Hamas puts Gazans in danger by drawing IDF into urban warfare

[shira]

Hamas has thus far avoided direct clashes with Israel Defense Forces troops, preferring instead to take refuge in densely populated civilian neighborhoods, Palestinians sources said yesterday.

Hamas, they said, prefers to shoot from between houses, leaving local civilians to absorb the IDF's retaliatory strikes. Yesterday, two Palestinian families were killed by IDF fire.

<snip>

The sources also said that senior Hamas officials have been spotted more than once wandering around the maternity ward of Gaza City's Shifa Hospital and even using the hospital to hold press conferences, on the theory that it offers a safe haven from Israeli fire. For the same reason, Hamas forces have taken refuge near buildings that serve as headquarters for various international organizations, such as the Red Cross and the United Nations.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1052981.html

Now once again, why would these brave, fierce fighting warrior heroes for Hamas choose to hide in civilian homes or hospital maternity wards? Are these real men, who valiantly fight for the rights and honor of Palestinian civilians thinking that Israel will slow down for one moment and not fire at them, as well as the mothers and infants they so gallantly hide behind?

:sarcasm:

[ShortnFiery]

1. I'm sorry, I'm not buying this meme "hook, line and sinker." IDF knows they're killing civilians ...

that's what some call volitional MURDER of INNOCENTS not collateral damage.

[ShortnFiery]

3. p.s. that's called "Guerrilla Warfare" and has been with us since the beginning of time. Vietnam?!?

[EFerrari]

2. So, Hamas is choosing IDF targets now? How pathetic.

"They made me kill those women and children!"

:puke:

[shira]

7. The choice seems to be that Hamas is saying...

..."kill our brave warriors, as well as the babies or mommies whose skirts we're hiding behind, or don't - and we'll eventually kill you with more rockets - whose range, accuracy, and lethality are bound to improve over time."

[EFerrari]

11. Keep it up. Someone needs to agree with you.

The world is and will continue to turn away in revulsion.

[shira]

15. reality bites sometimes

from the horse's mouth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0wJXf2nt4Y

[azurnoir]

28. The biting reality is

Israel knowingly then chooses to kill women and children that is reality and you can not no matter how hard you try clean that up

[shira]

29. if that's what Israel does reguarly

then why does Hamas think they can feel more safe and secure resorting to these repulsive tactics?

If you check out the 2 youtube videos I posted, you'll see they do this because it's effective in saving them or making them more secure.

Maybe you're thinking of China or Russia, where these human-shield tactics would have no effect at all.

[azurnoir]

40. I did check out the MEMRI tv video's you posted

That is why I stated that Israel is knowingly choosing a path which will lead to many civilian causalities and exactly why you are here posting this stuff in an attempt to clean it up to make it somehow OK for IDF to do this
Oh and show me where I said Israel regularly does this? This action id irregular even for Israel.

[shira]

44. so you agree that this tactic works for Hamas

and "regurlarly" slows down, thwarts, or stops Israel from getting the bad guys, due to Israel and the IDF's morals and ethics.

[azurnoir]

46. Doesn't seem to be stopping them now

Like I said earlier that is why the clean up act to transfer responsibility for what IDF chooses to do

[shira]

75. so if it's not stopping Israel now...

...why is Hamas still using mommies and their babies as their civilian-shield hostages? Is Hamas stupid, retarded?

And how do you "KNOW" Israel is so careless as to not even care about minimizing, as best they can in war, civilian casualties when they target Hamas among civilians? Do you think the entire IAF, navy, and IDF are clued in on the orders to "kill them all and sort 'em out later"? You don't think Israel's soldiers would have a problem with such orders or that we'd read about this in Haaretz or Ynet?

[Joe the Revelator]

99. Your logic is extremely flawed

Hamas fires rockets into Israel until Israel is forced to do something

Israel goes into Gaza in order to destroy the rockets

Hamas, knowingly places rockets in Civilian areas in order to use their own people as Public Relations pawns

Israel warns civilian neighborhoods that they are coming

Hamas moves more equipment into these areas, and hides out in private homes

Civilians are killed when Israel makes good on its warning

You blame Israel.



Really?

[kenichol]

137. "...?until Israel is FORCED to do something about it?..."

That sounds exactly like the abusers in domestic violence situations. "She/They made me do it."
NOT There is an infinite number of responses to the 14 Israeli deaths over the past 12 years; killing nearly 700 Palestinians in 2 weeks is not the just, humane choice.

[Joe the Revelator]

98. There you go again.

[BunkerHill24]

14. You should be volunteering for IDF, instead sitting here as keyboard commando

[shira]

16. did the IDF put this together too?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2G1TZKerTo&NR=1

Reality bites, huh?

[BunkerHill24]

42. "Reality bites, huh?"

you said it!

[azurnoir]

61. LOL this video no longer availible

reality does indeed bite

[shira]

79. works for me, here it is again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2G1TZKerTo

[azurnoir]

85. It is a different video

but do keep on making excuse for the killing of civilians

[shira]

86. same video

do keep up. Learn anything from that video that you didn't know, or denied in the past?

Now please answer - do you really and truly think that IDF troops like our own Pelsar here have standing orders to kill and sort out the civilians from the combatants only after the carnage? Do you think that Pelsar and the rest of the IDF are not ordered to be careful in distinguishing combatants from civilians?

Please be very clear answering.

[azurnoir]

89. BS shira it is different address from someone

called Israel Protecter, the fist one and the other 2 or 3 did not work and our own Pelsar is to be honest at 51 years old a bit aged to be on front line active duty and he himself has admitted that while IDF may not target civilians they do not care either.

[shira]

92. so what did you learn from the video?

It's interesting how those hostile to Israel here first deny the OP, but then change tactics once they learn it's true and then minimize Hamas responsibility in using Palestinian soft-targets as their shields, isn't it?

So you believe Israel, the IAF, and IDF don't care about Palestinian civilians?

If so, why the rush to switch from air strikes to ground troops? It's so much easier striking any target safely from the sky, rather than putting IDF soldiers at risk on the ground, isn't it? Maybe Israel doesn't "care" for its IDF soldiers either?

[azurnoir]

93. I learned that Israeli propaganda comes in may forms

really I already knew that and it does not change my original premise if this known then IDF is knowingly killing civilians twist and turn and try to reassign blame all you want but that fact remains

[shira]

94. and you wonder why Israel cannot negotiate with hamas

You probably think there are IDF commanders who say - "hey look over there...there are Palestinian civilians sheltered in that building...let's blow it up, okay?".

If you think that insanity really happens and that Israelis are capable of doing that, you're too far gone to discuss anything rationally.

