Israel's war of terror against Gaza

[subsuelo]

The number of people who have died in the last five days is now more than 400, including 70 children and 18 women. They have also attacked 18 mosques. The number of injured is about 2,500. It's crazy, it's genocidal. They want to send us back to the dark ages, as they say.

...
The Israelis want to punish the people for voting for an anti-Oslo organization three years ago when they voted for Hamas.

...the timing of the first strikes was at 11:30 a.m. on a Saturday morning, when schoolchildren are returning home. So 80 children have been killed, and by the way, today, two sisters--seven and eight years old--died in the morning, and an hour ago, I heard their brother died from his injuries.

So Israel's "strategy" is to kill as many civilians as possible to create a situation where civilians would rebel against Hamas and resistance movements. But like in Lebanon, this has had the opposite effect. The population supports the resistance--and not only the resistance of Hamas by the way.

http://socialistworker.org/2009/01/02/israels-war-of-terror">SocialistWorker.org - read more

[Duckhunter935]

1. I think

"So Israel's "strategy" is to kill as many civilians as possible"

They could of killed a whole lot more.

[parasim]

3. Sure they could have.

Perhaps they should have said, as many as possible before they would have been thought of as engaging in genocide.

[tekisui]

23. It's not over. The ground invasion is about to begin.

[damntexdem]

2. Israeli politicians DO NOT want to destroy Hamas.

They need Hamas, as well as Hezbollah, in order to stay in power. Just as Hamas needs the terrorist Israeli government in order to retain its power over Gaza.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

7. it's a massacre

but it is not a colonial one.

[EFerrari]

8. People who use colonialism to theorize are 'way behind the curve.

Because the idea isn't to supplant a native population with your own or even, to eliminate them in favor of yours. It's simply to manipulate public opinion for the required length of time it takes to move capital.

That isn't colonialism. It's her more efficient, more brutal sister, corporatism.

[cali]

11. no, it's not corporatism

either. And corporatism really isn't different from colonialism anyway. They're both rooted in greed and profit.

[EFerrari]

15. Sure it is. And corporatism is different from colonialism as

as race car is different from a skateboard.

The Arab world doesn't support Hamas. There is no Arab League about to invade Israel. The Hamas rockets have killed four people, two of them Arab Israelis. There is no crisis here that isn't a pure product of propaganda, a planned campaign ahead of an election and with an eye out for oil prices. Which have gone up in the last week as have Barak's polls.

The defense and oilmen have this one last chance before they lose the White House. They don't yet know if or how much Obama will play ball.

Hamas leadership is floundering around like fish in a barrel, which is exactly what they are.

This is the corporati exploiting this situation as much as possible before January 20 when the sale ends.

[The Magistrate]

17. There May a Few Too Many Moving Parts Here, Ma'am

There have been reports, which seem to me believable, that Israeli planning for this strike commenced shortly after the 'cease-fire' half a year or so ago was declared. In the Near East 'cease-fire' tends to be code for 'out of ammunition' or 'we really need to build up for the next round', and both sides seemed to have followed this pattern during the last half of last year, with Hamas doing a good deal to beef up their rocketry and Israel doing the intelligence work necessary to compile an accurate current target list. This means that the strike was in the works well before the present economic situation set in motion the collapse of oil prices, and suggests it would have gone through even if oil were still up near its highs. That part of its purpose was to bolster Olmert and Kadima is doubtless true, but that, too, is a local concern.

[EFerrari]

19. That may be right. Just because this was an auspicious time for the operation

doesn't mean it wouldn't have gone forward regardless.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

16. It most definitely is colonialism no matter how you dress it

Just as the traditional American cowboy film presented white Americans under siege, with Indians as the aggressors, which was the opposite of reality, so, too, have Palestinians become the aggressors and not the victims. Beginning in 1948, 750,000 Palestinians were deliberately cleansed and expelled from their homes, and hundreds of their villages were destroyed, and their land was settled by colonists, who went on to deny their very existence and wage a 60-year war against the remaining natives and the national liberation movements the Palestinians established around the world. Every day, more of Palestine is stolen, more Palestinians are killed. To call oneself an Israeli Zionist is to engage in the dispossession of entire people. It is not that, qua Palestinians, they have the right to use any means necessary, it is because they are weak. The weak have much less power than the strong, and can do much less damage. The Palestinians would not have ever bombed cafes or used home-made missiles if they had tanks and airplanes. It is only in the current context that their actions are justified, and there are obvious limits.

