Once again Israel shows it doesn't screw around

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

I bet Hamas would stop firing another bullet let alone a rocket if they destroy all illegal settlements, open borders and give Palestinians their own state.

Hamas says otherwise. They want the destruction of Israel. You don't believe them?

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Nm

[Manhattanboy]

^^^^Hamas knows this. They would never allow it.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Moderator

Maybe the previous warning wasn't visible enough...

The topic is not other posters, if you disagree with another post argue the point. Or if you think another post goes too far or is obviously nonsense, just ignore it and don't engage.

Otherwise we will have to lock the thread, or delete all posts that contain anything directed at another poster (i.e. if the post contains "you").

Heavy artillery alert!

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

As far as I know and last I checked was yesterday only 3 civilians have been killed by Hamas while 43 Israeli soldiers have been killed by Hamas. That seems pretty disproportionate when you consider almost a thousand dead civilians in Gaza.

Maybe Hamas is doing a better job at killing their actual enemy than Israel is.

Hamas is firing hundreds of rockets indiscriminately into Israeli cities. The only reason there aren't more Israeli civilian casualties is the Iron Dome, not the consideration of Hamas for civilian lives.

I understand criticism of Israel and have quite a bit of my own criticism, but they are not targeting civilians in the sense that Hamas is. Complimenting Hamas is beyond the pale.

[WCW Nitro]

Originally Posted by Savvy27

Hamas is firing hundreds of rockets indiscriminately into Israeli cities. The only reason there aren't more Israeli civilian casualties is the Iron Dome, not the consideration of Hamas for civilian lives.

I understand criticism of Israel and have quite a bit of my own criticism, but they are not targeting civilians in the sense that Hamas is. Complimenting Hamas is beyond the pale.

You do realize that the rockets hamas has can only be fired indiscriminately, right? I'm against the rockets from both a moral and strategic perspective, but I don't get why people don't get the simple fact that one side is using what they have and it is very primitive technology.

[Flash Walken]

4) Only Hamas is guilty of war crimes, not Israel

Human Rights Watch: "Israeli forces may also have knowingly or recklessly attacked people who were clearly civilians, such as young boys, and civilian structures, including a hospital - laws-of-war violations that are indicative of war crimes." Amnesty International: "Deliberately attacking a civilian home is a war crime, and the overwhelming scale of destruction of civilian homes, in some cases with entire families inside them, points to a distressing pattern of repeated violations of the laws of war."

5) Hamas use the civilians of Gaza as 'human shields'

Jeremy Bowen, BBC Middle East editor: "I saw no evidence during my week in Gaza of Israel's accusation that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields." The Guardian: "In the past week, the Guardian has seen large numbers of people fleeing different neighbourhoods.. and no evidence that Hamas had compelled them to stay." The Independent: "Some Gazans have admitted that they were afraid of criticizing Hamas, but none have said they had been forced by the organisation to stay in places of danger and become unwilling human-shields." Reuters, 2013: "A United Nations human rights body accused Israeli forces on Thursday of mistreating Palestinian children, including by torturing those in custody and using others as human shields."

6) This current Gaza conflict began with Hamas rocket fire on 30 June 2014

Times of Israel: "Hamas operatives were behind a large volley of rockets which slammed into Israel Monday morning, the first time in years the Islamist group has directly challenged the Jewish state, according to Israeli defense officials.. The security sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, assessed that Hamas had probably launched the barrage in revenge for an Israeli airstrike several hours earlier which killed one person and injured three more.. Hamas hasn't fired rockets into Israel since Operation Pillar of Defense ended in November 2012." The Nation: "During ten days of Operation Brother's Keeper in the West Bank [before the start of the Gaza conflict], Israel arrested approximately 800 Palestinians without charge or trial, killed nine civilians and raided nearly 1,300 residential, commercial and public buildings. Its military operation targeted Hamas members released during the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange in 2011."