Also, you must think that by deliberately killing civilians, Israel WANTS to hand Hamas a propaganda victory so that the international community gets fed up and stops Israel before they accomplish their military goals.

So really - you think Israel is sadistic and evil, and retarded to boot. And that most leftist Israeli civilians who serve in that evil IDF with standing orders to commit a "FINAL SOLUTION" are too ignorant, stupid, or retarded to know any better? You think Haaretz and Ynet aren't in on your "scoop"?

Sheesh....and you guys wonder why you aren't taken seriously. :eyes: And then wonder why it is Israel cannot negotiate with Hamas.

[azurnoir]

110. No one takes us seriously you mean lke Bush?

you have been reduced to making obviously false accusations your whole post sounds rather wild eyed to me

[shira]

113. the only wild-eyed accusations are yours

You can't challenge the points in that last post, can you? Why not?

All you do is accuse Israelis of being retarded and immoral nazis who are hellbent with genocidal aspirations.

[azurnoir]

117. thanks for making my point for me

but show me where I said that or is that how you need to interpret things?

[shira]

123. you have been implying for a LONG time

that the state of Israel acts in very suspect ways when it comes to war and Palestinian civilians, as if they don't give a rip about civilians - and that even liberal Israelis are "in" on this nastiness but shrug it off (due to immorality?). Or maybe you think they're as bad as Hamas, or only that their actions result in the depravity that Hamas is all about?

Or, is it that you are solely against ANY war whatsoever?

Or that when Israel wages war, they are worse than most or all other nations when going about their business?

Just trying to be clear.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[Bryan Sacks]

64. not even you can believe the shit you post n/t

[Scurrilous]

4. "Palestinians sources said..."

I'm convinced!!1!:thumbsup:

[shira]

9. and why wouldn't you be convinced....

...if Palestinian sources were accusing Israelis of something even more insane, you'd be convinced of that. So why not this?

[Scurrilous]

97. From the talkbacks:

(referring to the author) "Did Avi write this?"

"Or did he simply copy a transcript from the IDF PR Department?"


You broke out the big red font for this?

:rofl:

[shira]

100. as han said to chewy: "laugh it up fuzzball"

you didn't happen to check out those youtube links in this thread that clearly confirm this, did you?

do keep up, dear.

[leftchick]

5. interestingly a doctor at one hospital disputes this

Others did not escape the assault. The wounded and dead piled up at Gaza's Shifa hospital yesterday.

Eric Fosse, a Norwegian doctor there, said Hamas fighters were a small minority of the casualties brought in. "This hospital has been filled up with patients," he added. This morning they bombed the fruit market. There were a large number of casualties.

"We became like a field hospital. There were two patients at a time in the operating rooms and we were operating on other people in the corridors. Some were dying before we could get to them."

Moawya Hasanian, the head of Shifa's emergency and ambulance department, said the hospital had taken in 33 dead and 137 wounded by lunchtime on Sunday.

Among those killed was a paramedic after his ambulance was hit by Israeli fire. Three of his colleagues were wounded.

"Only three of the dead are from Hamas, the rest are civilians," Hasanian said. "There are many children under 18. There are many in critical condition. We are working under pressure. It's not easy to work with bombs and air strikes everywhere. It's not easy for ambulances to move."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/05/civilian-catasrophe-gaza

I believe the doctor

[Shaktimaan]

45. He disputes what?

Your post doesn't seem to have anything to do with the OP.

[leftchick]

54. it is not my fault

you lack reading comprehension skills. Try again or seek help.

[Shaktimaan]

96. This must be embarrassing for you.

The doctor you quoted was talking about casualties being mostly civilian with very few Hamas fighters being among them... AMONG THE WOUNDED...AS CASUALTIES! The OP is talking about Hamas fighters using Shifa hospital as illegitimate cover to hide in and hold press conferences in so that they won't be targeted by the IDF. The doctor does not mention a single thing about non-wounded Hamas fighters. He neither confirms nor denies the OP, his statement has nothing to do with it.

[StudsT]

6. that is what the military occupier always says... i think folks ain't buying it this time round

thanks to the bush misadministration (see there are some benefits to their reign of terror)

StudsT

[shira]

17. do you buy into this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBYtij4Q7sE&feature=related

[backwoodsbob]

19. why is it

when *anonymous* Norwegian doctors claim ONLY in Iranian papers that Israel is using WP against civilians it is taken as absolute fact but this must be met with skepticism

[JuniperLea]

122. The doctor was named...

And it was a UK news agency.

This is really sad and incompetent... even for spinning.

[leftchick]

8. UN official says Gaza school was clearly marked

whom to believe, the aggressors or those crazy UN people on the ground? :eyes:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUKN06430746


Tue Jan 6, 2009 5:39pm GMT
(Adds details throughout)

By Claudia Parsons

UNITED NATIONS, Jan 6 (Reuters) - A U.N. official in Gaza said a school where dozens of Palestinians were killed by tank shells on Tuesday was clearly marked with a U.N. flag and its location had been reported to Israeli authorities.

John Ging, director of operations in Gaza for UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, said the death toll in the Israeli artillery strike near the school in Jabalya refugee camp was 30 dead with another 55 people injured.

Medical officials on the spot have said more than 40 people were killed.

Ging told reporters at U.N. headquarters by videolink from Gaza that three artillery shells landed at the perimeter of the school where 350 people were taking shelter.

He said UNRWA regularly provided the Israeli army with exact geographical coordinates of its facilities and the school was in a built-up area. "Of course it was entirely inevitable if artillery shells landed in that area there would be a high number of casualties," he said.

Casualty numbers were still being assessed but the latest figures were 30 dead and 55 injured, including at least five critically, Ging said.

The Israeli military said it is looking into the incident at al-Fakhora school in Jabalya on the fourth day of a ground assault launched after a week of air strikes failed to end Hamas rocket salvos against Israeli towns.

[Hydra]

10. If Israel, with Mossad at their command

Cannot identify and assassinate all Hamas members, then I'm a monkey's uncle.

This is a civilian purge. The people inside can't even flee. It's rather hard to misunderstand such actions when they are firing on UN targets.

"Oops!"

Yeah, I'm sure...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

131. You must watch "The Unit". Its bad fantasy

Through mixed sources they did identify a lot about Hamas. So much so that when the strikes came, it hurt Hamas badly.

The concept of hit teams to do it all is just silly.


So what do you call your simian nephew/niece

[Hydra]

138. /fail

Up to 3/4th of the targets are non-Hamas, including UN structures and medical personnel, not unlike Lebannon.

If Hamas was a real threat rather than an excuse for purging, you can bet they could indeed have them all killed on the same day without airstrikes.

