Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13
Send Topic Print
About those alleged "human shields" in gaza (Read 15839 times)
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #135 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 11:50am
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 11:43am:
freediver wrote on Aug 9th, 2014 at 10:37pm:
It is not blindly accepted without evidence. The overwhelming evidence puts it in the bleeding obvious category. Hamas owes it's continued existence to hiding among civilians.


Hamas is a grassroots Gazan movement - they *EXIST* among civilians. Striking rockets are only a small part of the Israeli campaign - much of it involved targeting Hamas residences, and civil infrastructure linked to Hamas.

I have pointed out to you the absurdity of expecting Hamas to recruit only from people who live outside urban areas, or building civil infrastructure outside the urban areas that it serves. A point you naturally ignore.



do you think Hamas is taking care of the people that elected them to do just that???..

no ifs or buts....dont you think any govt should put its people first.? and make sure they have bomb proof places to go into.. if they wish to keep firing rockets..

seems to some of us.. the Hamas are using the children as shields.... not a good look is it?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
wally1
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2055
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #136 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 11:53am
 
Foreign press: Hamas didn't censor us in Gaza, they were nowhere to be found


On Wednesday night Benjamin Netanyahu briefed the foreign press, summing up four weeks of warfare in Gaza. “Now that the members of the press are leaving Gaza and are no longer subjected to Hamas restrictions and intimidation,” he said,” I expect we will see even more documentation of Hamas terrorists hiding behind the civilian population, exploiting civilian targets. I think it’s very important for the truth to come out.”

The prime minister’s voice betrayed no rancor but his words masked a deep frustration in his office over what one adviser called “a conspiracy of silence” by the foreign correspondents reporting from Gaza for the past month. “They have remained silent over how no one digs too deep into the Hamas side or into how they use civilians as human shields,” the adviser said. “That’s how they get an opportunity to cover Gaza, and it creates an imbalanced picture, which is bad for Israel. We should be trying to expose that.”

Netanyahu’s expectations have yet to be fulfilled. Of the 710 foreign journalists who crossed into Gaza during Operation Protective Edge, only a handful have claimed they were intimidated by Hamas or produced hitherto unpublished footage of rockets being fired from civilian areas, such as the pictures filmed by Indian channel NDTV, which were shown at the Netanyahu briefing. Maybe such footage will still emerge — all the foreign correspondents interviewed for this piece insisted that it doesn’t exist, and not because they wouldn’t have liked to obtain such pictures.

“It’s a phony controversy,” said one reporter who spent three weeks in Gaza and, like most who were interviewed, asked to remain anonymous. “This is a post-facto attempt to claim the media’s biased and Netanyahu [is] therefore infallibly right."

Elusive Rockets

But how could Hamas and other Palestinian organizations launch 2,657 rockets and mortar shells from Gaza, Israeli officials ask, and only NDTV reporter Sreenivasan Jain captured a launcher on film? Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor says he can’t believe “how veteran war photographers couldn’t capture even one launch team, a single Hamas fighter on a barricade, the kind of exclusive photo they routinely risk their neck for.”

“What nonsense,” says one senior correspondent based in Israel. “The fact that NDTV succeeded proves nothing; it was an almost unbelievable opportunity. There are places which are just too dangerous and a photographer has to first protect himself.”

“I didn’t see a rocket at point of launch,” says one European photographer who left Gaza a few days ago, “but I did see a lot in the air, and those pictures were published. If I had a chance I would have photographed launchers, but they were well hidden. Israel, with all its sensors and drones, didn’t find them all.”

“You couldn’t tell exactly where a rocket was being launched from,” says an American reporter. ”Often they were hundreds of yards away, although you could hear the launch and see the contrails. We didn’t hesitate to mention the general area in our reports, but that didn’t necessarily add much.”

