Under fire


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 1,056 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange

Literally a minute after I was done explaining to my young brother that no, we don't need to flee to the united states because we are not even in danger, the alarm sounded. Wasn't really scary, because the missiles are very inaccurate and the alarm covers a very large radius... but still, it was the first time ever that an alarm was sounded so far north.

A friend in the army confirmed to me a couple minutes ago that it was a true alarm and that an actual missile was blown up over my sky with the defense system. My mom's friend's son was hastily recruited back to the army with a "directive 8" - one used to bring back soldiers to active service ASAP when a war starts.

Drek.

Current state of affairs in Israel, politically, a rough sketch:

Spoiler:

After the failed peace talks initiated by Carry, and the union between Fatah (the semi formal government of what is currently Palestine) and the Hamas (a terrorist organization/political party that used to rival Fatah), three Jewish kids were kidnapped by Hamas operatives. Kids as in 16 years old.

In the following few days the IDF raised a polite hell. Many Palestinians were arrested, soldiers patrolled streets and searched houses and governmental buildings, and made life unbearable to Palestinians. The justification was a search for the kids. As they did, some missiles were fired on Israeli territory, provoking retaliations carried out by bombardment from the air by the IDF. Aggression slowly increased.

A few days ago, the remains of the three poor kids' bodies were found. They were, apparently, killed shortly after their kidnapping. Beyond the disgust at the abhorrent murder, what was so infuriating about it all was it seems that the IDF actually *knew* that the kids were dead during most of their search. The invasion they carried out seems now like an obvious and clumsy attempt to topple the new unified government.

Following news of the three deaths, some Jewish mobs gathered to rally across the country. In Jerusalem, a vile group of subhumans decided to avenge the deaths by another act of murder - they kidnapped a 14 years old Palestinian kid, and burned him alive. The kid's cousin was later beat bloody (broken bones) by police enforcers while raging.

Following that tension rised further as Palestinians across Israel gathered for rallies of their own, though thankfully these were either peaceful or contained with no loss of life.

In the last couple of days we practically reached the status of a war. Forty thousand people have been called to reinforce the army already. In the Palestinian side, it sounds like there are already at least 10 casualties, some of them children (a family huddled in a building, even after the "knock on the roof" protocol which is supposed to allow any civilian time enough to evacuate the building).

That's the essentials, anyway.

Perhaps not surprisingly (it was to me) being shot at, even impersonally, kind of ruined my mood for the evening. Here's hoping for a quick end to this latest round of fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

War, what is it good for?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MagusJanus wrote:
I'm going to be blunt: It's quickly reaching the point where the only way there will be peace in Israel is if we nuke Jerusalem. Because, sadly, that city is what all of the fighting is about.

Just No.

And horribly provocative. This thread is doomed, but there's no need to kick it over the edge.

Lord Snow. Glad you're alright. Glad the defense system worked and no one was hurt in that attack.

The Exchange

MagusJanus wrote:
I'm going to be blunt: It's quickly reaching the point where the only way there will be peace in Israel is if we nuke Jerusalem. Because, sadly, that city is what all of the fighting is about.

It WILL end the conflict... if only because the entire area is so small that a nuke is likely to wipe out 95% of the people fighting or something. However, the reality is that the conflict is about more than Jerusalem or any other specific piece of land. It's a clash of cultures, both of them finding it hard to tolerate each other. For example, what failed the latest peace talks was not the specifics of the way Jerusalem was split, but the Israelis insistence that any new formal Palestinian state will recognize Israel as a Jewish state... and the Palestinian's staunch insistence not to agree to that term. Imagine that - an entire diplomatic endeavor collapsing because the sides can't even acknowledge one another's existence.

In the grand scale of things though... Jews and Palestinians have been doing war for less than a century. There are specific wars that lasted longer than that between those who are now strong allies. The conflict will end someday, somehow, the only open question is the ever increasing body count.

The Exchange

thejeff wrote:
MagusJanus wrote:
I'm going to be blunt: It's quickly reaching the point where the only way there will be peace in Israel is if we nuke Jerusalem. Because, sadly, that city is what all of the fighting is about.

Just No.

And horribly provocative. This thread is doomed, but there's no need to kick it over the edge.

Lord Snow. Glad you're alright. Glad the defense system worked and no one was hurt in that attack.