[question everything]

12. And so far it is working

They don't care about the life of the innocent. After all, they do send women with crying babies to houses that the IDF warns will be bombed. That "leader" who kept his four wives and several children with him, and who sent his son to be a suicide bomber played martyr and took the innocents with him.

Their culture is a culture of death. With or without the virgins in heaven. They hide behind women and children - which normally would generate contempt in the patriarchal Arab society - and get the whole world, to be aghast.

Oh, and by the way, has the world noticed that many are killed in Darfur, and in the Congo? In Uganda? No, the world does not care as long as blacks kill blacks. But Jews are not allowed to be warriors. They have to be victims, know their place, the way they have done for centuries.

:puke:

[tekisui]

21. Their culture is no more a culture of death than the US's.

Their tactics may be disgusting, but so are Israel's and America's for that matter. What military has more blood on their hands? That may be the one with the culture of death.

[shira]

35. really?

did you check out those youtube videos? there's plenty more to view of that sick shit.

amazing what you can find when you're not always reading rags like counterpunch.

[tekisui]

39. I've never read counterpunch.

Have you seen what Iraq looked like after shock and awe? I saw some of the youtubes. I have also seen youtubes of indiscriminate killings by Israelis and Americans. The 'culture of death' seems to be worldwide. A dead innocent, a dead child from bombings is disgusting, I blame the bomber.

[EFerrari]

30. Too bad "the Jews are not allowed to be warriors" and massacre innocents

without all this blow back? Did you just say that?

:puke:

[shira]

34. he's saying that in war

there is no such thing as zero civilian casualties, which is the impossible expectation those hostile to Israel have.

[EFerrari]

37. No. That's not what was posted.

And your translation is mendacity. Most people here are not hostile to Israel but hostile to needless SLAUGHTER.

[burythehatchet]

147. YOU. ARE. A. RACIST.

a SICK FUCK.

[T Wolf]

13. The same tactics used by the colonists in fighting the superior British army. How shameful.

[ellisonz]

59. Link?

[Recursion]

18. Easy solution: end the blockade and open the borders

Then I'm sure you'll find a lot of Hamas militants leaving "the skirts they are hiding behind."

[shira]

36. and Hamas will renounce their violence and the rockets will stop?

are you so arrogant as to honestly believe that? Talk about blind faith.

[Recursion]

38. I was being snarky

Because I'm astonished that Israel would complain that the Hamas militants are staying in the densely-populated area in which Israel has locked them.

[tekisui]

20. They are severely under armed and underfunded compared to Israel.

They have to use guerrilla tactics to survive, as reprehensible as that is. If they acme out with guns ablazing, Israel would end them will one 2-ton bomb.

Israel chooses its targets. Neither side can claim any kind of moral superiority. Hamas is hiding in the cities, Israel is bombing the cities.

[shira]

22. so Hamas does this.......why?

can you be specific please? They hide among civilians and infants because ______________.

Surely they don't do it because they feel Israel is moral enough to stop, slow down, or not go after them?

[tekisui]

26. It is a tactic.

Just a terrorism is not an ideology, it is a tactic or a weapon. Gazans have no where to flee to anyway, so I don't really care for that argument. Further, Israel bans any journos from reporting from Gaza, so their arguments are largely suspect.

Please be specific for me. Israel kills innocent children because______________. That is their tactic. They have the bombs and the missiles, they can fight the war from a desk. They don't have to resort to warfare that appears so callous, when in fact it is just as calloused.

[shira]

80. let's try again

1. This "tactic" by Hamas is successful for them.......why? If it wasn't, they wouldn't do it. So why do you think they do it?

2. If Israel were in dire straits against Hamas/Hezbollah/PLO, etc... and Israel's irregular forces chose this "tactic", to hide behind Jewish babies and mommies, what purpose would it serve? Should they expect different results from their enemies than when Hamas does it against their western foes?

3. Can you admit Israel and especially its forces, at least TRY in some way, to minimize civilian casualties when they fight Hamas?

4. If you think Israel can fight this war from a desk, you must have blind faith in Hamas' intentions to follow through and be "nice" once Israel does their bidding. History shows that Israel's enemies only become emboldened when they perceive weakness in their enemy, and they attack more - just as the Gaza pullout of 2005 shows. So what makes you think this could have been resolved by Israel peacefully, as a reaction to Hamas' recent decision NOT to extend the ceasefire and INCREASE the rocket barrage into southern Israel? Blind faith?

[tekisui]

101. The tactic draws Israel into cities, where they cannot 'win'.

It is too messy in urban warfare. If Israel takes the fight into the city streets, they will suffer more casualties and kill too many civilians to maintain any public support, which is waning on the international level now.

That is why Hamas' tactic is successful. They are bleeding Israel's support.

As far as Israel's attempt to keep the civilian body count low, I think they try to control the PR. That involves rationalizing and justifying every civilian death. The US used the same arguments in Iraq, using precision missiles and 'smart bombs'. That is all PR spin, there is no such thing. When the decision is made to take a war to civilian populations, the decision is made to kill innocents.

There is no military solution. If you think this invasion is making Israelis safer, I disagree. We'll see if in a few months Israelis are safer. Unfortunately, I fear there will be further destabilization, worsening violence and more steps away from peace.

[Vegasaurus]

102. Hamas is itching to bring the war into the cities

where they can hide in bunkers or homes in civilian clothing, and then cry foul when they are hit.

Cowards.

[tekisui]

103. They don't have Israel's jets, missiles and bombs.

Israelis can kill from the air and the sea, just as cowardly, IMO.

[Vegasaurus]

104. True enough

But again, if Hamas had not wanted to inflict this much damage on their own people, they could have stopped the rockets at any time.

It isn;t just cowardly, but downright evil, that they would continue this way.

[shira]

116. you avoided point #2 in my post to you

care to reply to it?

[Recursion]

66. Where else would they go?

Maybe you don't realize how dense the Gaza strip is?

[shira]

81. not behind mommies and babies

how about underground? tell the civilians to get away from the action as far as possible....take to the undergound, hide, and fight? If you were in control of your own irregular forces and you were in dire straits, would you cowardly hide behind your own most vulnerable people? And if so, why?

[Recursion]

87. What in the hell are you talking about?

Seriously, you're not even making sense.

They're "hiding behind women and children" by staying in their homes and places of work? How messed up is that?

Where do the women and children go? Again, I feel like you don't have any idea of how small and densely-populated Gaza is.

[shira]

88. did you read the OP?

They are in OTHER people's homes and in maternity wards. They are not in their OWN hideouts or digs.