It is impossible to make a universal ethical claim or establish a Kantian principle justifying any act to resist colonialism or domination by overwhelming power. And there are other questions I have trouble answering. Can an Iraqi be justified in attacking the United States? After all, his country was attacked without provocation, and destroyed, with millions of refugees created, hundreds of thousands of dead. And this, after 12 years of bombings and sanctions, which killed many and destroyed the lives of many others.

I could argue that all Americans are benefiting from their country's exploits without having to pay the price, and that, in today's world, the imperial machine is not merely the military but a military-civilian network. And I could also say that Americans elected the Bush administration twice and elected representatives who did nothing to stop the war, and the American people themselves did nothing. From the perspective of an American, or an Israeli, or other powerful aggressors, if you are strong, everything you do is justifiable, and nothing the weak do is legitimate. It's merely a question of what side you choose: the side of the strong or the side of the weak.

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/29/gaza-hamas-israel

[EFerrari]

18. Nope. The aim here is not colonialism, even intellectual colonialism.

The corporati have figured out you don't need to go to all that trouble.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

20. The aim is definitely colonialism

Colonialism is the extension of a nation's sovereignty over territory beyond its borders by the establishment of either settler or exploitation colonies in which indigenous populations are directly ruled, displaced, or exterminated. Colonizing nations generally dominate the resources, labor, and markets of the colonial territory, and may also impose socio-cultural, religious, and linguistic structures on the indigenous population (see also cultural imperialism). It is essentially a system of direct political, economic, and cultural intervention and hegemony by a powerful country in a weaker one. Though the word colonialism is often used interchangeably with imperialism, the latter is sometimes used more broadly as it covers control exercised informally (via influence) as well as formal military control or economic leverage.

If it looks like a duck...

[aquart]

5. But shooting missiles 27 miles into a nation is NOT terrorist?

Nice standards you have, sweetie.

[subsuelo]

9. where does it say that shooting missiles 27 miles into a nation is not terrorist?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[subsuelo]

10. While Israel massacres women, children, and anything that moves

You get upset by those that condemn the terror.

You must get really sick of us bleeding heart liberals huh

[backwoodsbob]

12. massacre women and children?

why can't people let go with the drama?

If Israel wanted to MASSACRE women and children the dead would number in the hundreds of thousands right now.

How about Hamas declar they will shoot or allow no more missiles and they want to talk.THAT would stop this in an instant

[Sezu]

14. But the drama is what SELLS and selling is what it is

ALL about for some here.

[subsuelo]

26. Never ceases to amaze me.

While hundreds are being killed, the actual *drama* is in the outcry against the killings.

Never ceases to amaze me.

[Sezu]

13. No I get sick of those who use classic antisemitic

tropes in their talking points/propaganda and then resort to some kind of Chewbacca defense to defend their garbage.

[subsuelo]

25. Nothing antisemitic at all

I'm just opposed to terrorist attacks on innocent people.

Sorry you have such a problem with that.

[Taitertots]

21. Israel massacres no one

There is no massacre of women and children. If anything it would appear that Israel takes great efforts to prevent civilian deaths.
The same can not be said about people firing unguided rockets into civilian centers.