7) Hamas has never stopped firing rockets into Israel

Jewish Daily Forward: "Hamas hadn't fired a single rocket since [2012 Gaza conflict], and had largely suppressed fire by smaller jihadi groups. Rocket firings, averaging 240 per month in 2007, dropped to five per month in 2013." International Crisis Group: "Fewer rockets were fired from Gaza in 2013 than in any year since 2001, and nearly all those that were fired between the November 2012 ceasefire and the current crisis were launched by groups other than Hamas; the Israeli security establishment testified to the aggressive anti-rocket efforts made by the new police force Hamas established specifically for that purpose.. As Israel (and Egypt) rolled back the 2012 understandings - some of which were implemented spottily at best - so too did Hamas roll back its anti rocket efforts."

8) Hamas provoked Israel by kidnapping and killing three Israeli teenagers

Jewish Daily Forward: "The [Israeli] government had known almost from the beginning that the boys were dead. It maintained the fiction that it hoped to find them alive as a pretext to dismantle Hamas' West Bank operations.. Nor was that the only fib. It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren't acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas' Hebron branch -- more a crime family than a clandestine organization -- had a history of acting without the leaders' knowledge, sometimes against their interests." BBC correspondent Jon Donnison: "Israeli police MickeyRosenfeld tells me men who killed 3 Israeli teens def lone cell, hamas affiliated but not operating under leadership.. Seems to contradict the line from Netanyahu government."

9) Hamas rule, not Israel's blockade, is to blame for the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip

US State Department cable: "Israeli officials have confirmed to Embassy officials on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis.. Israeli officials have confirmed.. on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge." The Guardian: "The Israeli military made precise calculations of Gaza's daily calorie needs to avoid malnutrition during a blockade imposed on the Palestinian territory between 2007 and mid-2010, according to files the defence ministry released on Wednesday under a court order.. The Israeli advocacy group Gisha.. waged a long court battle to release the document. Its members say Israel calculated the calorie needs for Gaza's population so as to restrict the quantity of food it allowed in."

10) The Israeli government, unlike Hamas, wants a two-state solution

Times of Israel: "[Netanyahu] made explicitly clear that he could never, ever, countenance a fully sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank.. Amid the current conflict, he elaborated, 'I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan.'"

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehd...b_5624401.html

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

You do realize that the rockets hamas has can only be fired indiscriminately, right? I'm against the rockets from both a moral and strategic perspective, but I don't get why people don't get the simple fact that one side is using what they have and it is very primitive technology.

So, it's not just that Israel built bunkers for their citizens, it's also that Hamas isn't using F-16s, drones and artillery that accounts for the imbalance of civilians deaths?

Huh.

The way you always hear it, it seems like it's the ingenuity and forward thinking of the Israeli's that has prevented large scale civilian casualties on that side, and the backward, primitive approach to infrastructure, not to mention the rampant disregard for human life, that is the cause of all those Palestinian civilian deaths.

Weird.

Why doesn't anyone ever mention that part of it?

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

You do realize that the rockets hamas has can only be fired indiscriminately, right? I'm against the rockets from both a moral and strategic perspective, but I don't get why people don't get the simple fact that one side is using what they have and it is very primitive technology.

The technological limitations of rockets are irrelevant to the point that Hamas is firing explosives that are not being aimed at military targets. It is fair to describe them as targeting civilians because they don't know what they are going to hit and they are aiming at cities. The comment I was replying was arguing that because Hamas is killing more soldiers than civilians, their conduct is morally preferable. However, that comment was disregarding the intent of the rocket attacks and apparently the history of Hamas terrorism.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Savvy27

The technological limitations of rockets are irrelevant to the point that Hamas is firing explosives that are not being aimed at military targets. It is fair to describe them as targeting civilians because they don't know what they are going to hit and they are aiming at cities. The comment I was replying was arguing that because Hamas is killing more soldiers than civilians, their conduct is morally preferable. However, that comment was disregarding the intent of the rocket attacks and apparently the history of Hamas terrorism.

