Hamas vs Israel in the streets of Gaza

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

Because they are just as hateful as the Nazi's before them. They think that their land is only for their people, and they won't stop until they get rid of everyone who doesn't tow that line.

Show me a gas chamber and you win. Otherwise, I'm invoking Godwin's Law. It is estimated that around 6 million Jews were exterminated during WWII in a plan calculated to quickly and efficiently eradicate them.

If the Israelis wanted to eliminate Gaza, they absolutely have the military might to do that. Instead, they're targeting a specific enemy and placing their own people in harm's way (house to house fighting with infantry) to try to minimize collateral damage.

There simply is no comparison. Trying to compare the Israelis of today to the Nazis is comical.

[RU OX Alum]

yeah 6 Million jews and probably more than 6 Million others

The methods of the deaths don't matter. People who die because the Israelis bull-dozed their house are no less dead than someone who pushed into a gas chamber.

No one in the Gaza has anything to do with the war Israel is having with Hamas.

Actually, it is comparable. Some find it comical? Everyone is in entitled to their opinion of humor. That doesn't make the note any less valid.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

The methods of the deaths don't matter. People who die because the Israelis bull-dozed their house are no less dead than someone who pushed into a gas chamber.

As far as people dieing when their homes are bulldozed is concerned -- first, who the hell stays in a house when a slow bulldozer is coming towards it? I would call this suicide rather than murder. It's not these bulldozers sneak up on folks. Secondly, I believe the policy of bulldozing houses had something to do with retaliating against suicide bombers' families or terrorist collaborators. I find Israel's policy here to be reasonable. It's a lot like a civil forfeiture proceeding in the U.S., except that with the current situation in Gaza, Israel technically "owning" someone's home via civil forfeiture would be meaningless as no one would respect their property right. Let's not forget that in the vast majority of these cases, the people in those homes knowingly raised kids as murderers or cohabitated with individuals conspiring to murder innocent civilians. That is not a blameless situation and to pretend to be shocked and appalled in these situations completely ignores the reality of the situation and the fact that Israel has a right to defend itself.

No one in the Gaza has anything to do with the war Israel is having with Hamas.

I don't see how you could possibly believe this, but whatever.

Actually, it is comparable. Some find it comical? Everyone is in entitled to their opinion of humor. That doesn't make the note any less valid.

Actually, it is less valid. Genocide is different from war. 800 (with the majority being legitimate targets) is different than 6 million+ targets

It's not hard to see that.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Secondly, I believe the policy of bulldozing houses had something to do with retaliating against suicide bombers' families or terrorist collaborators. I find Israel's policy here to be reasonable. It's a lot like a civil forfeiture proceeding in the U.S., except that with the current situation in Gaza, Israel technically "owning" someone's home via civil forfeiture would be meaningless as no one would respect their property right. Let's not forget that in the vast majority of these cases, the people in those homes knowingly raised kids as murderers or cohabitated with individuals conspiring to murder innocent civilians. That is not a blameless situation and to pretend to be shocked and appalled in these situations completely ignores the reality of the situation and the fact that Israel has a right to defend itself.

So, you commit a suicide bombing and the American government has the right to kill your family? Thats reasonable?
A civil forfeiture would only make sense if it were in the US. A CF claim could not be made on land in Iraq. It is not US land. Israel would have no property rights because it is a different country! They have NO property rights at all.
The idea that most people are raising their kids to be murderers is total crap.
You keep saying that Israel has a right to defend itself. Isreal is not currently defending itself. Israel is attacking Gaza. Two different things.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

You keep saying that Israel has a right to defend itself. Isreal is not currently defending itself. Israel is attacking Gaza. Two different things.

I mean . . . we can play the "spin game" all day, but isn't Israel defending itself from . . . thousands of rockets lobbed into Israel all willy-nilly?

[TexasWSP]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

You keep saying that Israel has a right to defend itself. Isreal is not currently defending itself. Israel is attacking Gaza. Two different things.

You're reaching here sport.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

yeah 6 Million jews and probably more than 6 Million others

The methods of the deaths don't matter. People who die because the Israelis bull-dozed their house are no less dead than someone who pushed into a gas chamber.

