pro-israel. your idea is flawed because it posits israel as simply a reactionary force, and one that does not instigate on its own, when history says otherwise (see: sabra and shatila massacre). also, it trivializes the pain and suffering of many israeli and palestinian people, many of whom were uninvolved with the conflict to begin with.

 

i'm optimistic that these two forces can arrive at a solution, but more of an international presence needs to exist in israel in order to tackle the issue of their treatment of palestinians, and to ensure that more israeli settlements are not established near either gaza or the west bank. as much as you hear that the palestinians use civilian rooftops to shoot their rockets from, israel has similar practises in that they develop new settlements for families closer and closer to harm's way, pawns in a politician's game. to relinquish that land is to let the palestinians "win," so instead, they settle it, allowing for a few casualties here and there as well as international sympathy.

 

bishop, did you know that the israeli military has bulldozed houses between rafah and the egyptian border, stationed military towers there instead, all to ensure that palestinians aren't allowed to trade with egypt? sure, trade includes everything, even weapons, but it also includes basic necessities like food. the situation has got to the point where palestinians now must tunnel underground in order to get even livestock or grains. what kind of existence is that? do they somehow "deserve" that? is that a measured response by israel? israel doesn't have to be egged on or aggravated to act out on the palestinians. it can do what it wants. but autonomy comes with a price: you're responsible for your own actions. palestine doesn't make israel do anything it hasn't already thought of, or hasn't been wanting to do for some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palestine was never a country, then what was it between end of WWI and after WWII when the British gave the land to Israel? I suppose it was just a British colony under British rule?

 

Anyways, what is obviously needed is a 2-state solution. But even then, you would see rogue peeps on both sides striking each other because they think the other should be off "their" land. Honestly, i wish we could go back in time and have given Israel their own state. It has brought democracy & a western ally to the middle-east, but little else other than violence. In 1947 & prior with the whole zionist movement i don't know why a nation like Jews should feel they have a right to have their own country. I see their point, its where they were before, but is it fair to kick other people off the land? Sometimes i just think maybe Israel should just pack up and leave, maybe the U.S. can give them Alaska, or Canada can give them the Yukon or something LOL. I'm sure a ton of Jews would never leave though, they want to keep their holy land & i can understand that.

 

I'm just glad i live in Canada and not where Shiri is, that would be scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Palestine was never a country, then what was it between end of WWI and after WWII when the British gave the land to Israel? I suppose it was just a British colony under British rule?

 

Anyways, what is obviously needed is a 2-state solution. But even then, you would see rogue peeps on both sides striking each other because they think the other should be off "their" land. Honestly, i wish we could go back in time and have given Israel their own state. It has brought democracy & a western ally to the middle-east, but little else other than violence. In 1947 & prior with the whole zionist movement i don't know why a nation like Jews should feel they have a right to have their own country. I see their point, its where they were before, but is it fair to kick other people off the land? Sometimes i just think maybe Israel should just pack up and leave, maybe the U.S. can give them Alaska, or Canada can give them the Yukon or something LOL. I'm sure a ton of Jews would never leave though, they want to keep their holy land & i can understand that.

 

I'm just glad i live in Canada and not where Shiri is, that would be scary.

 

apparently the area was considered the "mandate of palestine" and not a country... kind of an ambiguous area under the control of the british empire after the fall of the ottoman. i think it was proposed to be a country, but it was as much of a hot-spot then as it is now, so you can imagine how heated that debate was. there was a huge influx of jews to the area following world war one, and in a very short period of time conflicts arose between the jewish and arab populations of palestine, both claiming rights over the land. the UN tried to partition the land in half, one state arab, one state jewish, which was a huge concession for the jews and greatly displeased a lot of the arabs who were forced from their homes consequently. i think a lot of the modern conflict we see today still stems from this moment, and you can really attribute it to britain's failure to control the situation properly. obviously it's not just britains fault, but their decision played an integral role.