If YOU were in charge or irregular forces, and in very dire straits, would you DELIBERATELY seek out the most vulnerable civilian shields you could find in order to hide behind them?

If so, would you do it against Hamas/Hezbollah.......or IDF/USA troops? Or is there no TACTICAL difference in your opinion?

[Marr]

120. I am not a defender of Israel, but I think we need to acknowledge the fact that

religious lunatics are making the conflict untenable. It's not all down to poverty or oppression-- the core of the conflict is incompatible religious claims. I know the situation is very complicated, but really, if we take just this one element on it's own... what are they supposed to do? Pull out and just accept the occasional rocket as a part of life? The state has to act in a situation like that.

I'm not suggesting that Israel's response has been proportionate or proper because I don't think it has been. Not at all.

It seems to me that there is no bloodless solution to this situation. I'm very much against Israel's bantustan policies, but they did not come about in a vaccuum. It was violent conflict that spurred that response to begin with, and the notion that ending it will solve the problem seems nonsensical to me.

It's a religiously motivated conflict, and I don't see how you can ever hope to have a sane solution to an insane problem.

[Vegasaurus]

127. All of Israel's policies, which have restricted the Palestinians

or made their lives more miserable,

are in direct response to kidnapping, suicide bombings, rockets and nonstop terrorism for well over 60 years.

Before there was ever an occupation,

Before there were walls or checkpoints.

Even before there was a state of Israel.

This conflict is not about "the occupation" because ending the occupation will never end this conflict.

The occupation, according to Hamas and its supporters, is the entire state of Israel.

There is no end in sight, because groups like Hamas do not know how to negotiate, or even have a state, since they are doing a *****y job of running a government now.

[azurnoir]

23. It seems to me that Israel being the sovereign state

member of the UN western country ect is holding the cards, going in to urban areas is Israels choice they could have held they could have dealt with the international team now in Israel trying to negotiate a cease fire which Israel is refusing, they could allow in an international peace keeping mission but instead have chosen to take this route which will inevitably cause massive civilian causalities, if Israel is the supposed "grown up" here why does it not act like it instead of endlessly trying to transfer blame first it was all Egypts fault now its Hamas, when will the Israeli government ot its supporters stop trying to transfer responsibility for its actions. "the devil made made me do it" defense is getting a bit worn.

[shira]

27. why can't Hamas act grown up too?

what's with these low expectations, as if Israel's enemies are all retards?

Hamas will never recognize Israel's right to exist and will continue to be at war with Israel. That's what's in their charter, it's what they say and it's what they do. They refused to extend a ceasefire and hit Israel with more than 80 missiles daily until Israel struck back.

The choice is simple. Israel does next to nothing and lets Hamas's rockets become more lethal and gain more range and accuracy - or Israel fights back and Hamas resorts to morally depraved fighting tactics. Shitty choices, and let's not pretend the "infant" retards of Hamas who are not grown-ups yet can be expected to negotiate a better solution.

[azurnoir]

32. There it is again the either or equation

I gave several other possibilities, I will not even discuss the ending of the cease fire other than it ended November 4, your missile count is a bit high but whatever, your attempts to clean up Israels chooseing to kill civilains as self defense is falling flat and oh that Hamas charter the one that is trotted out daily as an excuse

here is a link to the PLO charter of which Fatah is a part

http://www.iris.org.il/plochart.htm

and two from a source I am sure your familiar with

American Jewry: Fatah Charter Calls to 'Eradicate' Israel

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/124315

Fatah and Hamas - Is There REALLY a Difference?

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/2051

[Xolodno]

24. That...

...doesn't make it ok. Just because Hamas is a cowardly shoot rockets and then hide behind civilians, doesn't make it ok for Israel to shoot anyway.

Its a hostage situation, you have a thug holding someone hostage. The police don't just open fire and shoot anyway and hope the hostage doesn't get killed.

Instead they get several snipers waiting patiently to shoot him when the opportunity arises. Time is on your side, not theirs.

Israel had the same opportunity, why send in its own troops? Train Palestinian Authority troops (which probably have no love for Hamas) in guerrilla warfare, sneak them in and slowly eliminate the thugs in charge (perhaps even calling in surgical missile strike when feasible). In order to track down the snipers, they would have to oppress the very people they say they are fighting for...which in turn breeds more that are disaffected.

[GoesTo11]

25. Hamas has no choice but to do what it does for the Gazans

An Israeli military spokesman said Israeli forces shelled the UNWRA-run school in Jebalya killing 40 Palestinians in response to mortar fire from the building.

There were secondary blasts from explosives cached inside.

The casualties included the Hamas mortar unit and several Hamas commanders who had been hiding behind the backs of the civilian refugees.

DEBKAfile's militlary sources report: In Gaza, Hamas has abdicated its responsibilities for governance and reverted to terrorist tactics – against the Palestinian population - in order to maximize civilian casualties for horror scenes to be broadcast across the world as pressure on Israel to stop fighting.

Palestinians say whole families are locked in their homes from which Hamas open fire. Some are booby-trapped to blow up Israeli invaders with those families.

After shedding their uniforms, Hamas operatives emerge from their bunkers to seize petrol stations and ambulances and grab most of the incoming food and medical aid carried in daily by hundreds of trucks from Israel and Egypt.

Their firing stations are often located in schools. One huge explosives and weapons arsenal was uncovered next door to Shifa hospital in Gaza City. Hamas terrorists force small children to accompany them on combat missions.

www.debka.com

[ProgressiveMuslim]

31. Why doesn't Hamas adopt Ghandi's nonviolence?

From LAwrence of Cyberia:

I should start out by saying that personally I am not convinced that most of the people who lament the lack of a Palestinian Gandhi do so sincerely. What I mean is, non-violence might well be an effective means of realizing Palestinian rights, but I do not believe that the people who criticize Palestinians for not adopting it are necessarily interested in seeing the Palestinians realize their rights at all. I don't think for a minute that Israel and its supporters would treat - or would ever have treated - the Palestinians any better had the Palestinians gone quietly. Zionism's problem with the Palestinians is not that they are terrorists. Zionism's problem with the Palestinians is that they exist. The Palestinians have to be forcibly displaced, dispossessed and disenfranchised not because of anything they do, but because that is the only way to create a Jewish state in a land where there is a pre-existing indigenous majority population that happens to be overwhelmingly non-Jewish. Even if every single Palestinian became a pacifist right now, Zionism would still have no room for them: Israel would still be colonizing the West Bank, and still depopulating East Jerusalem of residents who happen to have the wrong ethnic-religious background. It takes a special kind of nerve to embark upon a project - Zionism - that can be fulfilled only through the violent destruction of another people, and then criticize the people you are destroying for their failure to adopt non-violence.