Thank you. I know that if the thread develops into a political argument it will collapse upon itself. Honestly though... I was under some stress and vented towards the only forum I am active in.


Lord Snow, I hope things continue to go well for you.

But, at the same time, I would suggest coming to the U.S. for awhile. Getting away from that scene is probably your best bet. If this goes as expected... then things are going to get a whole, whole lot worse than the outcome of my last post.

Here's hoping things settle down and peace is reached soon.

And, you have my apologies for my previous post. I'm exasperated over the whole situation. I'll not comment further and delete the post.

The Exchange

MagusJanus wrote:

Lord Snow, I hope things continue to go well for you.

But, at the same time, I would suggest coming to the U.S. for awhile. Getting away from that scene is probably your best bet. If this goes as expected... then things are going to get a whole, whole lot worse than the outcome of my last post.

Here's hoping things settle down and peace is reached soon.

And, you have my apologies for my previous post. I'm exasperated over the whole situation. I'll not comment further and delete the post.

Hey, if anyone can understand your exasperation, it's me. As a matter of fact, my life's plan is to go live in the U.S as soon as that's feasible (taking advantage of my citizenship) because I feel the filth of this conflict (and because of other matters, such as the increasingly religious and aggressive human climate in the country). For you it's news you sometime hear about a faraway place. For me it's a daily reality.

However, me and family will not flee the country in this conflict, probably. Unless Hamas proves to be far more capable of hitting it's targets than it did so far. If nothing else, we will never abandon my brother here -tomorrow morning (in about 10 hours) he will be recruited to the army and start basic training for the army intelligence. He won't be anywhere near the line of fire, but he certainly isn't free to leave, either.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, my frustration in the U.S. (and don't think we're not involved)/Palestine/Israel conflict is that ALL sides have blame, and ALL sides have extremists who don't want peace or cooperation. It gets very hard to turn the other cheek and accept that the other government really wants peace when that government's people are murdering your people. And yes, at this point even the governments are refusing to acknowledge each other's right to existence. But I feel like that's surmountable, eventually.

The only bright point I see is that the U.K. finally accepted the IRA and the terrorism in Ireland stopped as the Irish turned in the more militant members of their own organizations to promote the peace. It shows that peace CAN be attained. Unfortunately, the U.K. had no one pushing for further "settlements" in Ireland, further compromising the Irish.

Step 1 is for Israel to stop all new settlements. Until they can get that accomplished (and I am under no illusion that it's not a nigh-impossible goal), I don't see further progress...

...the problem is, once Israel stops the settlements, the Palestinians are going to have to do something in return. That'll be at least as hard as stopping the settlements in the first place.

Here's crossing my fingers and hoping...

EDIT: And since I have never been to Israel, I will take no offense at being called an uninformed idiot. I know only what I read, and from my position thousands of miles away it seems like the first step is for the stronger party to offer something unilaterally, and hope that the weaker party is strong enough to do something in return...

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:

Yes, my frustration in the U.S. (and don't think we're not involved)/Palestine/Israel conflict is that ALL sides have blame, and ALL sides have extremists who don't want peace or cooperation. It gets very hard to turn the other cheek and accept that the other government really wants peace when that government's people are murdering your people. And yes, at this point even the governments are refusing to acknowledge each other's right to existence. But I feel like that's surmountable, eventually.

The only bright point I see is that the U.K. finally accepted the IRA and the terrorism in Ireland stopped as the Irish turned in the more militant members of their own organizations to promote the peace. It shows that peace CAN be attained. Unfortunately, the U.K. had no one pushing for further "settlements" in Ireland, further compromising the Irish.

Step 1 is for Israel to stop all new settlements. Until they can get that accomplished (and I am under no illusion that it's not a nigh-impossible goal), I don't see further progress...

...the problem is, once Israel stops the settlements, the Palestinians are going to have to do something in return. That'll be at least as hard as stopping the settlements in the first place.

Here's crossing my fingers and hoping...

EDIT: And since I have never been to Israel, I will take no offense at being called an uninformed idiot. I know only what I read, and from my position thousands of miles away it seems like the first step is for the stronger party to offer something unilaterally, and hope that the weaker party is strong enough to do something in return...

Mostly you've hit the nail on the head in regards to the way things stand. Regrettably, even as I strongly support stopping the any construction in the settlements and removing any of the current existing ones... I have to admit that there's historical proof that this is not a good strategy.