“There are always some gung-ho photojournalists who would go to any front line, no matter how dangerous,” says Anne Barnard, the New York Times Beirut bureau chief, who spent two weeks reporting from Gaza. “But that requires essentially an informal embed with the militants, to even be able to locate them without getting caught in crossfire on the way. Our team in Gaza noted frequently in stories that Hamas operates in urban areas and from farm fields. We mentioned witnessing specific rocket launches in numerous stories, witnessing the rocket going up from some distance away, that is. But in two weeks I never saw a rocket crew; for obvious reasons, to avoid getting a hit by Israeli strikes, they try not to be seen.”

Missing in Action

The elusive rocket launchers are only one detail in the Israeli criticism. Where were the Hamas attackers throughout the operation? Why are pictures of uniformed and armed fighters totally absent from the coverage?

“I described the few Hamas fighters I saw in my pieces,” says one veteran war reporter, “but there were so few of them. It reminded me a lot of Lebanon in 2006, where you didn’t really see Hezbollah fighters even right at the border. Except for one chance encounter with a mortar team who looked embarrassed to be spotted. It was the same in Iraq, too, in the 2003 insurgency. Most of the time the fighters were invisible and dangerous.”

Reporter after reporter returning from Gaza has spoken of how, with the notable exception of spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, Hamas fighters melted away during the warfare, even abandoning their regular checkpoint at the entrance to the Strip from Erez, so no one was checking the journalists’ passports.

“Members of the political wing could only very occasionally be found or talked to,“ says Barnard. “This was frustrating because, of course, there are many questions they should be asked, not just to respond to Israeli allegations but to evaluate their performance on their own terms and those of Palestinians in Gaza: Are their strategy and tactics effective? Do they believe they have popular support for their conduct of the conflict and the decisions they made? How do they respond to people who complain that they went into hiding and left ordinary people who had no choice ab
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49347
At my desk.
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #137 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 7:06pm
 
Quote:
restraint - as in "restraining" themselves from an attack that was never on the agenda anyway - sure.


Not putting it on the agenda is an act of restraint Gandalf. Israel has every option open to them. That you pretend their course of action is the only one open to them just highlights how deliberately deceptive you must be to promote this bullshit argument.

Quote:
Perhaps you can understand why I find FD's term of a "scaled down" attack such nonsense. The only way the term could make sense is if they would have gone for a "chain drag" or whatever option - but were forced to "scale" it down on account of civilians being in the way.


Again you misunderstand Gandalf. They choose to.

Quote:
Which is rubbish - the chain drag option was never on the table in the first place - a point that FD cannot seem to comprehend. In fact he can't even explain what the attack was "scaled down" from.


Israel has actually used bulldozers already. For Israel, every option is a possibility.

Quote:
Israel hit Hamas exactly as hard as they always intended to.


They would hit Hamas much harder if Hamas weren't hiding behind their mothers skirts, and it takes a peculiar dedication to delf delusion to insist otherwise. Israel does not want to have rockets fired at them for the next few decades, and only a Muslim ciould suggest they do.

Quote:
Hamas is a grassroots Gazan movement - they *EXIST* among civilians.


Israel is also a grassroots organisation. So are the Greens apparently. What makes Hamas different is not idiotic labels like grassroots, but drawing military fire into urban areas and capitalising politically on the misery they create. Being grassroots is no excuse for being scum.

Quote:
Striking rockets are only a small part of the Israeli campaign - much of it involved targeting Hamas residences, and civil infrastructure linked to Hamas.


Ah, so it is unfair for Israel to target the people firing the rockets, as well as the rockets themselves?

Quote:
I have pointed out to you the absurdity of expecting Hamas to recruit only from people who live outside urban areas, or building civil infrastructure outside the urban areas that it serves. A point you naturally ignore.


You have not. This is a new claim. I have not suggested this at all. It is a strawman, of Islamic stupidity. What I suggest is Hamas stop firing rockets from within urban areas.

Quote:
is Hamas looking after its people????????...


Hamas' charter is to destroy Israel, and the suffering of the Palestinian people helps them achieve this goal. Or at least, to keep firing rockets at Israel.

Quote:
“You couldn’t tell exactly where a rocket was being launched from,” says an American reporter. ”Often they were hundreds of yards away, although you could hear the launch and see the contrails. We didn’t hesitate to mention the general area in our reports, but that didn’t necessarily add much.”