 

the two-state solution is tempting, and it seems obvious, but it's been tried before and i think it's only a band-aid. i highly doubt that israeli citizens, jewish or not, will not take kindly to their country being divided in two, when the land (aside from gaza and the west bank) has been considered theirs for so long. that said, israel has certainly bitten off more than it can chew, and should be mandated by the UN to retreat to its 1967 borders. really, they just need to cool off and co-exist. both have the right to be there. gaza needs to be under international control simply because you have three religious groups claiming that they have right to it. that issue will probably never be resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that analogy would be sound if the "child" were the sole aggressor, or if most of the western world wasn't pro-israel. your idea is flawed because it posits israel as simply a reactionary force, and one that does not instigate on its own, when history says otherwise (see: sabra and shatila massacre). also, it trivializes the pain and suffering of many israeli and palestinian people, many of whom were uninvolved with the conflict to begin with.

 

i'm optimistic that these two forces can arrive at a solution, but more of an international presence needs to exist in israel in order to tackle the issue of their treatment of palestinians, and to ensure that more israeli settlements are not established near either gaza or the west bank. as much as you hear that the palestinians use civilian rooftops to shoot their rockets from, israel has similar practises in that they develop new settlements for families closer and closer to harm's way, pawns in a politician's game. to relinquish that land is to let the palestinians "win," so instead, they settle it, allowing for a few casualties here and there as well as international sympathy.

 

bishop, did you know that the israeli military has bulldozed houses between rafah and the egyptian border, stationed military towers there instead, all to ensure that palestinians aren't allowed to trade with egypt? sure, trade includes everything, even weapons, but it also includes basic necessities like food. the situation has got to the point where palestinians now must tunnel underground in order to get even livestock or grains. what kind of existence is that? do they somehow "deserve" that? is that a measured response by israel? israel doesn't have to be egged on or aggravated to act out on the palestinians. it can do what it wants. but autonomy comes with a price: you're responsible for your own actions. palestine doesn't make israel do anything it hasn't already thought of, or hasn't been wanting to do for some time.

 

By no means was I trivializing any of this conflict. Being a student of history and of war in particular, I find all of this so very interesting. I totally agree that this primarily a politically driven situation. I am by no means painting Israel as the innocent...because yes, Sabra and Shatila were horrendous, and the Palestinian trade intervention, was downright vindictive. But I still maintain that because Israel is considered an unwelcome presence in the region, that a lot of what goes on from her end, is "carrying a big stick, or rattling the sabre" in an effort to remind her neighbors that like the "Wu-Tang Clan" Israel ain't nuttin to fuck with.

 

I also recognize the game of political chicken that gets played with the settlement, and that the American Jewish population, also plays a role in lobbying for these behaviors as well.

 

I guess the important thing I left out was that, while I understand why it happens, I by no means agree with it. Any war is horrible, but the needless murder of innocents is criminal. A former Israeli Officer stated on CNN the other day, that Hamas attacks innocent civilians, and that Israel is simply routing out cowards who use willing civilians to shield their agenda.

 

I pray for peace, but I don't forsee it. The two sides are just to unwilling to compromise. I think any hope of that died with Arafat.

Edited by bishopx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

israel is the only country that sends people to lobby in congress. they are also the biggest receiver of millarty aid in the world from the US. The ties between the two counties lie too deep if you ask me. If this were another two countries the US/UN intervenes.

 

Totally agree on the sentiment this isn't gonna ever be settled without some genocide or mass resettlement, I don't know who's "right" or there first but it just seems to me on the surface if US/Brittan put together this country, and all the arab world sees conflict maybe there's a better way to go about the situation.

 

 

As a citizen of the world, peace without violence is the only answer, and this conflict is just dragging the world down. Plenty of other more important things to fight about than what dirt is under your feet. People of all religions(yawn) and races need to man up quit pointing fingers and start helping each other even if it means losing the battle to win the war.

 

That said if I live in israel and believe me if rockets were going over my head i'd move, jobs, houses, family don't matter much if your not alive. i'd be under the approach of fire a rocket(poorly, indirectly, whatever) we level a city. rattling that sabre would be an understatement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.