The most recent attempt at a unilateral gesture was what created the current boogyman, Hamas. My own house would have never come under fire had Israel not relented and backed away from Gazah - a move which, by most accounts, rekindled the flame of resistance there.
Additionally, any agreement which allows a freed Palestine to have it's own army and liberties risks adding yet another Islamic force to the growing ring of destruction which currently impact Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and most of the Arabic world to some degree. If a liberated Palestine joins someone like the new Islamic State, a war larger than the current one by orders of magnitude could ensue. Every single time an Israeli leader gives anything away to Hamas, they are playing with fire. It backfired plenty of times in the past, and in each such case there's a potential for things to go dreadfully wrong. It's an incredibly delicate matter.

However, it is important to view the larger picture. I believe that while showing any sign of "weakness" no by stopping the illegal settlements might make things worse in the near future... it's also the first essential step in any possible, feasible solution to the conflict. It has to happen at some point.


Yeah; that's what's depressing about the whole thing -- any concessions to sanity, compassion, or compromise are seen as "signs of weakness" and indications that it's time to attack.

*SIGH*. Good luck again!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lord Snow wrote:
... In the following few days the IDF raised a polite hell.

Or as it is more commonly know-war crimes.

While I feel bad for many of the civilians, the rulers of Israel deserve to be hung by their necks from the nearest street lamp.

Occupation, torture, apartheid, murder, etc. etc. these are the actions of scumbags, not a civilized society. Your governments actions are to blame for these current problems.

Lord Snow, I'm glad your alright, and I'm deeply sorry you are a victim of location and circumstance. Clearly you are not to blame for any of this. I feel great sorrow for the kids and others killed on both sides, but Israel's government is less deserving of sympathy then just about anything short of North Korea. Israel is the source of its own suffering, and needs to get its morals right, or suffer the consequences.

PS Don't get me wrong, the US plays a huge part (especially financial/arms) in all of these problems, and if there is a night of long knives (to put it in Nazi terms), the US government would also get thinned out quite a bit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Well, that's certainly one opinion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:
Well, that's certainly one opinion.

I did hold back my real feeling since this is a forum where people are expected to be polite, and not use four letter words.

I guess I'm not a fan of governments using force against civilian populations.

Never bought the justifications for it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Though on balance my sympathies lie more with the Palestinians, you could certainly say very similar things about their leadership.

Both elite groups profit by having a enemy. And then they're in turn pushed by the very hatred they've stirred up. They're riding the tiger and can't get off.

The Exchange

Actually the solution may be unification. And all this child abduction has done is convince isis that killing kids on each side can be used to end all future peace and both factions are prepared to attack each other at the drop of a Lego brick.


yellowdingo wrote:
Actually the solution may be unification. And all this child abduction has done is convince isis that killing kids on each side can be used to end all future peace and both factions are prepared to attack each other at the drop of a Lego brick.

Well, people seemingly always find reasons for Us/Them, but on the other hand people always have sex, too. Since the Semitic peoples, who have very recent common ancestors, obviously live cheek by jowl, I guess my hope is that interbreeding will gradually efface the distinctions (real or perceived) between peoples.

The Exchange

jocundthejolly wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Actually the solution may be unification. And all this child abduction has done is convince isis that killing kids on each side can be used to end all future peace and both factions are prepared to attack each other at the drop of a Lego brick.
Well, people seemingly always find reasons for Us/Them, but on the other hand people always have sex, too. Since the Semitic peoples, who have very recent common ancestors, obviously live cheek by jowl, I guess my hope is that interbreeding will gradually efface the distinctions (real or perceived) between peoples.

The sad thing is that religeon makes that very hard. The Jewish religeon is incredibly racist, and "interbreeding" has it's own word in Hebrew, when it refers to a Jew having kids with a non-Jew. So if a Jew and a non Jew want to get married, they can't do that in Israel - seperation of faith from state here isn't very good.

On the flip side of that, most Palestinians around here live in "hemulas" - large clan-like extended family. Marriage has a lot to do with the politics of those families, and marrying into one can leave someone facing extreme hostility and sometimes a serious danger for the Israeli involved. Numerous times an Israeli had to be rescued by the army from such a marriage.

