Escalating Tensions in Palestinian Territories

[Manhattanboy]

Ya these things are more than bleach, fertilizer and other household chemicals cobbled together.

From the New York Times:

“The arsenal’s medium-range rockets, based on Iranian and Russian design, can reach targets up to 25 miles, making Israeli targets as far as the Tel Aviv suburbs vulnerable. Versions of these weapons are believed to be produced inside Gaza.

The longest-range rockets can travel much farther and can hit Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Ben-Gurion Airport. They include the M-75, a locally made rocket with technology supplied by Iran, and the J-80, a locally made rocket named after a famous Hamas military commander, Ahmed al-Jabari, killed by an Israeli airstrike in 2012. The numbers refer to their estimated ranges in kilometers.

On Thursday, Hamas claimed in a statement that it has a missile with a range of 250 kilometers, about 155 miles, that can hit anywhere in Israel.”

And Hamas is expanding its use of drone technology:

https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/ir...nalysis-668110

[PepsiFree]

So far Israel has killed 122 Palestinians. Among those, 20 women and 31 children. They are killing children. I don’t feel the need to post the video here, do to the nature of it, but have you seen a father kiss his dead daughter laying on a slab in a mobile refrigerator next multiple other children? Have you seen a man weep while holding up his lifeless BABY, covered in dirt, ash, and blood?

Israel is refusing mediation. They are looking to commit genocide. They have damaged or destroyed hundreds of homes. They have damaged or destroyed dozens of schools. They have damaged or destroyed medical facilities and media facilities.

They are not defending themselves. They are willingly killing civilians and destroying their lives as a show of aggression. Hamas (who is not to be defended either) has come to the table, Israel refuses. Israel is not going to stop until they have erased Palestinian people from existence. They’ve been doing it through violence and displacement and the removal of rights.

The government of Israel is a terrorist organisation and any defence of them is a defence of terrorism and genocide. Absolutely disgusting.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You cant disarm them, they aint buying those rockets from Rocket 'R' Us or Dollarama, they are making them from bleach and fertiliser and various other household chemicals, and for every Hamas soldier the Israeli's kill 3 more will take their place, Palestinians arent joining Hamas because it looks like a bit of fun before they go to Uni' and then start a career, they have nothing else, they have nothing to lose, they have no future, this is a war of desperation, nothing Israel or Iran does, nothing Hamas does frankly will alter any of it, the poor desperate will still lash out at their oppressors whether they have support or not.

Nothing Israel does changes the equation for the Arabs, before the war they had no hope, after the war they will have no hope, if there was peace they will have no hope, nothing changes, they have nothing to lose except their lives and their lives are utter poverty stricken meaningless ####e.

Again, not trying to make this personal, but your posts implied you do not understand anything about this situation beyond the headlines you've read and an inferred understanding based on one perspective.

These are modern rockets supplied from Iran and other Shia jihadi groups through a network of tunnels and other means. These are not crude IEDs made from pots and fertilizer. These are expensive weapons and supported my somewhat modern military technology backbones. Have a look at Hamas' drone fleet, these aren't converted RC planes with C4 stuck to the underbelly.

You act like neither side can do anything to change things. The one thing that can be done is limiting support for Hamas through its funding. They indoctrinate the youth, make celebrity of martyrs, and pay handsomely for successful attacks on Israel. The culture there is to hate and destroy Israel. Until that changes and Hamas is seen for the destructive cultural force it is, Gazans will suffer by buying into the rage.

Things are so much better in the West Bank over Gaza for a litany of reasons, but a big piece is that they have weened themselves off of the Hamas kool-aide a lot more than Gaza.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Again, not trying to make this personal, but your posts implied you do not understand anything about this situation beyond the headlines you've read and an inferred understanding based on one perspective.

These are modern rockets supplied from Iran and other Shia jihadi groups through a network of tunnels and other means. These are not crude IEDs made from pots and fertilizer. These are expensive weapons and supported my somewhat modern military technology backbones. Have a look at Hamas' drone fleet, these aren't converted RC planes with C4 stuck to the underbelly.