But even if we suspend our disbelief about Zionism's willingness to respond to Palestinian non-violence, and assume the very best about Israel's intentions, it still strikes me as a little odd that any Zionist would use the moral authority of Mahatma Gandhi as a line of attack against the Palestinians, seeing as Gandhi himself was very opposed to Zionism:

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. …Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred.


… I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.

-- The Jews In Palestine, by Mahatma Gandhi; The Harijan, 26 Nov 1938.

From a Zionist perspective, Gandhi apparently has enough moral authority to be called upon when he criticizes Arab violence, but not enough to be listened to when he condemns the underlying injustice against the Palestinians that gives rise to the violence in the first place.

One of the commenters at Mondoweiss cited a quote from Gandhi, lamenting Zionism's reliance on terrorism to impose itself on Palestine. I looked for the context to the quote, and found the source article, in which Gandhi had this to say about the use of terrorism to establish a Jewish state in Palestine (click images to enlarge):





-- Jews and Palestine, by Mahatma Gandhi; The Harijan, 21Jul 1946. (via The Gandhi Reader).

And that strikes me as the biggest irony of all. Here in the U.S., where Zionism is the default perspective for viewing the Middle East, people look at Palestine's confrontation with Zionism and ask: Why can't the Palestinians adopt Gandhi's nonviolent methods? But when Gandhi himself looked at Palestine's confrontation with Zionism, the question that occurred to him was: Why can't the Zionists adopt my nonviolent methods?

.

http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2008/09/why-didnt-zionists-adopt-gandhis-methods.html

[Alamuti Lotus]

78. Does anybody know a thing about the first intifada?

The embryonic Hamas movement spearheaded this from Gaza, along with non-PLO left-wing movements in the West Bank. Largely composed of workers strikes, mass demonstrations, etc.. all of those "non-violent" tactics that certain sources wail endlessly about. In response to this largely non-violent campaign, that sacred cow of the 'peace movement' Yitzak Rabin told the IDF to "BREAK THEIR BONES"--and indeed they did. What follows should then not come as a surprise.

[shira]

82. first intifada was non-violent?

[Recursion]

95. For the first few months

For the next few months it was violent in one direction (unless you count throwing rocks at tanks as "violence").

I'm not saying they were a bunch of Gandhi's, but they did try non-violent demonstration at first and got burned pretty bad in the process, which soured the current generation of leaders on the idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Intifada

[daleo]

33. In a society not permitted an "official" army

Any military resistance to occupation or invasion is bound to be from irregulars that live within the society itself. If Hamas bravely marched out in the open to be killed, like some 17th century troop formation, a new set of irregulars would arise to oppose the occupation. They would then live among the population, as Hamas did. The names would change, but the underlying dynamic would be the same.

This is the only option open for a society that doesn't have the full resources and legal structures of a state, short of assimilation into the larger occupying society or everlasting existence as a ghetto within the larger occupying society. Israel will have to choose - a real Palestinian state, assimilation into Israel, or endless occupation and bloodshed.

[shira]

41. bullshit

This is the face of 7th century religious fanaticism and the looking forward to 72 virgins in the case that it just doesn't happen to work out.

[tekisui]

43. You have a singular and simplistic view of a culture you don't understand.

The previous poster was correct. This is military strategy. It looks different than the one you are defending, but only due to funding.

[daleo]

47. Remember what Churchill said in 1940

"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 even 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."

He was promising guerilla warfare - "we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender." This is how (nearly) all society's act when under invasion and occupation.

For the record, I am not claiming any "moral equivalency" between wartime Britain and Palestine, but pointing out that guerilla warfare is not unusual, even in advanced western societies (the French Resistance is another example).

When we feel a kindred with a people, we call it freedom fighting, when we don't we call it terrorism.

[shira]

48. churchill and company

would never advocate for hiding behind mothers and their infants. Would you do it?

Big difference, right?

[EFerrari]

49. During the war of independence, that's exactly what happened.

Big difference? Not at all. In fact, none at all.

[daleo]

55. My mom nearly got killed in the blitz

Churchill was perfectly willing to have women work in war industries. Furthermore, soldiers and civilians mixed freely in wartime Britain - they didn't segregate the population, though some children were sent to the countryside. Were soldiers hiding behind skirts and prams? Were these women and children human shields?

[shira]

76. not the same

Do you see Israeli, British, or American leadership ever stooping to the lows of Hamas or Hezbollah, and deliberately holding as hostages kids and mommies so that the enemy, whoever that is, has to choose whether to annhilate all, some, or none? Who would this "enemy" be to Israeli, British, or American irregular forces - that they would even think twice about the moral ramifications?

You're clearly wrong, and what's worse is you're trying to defend the indefensible.

You think the Nazis would have thought twice about eliminating women and children that British troops would hide behind? What purpose would such a tactic serve for the British?

It's so obvious that Hamas is using western values of morality and ethics against their enemies - who they KNOW will pause, deliberate, and very possibly not attack at all, given the humanitarian ramifications.

[daleo]

107. Israel has killed plenty of Palestinian civilians

Clearly, they are not letting "human shields" affect their military strategy unduly. Yes, I know that they could kill many more if they desired.

As for western military values, that hasn't stopped the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocents by the British, Americans, or other western military forces. This has applied to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Viet Nam, at a minimum, in my lifetime. I haven't noticed much "pause, deliberate, and possibly not attack at all" in those conflicts. Slaughtering civilians was accepted military strategy by all sides in WWII (one of the stated goals of allied bombing campaigns was called "breaking the enemy's will to fight").

I am not defending the indefensible - I am saying that military forces and civilian populations regularly mingle during wartime, whether they be irregulars or normal state militaries. Hamas is no different from the Iraqi insurgency that way.

[shira]

111. you're avoiding a big difference in cultures, not tactics

Would it make sense in ANY way for Israeli irregulars to adopt Hamas tactics and hide behind Jewish mommies and their babies - given a similar dire and desperate situation?

No.

Why not?

You know the answer to this. You're avoiding it.

This tactic only works one way. It's not a common military tactic as much as a cultural one - or one implemented by morally depraved, evil and demented leadership.

Like you said, Israel could easily kill more. This war could have been over days ago as Israel could have wiped out Hamas without ANY regard whatsoever for civilians. So why didn't they do that? There must be SOME regard for civilian life, regardless of the reason.

The fact Israel also committed and therefore endangered their ground troops just days in shows a regard for civilian welfare, since the IAF could easily maintain their bombing from the skies, but you seem incapable of admitting to this. Why?

Also, do you really think Israeli commanders are telling their troops to deliberately target Palestinian soft-targets in sheltered buildings - and that the IDF is so morally depraved that they get their rocks off doing so? You can't be that deluded, can you?

