Israel should use this gesture from Hamas to directly engage them!

[Kalam]

Hamas can go a long way in this by releasing Schalit.

Maybe, but Israel shouldn't hinge its willingness to work towards peace on the fate of a single prisoner of war.

 

[DavidS]

Hamas can go a long way in this by releasing Schalit.

Maybe, but Israel shouldn't hinge its willingness to work towards peace on the fate of a single prisoner of war.

Please go back and read what happened in 2006 when Israel went to war against Hezbollah because they captured two soldiers.

In my opinion, it wasn't worth it. The war was poorly planned, however; Israel is willing to do quite a lot in order to make sure Schallit is released. If Hamas were to release him, unharmed and unconditionally, you would see Israel give up quite a lot of concessions in return.

 

[DavidS]

You seem like a rational person, not nearly as bad as I feared. So, that's good.

Okay, so, let me ask you this:

Can you please show me the cease fire agreement in which Israel said, in accordance with this cease-fire agreement with Israel whereas if there were NO rockets fired from Gaza for this period of time, Israel would agree to lift the blockade?

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. No written text containing the specific conditions of the cease-fire was ever accepted by both Israel and Hamas. It was obviously understood that the two would end military operations against one another if Hamas stopped rocket and mortar attacks and if Israel eased its stranglehold on Gaza's commerce.

But that's the thing. There's a difference between outright stopping them, which is what a cease fire is, and reducing the number. 11 rockets is still 11 rockets. That's not a cease fire. How many times has America bombed Japan since the end of World War 2? Zero. Why? We have a cease fire agreement. It's pretty simple. The other side did not stop firing rockets. And Gaza really wasn't much of a center for trade before Hamas took over to begin with. I mean, let's be honest here. Gaza has been a third world country since the Arabs took it over in the 1920s and 1930s.

I mean, this supposed cease fire began in June 2008 and ended in December. During this time over 500 rockets and mortars were fired at Israel. Doesn't sound like much of a cease fire to me....

Expressing the number in that way is disingenuous. From the beginning of July through October, only 11 rockets were fired (8 in August, one in each of the other months,) presumably by a terrorist group or groups outside of Hamas' control. Rocket fire was extremely reduced. During this entire period, Israel did almost nothing in the way of lifting the blockade in spite of Hamas keeping up its end of the bargain incredibly well for four months. [/QUOTE]

Holding up a bargain means NO rocket attacks. Not a few. Not a half dozen. Not a dozen. NO attacks.

You're also forgetting the number of rockets fired at Israel in June, which was over 150.

As I explained, there were virtually no rockets being fired at Israel for a 4-month period.

There's a big difference between virtually none and none. You can't be virtually pregnant or virtually dead. You either are or you aren't. And Israel did ease up on restrictions - just not as much as Gaza wants. Again, this was Israel's blockade. There was also a blockade from Egypt as well.

Rocket attacks during the first month of the ceasefire obviously weren't completely reduced, as word had to be spread that a ceasefire was in effect.

Yeah, because Gaza is a HUGE area with tens of millions of people and all....

After that, rocket attacks all but ended until frustration evidently began giving way to more attacks in November.

11 rockets and mortars is not all but ended.

What's the significance of this?

You compared death tolls. If Hamas had its way, there would be tens of thousands of dead Israelis. It's not as if a rocket landing in your home with you there couldn't kill you. It could. The only reason why Israel's numbers were so low was because Israel sent its people into bomb shelters.

Imagine what it must feel like to have your town pounded for a month by modern weaponry (not feebly-constructed "rockets.") [/QUOTE]

Economically, how about having to rely on aid that can barely get through to your overcrowded, highly-polluted ruin of a city?

If the place is so over crowded and the people are so poor, why do they have 10 children per family? See, rational people say: "We only make x amount of money per year and we cannot afford more children." Don't blame Israel because Gaza is small and overcrowded.

The only two death tolls have been provided by the Palestinian Ministry of Health and the IDF. Frankly, it's ridiculous to believe that the IDF's report is any more accurate than the MoH's.

If you feel the MoH's numbers are innacurate, why do you quote them?

Oh, only 300? That makes it all okay, then.

It doesn't. Hamas is responsible for their deaths by using them as human shields.

Hamas' interspersion of its soldiers into groups of civilian is doubtlessly overstated in an attempt to justify civilian deaths caused by Israel.