No one in the Gaza has anything to do with the war Israel is having with Hamas.

Actually, it is comparable. Some find it comical? Everyone is in entitled to their opinion of humor. That doesn't make the note any less valid.

No, actually, the fact that you really believe such an inane comparison is, as they say on the Internet, "all sorts of LOL."

Very basic reason: the Nazis attacked an unarmed, unassuming group for no particular reason other than hatred and feelings of supremacy (scapegoating, essentially). Hamas has actually fired thousands of rockets into Israeli territory, and has made its bacon off repeated threats to Israel and Israelis, attacks on civilians via suicide bombings, and . . . oh yeah . . . its stated purpose is the annihilation of the nation of Israel. So there's that. It's kind of a key difference, especially since the threats are quite credible.

Or are you going to deny that there are rocket bunkers in Gaza, that a significant number of suicide attacks have come from Gaza and Hamas, etc.? If so, just save the typing, as you've lost all credibility with me.

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

yeah 6 Million jews and probably more than 6 Million others

The methods of the deaths don't matter. People who die because the Israelis bull-dozed their house are no less dead than someone who pushed into a gas chamber.

No one in the Gaza has anything to do with the war Israel is having with Hamas.

Actually, it is comparable. Some find it comical? Everyone is in entitled to their opinion of humor. That doesn't make the note any less valid.

By your standards then the Allied offensive during WWII is comparable to the holocaust? Countless civilians were targeted and killed during that war in Europe and Japan.

[PeppyGPhiB]

The Israel vs. The Whole Arab World conflict will never end until one of them is completely eradicated. This is about religion, which is greater than anything on Earth. If there's anything we should have learned by now from our experience in Iraq it's that there are parts of this world where "separation of religion and state" does not and cannot exist. Americans and Europeans cannot possibly understand this war, because it wouldn't happen in our countries - we don't care enough about religion.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by Kevin

If the Israelis wanted to eliminate Gaza, they absolutely have the military might to do that. Instead, they're targeting a specific enemy and placing their own people in harm's way (house to house fighting with infantry) to try to minimize collateral damage.

Did you miss the post about the bombing of the U.N.? They were responsible for the majority of humanitarian aid in Gaza, but now Israel has succeeded in rendering them unable to help the citizens of Gaza. I KNOW - it must be that all those refugees were known terrorists! And anyone in Gaza must SOMEHOW be related to, or know, a militant, and thus deserve to die - be it by military means, starvation, lack of access to medical care, whatever it takes. They are justified in their inhumanity, simply because they are Israel.

The fact that the IRC, the EU and the UN are condemning Israel should mean something.

And if you want reports from others than the UN and Palestinians, let the reporters in . Unless they have something to hide . . .

eta - there has to be a negotiated truce that can hold. But both sides will have to concede on some issues, and I don't see that happening. Hope I'm wrong. Hamas will have to cede Israel the right to exist, and Israel will have to allow Gaza their autonomy and control of their borders.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

eta - there has to be a negotiated truce that can hold. But both sides will have to concede on some issues, and I don't see that happening. Hope I'm wrong. Hamas will have to cede Israel the right to exist, and Israel will have to allow Gaza their autonomy and control of their borders.

This is a gross oversimplification, and is probably plainly wrong.

Here's a hint: the offer you propose from Israel been on the table in the past. It was turned down.

[SWTXBelle]

Well, yes,it is simplified. It's a post on a thread, not my master's thesis.

But here's a question for all the pro-Israeli posters - how would you like to see this resolved? What, other than my already stated "right for Israel to exist" and the unstated but surely understood ceasing of rocket fire would you want Hamas to agree to, and what should Israel sign on to in order to bring this to a resolution?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Well, yes,it is simplified. It's a post on a thread, not my master's thesis.

But here's a question for all the pro-Israeli posters - how would you like to see this resolved? What, other than my already stated "right for Israel to exist" and the unstated but surely understood ceasing of rocket fire would you want Hamas to agree to, and what should Israel sign on to in order to bring this to a resolution?