In addition, Hamas would have better rockets if Israel was not imposing strict rules for what can be brought into Gaza. It is a shame, honestly. If there was no violence, Israel would have no justification for the walls, strict checkpoints or the rules.

I am worried at some point Israel has had enough and creates a larger buffer zone. Rockets are fired at population centres and launched from population centres, a double whammy.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

I really do wish one of the mods would rein you in. Making up mock quotes with such messages and impugning others in this thread in such a derogatory fashion is not only insulting, but rather uncivilized.

I have yet to do so and am confused by the relentless name calling at me.

[Chill Cosby]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehd...b_5624401.html

This article could be posted ad infinitum as a response to many of the pro-Israel arguments here.

Excellent and thorough debunking, even went into some things I wasn't entirely aware of.

[WCW Nitro]

Originally Posted by Savvy27

The technological limitations of rockets are irrelevant to the point that Hamas is firing explosives that are not being aimed at military targets. It is fair to describe them as targeting civilians because they don't know what they are going to hit and they are aiming at cities. The comment I was replying was arguing that because Hamas is killing more soldiers than civilians, their conduct is morally preferable. However, that comment was disregarding the intent of the rocket attacks and apparently the history of Hamas terrorism.

It is very relevant. Does israel care that there is a guarantee that thousands of civilians will die when they bomb a heavily populated area? The reasoning that it's ok to kill thousands to take out rockets that are not even capable of being guided and cause little damage is madness.

[Flash Walken]

Here is the thing about ascribing monolithic belief systems to an ethnicity or country.

There will always be problems in the ranks. Leaders can negotiate and implement policy, but radicals are radicals and cannot negotiate in such terms.

It behoves a nation to not use violence or the threat of violence from fringe factions or groups in an occupation peace process. It embolden's the violence. There is a principle here that needs to be followed. At some point, if the occuyping power desires peace, they have to 'be the bigger man' so to speak.

Israel can clearly brutalize Palestine the same way the white South African government could brutalize their black or coloured population. It takes no courage to hit back when your force is so overwhelming. It takes even less to seek opportunities to do so. Restraint is more courageous, and this is certainly not restraint.

The Irish and British had to do it during the 90s. When a radical, hell bent on sabotaging any kind of peace process does their best to disrupt it, you need restraint, you cannot allow yourself to be provoked. Israeli settlements are that saboteur, so are the fringe elements in palestinian territory.

It's my opinion that as the occupying power, the supreme power of the region, Israel has to take that first step. Good faith, honest negotiations with a commitment to compromising heavily in order to establish good faith relations for future negotiations and partnerships. There is a precedent for this, it has happened. However, it requires rationalism and humanism to take root.

The violence can be forgiven, but negotiations at the barrel of a gun poison the well from the outset.

In South Africa, as part of the political and psychological healing of the country, they instituted a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to document testimony from victims and their accused as part of a social justice initiative. A means of documenting the facts of the situation and allow expression from all those affected by the brutality and atrocities that went back hundreds of years. The inspiration for this came from a similar commision set up in Chile following the appalling dictatorship of augusto pinochet.

As long as there's defiance towards an honest accounting of the realities on the ground, there will never be any trust to see-through a meaningful ceasefire and eventual land treaty negotiation.

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

It is very relevant. Does israel care that there is a guarantee that thousands of civilians will die when they bomb a heavily populated area? The reasoning that it's ok to kill thousands to take out rockets that are not even capable of being guided and cause little damage is madness.

No, it really isn't relevant. It's not relevant because the lack of a targeting system doesn't change the intent to hit non-combatants. I'm not sure what argument you think we are having, but my initial comment was responding to the suggestion that Hamas is primarily targeting IDF combatants and not civilians. I reject that suggestion because hundreds of rockets are being fired at urban centers. Are you claiming that if the Iron Dome was unable to intercept rockets, then Hamas would not be firing so many?