Oh so you think Israel shouldn't fire into a home that Hamas is using to fire rockets into Israel? Israel should let them stay there and let them keep firing rockets. Is that it?

Hamas did not hide in UN buildings the American International School, or mosques during prayer (when Israel felt the need to strike.)

Hamas doesn't play by the rules but you expect Israel to?

Double standard much?

Even if they did, dropping a bomb on a building full of civilians to take a out a couple of Hamas fighters would be unjustified.

How does Israel know if a building has civilians in it or not? They see Hamas firing a rocket from the building. At that point, Hamas is endangering the lives of the civilians in the same building, if there are any. Sorry, but if you're firing weapons and using civilians as human shields, you're using those people as propoganda and lining the dead bodies up on the streets in full front of view for the cameras to see. It's propoganda. You don't actually think Hamas would go out there, put on some uniforms and fight, do you? Of course not. They're cowards.

The death of civilians to kill Hamas terrorists who use those civilians as human shields is justified. Hamas uses them as human shields for one of two reasons: Reason 1: They hope that Israel won't fire into the building so Hamas can keep firing into Israel cities, villages and towns and kill Israeli civilians or reason 2: That if Israel does fire into the building, they'll kill the terrorists and the civilians and then Hamas will use those civilians as propoganda. The IDF's main goal is to protect Israeli civilians. NOT Gaza civilians. So the IDF must eliminate the threat to its civilians.

Hamas has no aircraft or effective anti-aircraft weaponry.

Not my concern.

Israel could easily have flown in, bombed Hamas' military and government installations, and left Hamas crippled without causing any significant number of civilian casualties.

What's your point? And Israel could have also easily dropped a couple of atomic bombs into Gaza and evacuated some of the bordering towns and villages and would have not had to worry about any further threat from Hamas. They didn't do that either.

The report of civilians killed in the UN school was completely infactual and there were no civilians killed in that report at all!

Can you back that up with a credible source? [/QUOTE]

Any source I would quote you, you wouldn't find credible. Just as any source you quote me, I wouldn't find credible.

If you're going to use this forum as a tool for propoganda for Hamas, please let me know so I can put you on ignore. If, however; you're here to freely discuss and exchange ideas and are open to seeing another side of the story... I welcome you.

All of Hamas' soldiers can die for all I care. My concern is for the people of Gaza, whose condition will never improve as long as Israeli oppression drives them to elect violent and ineffective governments.[/quote]

I see no difference between Hamas and those who elected Hamas.

This is what I see:

 

[GHook93]

Hamas can go a long way in this by releasing Schalit.

Maybe, but Israel shouldn't hinge its willingness to work towards peace on the fate of a single prisoner of war.

They haven't! The daily and continuous rocket fire was the cause!

 

[Shogun]

Hamas can go a long way in this by releasing Schalit.

Maybe, but Israel shouldn't hinge its willingness to work towards peace on the fate of a single prisoner of war.

Lets be honest.. thats nothing more than a straw man excuse anyway.

Hell, zionist complain about the hostage status of one jew from the military while holding the entire fucking population of pali refugees by the neck in what amounts to giant concentration camps. Shalit could be released tomorrow and israel would find one more excuse not to face their racism.

 

[Kalam]

But that's the thing. There's a difference between outright stopping them, which is what a cease fire is, and reducing the number. 11 rockets is still 11 rockets. That's not a cease fire. How many times has America bombed Japan since the end of World War 2? Zero. Why? We have a cease fire agreement. It's pretty simple. The other side did not stop firing rockets.

The understanding seems to have been that Israel would lift its embargo in stages as reductions in missile fire occurred. As you can see, the number of missiles fired dropped exponentially. Incredibly little was done in the way of lifting the embargo, so the attacks resumed again. Bitching about 11 rockets fired over the course of four months is nonsensical. Hamas can't maintain constant surveillance over every single person in the Gaza strip; a few rockets are going to be fired by someone no matter what. The ceasefire was between Hamas and Israel - Hamas ceased firing.

And Gaza really wasn't much of a center for trade before Hamas took over to begin with. I mean, let's be honest here. Gaza has been a third world country since the Arabs took it over in the 1920s and 1930s.

Arabs took over Gaza in the 7th century. It was a fairly successful fishing center for most of its history and had thriving bazaars before the advent of Zionist mass emigration and the creation of Israel.

