Israel-Hamas War

OK, I think it's high time I made a post about this.

The number of civilian casualties in this war is ridiculous. At the point where Israel is quite literally targeting UN shelters for civilians, I just don't have any confidence in their claims that they're only targeting Hamas fighters. Putting aside any political claims of statehood or whatever, I just don't see this as justifiable in any way. Even if they kill every Hamas fighter, I don't see that as stopping the resistance under these conditions either. If anything, this gives them more reason to fight back.

admin: Intifada!!

Also this: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/07/25/israel_brazil_world_cup_loss_official_spokesperson_taunts_brazil_over_loss.html

admin: What if Hamas militants are hiding among civilians? It wouldn't be too surprising, as they already use human shields. If this were the case, it would be quite difficult for the IDF not to hit the civilians as collateral damage. Israel is looking out for its own best interests, which means defeating the enemy which constantly bombards Israel with missiles. If this means that lots of Palestinian civilians must die in order to achieve this goal, then they're showing about as much consideration as Hamas.

Dassault Papillon: So a few points here:

> I rather trust the UNOCHA. I have real trouble believing that when children and elderly are killed when a special humanitarian area was set up in a school and constantly patrolled by the UN to keep out weapons, there were Hamas fighters there.
> I somehow don't believe that Hamas fighters are particularly effective when they hide behind children playing on the beach
> Nor do I believe that when Israelis abduct and then kill Palestinians in "revenge" attacks that never go prosecuted by the government, that this shields Hamas
> Nor do I understand how refusing medical care to injured civilians, even injured Palestinians, provides any sort of cover for Hamas
> "showing about as much consideration as Hamas" - the majority of the missiles hurled at Israel, though not counted in the official statistics for obvious reasons, are actually rocks thrown by protesters who oppose the occupation, not Hamas rockets. The Israeli army invariably responds to such protests by mowing down the protesters with automatic weapons. Israel has always killed anyone even out on the streets in Gaza at night, the majority of the victims of this policy being children. Hamas has never done this kind of thing.

Hamas doesn't hide inside schools or hospitals - Israel themselves admit Hamas hides in tunnels. Every other day a new major tunnel network is discovered. The human shields thing may be occasionally true, and it may not be - Israel has never shown conclusive proof, and Hamas obviously can't prove a negative.

But even if all this were not the case, think about it this way. Imagine if some psycho killer raced into your house and tied you up. He's got a gun pointed at your head and will shoot you if you try anything funny. Which would you prefer:
a) that the police sniper the attacker,
b) that the army launch a hellfire missile in the general direction of your house

But even more importantly, ATTACKING PALESTINE CREATES MORE TERRORISM. Most ordinary Palestinians don't want to fight Israel and oppose the military part of Hamas, only vaguely supporting them because they're the only one smuggling much-needed food and medicine into the country. When they are being targeted by the Israeli army, they are gradually left with fewer and fewer options. It's fight or flight, and if flight, you have to get past the massive blockade Israel has. Even if every single Hamas commander is slain, the fighting won't end until Palestine comes out of poverty. The problem Israel has is not Hamas. It is poverty, and people will always fight to get out of it. Why else do you think Somalia is so violent? In fact the more you destroy hospitals and such, the more you create the very conflict you are trying to end.

You know, I'll bet Hamas would agree to give up all their weapons if Israel would agree to stop the blockade on Gaza. Obviously Hezbollah and such wouldn't agree to something like that, but they're off in Lebanon and can't do anything about it. Imagine if Israel were to give all in Gaza the option of Israeli citizenship. That would quite literally solve all the problems in this war.

Not to defend terrorism like Hamas rocket attacks, but this article from HRW is pretty sickening

http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/07/22/gaza-airstrike-deaths-raise-concerns-ground-offensive

Also this shows some of the opinions from inside Israel: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.606848

"I couldn’t care less that Arab children were killed, too bad it wasn’t more. Well done to the IDF"
"Only four [killed]? Too bad. We hoped for more."
"Great. We need to kill all the children."
"There isn’t a more beautiful picture than those of dead Arab children"
"I’m not for children dying in Gaza. I’m for everyone burning"
"As many children as possible should die."