Were these reporters camped out in open land, or in the cities?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #138 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:19pm
 
freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
Not putting it on the agenda is an act of restraint Gandalf. Israel has every option open to them. That you pretend their course of action is the only one open to them just highlights how deliberately deceptive you must be to promote this bullshit argument.


*facepalm*

They could also launch a nuke against New York, or bomb the polar bears in the arctic. Yes, FD, "every option" is open to them - but we don't say that because they made the shock decision not to launch nukes against New York that they are executing a "scaled down" attack. We say such "options" are smacking retarded, and as such not in the least bit relevant to the discussion.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
They would hit Hamas much harder if Hamas weren't hiding behind their mothers skirts


Once again, baseless.

There is no reason to think that Israel didn't hit those targets just as hard as it needed to to achieve their goals - which once again did not involve flattening Gaza, or even anhialating Hamas.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
Israel does not want to have rockets fired at them for the next few decades


Of course they don't, but it can be argued that it is an acceptable price to pay for maintaining the gaza blockade and keeping the Gazan economy perpetually crippled. It does after all require a freak alignment of the planets for the rockets to actually do any harm to the Israelis. But even so, absolutely the Israelis would prefer Gaza to be suppressed *AND* non-beligerant at the same time.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
You have not. This is a new claim. I have not suggested this at all. It is a strawman, of Islamic stupidity. What I suggest is Hamas stop firing rockets from within urban areas.


I did mention it before, you ignored it then just like you are ignoring it now with a completely unrelated response.

Israel targeted Hamas civil infrastructure including TV and radio broadcasters - fact.
Israel also targeted Hamas personnel's residences in built up urban areas - fact.

See how thats got nothing to do with targeting rockets?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49347
At my desk.
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #139 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm
 
Quote:
They could also launch a nuke against New York, or bomb the polar bears in the arctic. Yes, FD, "every option" is open to them - but we don't say that because they made the shock decision not to launch nukes against New York that they are executing a "scaled down" attack. We say such "options" are smacking retarded, and as such not in the least bit relevant to the discussion.


Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?

Quote:
Once again, baseless.


For most people, it is common sense.

Quote:
There is no reason to think that Israel didn't hit those targets just as hard as it needed to to achieve their goals


You are making up imaginary goals for them. Having rockets lobbed over the border for years on end is not a goal Gnadalf. Stopping the rockets is. Have they achieved that?

Quote:
Of course they don't, but it can be argued that it is an acceptable price to pay for maintaining the gaza blockade and keeping the Gazan economy perpetually crippled.


Ah yes, the "Jews are evil" argument. Israel doesn't impose a blockade to try to stop the rockets, rather it permits the rockets so it can maintain the blockade and use Palestinian civilians as target practice. You've got me there Gandalf. Muslim logic wins the day, once again. Falah would be impressed.

Quote:
Israel also targeted Hamas personnel's residences in built up urban areas - fact.


So you keep saying. As I responded earlier - is this unfair? Should they bomb them at the army base instead?

Quote:
See how thats got nothing to do with targeting rockets?


It has something to do with stopping the rockets. I'll let you figure it out. That way you won't demand evidence.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #140 - Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:39pm
 
freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?


The idea of nuking the gaza strip or "chain dragging" as you describe it - is smacking retarded.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
You are making up imaginary goals for them.


Israel has pulled out. *THEY* say all their objectives are complete. Do you have any good reason to suggest they are lying, or not being completely honest with us?

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
Ah yes, the "Jews are evil" argument.


Once again, you said it FD, not me. Beginning to become a pattern this isn't it?

As I have said before, it would be so much easier for you to turn this into an "evil joos" debate.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
Israel doesn't impose a blockade to try to stop the rockets


The wall and the blockade was established about 5 years before any rockets started. I believe I have stated that about 5 times already in this thread alone.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
So you keep saying. As I responded earlier - is this unfair? Should they bomb them at the army base instead?