[daleo]

119. So are you saying Arabs and/or Muslims re uniquely depraved?

Or just Palestinians? or just Hamas? You call it hiding behind mommies and babies, and call it living among the population to which they belong, just as the Viet Cong did (for one example) or as the Taliban do now (for another example). Native American Indians who resisted European expansion would have been doing the same. One could enumerate many more examples from history. It's not pretty, but it isn't unique to Hamas.

I never said the IDF had no regard for civilian life, but that regard is conditioned by military necessity, thus the fairly high civilian casualty rate. And I never said the IDF enjoyed killing civilians - you imputed that to me with no foundation in fact. In that sense, you seem to be the one who is deluded. I think it is the rare soldier, regular or irregular, who enjoys killing.

[shira]

125. you're evading the issue once again

Last time, before I answer anymore of your questions. I've asked you the same thing over and over and made the following points just as many times.

1. Why would it be a VERY bad idea for Israel to resort to Hamas tactics of hiding behind Jewish mommies and babies if under desperate circumstances against Hamas or Hezbollah militants?

Or why does this tactic work for Hamas but not the other way around?

2. The very fact that 20-25% of casualties NOW consist of civilians, when Gaza's population consists of 50% women and 50% children - meaning the casualty rate should be near 75% if Israel was randomly shooting the joint up, shows a regard for civilian life. Do you disagree?

In addition, the fact that Israel has deployed ground troops just days in also shows a regard for civilian life. The REASONS are irrelevant - the FACT remains civilian life is being regarded. Why is it so difficult for you to admit this?

[daleo]

140. I will try to answer your questions

"1. Why would it be a VERY bad idea for Israel to resort to Hamas tactics of hiding behind Jewish mommies and babies if under desperate circumstances against Hamas or Hezbollah militants?
Or why does this tactic work for Hamas but not the other way around?"

I don't really understand the question here, but I will try to respond. If Israel were in the same position as Palestine(i.e. under occupation and/or the military domination of another society), I would expect that Israeli irregulars would in fact live amongst their population. Hiding behind mommies and babies is your characterization of this, not mine. I made clear that I think this is a constant feature of human history, and gave numerous examples. Whether it is a "VERY bad" idea is a value judgment - I just point out that it is very common across the centuries and across world societies. Hamas is not uniquely evil (or uniquely good) for employing this tactic.

"2. The very fact that 20-25% of casualties NOW consist of civilians, when Gaza's population consists of 50% women and 50% children - meaning the casualty rate should be near 75% if Israel was randomly shooting the joint up, shows a regard for civilian life. Do you disagree?"

In response to your question 2, here's what I said in the previous post:

"I never said the IDF had no regard for civilian life, but that regard is conditioned by military necessity, thus the fairly high civilian casualty rate. And I never said the IDF enjoyed killing civilians... I think it is the rare soldier, regular or irregular, who enjoys killing."

So clearly, I never said that the IDF had no regard for civilian life, or that they were randomly "shooting the joint up". I only said that their regard for civilian life only goes so far, and thus the civilian casualties are fairly high. This hardly seems like a controversial statement, given what has gone on over the last week.

I don't think either side is morally superior or inferior to the other. They are both acting within the historic norms of human societies in conflict. I don't think either side is inherently bloodthirsty or genocidal, though there are elements of both sides that talk that way sometimes. It seems like you would disagree with me on that point. Perhaps you have a religious bias towards one side, which I lack, since I generally find organized religion to be the source of more bad than good in the world.

[shira]

142. couldn't disagree more with you

Have you seen this yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBYtij4Q7sE&feature=related

What that shows is that Gaza civilians are very used to defending terror strongholds by willingly standing on rooftops as shields to prevent IAF targeting. Why would they do this if they were like you or others here who think Israel wouldn't think twice about blowing up the building, civilians and all? This clearly shows that Hamas and many civilians are counting on Israel's morals and ethics to save either terrorists or their weapons/tunnels.

How you gather that Hamas is not morally superior to Israel is even better.

They've shown very well that they have no problem deliberately targeting Israeli civlians, for years now. Contrast this to Israel's first attacks in which about 200 were initially killed and about 5% were civilians according to Hamas' own reports. They caught Hamas with their pants clearly down and were very "successful" (for lack of better terms) with their initial combatant/civilian kill ratio. Of course, when Hamas got it together, they used their shields and the rest is history as civilian casualties have climbed.

The IDF ground incursion is yet MORE proof that Israel is careful about civilians. Be honest, do you REALLY think that if Hamas had an airforce and Israel didn't, Hamas would cut the bombing raids short and go to the ground so quickly? As dense as Gaza is with civilians, Israel could have EASILY killed tens of thousands by now, but they haven't. Can you honestly say that if it were up to Hamas, civilian casualties would stand at this time around 700?

[daleo]

148. I can't imagine a situation where Hamas had an air-force and Israel didn't

It just doesn't apply, in the usual sense of the term. Only a modern state with all the trappings of such a state could posses an air-force, or at least an air-force of any consequence. I don't know what the Palestinians would do if they had an air-force, but I suspect not much, since that would mean that they had achieved sustainable statehood, which I think is their aim. Once that is done, I think the would learn to live with Israel, like neighbors generally do. I don't believe that they are inherently out to wipe Israel off the map, or anything like that.

I think that's the crux of the debate. I believe that compromise is possible, while you believe that the Arabs will never accept Israel's existence, perhaps because they are inherently incapable of finer morality. I just can't accept that reasoning.

[azurnoir]

109. And you are what?

Defending the killing of civilians with same old tired "the devil made me do it" but hey it workd for Flip Wilson so who knows

[shira]

112. and you are accusing Israel of "brainwashing" the Israeli populace

into thinking that deliberate murder of civilians is a wonderful thing - and that most Israelis are too morally deficient or retarded to know better and have wonderful morals like yourself. Those foolish Israelis, thinking they're under threat from "firecrackers". They're retards, huh?

[azurnoir]

118. The Israeli public try again

or is that the targetb audience this is a strange place to do it from

[sabbat hunter]

62. There is a difference between guerilla warfare

and terrorism, and it is a key point.

If you want to be considered a "freedom fighter" or fighting guerilla war fare, then do not target civilians and solely civilian targets as Hamas/IJ does. When they fire rockets on to Sderot they have one target, civilians. When they launch suicide bombers they have one target, civilians.

Israel is targeting military/irregular military targets. Hamas cowardly puts these targets in civilian areas so that the world will be horrified when Israel strikes back and some civilians die.