As for your question of whether Israel cares, I don't know (though I am convinced that many individual Israelis care a lot). It seems like the leadership of Israel is alarmingly comfortable with the fact that Palestinian civilians are being killed at a far, far greater rate than the people they are supposed to be aiming at (then again, they are employing measures to warn some civilians of impending attacks, so I suppose they care somewhat). From what I can tell, the leadership of Israel seems to believe that any improvement in the lives of Palestinians will amount to a greater threat to Israelis and they are willing to continue to take measures that cruelly oppress the Palestinian people. Currently, it seems that Israel will kill whoever they need to in order to weaken Hamas and to dismantle any sort of supply system that they are not in control of. I also believe that there is an element of collective punishment aimed at the Palestinian people for complicity in the actions of Hamas (which I feel is morally reprehensible).

You describe the targeting of civilian areas to kill the people launching rockets as 'madness' but is it? What should they do instead?


Tangent --> I am confused as to why some 'pro-Israel' posters ignored Flames Fan phd's challenge to outline legitimate grievances of Palestinians (and I think it suggests some blind spots).

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

It's my opinion that as the occupying power, the supreme power of the region, Israel has to take that first step. Good faith, honest negotiations with a commitment to compromising heavily in order to establish good faith relations for future negotiations and partnerships. There is a precedent for this, it has happened. However, it requires rationalism and humanism to take root.

I agree...the brutal logic is that Israeli (justifiably) value the lives of their people highly...and any casualty is horrible/unacceptable. Why would the Palestinians feel any different about their casualties?

The point being...every dead Palestinian (especially civilian) reinforces the radicalism dynamic that is one saboteur of peace. Its like fighting fire with gasoline...its not going to work.

Other saboteurs like Illegal Israeli settlers and Evangelicals hoping for a Gog/Magog/Jesus party need to be addressed before any real chance for rational solutions can emerge.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]4) Only Hamas is guilty of war crimes, not Israel

Human Rights Watch: "Israeli forces may also have knowingly or recklessly attacked people who were clearly civilians, such as young boys, and civilian structures, including a hospital - laws-of-war violations that are indicative of war crimes." Amnesty International: "Deliberately attacking a civilian home is a war crime, and the overwhelming scale of destruction of civilian homes, in some cases with entire families inside them, points to a distressing pattern of repeated violations of the laws of war."

Both quotes are not based on facts, but based on deliberate condemnation. What were they saying for the past year?

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]5) Hamas use the civilians of Gaza as 'human shields'

Jeremy Bowen, BBC Middle East editor: "I saw no evidence during my week in Gaza of Israel's accusation that Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields." The Guardian: "In the past week, the Guardian has seen large numbers of people fleeing different neighbourhoods.. and no evidence that Hamas had compelled them to stay." The Independent: "Some Gazans have admitted that they were afraid of criticizing Hamas, but none have said they had been forced by the organisation to stay in places of danger and become unwilling human-shields." Reuters, 2013: "A United Nations human rights body accused Israeli forces on Thursday of mistreating Palestinian children, including by torturing those in custody and using others as human shields."

I don't agree that Hamas has allowed people to leave, I have seen as many reports suggesting people are pushed to stay. Plus, the act of launching attacks in civilian areas is simply using human shields. This is not a debate.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]6) This current Gaza conflict began with Hamas rocket fire on 30 June 2014

Times of Israel: "Hamas operatives were behind a large volley of rockets which slammed into Israel Monday morning, the first time in years the Islamist group has directly challenged the Jewish state, according to Israeli defense officials.. The security sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, assessed that Hamas had probably launched the barrage in revenge for an Israeli airstrike several hours earlier which killed one person and injured three more.. Hamas hasn't fired rockets into Israel since Operation Pillar of Defense ended in November 2012." The Nation: "During ten days of Operation Brother's Keeper in the West Bank [before the start of the Gaza conflict], Israel arrested approximately 800 Palestinians without charge or trial, killed nine civilians and raided nearly 1,300 residential, commercial and public buildings. Its military operation targeted Hamas members released during the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange in 2011."