"unfair" is neither here nor there, and therefore completely meaningless.

What it is though, is a complete debunking of this idea that Israel only bombs residential areas because Hamas are hiding behind their mother's skirts. Unless you think its only reasonable for Hamas to recruit from people who live outside urban areas.

freediver wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 10:29pm:
It has something to do with stopping the rockets. I'll let you figure it out.


Yes, and I'll let you figure out how the imperative of Hamas to build civil infrastructure in residential areas to fulfill their duties as civil administrators, which then gets targeted by Israel - has nothing to do with Israel hitting residential areas because Hamas "hides behind their mother's skirts".
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49347
At my desk.
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #141 - Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:07pm
 
Quote:
The idea of nuking the gaza strip or "chain dragging" as you describe it - is smacking retarded.


Oh goody. Circles again. Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #142 - Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:17pm
 
freediver wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:07pm:
Is the option of using twice as much firepower as they currently do "smacking retarded"?


If they never needed to in the first place - then yes.

The reason I specified the chain dragging option is because that was your original answer to how Israel had "scaled down" their attack.

Also, I'd be interested on your thoughts about how having residences and civil infrastructure within urban areas constitutes "hiding behind their mother's skirts".
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49347
At my desk.
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #143 - Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:30pm
 
Quote:
If they never needed to in the first place - then yes.


How effective have current measures been at stopping the rockets. Please for a moment drop the BS that Israel's only goal is killing innocent Palestinians, or whatever else you can make up on the spot.

Quote:
The reason I specified the chain dragging option is because that was your original answer to how Israel had "scaled down" their attack.


That was my effort to explain to you that Israel is capable of far more than what it does. I tried many different ways to explain the same thing. Trust a Muslim to get it wrong eh?

Quote:
Also, I'd be interested on your thoughts about how having residences and civil infrastructure within urban areas constitutes "hiding behind their mother's skirts".


Firing rockets from behind their mothers skirts constitutes hiding behind their mothers skirts.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #144 - Aug 11th, 2014 at 11:26pm
 
freediver wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:30pm:
How effective have current measures been at stopping the rockets.


We shall see. But finding evidence that Israel failed in stopping the rockets is not evidence that not all of Israel's objectives were complete.

Israel says all their objectives were complete - would you disagree?

And please pause before posting your usual knee-jerk "Hamas still exists" retort- and consider the point I have been making repeatedly that the anhialiation of Hamas is almost certainly not a desirable Israeli outcome, nor is the wholesale flattening of Gaza.

Like I said, a continuation of rockets that require a freakish alignment of planets to cause any actual damage might be considered an acceptable price - for the continued denial of Palestinian rights.

freediver wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:30pm:
That was my effort to explain to you that Israel is capable of far more than what it does.


Of course it is - it is also capable of bombing polar bears in the arctic, or launching nukes against the US.

That said, your point is not an invalid one - but saying this therefore means the Israelis "scaled down" their attack is. You have no basis whatsoever to conclude that Israel would have chosen and would have prefered a more intense attack if it hadn't been for civilians. There is nothing, I say nothing, at all to assume that what transpired in this last attack, wasn't the exact intensity of targeting and firepower that Israel intended all along, and indeed felt was the most optimal all along. There are many reasons to argue why this was that case that I have covered - including the dangers of creating a power vacuum that would be filled by worse extremists than Hamas, the economic cost of rebuilding Gaza - that even a negligent occupier as Israel would find impossible to ignore, not to mention both a domestic and international backlash. But mostly, your "scaled down" attack argument is invalid because it is completely baseless - just like everything else you argue.

freediver wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:30pm:
Firing rockets from behind their mothers skirts constitutes hiding behind their mothers skirts.


So I take it you concede that there is at least some Israeli targeting of residential areas that isn't because of "hiding behind their mothers skirts"?