Actually, it's funny you post that. My Master's thesis was on the terrorism/counter-terrorism dynamic and whether it really has an effect on world events.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

Actually, it's funny you post that. My Master's thesis was on the terrorism/counter-terrorism dynamic and whether it really has an effect on world events.

Well, butter my butt and call me a biscuit! You are the person we need to hear from - what do you think? C'mon - how often do you get to use your thesis? (I'm ready, willing and able to weigh in on all matters Thomas Hardy, and use mine!)

[agzg]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Well, butter my butt and call me a biscuit! You are the person we need to hear from - what do you think? C'mon - how often do you get to use your thesis? (I'm ready, willing and able to weigh in on all matters Thomas Hardy, and use mine!)

*dead*

OK, well the basic premise of the idea is that terrorist action feeds counter-terrorist activity, and counter-terrorist activity feeds terrorist action. However, it takes a terrorist act to start the cycle.

That's the logic behind it. However, some believe that terrorist activity feeds a counter-terrorist OVER-reaction, which leads to bigger terrorist acts, which leads to bigger counter-terrorist overreactions, and so on.

My point, at the end of the day, is that there definitely is a cycle. And while overreactions happen everywhere, it doesn't happen every time. In fact, sometimes it's an under-reaction (if that's even a word), for example, in the case of Saudi Arabia after the Khobar Towers attack many counter-terrorism analysts believe we, and the Saudis, did not do enough to prevent the attack in the first place (considering we found a car FULL of explosives about 2 weeks beforehand, and had intelligence about the strength of the barrier and perimeter of the building that was ultimately blown up), and after the fact, we had a biotch of a time even following protocol as to interviewing suspects.

For the Khobar Towers example, however, foreign diplomacy and international relations in general did get in the way of the counter-terrorist reaction after the attack, which could be a reason why it was not at least equal, if not greater, than the relative scale of the original attack.

Now, the question essentially is, minus the diplomacy "getting in the way" of counter-terrorist activity, would the reaction be more likely equal and opposite or would it be greater?

I couldn't answer that question definitively, and since it was only a semester-long thesis I didn't have to. I was able to point to examples of what I thought my hunches led to.

Some nations are more likely to overreact, some are more likely to react equally, and some are likely to react to a lesser degree.

The United States and Israel fell into the category of overreaction.

Most European countries (in recent history, remember, not in colonial times) fell into the category of equal reaction.

Now, the category of reaction to a lesser degree is a mixed bag. In instances of state-sponsored terrorism, obviously they would not react, but would pretend to. In some cases it depends on who is the intended target of the terrorist attack. In the Khobar Towers example, Saudi Arabia did not have much more of an incentive to react than keeping us happy, since American Air Force personnel were the target of the attack. Obviously, we weren't happy with their reaction, but at least they reacted.

Then, as to it feeding more terrorism, that also depends. Was a resolution reached as a result of the terrorist and counter-terrorist activity? More likely than not, the dynamic is as it is. Terrorist activity feeds counter-terrorism which feeds terrorist activity which feeds counter-terrorism and so on.

The way I see it, the only thing that can stop that cycle from playing out over and over and over again is one of two things:

1. The satisfactory resolution of the conflict at hand (to both sides), or
2. The complete and total annihilation of the group that is carrying out the attacks, including all of their sleeper cells, all of their families, and all of their cultural group (also known as the impossible plan).

It also should be noted that economic situations feed into the cycle by creating a larger pool of people for terrorist groups to exploit in their aims. They have more people to draw on for members, they have more people to draw on for sympathizers, and they have more people to draw on as donors.

At the end of the day, do I think Israel overreacts to Hamas' aggression? Yes. Do I think Hamas is wrong for taking the terrorist route instead of the negotiations route for solving the problem? Yes. Do I think Hamas is completely wrong for attacking Israel? No. Do I think Israel is completely wrong for retaliating against Gaza? No.

As you can see, if you get into the nitty gritty of it, it becomes an even more complicated question.

ETA: $20 says I get at least one reply with "tl;dr"