This is all false. There has rarely been a lull in rocket attacks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...n_Israel,_2014

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]7) Hamas has never stopped firing rockets into Israel

Jewish Daily Forward: "Hamas hadn't fired a single rocket since [2012 Gaza conflict], and had largely suppressed fire by smaller jihadi groups. Rocket firings, averaging 240 per month in 2007, dropped to five per month in 2013." International Crisis Group: "Fewer rockets were fired from Gaza in 2013 than in any year since 2001, and nearly all those that were fired between the November 2012 ceasefire and the current crisis were launched by groups other than Hamas; the Israeli security establishment testified to the aggressive anti-rocket efforts made by the new police force Hamas established specifically for that purpose.. As Israel (and Egypt) rolled back the 2012 understandings - some of which were implemented spottily at best - so too did Hamas roll back its anti rocket efforts."

See the above link, in case you are curious about 2013, here it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...n_Israel,_2013

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]8) Hamas provoked Israel by kidnapping and killing three Israeli teenagers

Jewish Daily Forward: "The [Israeli] government had known almost from the beginning that the boys were dead. It maintained the fiction that it hoped to find them alive as a pretext to dismantle Hamas' West Bank operations.. Nor was that the only fib. It was clear from the beginning that the kidnappers weren't acting on orders from Hamas leadership in Gaza or Damascus. Hamas' Hebron branch -- more a crime family than a clandestine organization -- had a history of acting without the leaders' knowledge, sometimes against their interests." BBC correspondent Jon Donnison: "Israeli police MickeyRosenfeld tells me men who killed 3 Israeli teens def lone cell, hamas affiliated but not operating under leadership.. Seems to contradict the line from Netanyahu government."

Not sure what the argument is, Hamas had been launching rockets, yet again, nearly daily. How long should Israel take it for? And then the murder of three teens. I am unsure why people are posting that it matters here what set off Israel, it doesn't matter...Hamas has been attacking for months and Israel has defended itself. Not only that, Israel discovered some shockingly deep tunnels that Hamas was planning attacks from, attacks with certainly no chance of survival, in other words suicide for the attackers.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]9) Hamas rule, not Israel's blockade, is to blame for the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip

US State Department cable: "Israeli officials have confirmed to Embassy officials on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis.. Israeli officials have confirmed.. on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge." The Guardian: "The Israeli military made precise calculations of Gaza's daily calorie needs to avoid malnutrition during a blockade imposed on the Palestinian territory between 2007 and mid-2010, according to files the defence ministry released on Wednesday under a court order.. The Israeli advocacy group Gisha.. waged a long court battle to release the document. Its members say Israel calculated the calorie needs for Gaza's population so as to restrict the quantity of food it allowed in."

Exactly correct (outside of the conspiracy stuff), unsure what Israel should do in this circumstance. Perhaps get rid of Hamas? Just exactly why would anyone want them in charge? The elected government in Gaza wants to destroy Israel, I can see Israel absolutely limiting supplies. Embargoes are fairly standard when dealing with a hostile nation. Get rid of Hamas and I don't doubt for a second massive relief for the people. Recognition of Israel? Possibly even greater access to goods. I know it is harsh, but I am really not sure why the resistance to something that appears very simple.

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

[url]10) The Israeli government, unlike Hamas, wants a two-state solution

Times of Israel: "[Netanyahu] made explicitly clear that he could never, ever, countenance a fully sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank.. Amid the current conflict, he elaborated, 'I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan.'"

Correct, and I agree completely. Full autonomy for Palestinians is good, but by all means, Israel should be in charge of security, to protect both Israelis and Palestinians. Palestinian police is fine, but military, only Israel. I think we are way past the point of providing Palestinians with Jets. Perhaps in the future, but for now zero chance. There has simply been too much violence.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

That's not true, what has actually happened is that a Israeli police spokesman told a Buzzfeed and a BBC reporter that the killers were operating as a lone cell, the reporters tweeted it, and now the spokesman has backtrack from his comment. Everything in the case is essentially based on conjecture at this point.

http://www.vox.com/2014/7/28/5943097...ctually-kill-3

Nope.