There IS a class of urban, advanced people from both sides that is capable of mingling... but it's a thin one. Too thin to relay on to be a source of eventual unity.

Quote:


Actually the solution may be unification.

Shockingly, this opinion is a real one. However, in practice this too is likely a bad idea. The unification plan is popular mostly among the religious right-wing parties in Israel, and what they aspire to is more like an occupation than a unification - simply adding all remaining Palestinian grounds to Israel's rule, while still keeping the Palestinians themselves as second rate citizens with very few civil rights. That's called an apartheid and I'd really rather avoid that.

The Exchange

Fergie wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
... In the following few days the IDF raised a polite hell.

Or as it is more commonly know-war crimes.

While I feel bad for many of the civilians, the rulers of Israel deserve to be hung by their necks from the nearest street lamp.

Occupation, torture, apartheid, murder, etc. etc. these are the actions of scumbags, not a civilized society. Your governments actions are to blame for these current problems.

Lord Snow, I'm glad your alright, and I'm deeply sorry you are a victim of location and circumstance. Clearly you are not to blame for any of this. I feel great sorrow for the kids and others killed on both sides, but Israel's government is less deserving of sympathy then just about anything short of North Korea. Israel is the source of its own suffering, and needs to get its morals right, or suffer the consequences.

PS Don't get me wrong, the US plays a huge part (especially financial/arms) in all of these problems, and if there is a night of long knives (to put it in Nazi terms), the US government would also get thinned out quite a bit.

I don't want to go into an actual debate here, but in your judgment of the whole case I want to remind you, as theJeff did, that things are far from one sided around here. For example, had you asked just about any sane person if they would rather full captive to Israel or the Hamas, they'd choose Israel for sure. Hamas is an actual terrorist organization, with all the baggage that comes from that - intentionally attacking Israel's civilians, and even using Palestinians civilians as meat shields. In previous wars, vast Hamas weapons stacks were discovered in elementary schools - they used their own children to protect their toys.

When it comes to killing in war time, Israel actually goes out of it's way to avoid civilian casualties - the problem is the day to day life. Endless acts of pointless cruelty - midnight raids into sleeping towns for no real reason but to train our soldiers, arresting obviously innocent people for life with no trial, and using every other opportunity to humiliate and repress Palestinians while protecting the encroaching illegal settlements of Israel in the area. All of this is unforgivable, and the fact that Hamas is worse doesn't make it any less of a crime... but for having a balanced idea for what's going on, it's important to remember that Hamas IS worse. To get an idea of what happens when the terrorists are the one dictating the rules, one needs look no further than Syria.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Terrorist is a boo word. Like freedom is a hooray word. The most basic part of understanding propaganda is that someone using either hooray words or boo words is selling something deeply simplified and generally useless. Nothing against you, Lord Snow, and you may even be right in that Hamas is worse, but using terrorist like that doesn't help your message.

The IRA lost the hearts and minds of the people of Northern Ireland when the economic situation improved. Big surprise. People have better things to do with their lives than killing people and making political statements - if given the option. Things like getting their kids to good schools, work to get food on the table, and perhaps a forty inch plasma TV. Making sure their parents are doing okay. Falling in love and keeping up with what Justin Bieber is doing. Improving on their cooking. Debating politics. Reading obscure fantasy novels. Wasting time on forums. Going to prison for driving too fast. You know, stuff. Life.

The problem is that it is seen as a security and military problem primarily. That has always been a good way to increase suppression and authoritarianism. If you have someone imprisoned for causing someone's death, you can ALWAYS say "he killed someone, so we can't let him out this year, he might do it again". But it is at its most basic level a failure. Not getting out, he grows angry and feels you are being unjust, and causes trouble. So, you send in some thugs with knuckledusters to teach him he shouldn't cause trouble. Now he realizes he has to fight for his life. His behaviour grows worse. Then you can CLEARLY not let him out, because he now hates your guts. Brilliant. There IS no solution that way. And perhaps worst of all, there are many in politics and the military, that stand to gain from that path.

Even if the Hamas are worse, they, like the IRA, are merely reflections of what they see as their enemies.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:


Even if the Hamas are worse, they, like the IRA, are merely reflections of what they see as their enemies.

