Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

It seems that Hamas does no good for those living in the Gaza strip. Why don't they decide

to have Hamas leave that area and use the Palistian Authority instead? The Arabs in the

Gaza strip are being used by Hamas for their political goal and it is brutal for the Arabs.


Jul 23rd 2014 new
(quote) Marianne-100218 said:

It seems that Hamas does no good for those living in the Gaza strip. Why don't they decide

to have Hamas leave that area and use the Palistian Authority instead? The Arabs in the

Gaza strip are being used by Hamas for their political goal and it is brutal for the Arabs.


I gather that Hamas has most of the guns.
Jul 23rd 2014 new
(quote) Marianne-100218 said:

It seems that Hamas does no good for those living in the Gaza strip. Why don't they decide

to have Hamas leave that area and use the Palistian Authority instead? The Arabs in the

Gaza strip are being used by Hamas for their political goal and it is brutal for the Arabs.


Folks are working on that: tinyurl.com

Easier said than done. Abbas' strategy in forming a unity government with Hamas was perhaps naive, but his goal was turning them away from violence and accepting reality. Israel is there to stay, and Abbas accepts that even though Hamas clearly does not. The Muslim Brotherhood was Hamas' main source of support, and we're making headway talking with Iran so they are becoming increasingly isolated. There has to be a better way without slaughtering so many civilians. Hamas may be deviously hiding missiles in underground bunkers beneath homes and hospitals, but it is morally wrong for Israel finding 70-80% civilian casualties an acceptable price to pay. They both have blood on their hands. With every military operation into Gaza, Israel loses a measure of the world's support. It's even eroding here and we are virtually their only friend. Hamas' missiles are a problem for certain, but they are only a reaction to the elephant in the room that few have the courage to notice- Israel's ever expanding occupation. Most Israelis and Americans are just fine with an entire people living in a permanent ghetto status. Out of sight, out of mind. A forced migration to Jordan as some suggest would be a logistical nightmare, and would be referred to as a "New Nakba."

You may see this as a good thing, but you have to acknowledge the following illustration explains quite well the frustration of the Palestinian people:

tinyurl.com

My two cents



Jul 23rd 2014 new
I'm pleased to find myself in agreement with Peter on a number of points here, but (I know, there's always a 'but') feel impelled to add:

1. The map he links (the 1897 one) is seriously misleading, because it only shows Western Palestine. At that time, the whole of what is now Jordan (and the West Bank) was part of Palestine, which of course was not an Arab state but a province of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. An accurate map would, of course, show a much larger amount of territory in Arab hands. The map shown in the link is closer to showing what Palestine looked like in 1921 when the British occupiers drew a line down the Jordan River and pronounced everything east of it to be "Trans-Jordan" and therefore not-Palestine.

2. "It is morally wrong for Israel finding 70-80% civilian casualties an acceptable price to pay". Israel's counterstrikes are as surgical as it gets in these things, given Hamas's placement of rocket launchers in heavily populated areas. no country in the world would passively accept rocket attacks. Again, if Mexico were lobbing thousands of rockets into Texas, you don't think the US would (at a minimum) try to take out the rocket batteries, regardless of the collateral damage to Mexican civilians?

3. "The elephant in the room--Israel's ever-expanding occupation". Just to be clear, the settlements Peter refers to are not in Gaza at all, they're way over in the West Bank. Israel ended its occupation of Gaza years ago. Whatever is motivating the rocket attacks, solidarity with West Bank Palestinians is probably not high on the list. The close Hamas-Iran relationship and other factors may be far more motivating.
Jul 23rd 2014 new
#1~ "The map he links (the 1897 one) is seriously misleading, because it only shows Western Palestine." You're right but it is there only for comparison to the modern territory that is relevant.

#2~ I stand by what I posted. I don't believe the US would deliberately sacrifice near that many civilians. And yes I'm aware of the collateral damage during WWII especially in Dresden, Germany. Different world.

#3~ I'm fully aware that there have been no settlements in Gaza since Sharon removed them in 2005. Many Palestinian families have been torn apart between the two territories. Upon release from prison, Palestinians from the West Bank or East Jerusalem are not allowed to rejoin their families and are banished to Gaza. Those family connections remain so they do have solidarity with each other.

