Discussion in 'Israel and Palestine' started by Annie, Dec 27, 2008.
Israel launches air strikes on Gaza, 145 dead - Yahoo! News
Whoops, 145 dead.
The cycle of violence keeps a turning.
What else can anyone say?
The warmongers on both sides are winning
Here's where we differ, I don't see a response to being attacked, warmongering or a basis to hit the diplomatic tables.
Israel attacks Gaza, more than 155 reported killed | Reuters
Read this article by Reuters. The death toll has risen to 155 and Hamas is claiming 170 have died. For the past... gosh, I dunno how many years, ever since Israel left Gaza strip and allowed the Arabs there to fend for themselves, they started launching rockets and artillery at Israel. Their rockets have killed dozens of people. In the past few months, while this truce has been going on between Hamas and Israel, Hamas has been firing rockets and artillery at Israel. And Israel has responded with barely a pin prick.
Now the "truce" is finally over and what happens? In the past week or so, southern Israel has been bombarded with rockets. Hundreds. Not a few. Not a dozen, not even a few dozen. HUNDREDS.
So my question is, why doesn't this story talk about it? The bias in the media against Israel is absolutely astounding. This has been an issue of mine for a long, long time. Yes, talk about Hamas and the dead Arabs. Yes, talk about the air strikes. But don't limit the reason for the Israeli airstrikes to: "The air strikes followed a decision by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's security cabinet to widen reprisals for cross-border Palestinian rocket attacks following the collapse of a six-month-old, Egyptian-brokered ceasefire a week ago."
The article makes it sound like there have only been a few rocket attacks, no one has died or been injured and everything is fine and dandy until this big, bad Israel comes along and destroys everything and kills nearly 200 people.
It goes beyond that, though. Now there's this huge meeting of Arab leaders to take a position on the attack. Abbas calls these actions criminal. European Union Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana said "We are very concerned at the events in Gaza. We call for an immediate ceasefire and urge everybody to exert maximum restraint," his spokesman said. Where was he a week ago, or even earlier this week when southern israel was being bombarded by rockets?
The world community chooses to ignore when Israel is attacked and when Israelis are killed, yet when Israel takes a step to defend itself, the world community unilaritarily condemns Israel. It's a sad state of affairs to be honest.
Now about the actual attack itself. It's horrible that Israel has to, once again, resort to this to defend itself. I pray that not one innocent Arab who has had nothing to do with these attacks on Sothern Israel is killed or even hurt. But I also pray that every single member of Hamas is wiped out. Wiped out for good. Once and for all. Destroyed. Anihilated. There can be no peace while Hamas continues to exist.
David, I think it's because when Israel responds, it's effective. All those missiles lobbed and all Hamas manages to do is kill two little girls and more than a few of the 'militants' who cannot fire straight, or sometimes even manage to get them fired at all.
In fact, this illustrates the weird mindset of 'many' from both sides of the spectrum. While it's not nice to overrun other's borders or lob missiles or make pronouncements of death and destruction if the 'not nice' happen to be ineffective or just blowhards, the recipient is expected to just 'take it.' Most successful countries are just that because at one time they learned to not just protect themselves, but prevent attacks. Now any effective response is called 'disproportionate or even aggressive.'
It would be easier to understand your position if you were equally defensive about other countries as well.
I've supported India's right to respond to the attacks, I supported the Afghanistan war when the US responded to 9/11, uhhmmm... let's see... give me an example of another conflict where a country is attacked by an opposing government.
And I must say, I need you to provide me with some examples of when countries have just sat there and taken it. Besides France in World War 2, can you name any other country?
The so called rockets that Hamas shots into Israel are no more that glorified bottle rockets.
They are home made rockets with no guidance systems and very little explosives packed inside.
Only a very small number of Isralies have been harmed by these inefective weapons.
When Israel responds, it is with massive amounts of high expolsives that kills large numbers of civilians.
Of course any Palestinians that are murdered are declaired to be Hamas or Hamas Leadership. No matter if they are women, children, or even dead babies.
Sure the US prior to 9/11, with the exceptions of lobbing a few missiles against useless targets. The US allowing uncontrolled illegal immigration for years and implying those that saw that as both security and cost issues being xenophobic and anti-immigration.
European countries allowing ghettos of angry, young immigrants, (ssshhh, Muslim), to riot and destroy property at will.
What you are saying is not true, these are more than 'bottle rockets'. What you are saying is that a country should respond with the same incompetence as it's lowest, most ineffective enemy?
In actuality, it would be evolutionary for Israel to annex the Gaza and Palestinian ghettos, control them, and bring some semblance of civilization there.
Separate names with a comma.