TV station in the middle of residential neighborhood hit by Israeli warplanes

Israel shell and bomb Gaza power plant, government offices and "symbols" of Hamas power:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-pounds-hamas-infrastructure-in-gaza-140662...

http://www.france24.com/en/20140729-israel-gaza-hamas-shelling-aqsa/
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49347
At my desk.
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #145 - Aug 12th, 2014 at 8:32am
 
Quote:
We shall see.


When two forces face off against each other, and one is vastly superior to the other, how long does it normally take to see what the outcome is?

Quote:
But finding evidence that Israel failed in stopping the rockets is not evidence that not all of Israel's objectives were complete.


Ah, so Israel's objective is to complete only some of it's objectives? Not stop the rockets?

Quote:
Israel says all their objectives were complete - would you disagree?


I would take it in the context it is obviously intended.

Quote:
And please pause before posting your usual knee-jerk "Hamas still exists" retort- and consider the point I have been making repeatedly that the anhialiation of Hamas is almost certainly not a desirable Israeli outcome, nor is the wholesale flattening of Gaza.


How about stopping the rockets? Is that too knee-jerky for you?

Quote:
Like I said, a continuation of rockets that require a freakish alignment of planets to cause any actual damage might be considered an acceptable price - for the continued denial of Palestinian rights.


So the Jews are only prepared to sacrifice a small number of their own people in order to continue slaughtering Palestinians?

Quote:
That said, your point is not an invalid one - but saying this therefore means the Israelis "scaled down" their attack is. You have no basis whatsoever to conclude that Israel would have chosen and would have prefered a more intense attack if it hadn't been for civilians.


Except of course for it being bleeding obvious.

Quote:
There is nothing, I say nothing, at all to assume that what transpired in this last attack, wasn't the exact intensity of targeting and firepower that Israel intended all along


The civilians have been there all along. Hamas have been hiding behind their mothers skirts all along. I am not suggesting a sudden change in Hamas behaviour with a demonstrable change in Israeli tactics.

Quote:
There are many reasons to argue why this was that case that I have covered - including the dangers of creating a power vacuum that would be filled by worse extremists than Hamas


You mean the angry Muslims? Ones who might be ideologically compelled to destroy Israel? Is this a subtler version of your hollywood alien monster theory of Palestinians military superiority? When the west destroyed the Nazis, did anyone fret that they might be replaced by a group of really angry Germans?

Quote:
But mostly, your "scaled down" attack argument is invalid because it is completely baseless


Ah, can't argue with Muslim logic, can you? Muslims merely explain away the obvious scaling down of retaliation in residential areas, then point out there is no longer any evidence of it. After all, they just finished explaining it away, didn't they?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #146 - Aug 12th, 2014 at 11:29am
 
freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2014 at 8:32am:
Ah, so Israel's objective is to complete only some of it's objectives? Not stop the rockets?


Oh please enlighten us all FD - what were the Israeli objectives? You should be asking the Israelis - they are the ones who say all their objectives were completed.

Suggest you start familiarising yourself with the Israeli leadership's mindset towards this, and the actual strategy they are developing against Hamas, which has become known as "mowing the grass":

Quote:
Obviously, Israel recognizes that the threats from groups like the Gaza-based militant group Hamas aren't the same as the Cold War-era threats it faced from Arab invasions. So it's developed a new version of its long-held threat management strategy, which is often called "mowing the grass." It's a pretty creepy term, as it implies that periodically killing people is the same as keeping your lawn groomed. But that's the basic analogy: Hamas, like grass, can't disappear, but it can be regularly cut down to size. And, like mowing the grass, it's implied that this is a routine that will be continued forever.

According to Efraim Inbar and Eitan Shamir, Israeli academics based at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, the basic difference between "mowing the grass" and Israel's old strategy is that the end-goal has changed. In the era of wars with Arab conventional armies, Israel hoped that eventually "a long and violent struggle, punctuated by decisive battlefield victories, could eventually lead Arab states to accept the notion of Israel's permanence." In other words, Israel believed that its threat-management strategy would eventually lead to peace, which in cases such as Egypt it did.

Israel does not believe the same thing today about applying this strategy to non-state militant groups. Israel sees Hamas and other militants as "implacable enemies, who want to destroy the Jewish state and there is very little Israel can do on the political front to mitigate this risk."