While I agree with the general tones of your post, I want to point out that the Islamic Jihad is a larger phenomenon than what could be seen in Israel, and ignoring that is problematic. Hamas is only one branch of the global association of a number of smaller organizations that are all dedicated to fight the west, and each other. While publicly distancing itself from Al-Qaeda, for example, Hamas has a strong working relationships with many of Al-Qaeda's allies. It's not merely a nationalistic movement that wants freedom for it's people - it is also motivated be religion and is part of a larger role. Thus it is not only a reflection of Israel's actions, but also the result of international powers.

I was using the word "terrorist" to signify that Hamas are specifically and intentionally targeting their violence against civilians, and are ruthless when it comes to sacrificing their own civilians for the slightest of edges. The argument that they "don't have a choice" is both meaningless and condescending - there's always a choice, as the peaceful uplifting of South Africa rather recently proved. And not holding Palestinians responsible to their actions is not treating them as equal humans to Israelis. Every man or woman has to answer for their own actions, and Hamas has accumulated quite a bit of that.


Saying Terrorist is a boo word is odd. They are using violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims. That is what a Terrorist is. Whether it is Hamas, the IRA, the Unabomber, elements of the US Army in Vietnam, or Vlad Tepes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vod Canockers wrote:
Saying Terrorist is a boo word is odd. They are using violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims. That is what a Terrorist is. Whether it is Hamas, the IRA, the Unabomber, elements of the US Army in Vietnam, or Vlad Tepes.

The key is that we only call certain groups of people who "use violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims" terrorists and whether we call them that or not depends on our political aims.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
Saying Terrorist is a boo word is odd. They are using violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims. That is what a Terrorist is. Whether it is Hamas, the IRA, the Unabomber, elements of the US Army in Vietnam, or Vlad Tepes.

The key is that we only call certain groups of people who "use violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims" terrorists and whether we call them that or not depends on our political aims.

That doesn't change what they are.

The Exchange

Lord Snow wrote:
jocundthejolly wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
Actually the solution may be unification. And all this child abduction has done is convince isis that killing kids on each side can be used to end all future peace and both factions are prepared to attack each other at the drop of a Lego brick.
Well, people seemingly always find reasons for Us/Them, but on the other hand people always have sex, too. Since the Semitic peoples, who have very recent common ancestors, obviously live cheek by jowl, I guess my hope is that interbreeding will gradually efface the distinctions (real or perceived) between peoples.

The sad thing is that religeon makes that very hard. The Jewish religeon is incredibly racist, and "interbreeding" has it's own word in Hebrew, when it refers to a Jew having kids with a non-Jew. So if a Jew and a non Jew want to get married, they can't do that in Israel - seperation of faith from state here isn't very good.

On the flip side of that, most Palestinians around here live in "hemulas" - large clan-like extended family. Marriage has a lot to do with the politics of those families, and marrying into one can leave someone facing extreme hostility and sometimes a serious danger for the Israeli involved. Numerous times an Israeli had to be rescued by the army from such a marriage.

There IS a class of urban, advanced people from both sides that is capable of mingling... but it's a thin one. Too thin to relay on to be a source of eventual unity.

Quote:


Actually the solution may be unification.
Shockingly, this opinion is a real one. However, in practice this too is likely a bad idea. The unification plan is popular mostly among the religious right-wing parties in Israel, and what they aspire to is more like an occupation than a unification - simply adding all remaining Palestinian grounds to Israel's rule, while still keeping the Palestinians themselves as second rate citizens with very few...

From what i have heard isreal is totally against being one country because they fear any significant population of non jews. There was a news story not long ago about them expelling refugees to protects their religion/racial "purity". that talk sounds too much like some areas in europe around ww2 to me


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Israel wants to be a a Jewish state. Can't remain that way having voting non-Jew members, I guess.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

And to Snow, peace to you and your family.
It's bad enough here when the tornado sirens go off, that feeling of dread and uncertainty that happens when you wonder if your house will get hit, or pass you by. I can't imagine what living in a war zone must be like.
Hope the Lord protects you and keeps you safe!


Kryzbyn wrote:
Israel wants to be a a Jewish state. Can't remain that way having voting non-Jew members, I guess.

Israel does have voting non-Jewish citizens, though they are second-class in some ways. What it's afraid of is a majority of non-Jewish citizens.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Indeed. That's what I meant.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:


From what i have heard isreal is totally against being one country because they fear any significant population of non jews.