I am very glad I am not a negotiator with the State Department taking a job doomed to fail even before presenting my credentials!
Jul 23rd 2014 new
(quote) Peter-449116 said: I am very glad I am not a negotiator with the State Department taking a job doomed to fail even before presenting my credentials!
Re: #2: Plenty of civilians died under U.S. fire in both Vietnam and Iraq. And neither Vietnam nor Iraq was flinging rockets into the U.S., so the American case is that much weaker than Israel's. I am simply arguing against a double standard for assessing the morality of "collateral damage". Couldn't agree with you more re the plight of any State Department official who has to deal with this mess!
Jul 23rd 2014 new
(quote) Peter-449116 said: Folks are working on that: http://tinyurl.com/pl4opv8

Easier said than done. Abbas' strategy in forming a unity government with Hamas was perhaps naive, but his goal was turning them away from violence and accepting reality. Israel is there to stay, and Abbas accepts that even though Hamas clearly does not. The Muslim Brotherhood was Hamas' main source of support, and we're making headway talking with Iran so they are becoming increasingly isolated. There has to be a better way without slaughtering so many civilians. Hamas may be deviously hiding missiles in underground bunkers beneath homes and hospitals, but it is morally wrong for Israel finding 70-80% civilian casualties an acceptable price to pay. They both have blood on their hands. With every military operation into Gaza, Israel loses a measure of the world's support. It's even eroding here and we are virtually their only friend. Hamas' missiles are a problem for certain, but they are only a reaction to the elephant in the room that few have the courage to notice- Israel's ever expanding occupation. Most Israelis and Americans are just fine with an entire people living in a permanent ghetto status. Out of sight, out of mind. A forced migration to Jordan as some suggest would be a logistical nightmare, and would be referred to as a "New Nakba."

You may see this as a good thing, but you have to acknowledge the following illustration explains quite well the frustration of the Palestinian people:

http://tinyurl.com/psks6hx

My



Since Hamas will not agree to a "cease fire," and since it continually fires its big weapons at
Israel, the Israeli's are compelled to go after Hamas' weapons once they determine their
position.

And we know those weapons are concealed in fragile locations. This is nothing new for
Hamas. The Arabs should try to get them out since they now know how destructive
the alliance is. Truly a shame.


Jul 24th 2014 new
(quote) Paul-1049651 said: Re: #2: Plenty of civilians died under U.S. fire in both Vietnam and Iraq. And neither Vietnam nor Iraq was flinging rockets into the U.S., so the American case is that much weaker than Israel's. I am simply arguing against a double standard for assessing the morality of "collateral damage". Couldn't agree with you more re the plight of any State Department official who has to deal with this mess!
Hi Paul,

How should one evaluate the potential " collateral " aspects of the hamas attempts to strike a fission reactor in Israel ?

A reactor strike could produce more damage and deaths than Chernobyl.

Could or should such attacks be framed as WMD attempts ?

Should that be a factor in evaluating IDF responses ?


Jul 24th 2014 new
(quote) Bernie-645443 said: Hi Paul,

How should one evaluate the potential " collateral " aspects of the hamas attempts to strike a fission reactor in Israel ?

A reactor strike could produce more damage and deaths than Chernobyl.

Could or should such attacks be framed as WMD attempts ?

Should that be a factor in evaluating IDF responses ?


I'd answer yes to both, Bernie. I hadn't read about that. Since Iran is Hamas' rocket supplier, Israel could declare that any such attack will be considered a nuclear strike by Iran, conducted by proxy, and that Israel will respond accordingly. The mullahs have lots of nuclear plants, the Israelis have lots of tactical warheads. It should also be pointed out that if Iran is not willing to help contain the WMD threat, this will necessarily affect how nations evaluate its insistence that its own nuclear program is purely peaceful. It wouldn't cost Iran much to cut off all military shipments to Gaza and to demand (however futilely) the return of any such materiel that Hamas has not already expended. The US and Europe (and Canada) funnel money to Abbas, so he should be pressured into using whatever influence he may have with his "partner" Hamas. Or Israel could wipe out as much of Hamas as it can find and turn Gaza over to Abbas.
Jul 24th 2014 new
(quote) Marianne-100218 said:

Since Hamas will not agree to a "cease fire," and since it continually fires its big weapons at
Israel, the Israeli's are compelled to go after Hamas' weapons once they determine their
position.

And we know those weapons are concealed in fragile locations. This is nothing new for
Hamas. The Arabs should try to get them out since they now know how destructive
the alliance is. Truly a shame.


If Hamas could shoot its rockets straight and accurately, does anyone doubt that they would aim them to produce the greatest number of possible casualties in Israel? Hamas routinely uses the Palestinian citizens as human shields to protect their missiles and other weapons. Until the Palestinians get rid of Hamas, they have no chance of achieving peace.

Hamas uses citizens to protect its missiles.

Israel uses missiles to protect its citizens.

Israel uses the Iron Dome system to protect its citizens from incoming missiles. Hamas would have no use for such an Iron Dome system. Hamas continually hopes to garner sympathy (through the media) by showing the casualties on their side. If they had an Iron Dome system, they would limit casualties, which would be counterproductive (in their eyes).

Perhaps the Palestinians will make a wiser choice at the ballot box next time. What do they expect will happen when they vote for terrorists.

IMHO.

Ed
Posts 1 - 10 of 108