You act like neither side can do anything to change things. The one thing that can be done is limiting support for Hamas through its funding. They indoctrinate the youth, make celebrity of martyrs, and pay handsomely for successful attacks on Israel. The culture there is to hate and destroy Israel. Until that changes and Hamas is seen for the destructive cultural force it is, Gazans will suffer by buying into the rage.

Things are so much better in the West Bank over Gaza for a litany of reasons, but a big piece is that they have weened themselves off of the Hamas kool-aide a lot more than Gaza.

I mean things are better in the West Bank on the surface, but the lack of Hamas there means that there are now 500,000 illegal settlers living there.

It seems as though Israel only responds positively to violence. Lay down your arms and they'll quickly take your land.

Not supporting Hamas here, but there's a reason why groups like them find support amongst the Palestinian people.

[PepsiFree]

Speaking of the so much better West Bank. IDF opened fire on Palestinian protestors in the West Bank today, killing six and injuring over 100.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I mean things are better in the West Bank on the surface, but the lack of Hamas there means that there are now 500,000 illegal settlers living there.

It seems as though Israel only responds positively to violence. Lay down your arms and they'll quickly take your land.

Not supporting Hamas here, but there's a reason why groups like them find support amongst the Palestinian people.

Israel withdrew from Gaza before Hamas was put into power. The narrative that Hamas prevents Israel from entering Gaza is false. Israel left before they were there.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by blankall

Israel withdrew from Gaza before Hamas was put into power. The narrative that Hamas prevents Israel from entering Gaza is false. Israel left before they were there.

Hamas has been in existence since 1987. After the failure of the peace process, Hamas began stepping up attacks on Israel between 2000 and 2004. The following year Israel withdrew all settlements in Gaza. This was seen as a victory by Hamas, having accomplished more for the Palestinian people through violence than what Fatah accomplished through negotiation in the prior decade. Subsequently, Hamas won the election the following year (2006).

[blankall]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Hamas has been in existence since 1987. After the failure of the peace process, Hamas began stepping up attacks on Israel between 2000 and 2004. The following year Israel withdrew all settlements in Gaza. This was seen as a victory by Hamas, having accomplished more for the Palestinian people through violence than what Fatah accomplished through negotiation in the prior decade. Subsequently, Hamas won the election the following year (2006).

So Israel should not back down from violence is what you are stating? Otherwise, the answer becomes more violence.

Israel had never intended to stay in Gaza. The plan was to use that as a test to see what would happen in the event of a withdrawal, before they withdrew from areas around major cities. It was also likely a false-compromise, by Ariel Sharon, whereby Israel would withdraw from Gaza but use that as an excuse to keep settlement blocs in the West Bank. It was in no way seen as a retreat.

Ultimately, withdrawal from Gaza was a way to rearrange the demographics of the region too. With 1.8 million Palestinians no longer in Irsael, it gave Israel the opportunity to expand in the West Bank, while still maintaining an overall Jewish majority.

This narrative that the withdrawal was some kind of military victory by Hamas is false and is only going to lead to more conflict. The only logical conclusion that comes from it is that Israel cannot allow another "military victory" as it will lead to more violence. So Israel either crushes Hamas or ceases to exist. It's a very dangerous train of thought.

[Jeff Lebowski]

AMY GOODMAN: Today, a special with Henry Siegman, the former executive director of the American Jewish Congress, long described as one of the nation’s “big three” Jewish organizations along with the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League. Henry Siegman was born in 1930 in Frankfurt, Germany. Three years later, the Nazis came to power. After fleeing Nazi troops in Belgium, his family eventually moved to the United States. His father was a leader of the European Zionist movement, pushing for the creation of a Jewish state. In New York, Henry Siegman studied and was ordained as an Orthodox rabbi by Yeshiva Torah Vodaas. He later became head of the Synagogue Council of America. After his time at the American Jewish Congress, Siegman became a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He now serves as president of the U.S./Middle East Project.