True enough, there is real fear in Israel of loosing the Jewish majority. A fear that even I, among the more liberal and open minded of the population, share to some extent. It might be the long years of brainwashing in public education, or it might be more rational, it's hard for me to tell. What I know is that there's enough constant evidence of antisemitism around the world that I feel like some people out there will always measure me by my racial heritage, and I'd be more safe with a government behind my back. Having said that, I believe that Israel can still look after the interests of Jews across the world even without being a racially pure (read: racist), religiously fanatic state.

Because of that issue, those in Israel who do support the "one country" solution are, paradoxically, the most racist - because they think they can get away with having a unified country where Palestinians are second rate citizens who would never achieve any position of power. Finding people - even liberals - who are willing to lose the Jewish majority in the country without suppressing the non Jews is really hard.

Quote:


There was a news story not long ago about them expelling refugees to protects their religion/racial "purity". that talk sounds too much like some areas in europe around ww2 to me

ww2 Europe? how about modern day Europe, that feels the threat of an increasingly large number of Africans and Muslims arriving there to live a better life or escape warzones? Some European countries react well, some less so - in Greece an actual Neo Nazi party used the people's unease with that to rise to power (well, that and a difficult economic crisis). While Israel's barbaric display of racism was incredibly shameful, it is far from the only country dealing with this kind of situation right now.


Vod Canockers wrote:
Saying Terrorist is a boo word is odd. They are using violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims. That is what a Terrorist is. Whether it is Hamas, the IRA, the Unabomber, elements of the US Army in Vietnam, or Vlad Tepes.

That last one is a bit odd. Vlad Tepes wasn't really a terrorist as much as he was a product of his times, when staying on your throne meant you had to be the baddest so-and-so around. He's considered something of a folk hero in parts of Eastern Europe, and his reputation was so fearsome he bragged a man could walk through his territory with a bag of gold and fear no thieves or bandits (quite true; it would not surprise me if I learned Vlad's idea of entertainment was 'come up with new and horrific ways to kill people who offend me').

The Exchange

Kryzbyn wrote:

And to Snow, peace to you and your family.

It's bad enough here when the tornado sirens go off, that feeling of dread and uncertainty that happens when you wonder if your house will get hit, or pass you by. I can't imagine what living in a war zone must be like.
Hope the Lord protects you and keeps you safe!

Thank you :)

So far things seem much calmer than I feared. A ground invasion by Israel seems like a very remote possibility, and the leadership has been surprisingly restrained today. From what I've been able to gather Hamas is trying hard to scale down the aggression. I hope things might settle down soon.


Lord snow wrote:
here's always a choice, as the peaceful uplifting of South Africa rather recently proved

Yeaaaah. No.

The sad fact is you have the future Mendella of the Palestinian territories sitting in one of your jails right now, or at least that's what history will make of this when its settled.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Lord Snow wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

And to Snow, peace to you and your family.

It's bad enough here when the tornado sirens go off, that feeling of dread and uncertainty that happens when you wonder if your house will get hit, or pass you by. I can't imagine what living in a war zone must be like.
Hope the Lord protects you and keeps you safe!

Thank you :)

So far things seem much calmer than I feared. A ground invasion by Israel seems like a very remote possibility, and the leadership has been surprisingly restrained today. From what I've been able to gather Hamas is trying hard to scale down the aggression. I hope things might settle down soon.

Yeah, I'm sure Hamas realizes there is a line, that if they cross it, there will be no Hamas left by the time the dust settles. So they're probably trying to reign it in before it gets there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vod Canockers wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
Saying Terrorist is a boo word is odd. They are using violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims. That is what a Terrorist is. Whether it is Hamas, the IRA, the Unabomber, elements of the US Army in Vietnam, or Vlad Tepes.

The key is that we only call certain groups of people who "use violence to terrorize people in an attempt to advance their political aims" terrorists and whether we call them that or not depends on our political aims.

That doesn't change what they are.

"The Dresden atrocity, tremendously expensive and meticulously planned, was so meaningless, finally, that only one person on the entire planet got any benefit from it. I am that person. I wrote this book, which earned a lot of money for me and made my reputation, such as it is. One way or another, I got two or three dollars for every person killed. Some business I'm in." -Kurt Vonnegut


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lord Snow wrote:
I was using the word "terrorist" to signify that Hamas are specifically and intentionally targeting their violence against civilians, and are ruthless when it comes to sacrificing their own civilians for the slightest of edges. The argument that they "don't have a choice" is both meaningless and condescending - there's always a choice, as the peaceful uplifting of South Africa rather recently proved. And not holding Palestinians responsible to their actions is not treating them as equal humans to Israelis. Every man or woman has to answer for their own actions, and Hamas has accumulated quite a bit of that.