In war, civilian deaths are a tragedy, but unfortunately rarely unavoidable. The difference is if you deliberately attack only civilians or a military.

[Vegasaurus]

65. And Hamas could put on uniforms adn fight like an army

instead of shooting AK47s in civilian clothes or even stolen IDF uniforms.

[azurnoir]

67. Put on uniforms

you mean like cops slaughtered on the first day? Yes I am sure you'd like that

[Vegasaurus]

68. Will YOU shut up?

Find me one post where I said I LIKED cops being slaughtered.

Seriously.

You are so out of line.

[azurnoir]

69. No I am not n/t

[Vegasaurus]

71. Yes, and you are drawing untrue assumptions

Stop it or I will alert on you.

[azurnoir]

84. No you are drawing the wrong assumption

you said Hamas should wear uniforms and I said yes like the cops that got slaughtered you would like that meaning it would make Hamas easier targets, I said nothing about you liking killing cops

[bemildred]

70. No, she means like the assassination teams that do extra-judicial killings of Palestinians.

:sarcasm:

[sabbat hunter]

72. it is war

they are called casualties. Hamas is an irregular military group, its members are allowed to be killed as they are fighting a war. Miltary members are targets in a war.

[Vegasaurus]

73. No, I mean fight like men

not stupid little boys, wearing stolen uniforms or civilian clothes, hiding among children.

[PerfectSage]

108. Has it ever occured to you that your ignorance of warfare and guerilla war is causing you to reach

the wrong conclusions.

Many people think it impossible for guerrillas to exist for long in the enemy's rear. Such a belief reveals lack of comprehension of the relationship that should exist between the people and the troops. The former may be likened to water the latter to the fish who inhabit it. How may it be said that these two cannot exist together? It is only undisciplined troops who make the people their enemies and who, like the fish out of its native element cannot live.

Mao Tse-tung On Guerrilla Warfare

The palestinians are the water and Hamas is the fish that must live in the water. So how does invading Gaza poison the water so the Hamas fish dies.

In my opinion Bush, Cheney, the neo cons and Israeali politicians are clueless, warmongering imbeciles. :rofl:

[shira]

114. so your solution would be.....what?

let Hamas be, let them terrorize Israel, use and abuse their own people.....and hope for the best? :eyes:

If you don't care about southern Israeli civilians, do you at least care about the Palestinian civilians who are occupied by Hamas - who obviously don't give a shit about them and will only make their lives miserable in their never ending quest to topple Israel?

[PerfectSage]

124. My solution is to let you do your own thinking

If I was prime minister of Israel I know what I'd do.

Here's a hint: In warfare the best strategy is to attack the enemy's strategy. The worst strategy is to attack the enemy.

So how would you deal with the Qassam rockets and how would you separate the fish from the water?

[shira]

126. I give up....please do tell.

I look forward to perfect sage advice.

[PerfectSage]

128. Meditate on the meaning of a rotten apple.

How's that for perfectsage advice. :rofl:

[shira]

132. so what would you do if you were in charge?

let's hear it please.

[PerfectSage]

139. The first thing I would do if I was in charge would be to tell you to get of your lazy ass

and do your own thinking please. :rofl:

War is an art in creative thinking to solve complex problems.
It's not hard at all to come up with a solution to Qassam rockets. Separating the fish from the water requires multiple solutions. I'll give you a hint: Hamas is also a social organization that controls rewards like jobs and the distribution of aid.

Start thinking.

[azurnoir]

91. Thank you LOL n/t

[sabbat hunter]

105. agreed

even if they all wore red bandannas on their arms, or other distinctive markings would be sufficient.

[ShortnFiery]

106. No, that's the classic definition of guerrilla warfare. Give the Palestinians a better quality

of life and something to LIVE FOR - then they will not so readily be willing to hide the guerrilla fighters.

The Palestinians are dirt poor and are not going anywhere. When you have little or nothing to lose, your perspectives regarding "human life" alter considerably. Even many of US would degrade emotionally IF we were forced to live in squaller after losing loved ones to IDF bombings. I'm not justifying Hamas but they are often the first ones there when "the people" need drinking water and social services. If the Israeli government TRULY cared about stopping the rockets, they would TARGET CIVILIANS for BETTER LIVING CONDITIONS. Then these civilians would not be all fired up to place the guerrilla fighting wing of "Hamas" on an artificial pedestal to be adored by all oppressed peoples.

Hell, like our Military in Iraq, the IDF bombing of civilians is the BEST DAMN PROMOTER for the guerrillas of "Hamas."

You can't reach a political solution through military operations. It only entrenches those who are oppressed MORE.

REMEMBER, most Palestinians have little or nothing to lose and they are not going ANYWHERE ELSE. If you can embrace the foregoing reality, then we can all work to arrive at positive POLITICAL solutions to a long term "Two State Solution."

[shira]

115. give them better quality with Hamas in charge?

Hamas will not allow Palestinians to enjoy their lives......the civilians are only good for Hamas when they can be used to fight against Israel.

Have you learned nothing about orgs like Hamas?

[Vegasaurus]

58. Hamas doesn't want a real Palestinian state

unless it is one that includes the land currently in Israel, and a state without Jews.

It's a bad military strategy, because Israel isn't going away.

The current methodology of terrorism will be endless bloodshed, with more lives lost on the Palestinian side, and a lot more misery.

[hack89]

90. Hamas has an organized and trained army of 20,000 men

These are not Islamic minutemen.

Today, the group has five brigades corresponding to five sections of the Gaza Strip - North, Center, Gaza City, and two brigades in the South. Each brigade has a commander and several battalions. Alongside the battalions there are special forces - units with expertise in rocket fire, mortar attacks, roadside bombs and commando operations.

In Gaza, the IDF would face an army of close to 20,000 armed men, among them at least 15,000 Hamas operatives. The rest are from Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Popular Resistance Committees.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1229868807023&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[ProgressiveProfessor]

130. Well maybe they did once

Not clear that they have anywhere near that amount of effective fighters today. Otherwise they would be 2-1 over the IDF. For defenders, that would be superior odds. Also note that Hamas has said it had new anti tank weapons and is fighting over prepared terrain.

[Dreamer Tatum]

143. I wish people would just cut the shit and call this what it is.

We know what the outcome is going to be: Israel will push to the outskirts of the big cities, where the
cowardly, fist-shaking Hamas fighters will hide behind their women and children (with their guns off safety,
of course, so the women and children will *stay* in front of them).

Israel is then in a box: it doesn't want to kill civilians, but it would have to slaughter huge numbers of them
to get to those brave, principled Hamas fighters (who have no problem gathering like a real military outfit when
there aren't any Israeli tanks around).