The word "lone cell" was never used:

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/1806...p-its-teens-no

The narrative begins to break down under scrutiny. “Katie Zavadski, fresh from a Dishternship, nails down a critical fact in the latest Israel-Hamas death-match,” wrote The Dish’s Sullivan yesterday. He cites Frenkel’s tweet, along with another tweet from the BBC’s Jon Donnison, posted hours before Frenkel’s, but which Sullivan says “confirms” hers. “Israeli police MickeyRosenfeld [sic] tells me men who killed 3 Israeli teens def lone cell, hamas affiliated but not operating under leadership,” reads Donnison’s first tweet. “Seems to contradict the line from Netanyahu government,” reads the second. (These tweets confirming the killers’ Hamas affiliations were belatedly added to the New York article, undermining its headline’s claim that “Hamas Didn’t Kidnap and Kill the 3 Israeli Teens After All.”)


Frenkel doesn’t provide her source for the “lone cell” quote, other than Donnison’s tweets, though in subsequent tweets, Frenkel says she has spoken to an “israeli officer.” This may refer to an article she wrote a month ago, in which an unnamed source told her, “What we do know, is that this was likely an opportunistic move. The men behind this may have ties to a larger terror group, but this does not have the markings of a well-planned, complex operation.” The source did not use the words “lone cell.”
But when I spoke to Micky Rosenfeld, Donnison’s alleged source, on Sunday morning, he denied having used the words “lone cell” in conversation with Donnison. Indeed, Rosenfeld insisted that he told the BBC reporter in no uncertain terms that what is known is that “Hamas terrorists from the Hebron area were behind the kidnapping and murder of the children.” Rosenfeld added that security organizations are continuing their search for the perpetrators. In other words, nothing new has developed. If the militants who murdered the boys were a “lone cell,” no officials have confirmed this.
It appears the entire episode is the result of an unfortunate game of internet telephone. In her tweet, which was picked up by New York, Frenkel placed Donnison’s words “lone cell” in quotation marks, inadvertently making it seem like Donnison’s language was actually Rosenfeld’s. But it wasn’t, and the implications that have been drawn by New York, and now spread by Andrew Sullivan, are not justified. It’s entirely possible that there was some “lone cell” with no more than tenuous Hamas connections—but right now all we have is Frenkel’s ambiguous anonymous source and Donnison’s source who believes he was misquoted as our only evidence for that proposition.

So " The men behind this may have ties to a larger terror group, but this does not have the markings of a well-planned, complex operation."....becomes "lone cell"....becomes "lone cell not working under the Hamas leadership".




I think it's unlikely that the Hamas leadership gave that order. That does not make Hamas any less responsible. They trained, funded, and supplied their operatives who carried out the attack. And the most alarming thing was what happened afterwards. The operatives were hidden and celebrated, as opposed to brought to justice.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

Ok, My point still stands. The tunnels weren't the reason for the invasion. The murder of the three Israeli teens was the main culprit.

Nope. The rocket fire was the main reason. Upon discovering the extent of the tunnels, a ground operation became necessary to secure a buffer zone and destroy them.

What may or may not be true is Israel's claim they found plans for an imminent attack that would involve hundreds of operatives pouring into Israel.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

I agree...the brutal logic is that Israeli (justifiably) value the lives of their people highly...and any casualty is horrible/unacceptable. Why would the Palestinians feel any different about their casualties?

The truth is they obviously do feel different. The very idea of a suicide bomber suggests a different feeling about death. Especially as most of the suicide bombers are young people just starting out their lives. The average age of a suicide bomber is 21:

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...age-21-1.67906

These are children being put up to something awful by cowardly older men who don't value their lives at all.

Now look how far Israel went to save one kidnapped soldier (Gilad Shalit). Hamas has been caught red handed putting people in the way of rockets.