What, you want them to assault army bases instead? Israel has what, the sixth largest military in the world? Face it, the only thing they can affect is civilian targets. Against military targets, they have nothing, no chance, no hope. And due to their lack of resources, their operations WILL cost them people. I find criticizing them on that basis a bit... odd. The alternative is to stop fighting back, which is as impossible to them as it is to the Israeli by now. And no, as was pointed out earlier, the change in South Africa was hardly a peaceful revolution. I maintain: The lives the could live, the change the majority of them would want, given that they are human beings, ARE out of their grasp, because of security measures put in place because "the Palestinians can't be trusted".

Finally: If every man and woman must answer for their own actions, why are the Israeli setting all Palestinians to answer for what the suicide bombers and rocket-flingers do?


Thing is, Hamas should've learned what Hitler should've learned from the London blitz: you don't break the enemy's back by just bombing all their s%+* on and on ad nausea. You just piss them off royally.

"We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and if, which I do not for a moment believe, this island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."


Sissyl wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:

What, you want them to assault army bases instead? Israel has what, the sixth largest military in the world? Face it, the only thing they can affect is civilian targets. Against military targets, they have nothing, no chance, no hope. And due to their lack of resources, their operations WILL cost them people.

I'm sorry, but I'm reminded of the 6 Day War for some reason.

Israel:
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed

The Gang of Belligerants:
Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed


Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:

What, you want them to assault army bases instead? Israel has what, the sixth largest military in the world? Face it, the only thing they can affect is civilian targets. Against military targets, they have nothing, no chance, no hope. And due to their lack of resources, their operations WILL cost them people.

I'm sorry, but I'm reminded of the 6 Day War for some reason.

Israel:
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed

The Gang of Belligerants:
Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

Which is still a lot closer in any kind of conventional military operation than the currest IDF and anything Hamas (or Hamas and Fatah and all the rest of Palestine) could put together? How many tanks do they have? What does their airforce look like?

They're under occupation. What are they supposed to do?


Israel's army exists for a reason other than bullying Palestinians is my point.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'll make sure an extra prayer goes out to Israel tonight. It's terrible that you have to worry about rocket attacks like that.


Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.


Sissyl wrote:
Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.

I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a$!%!#+s that they are.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.
I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a!#!&@@s that they are.

While I agree it's probably counter productive, I'm not sure what the alternative is. Israel has shown itself in the past to be quite happy with the status quo, quietly expanding settlements and dividing Palestinian territory further with Israeli controlled roads even at the lowest points of Palestinian violence. As far as I can see the only thing Israel wants from the Palestinians is more land for settlements and an end to violence.

Things are almost certainly worse for Palestinians now, but there's never been any sign of a long term solution. The only bargaining chip they have is stopping the violence and that's always been a precondition for any real negotiations. So "Give us what we want and then we'll start talking about making a deal."

Meanwhile, while everyone moans about how evil the Palestinian terrorists are, far more Palestinian civilians get killed than the other way around.

Liberty's Edge

thejeff wrote:
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.
I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a!#!&@@s that they are.

While I agree it's probably counter productive, I'm not sure what the alternative is. Israel has shown itself in the past to be quite happy with the status quo, quietly expanding settlements and dividing Palestinian territory further with Israeli controlled roads even at the lowest points of Palestinian violence. As far as I can see the only thing Israel wants from the Palestinians is more land for settlements and an end to violence.

Things are almost certainly worse for Palestinians now, but there's never been any sign of a long term solution. The only bargaining chip they have is stopping the violence and that's always been a precondition for any real negotiations. So "Give us what we want and then we'll start talking about making a deal."

Meanwhile, while everyone moans about how evil the Palestinian terrorists are, far more Palestinian civilians get killed than the other way around.

The alternative is to lay down weapons and go to the table and actually discuss things like mature boys and girls.

And do you think that maybe the reason palestenian civilians die is because they are being actively used as shields, not because they are being actively targeted?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.
I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a!#!&@@s that they are.