HENRY SIEGMAN: Yes, it’s disastrous. It’s disastrous, both in political terms, which is to say the situation cannot conceivably, certainly in the short run, lead to any positive results, to an improvement in the lives of either Israelis or Palestinians, and of course it’s disastrous in humanitarian terms, the kind of slaughter that’s taking place there. When one thinks that this is what is necessary for Israel to survive, that the Zionist dream is based on the slaughter of—repeated slaughter of innocents on a scale that we’re watching these days on television, that is really a profound, profound crisis—and should be a profound crisis—in the thinking of all of us who were committed to the establishment of the state and to its success. It leads one virtually to a whole rethinking of this historical phenomenon.

MARK REGEV: Listen, if you’ll allow me to, I want to take issue with one important word you said. You said Israel is the occupying authority. You’re forgetting Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip. We took down all the settlements, and the settlers who didn’t want to leave, we forced them to leave. We pulled back to the 1967 international frontier. There is no Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip. We haven’t been there for some eight years.

HENRY SIEGMAN: OK, yeah. That is of course utter nonsense, and for several reasons. First of all, Gaza is controlled completely, like the West Bank, because it is totally surrounded by Israel. Israel could not be imposing the kind of chokehold it has on Gaza if it were not surrounding, if its military were not surrounding Gaza, and not just on the territory, but also on the air, on the sea. No one there can make a move without coming into contact with the Israeli IDF, you know, outside this imprisoned area where Gazans live. So, there’s no one I have encountered, who is involved with international law, who’s ever suggested to me that in international law Gaza is not considered occupied. So that’s sheer nonsense.
But there’s another point triggered by your question to me, and this is the propaganda machine, and these official spokespeople will always tell you, “Take a look at what kind of people these are. Here we turned over Gaza to them. And you’d think they would invest their energies in building up the area, making it a model government and model economy. Instead, they’re working on rockets.” The implication here is that they, in effect, offered Palestinians a mini state, and they didn’t take advantage of it, so the issue isn’t really Palestinian statehood. That is the purpose of this kind of critique.
And I have always asked myself, and this has a great deal to do with my own changing views about the policies of governments, not about the Jewish state qua Jewish state, but of the policies pursued by Israeli governments and supported—you know, they say Israel is a model democracy in the Middle East, so you must assume—the public has to assume some responsibility for what the government does, because they put governments in place. So, the question I ask myself: What if the situation were reversed? You know, there is a Talmudic saying in Pirkei Avot, The Ethics of the Fathers: ”Al tadin et chavercha ad shetagiah lemekomo,” “Don’t judge your neighbor until you can imagine yourself in his place.” So, my first question when I deal with any issue related to the Israeli-Palestinian issue: What if we were in their place?