Hamas-Specifically targets civilians while avoiding obvious military targets
Israel-Specifically targets military targets while avoiding obvious civilian targets

[delad]

24. so all of those women and children killed (so far)

weren't massacred? Are you saying that if you make a decision that you know will result in the deaths of innocents, this is not murder? then obviously Israel can never do no wrong. It's funny because Hamas uses rockets (ie unguided) and are therefore firing *indiscriminately* and not deliberately targeting stuff. Sounds pretty much like what Israel is doing tbh

[Taitertots]

27. Not Massacred

If you make a decision to protect your country from terrorists and some people die despite efforts to limit civilian deaths than the civilian deaths are justified. Israel has not, and is not targeting civilians for attacks. Hamas is making an effort to kill only civilians. No one is massacring palestinians despite the obvious capacity to do it. Hamas is trying to massacre civilians, yet does not have the capacity. So Israel should do nothing in spite of this and wait wishing Hamas never gets more accurate rockets, to use in thier jihad against Israel, thier stated goal.

Hamas is using unguided rockets to target civilians. Firing unguided rockets at cities is terrorism, it is wrong, it is worse than anything Israel is doing.
Israel is firing guided munitions at Hamas targets. Specifically aimed to limit civilian causalties. No one is massacring Palestinians.

[The Magistrate]

28. A Certain Balance Of Intent And Effect Must Be Shown, Sir

The intent to kill non-combatants displayed by Hamas is indeed far worse than the intent to kill combatants, but often in ways that must encompass the deaths of non-combatants, displayed by Israel.

Hamas, however, has with its rocket attacks managed to actually kill very few non-combatants; Israel has encompassed a good number of non-combatant deaths in the destruction of many legitimate targets. The impact of a blow is the product of the moving weight, and the velocity at which it moves: a light object moving at great speed can strike as hard as a heavy object moving quite slowly. Something like that is going on here, with the degree of shock produced by the contrasting actions.

[Vegasaurus]

22. One does not have to be a terrorist supporter to be a bleeding heart liberal

(you are more even handed than that, in your criticism of terrorists, Subsuelo)

But too many bleeding heart liberals seem to support terrorists and resistance.

I want to see people calling out Hamas on endangering the lives of its citizens, for provoking a war in order to maintain their power and political positioning.

This is not all Israel's fault, but very much the fault of the terrorists, Hamas.

[subsuelo]

29. I see terrorists on both sides

Just out there killing for the sake of killing. Driven by hatred and vengeance, they're just killing people on the other side. Much of war comes down to just that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. And people complain about the Jpost being cited?

[subsuelo]

31. Oh no! The scary socialists are coming

I take socialist worker any day over your beloved right wing JPost rag

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. I take data from all sources. Be it the Jpost, NYT or the Wobblies.

It matters what is being published, even if its clearly nonsense. The socialist sites are clearly opinion with an agenda. They are not a source for real time facts. The Jpost is. All sites have opinions and agendas. Most of us can tell one from the other

[subsuelo]

33. You realize that you contradict yourself?

You criticize "socialist sites" for having opinion and agenda, then you later write that "all sites have opinion and agenda" (presumably in defense of JPost?) :shrug:

And btw - do you really turn to JPost for "real time facts"? Wow.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Not really, let me go into more detail of what I thought was obvious

The WS etc sites do not have reporters on the ground. They take what is reported and said by others. Most of their articles are not designed as factual reports as much as persuasive pieces. Nothing wrong with that. Some of them are quite good, other hyperbolic gobbledygook. Depends mostly on the author. However, not a source of real time facts.

The Jpost has reporters on the ground in Gaza and in Israel. They are a source of real time data. An example:
At 0903 on Friday A shot B and it was legitimate because B was shooting rockets into Israel. Clearly facts and opinion. This fits Al-J, Ma'an, Ynet, Haaretz in the region, IHT, etc elsewhere.

I don't take any reported facts as valid until there are multiple sources, and even then may be skeptical due to what I perceive are the limitations of the people reporting it. That has annoyed some, oh well. Facts matter, at least to me.

[Sezu]

34. Post modern world my friend. No truth means the

narrative is king even if the narrative is bent politically/ideologically. It is the scourge of the rational world. And those addicted to the latter are incapable of a cure by rationalists like any other addict. Socialism as dreamt by these addicts has failed again and again yet they continue jonesing for it. An addict is by definition seeking that escape from reality.

[subsuelo]

35. straight out of the Rush Limbaugh files I take it?

Or is it George Will