That thinking points to regular Israeli military assaults, like the Gaza invasion, designed to "cripple" Hamas' military capabilities such as its ability to launch rockets, without any regard to finding a political solution. Mowing the grass attacks are also, according to Inbar and Shamir, designed to make future wars less likely. The idea is that if Hamas is afraid of Israeli retaliation, it'll voluntarily reduce its rocket fire into Israel, thus requiring fewer "mowing the grass" attacks by the Israeli military.

Inbar and Shamir see this week's Gaza incursion as a textbook example of this strategy. Sasley sees things similarly. Israel, according to Sasley, wants "quiet." He believes that Israel would actually tolerate a number of rockets out of Gaza, so long as those rockets are not from Hamas, "they don't cause any damage, certainly don't kill any Israelis, and there's nothing else that requires a bigger response." Once that's happened, Israel will see — here's that stomach-churning metaphor again — the grass as cut down to an acceptable length (until it grows back, anyway).


http://www.vox.com/2014/7/22/5926275/israel-gaza-mowing-the-grass

In short, everything Israel intended to do, they did. They identified a finite set of objectives (tunnels, Hamas residences, Hamas civil offices etc), and they destroyed them with whatever firepower was necessary. There was no "scaling down" of their attack, because they knew exactly what they wanted to hit, and how much firepower was required to destroy the pre-identified targets. They fully recognise that Hamas will regain strength and continue the rocket fire - after which another "mowing down" will be required. In the mindset of the current Israeli leadership, this is seen as an acceptable cost to keep resistance to Israel's project of WB colonization and denial of the Palestinians their rights in check. Going for a more "permanent" military solution is not strategically optimal - given the previously stated economic and political costs for Israel such a solution would entail. Of course that is not to say this strategy will work in the long run - my feeling is that it won't - but it is nontheless the rationale the Israeli leadership has adopted - and thus why your "scaling down" theory is baseless and reflects a misunderstanding of the reality.

Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #147 - Aug 12th, 2014 at 11:31am
 
I see you are disowning your own "mother's skirts" argument now FD.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 11:26pm:
So I take it you concede that there is at least some Israeli targeting of residential areas that isn't because of "hiding behind their mothers skirts"?

TV station in the middle of residential neighborhood hit by Israeli warplanes

Israel shell and bomb Gaza power plant, government offices and "symbols" of Hamas power:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-pounds-hamas-infrastructure-in-gaza-140662...

http://www.france24.com/en/20140729-israel-gaza-hamas-shelling-aqsa/


Are you also disowning your original defense of baseless Israel accusations of Hamas ordering civilians to stay in the line of fire that is directly contradicted by actual evidence?

You've been very quiet on both.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #148 - Aug 12th, 2014 at 3:33pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 12th, 2014 at 11:31am:
I see you are disowning your own "mother's skirts" argument now FD.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 11:26pm:
So I take it you concede that there is at least some Israeli targeting of residential areas that isn't because of "hiding behind their mothers skirts"?

TV station in the middle of residential neighborhood hit by Israeli warplanes

Israel shell and bomb Gaza power plant, government offices and "symbols" of Hamas power:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-pounds-hamas-infrastructure-in-gaza-140662...

http://www.france24.com/en/20140729-israel-gaza-hamas-shelling-aqsa/


Are you also disowning your original defense of baseless Israel accusations of Hamas ordering civilians to stay in the line of fire that is directly contradicted by actual evidence?

You've been very quiet on both.

Well whoa there boy.
Did you miss it.
It was on the ABC several times... I watched it intently it was no baseless accusation.  They even went further and stated that the lives of civilians used as martyrs were part of their big plan.
Why do you think they launch from civilian residential areas and areas that they know will fly well with the useful idiots when Israel targets them.
You are very wrong on this and need to get out more.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: About those alleged "human shields" in gaza
Reply #149 - Aug 12th, 2014 at 3:35pm
 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13
Send Topic Print