Holding up a bargain means NO rocket attacks. Not a few. Not a half dozen. Not a dozen. NO attacks.

Again, this wasn't the understanding. No missiles is a stupidly unrealistic goal... even Israel realizes this.

You're also forgetting the number of rockets fired at Israel in June, which was over 150.

That's because the ceasefire didn't take effect until June 19th.

There's a big difference between virtually none and none. You can't be virtually pregnant or virtually dead. You either are or you aren't. And Israel did ease up on restrictions - just not as much as Gaza wants. Again, this was Israel's blockade. There was also a blockade from Egypt as well.

No, Israel did next to nothing to end the blockade. The "blockade from Egypt" was the same blockade.

Yeah, because Gaza is a HUGE area with tens of millions of people and all....

If you believe that you could successfully convince 1.5 million people to stop launching all missiles towards Israel in about 10 days, you should go for it.

11 rockets and mortars is not all but ended.

Yes, it is. Quit dwelling on the fact that a couple of missiles were still fired. It's an insufficient excuse for Israel's failure to uphold its end of the bargain.

You compared death tolls. If Hamas had its way, there would be tens of thousands of dead Israelis. It's not as if a rocket landing in your home with you there couldn't kill you. It could. The only reason why Israel's numbers were so low was because Israel sent its people into bomb shelters.

The reason why Israel's death tolls have been so low is the fact that Qassam rockets are pieces of crap.

Internet tough guy, huh?

If the place is so over crowded and the people are so poor, why do they have 10 children per family? See, rational people say: "We only make x amount of money per year and we cannot afford more children."

High birth rates are tied to a lack of availability of educational opportunities.

If you feel the MoH's numbers are innacurate, why do you quote them?

Because I don't doubt that their numbers are less inaccurate than the figures provided by those who did the killing.

It doesn't. Hamas is responsible for their deaths by using them as human shields.

That's foolish. If someone trying to kill you hid behind a child, and you were stupid enough to take the bait and shoot anyway, the innocent blood would be on your hands. Absolving the people doing the trigger-pulling of all guilt is downright ridiculous.

Oh so you think Israel shouldn't fire into a home that Hamas is using to fire rockets into Israel? Israel should let them stay there and let them keep firing rockets. Is that it?

Hamas doesn't fire rockets into Israel from homes in Gaza city.

No, I don't believe that there's an excuse for bombing a building full of civilians to kill a couple of enemy combatants. If you want to take them out, shoot them individually instead of carpet bombing a densely-populated urban area like a coward.

Hamas doesn't play by the rules but you expect Israel to?

Double standard much?

Hamas is a terrorist group. Israel is a state. If the IDF wants itself to be seen as anything better than a terrorist organization like Hamas, it has to be held to a higher moral standard.

How does Israel know if a building has civilians in it or not?

Non-military buildings typically have civilians in them. You can be pretty damn sure that civilians are going to be in a mosque during prayer time. How does Israel know if a building has "terrorists" in it or not?

They see Hamas firing a rocket from the building. At that point, Hamas is endangering the lives of the civilians in the same building, if there are any.

I do not believe that Israel waited to see conclusive evidence of rocket fire before targeting every non-military building they destroyed.

Sorry, but if you're firing weapons and using civilians as human shields, you're using those people as propoganda and lining the dead bodies up on the streets in full front of view for the cameras to see. It's propoganda.

Failed attempt to rationalize Israel's indiscriminate killing of civilians.

You don't actually think Hamas would go out there, put on some uniforms and fight, do you? Of course not. They're cowards.

Can you spot the difference?

If not, don't worry. Neither can Israel.

What's your point? And Israel could have also easily dropped a couple of atomic bombs into Gaza and evacuated some of the bordering towns and villages and would have not had to worry about any further threat from Hamas. They didn't do that either.

My point is that their goals could easily have been accomplished without causing the needless deaths of nearly 1,000 civilians.

Any source I would quote you, you wouldn't find credible. Just as any source you quote me, I wouldn't find credible.

Anything from the mainstream media (Israeli sources and bullshit factories like Fox and the Torygraph not included) will suffice. If you can't find anything, post what you've got and I'll look at it anyway.

I see no difference between Hamas and those who elected Hamas.

Most of Gaza's population either voted against Hamas or were too young to vote. Half of the population is under 15 years old.