And some interesting commentary from the article:

No one would think of firing them from their jobs, like they are doing now to Arabs and left-wingers. No one will condemn them, no one will attack or threaten them. They’re normal, according to the Israeli norms at least, where compassion for the other side is considered treason, and beastly criticism is considered patriotism... Such diabolical talk would not be heard in any other nation. Even the most extreme remarks are sufficient in expressing the current atmosphere. Not many Israelis will try to imagine the 155 dead children as just that, children. They won’t try to see them, to think of their fate, to reflect on their sad lives and their deaths. Israeli soldiers are fighting and dying in Gaza now, and the people’s heart is full of worry and fear for them. Nothing is more understood, human or natural. The rockets also continue to fall. But aside from those fears, there exists a complete lack of compassion for the victims on the other side, even for those children, dying in gruesome numbers, which will go down as a new record of shame, even in the Israeli record book.

admin: I see the civilian casualties as more of the totality of modern warfare. I don't think there are Hamas fighters hidden in UN shelters as some claim. However, I think Hamas sympathizers are hidden within such camps. Should they be targeted? I don't think so, but then again I don't have access to Israeli intelligence to state that with confidence.

Also poverty is not the problem. Poverty is only a situation that has existed in the region for quite some time. There are other conditions aggravating the violence. Most notably the lack of leadership. I noticed you did not discuss the Palestinian National Authority. You have coalition of people who are not binded by anything significant to develop some sort of cohesiveness. Even if there were a Palestinian state, I promise you it would collapse tomorrow on the account of the lack of cohesiveness among Palestinians themselves. The region is full of failed liberal democracy experiments within the last century ending with with the military taking control to restore order. The leadership in Palestine is often opportunistic at the expense of the region. The PNA itself is possibly schizophrenic sending out confusing messages to their neighbors in Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey that they want peace or war. Who is one to believe, the very well noted corrupt Fatah or the angry resolute Hamas? There is no recognized legitimate authority in the Palestinian region. You may negotiate with one to have the other stab you in the back.

On a different note, Somalia is a different problem altogether because the fall of the Communists there left a power vacuum that was not filled by anyone. Sort of how when the Soviet Union collapsed the former eastern bloc countries internally had a significant amount of chaos break out(political corruption, arms trafficking by former Soviet military officials, rise of organized crime that was previously unheard of, dramatic increase in street crime). The former eastern bloc countries still suffer from the fall of the Soviet Union, most notably Russia, Ukraine, and Romania.

Tophatdoc: Strong leadership on its own doesn't magically solve a crisis. I think Yassar Arafat was probably the strongest leader individually that the region had known for many decades.

admin: I am not referring to strong leadership but rather recognized leadership. We can proclaim ourselves leaders of the world but it would not matter if we are not recognized as the authorities of the world. I am saying there are leaders who are leading no one. This is the problem. These relationships are based on trust that someone gives in order to give them authority. Even Pol Pot and Stalin had a consensus of supporters who trusted them. In reverse, revolutions and rebellions happen when authority is no longer recognized or is not recognized(new kings/queens). Most notably, the French Revolution when the King XIV was seen as unsympathetic and aloof to the suffering of his people while he pranced around Versailles.

Tophatdoc: To a significant extent that's because Israel has been deliberately destabilizing things though. I actually stand by my claim - I think Arafat could have led a lasting state.

admin: Are you familiar with the internal disorder that plagued the PLO? Many Palestinians within Syria wanted to have him put to death.Ahmad Jibril, the PLF, and the Assad family planned to have Arafat assassinated in order for Jibril to replace him as leader. If there was a Palestinian state under Arafat, there would of been a coup attempt without a doubt instigated by the Syrian government most likely.

Tophatdoc: Uhh - yeah, about that. Are you familiar with the internal disorder plaguing Syria? Pretty much everything you said there applies to every country in the middle east.

admin: My point exactly! There is no stability.

Tophatdoc: By that logic then, you think every country in the middle east will collapse tomorrow.

admin: Yes, that sounds about right to me. I don't mean literally mean they will collapse tomorrow. I think of it more as a powder keg waiting to be lit on fire because the ingredients for disaster are prevalent. This is common in many places throughout the world. like Latin America, Southeast Asia, and Africa. There has been poor transitioning from monarchies and other traditional institutions to liberal democracies and other modern institutions(non-hereditary dictatorships) in many of these new states that came into existence in the last century or so. This is why many have suggested liberal democracy "does not work."

Notably, this is why one of our fellow Edeb8ers is devoutly opposed to democracy because he has experienced the misfortunes of these political experiments himself. However, I think liberal democracy only works in societies that respect classical liberal ideals(free speech), the rule of law, and a political system that doesn't encourage fragmentation.

Tophatdoc: I think if you accept Palestine has as much a claim to statehood as all of the middle eastern nations, the latin american nations, the south-east asian nations and the african nations, that's still a pretty strong claim.

admin: Do you mean nations or states? I think you mean states since you mentioned statehood.

I don't accept their claims to statehood nor do I need to, the states happen to exist. Nor do I consider majority of the states that are democratic to be friends or allies in any manner because they are normally illiberal democracies. In the Middle East for example there is only illiberal democracies such as we see in the Palestinian National Authority, Turkey, Iraq, and Egypt.