Israel knows that its position is weakened with each passing day, both strategically and morally. It will have to
turn around and go home, lest it face the reality that its campaign was more successful against civilians than
it was against Hamas. Once the tanks and infantry leave, those brave Hamas militants can come out from behind the
sofa and walk across the street to the elementary school to refit the teeter-totter into a missile launcher.

Meanwhile, Israel will go back to feeling sorry for itself, demand more money from the US, and devise yet more policies
make it seem like it wants to live in peace and harmony, but which reserve its right to crush anyone who dares
to disagree. "Tired of Israel's self-importance" does not equal "anti-semitic."

Note to Israel AND Egypt: when you seal people with dignity into a small area like you think they're a pack of rats, don't be surprised by their ingenuity in attempting to survive. Note to Iran: Hamas hides behind skirts. You hide behind Hamas. What's that make you?

[bemildred]

50. Israel puts Gazans in danger by bombing them.

If they really give a shit about putting Gazans in danger, they could stop bombing them, or do it less, or something like that. Why let Hamas call the shots on this issue? Why be a tool?

[ohio2007]

51. Hamas using children as human shield ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J08GqXMr3YE&eurl=http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/&feature=player_embedded

[AnOhioan]

52. And just what was this video supposed to show?

For all anyone knows the man with the rifle could have merely been carrying a child he knew to safety.

There is no way to determine what exactly was going on.

Maybe it was a case of human-shielding, maybe it wasn't.

For you to assume you know exactly what the deal was just shows your obvious bias in this matter.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

53. Shira, do you honestly believe that if Palestinians "played nice" and jumped thru

every hoop Israel erected, that there would be an independent viable state?

[StudsT]

57. thats why there HAS to be a outside arbiter to mandate a solution - just like 1946

and right now i think only the U.S. can do this or even better lead the way via the U.N.

i know, i know but hope springs eternal =)

:hi:

StudsT

[shira]

74. of course Palestinians would have their state

They could have had it in 1948. Or in 2000. Or recently with what Olmert offered at Annapolis. They certainly weren't going to get a state by playing nice between 1948-1967, right? They could have had the parts of Israel now that wouldn't have been available to Jews in 1948, as well as Jordan - which makes up a vast majority of original mandate Palestine.

[bridgit]

60. Correct

[Alamuti Lotus]

77. Whatver moral gymnastics you need to defend this crap..

which I would imagine that is becoming harder and harder these days. Enjoy the school bombings? That's receiving a lot of support at the moment.

[shira]

83. check out the youtube videos posted throughout this thread

you think all IDF troops are more than happy to kill children, and somehow, this evil strategy escapes the critical pages of Haaretz or Ynet?

[anonymous171]

121. People have been fighting that way since WWII. Apparently Israel never got the memo.

Or they are just being their usual whiny "THEY WON'T STAND STILL AND LET US KILL THEM" selves

[ProgressiveProfessor]

129. Many haven't

Its asymmetric urban warfare. Hamas want the Israelis to kill civilians. They are not so much controlling the IDF aim as much as making sure that in killing Hamas fighters civilians will die too.

[shira]

133. it's exasperating, isn't it?

many people here just cannot understand that the only way to deal with a Hamas, that fires upon Israel and then abuses its own citizens when attacked back is, to crush and decimate their capabilities - or make them so weak that they lose power. Such a "government" has no right to exist when it is good for absolutely no one.

Why people want Hamas "saved" is beyond me.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

135. No, its urban asymmetric warfare

There have been reports (Israeli media only) that there have been many few Hamas fighters any a lot of booby traps etc.

The clear use of human shields, including UN facilities is not a good thing, but everyone knew that is exactly what will happen. I don't think the Israelis are intentionally shooting civilians, but that Hamas is making it impossible not to.

[GoesTo11]

152. Why indeed.

Why do even any Palestinians want Hamas saved?

[cboy4]

134. That's why I say the Palestinians should be furious with

Hamas first and foremost for placing them in so much danger.

These Hamas thugs like to look bad ass, but at the end of the day, they're cowards who are rightly getting their asses kicked.

[JayMusgrove]

149. Problem is, Israel is not "kicking their asses", (what a strange way to describe...

killing innocent children who happen to live where Hamas lives!)

Israel is NOT doing herself any favors with this war, and may well lose any US $ AND the support of well-intentioned people of the world. The bottom line, there was NO REASON WHATSOEVER for Israel to have chosen this course. That's the bottom line.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

136. Israel puts Israelis in danger by occupying Palestine.

Never forget that the cause of the conflict is Israel occupying Palestinian land, not vice versa.

The only way the conflict will be ended is if the Palestinians believe that they have some way of getting their land back through peaceable means.

And Israel's actions make it fairly clear that they haven't.

[Dreamer Tatum]

144. There never was a country called "Palestine"

And that's part of issue. It MIGHT be a little more complicated than you think.

[JayMusgrove]

150. Never a country but a people...........oh some of you have such glib answers

to so many hundreds of deaths of children.

[ShadesOfGrey]

141. Go watch this video...

It pretty much answers your questions.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x257045

[JayMusgrove]

151. Great video! Thanks!

[ohio2007]

145. Canada blames Hamas for civilian casualties in Gaza

OTTAWA (AFP) — The Canadian government on Wednesday blamed Hamas for civilian casualties in Gaza, including 40 at a school bombarded by the Israeli military the previous day saying Hamas provoked the attack.

"The government of Canada has been very clear since the beginning of this crisis that it believes that the Hamas rocketing was responsible for the initial development of this crisis and for the continuing deepening humanitarian tragedy," Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Peter Kent told public broadcaster CBC.

Asked about the Israeli bombing of a school in Gaza that killed 40, he said: "Great responsibility rests with Hamas overall for triggering this incident and by their continued terrorist belligerence for prolonging" the crisis.

"Canada continues to fully support Israel's right to defend itself," he added.

Since its election in 2006, Canada's Conservative government has shown ardent support for Israel.

On Wednesday, Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon repeated Ottawa's position that Israel has a right to defend itself from rocket assaults, adding "Hamas is a terrorist group."

Cannon also expressed concern with "the humanitarian issue" and said Ottawa is pressing "for a durable cease-fire."

More than 30 Canadians were hoping to flee the conflict during a lull in fighting, he said.

As well, Canada pledged four million dollars to the United Nations and the Red Cross for humanitarian aid.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iI8qIDCLoK0EPTPEgf4e1rQwEGKw

No matter, the battle spreads to 'soft targets' in EU
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95HN1H02&show_article=1

[burythehatchet]

146. I guess the brave IDF manly men feel more comfortable dropping phosphorus shells

what a steaming pile of shit.