While I agree it's probably counter productive, I'm not sure what the alternative is. Israel has shown itself in the past to be quite happy with the status quo, quietly expanding settlements and dividing Palestinian territory further with Israeli controlled roads even at the lowest points of Palestinian violence. As far as I can see the only thing Israel wants from the Palestinians is more land for settlements and an end to violence.

Things are almost certainly worse for Palestinians now, but there's never been any sign of a long term solution. The only bargaining chip they have is stopping the violence and that's always been a precondition for any real negotiations. So "Give us what we want and then we'll start talking about making a deal."

Meanwhile, while everyone moans about how evil the Palestinian terrorists are, far more Palestinian civilians get killed than the other way around.

The alternative is to lay down weapons and go to the table and actually discuss things like mature boys and girls.

And do you think that maybe the reason palestenian civilians die is because they are being actively used as shields, not because they are being actively targeted?

Lay down weapons? As in unilaterally disarm and promise to stop fighting?

And then start negotiating the peace terms?
Has anyone ever done that? Has it ever worked out well?

There have been many attempts at cease fires and truces. None of them have led anywhere and not all of them have been broken by Palestinians.
Meanwhile the settlements claim more Palestinian land.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

History has proven that if you want someone to stop being a Richard, you have to use force. Unfortunately if the Richard you're going after is better equipped and funded, it doesn't work out so well.

I think Israel is showing incredible restraint. I think if it was the US, we'd have rolled in and stomped out all resistance by now...

<looks at zeta(?) skirmishes in Texas>

or not.

EDIT: not shoes...<facepalm>


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:

History has proven that if you want someone to stop being a Richard, you have to use force. Unfortunately if the Richard you're going after is better equipped and funded, it doesn't work out so well.

I think Israel is showing incredible restraint. I think if it was the US, we'd have rolled in and stomped out all resistance by now...

<looks at zeta(?) skirmishes in Texas>

or not.

Recent history has also shown that in the modern era, going in and stomping all resistance doesn't work very well.

Israel could probably kill everyone in Palestine. Or at least slaughter many and drive the rest out as refugees. Short of that, what could they actually do to "stomp out resistance" that would last more than a year or two? And wouldn't breed an even less restrained resistance.
Actually, strike that bit about refugees. That would just spawn resistance outside Greater Israel.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ShadowcatX wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Spanky the Leprechaun wrote:
Sissyl wrote:
Of course it does. It also makes it difficult to criticize the Palestinian "terrorist" organizations for targeting civilian targets. As much as accepting this leaves a dry taste in my mouth.
I got no difficulties. It serves no purpose, is probably counterproductive, and just makes them look like the a!#!&@@s that they are.

While I agree it's probably counter productive, I'm not sure what the alternative is. Israel has shown itself in the past to be quite happy with the status quo, quietly expanding settlements and dividing Palestinian territory further with Israeli controlled roads even at the lowest points of Palestinian violence. As far as I can see the only thing Israel wants from the Palestinians is more land for settlements and an end to violence.

Things are almost certainly worse for Palestinians now, but there's never been any sign of a long term solution. The only bargaining chip they have is stopping the violence and that's always been a precondition for any real negotiations. So "Give us what we want and then we'll start talking about making a deal."

Meanwhile, while everyone moans about how evil the Palestinian terrorists are, far more Palestinian civilians get killed than the other way around.

The alternative is to lay down weapons and go to the table and actually discuss things like mature boys and girls.

And do you think that maybe the reason palestenian civilians die is because they are being actively used as shields, not because they are being actively targeted?

I guess it depends what that entails. I do not believe Israel will ever come clean about its open secret nuclear weapons and its chemical weapons (they have used white phosphorus; it's safe to assume they have an arsenal of ugly stuff), allow inspections, give up the stuff that no country should have, sign the NPT like Iran has.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
thejeff wrote:

Recent history has also shown that in the modern era, going in and stomping all resistance doesn't work very well.

In the modern era? When in the modern era has the resistance been utterly defeated?

No one has the resolve to do that in the modern era. We move in, kill a bunch, lose the taste for it, and leave. Or we try to assassinate key leaders and hope it just falls apart. Either way, it comes up again in a few short months, rinse repeat.

1 to 50 of 1,056 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Under fire All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.