What if the situation were reversed, and the Jewish population were locked into, were told, “Here, you have less than 2 percent of Palestine, so now behave. No more resistance. And let us deal with the rest”? Is there any Jew who would have said this is a reasonable proposition, that we cease our resistance, we cease our effort to establish a Jewish state, at least on one-half of Palestine, which is authorized by the U.N.? Nobody would agree to that. They would say this is absurd. So the expectations that Palestinians—and I’m speaking now about the resistance as a concept; I’m not talking about rockets, whether they were justified or not. They’re not. I think that sending rockets that are going to kill civilians is a crime. But for Palestinians to try, in any way they can, to end this state of affair—and to expect of them to end their struggle and just focus on less than 2 percent to build a country is absurd. That is part of—that’s propaganda, but it’s not a discussion of either politics or morality.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: One of the things that’s repeated most often is, the problem with the Palestinian unity government is, of course, that Hamas is now part of it, and Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by Israel and also by the United States. I’d just like to read you a short quote from an article that you wrote in 2009 in the London Review of Books. You said, “Hamas is no more a 'terror organisation' … than the Zionist movement was during its struggle for a Jewish homeland. In the late 1930s and 1940s, parties within the Zionist movement resorted to terrorist activities for strategic reasons.” Could you elaborate on that and what you see as the parallels between the two?
HENRY SIEGMAN: Well, I’m glad I said that. In fact, I repeated it in a letter to The New York Times the other day, a week or two ago. The fact is that Israel had, pre-state—in its pre-state stage, several terrorist groups that did exactly what Hamas does today. I don’t mean they sent rockets, but they killed innocent people. And they did that in an even more targeted way than these rockets do. Benny Morris published a book that is considered the Bible on that particular period, the war of—
AMY GOODMAN: The Israeli historian.
HENRY SIEGMAN: Sorry?
AMY GOODMAN: The Israeli historian, Benny Morris.
HENRY SIEGMAN: The Israeli historian, right, then in the book Righteous Victims, in which he said—I recall, when I read it, I was shocked—in which he—particularly in his most recently updated book, which was based on some new information that the Israel’s Defense—the IDF finally had to open up and publish, that Israeli generals received direct instructions from Ben-Gurion during the War of Independence to kill civilians, or line them up against the wall and shoot them, in order to help to encourage the exodus, that in fact resulted, of 700,000 Palestinians, who were driven out of their—left their homes, and their towns and villages were destroyed. This was terror, even within not just the terrorist groups, the pre-state terrorists, but this is within the military, the Israeli military, that fought the War of Independence. And in this recent book, that has received so much public attention by Ari—you know, My Promised Land.
AMY GOODMAN: Shavit.
HENRY SIEGMAN: Ari Shavit. He describes several such incidents, too. And incidentally, one of the people who—according to Benny Morris, one of the people who received these orders—and they were oral orders, but he, in his book, describes why he believes that these orders were given, were given to none other than Rabin, who was not a general then, but he—and that he executed these orders.
AMY GOODMAN: Meaning?
HENRY SIEGMAN: Meaning?
AMY GOODMAN:
What did it mean that he executed these orders, Rabin?
HENRY SIEGMAN: That he executed civilians. And the rationale given for this when Shavit, some years ago, had an interview with Benny Morris and said to him, “My God, you are saying that there was deliberate ethnic cleansing here?” And Morris said, “Yes, there was.” And he says, “And you justify it?” And he said, “Yes, because otherwise there would not have been a state.” And Shavit did not follow up. And that was one of my turning points myself, when I saw that. He would not follow up and say, “Well, if that is a justification, the struggle for statehood, why can’t Palestinians do that? What’s wrong with Hamas? Why are they demonized if they do what we did?”

PRIME MINISTER BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I know that in our society, the society of Israel, there is no place for such murderers. And that’s the difference between us and our neighbors. They consider murderers to be heroes. They name public squares after them. We don’t. We condemn them, and we put them on trial, and we’ll put them in prison.
AMY GOODMAN: That was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu talking about the difference. Henry Siegman, can you respond?
HENRY SIEGMAN: Well, the only difference I can think of is that in Israel they made the heads of the two major pre-state terrorist groups prime ministers. So this distinction he’s drawing is simply false; it’s not true. The heads of the two terrorist groups, which incidentally, again, going back to Benny Morris, in his book, Righteous Victims, he writes, in this pre-state account, that the targeting of civilians was started by the Jewish terrorist groups, and the Arab—and the Arab groups followed.
AMY GOODMAN: You’re talking about Irgun and the Stern Gang.
HENRY SIEGMAN: Yes, yes. And as you know, both the head of the Irgun and both the head of the Stern Gang—I’m talking about Begin and Shamir—became prime ministers of the state of Israel. And contrary to Netanyahu, public highways and streets are named after them.

https://www.democracynow.org/2014/9/..._henry_siegman

[Jeff Lebowski]

More from same interview:

AMY GOODMAN: In a response to the piece that you wrote for Politico that was headlined “Israel Provoked This War,” the Anti-Defamation League writes, quote, “Hamas has a charter which they live up to every day calling for Israel’s destruction. Hamas has used the last two years of relative quiet to build up an arsenal of rockets whose sole purpose is to attack Israel. Hamas has built a huge network of tunnels leading into Israel with the purpose of murdering large numbers of Israelis and seizing hostages.” Henry Siegman, can you respond?
HENRY SIEGMAN: What I would point out to my former friend Abe Foxman of the ADL is that, too, is Israel’s charter, or at least the policy of this government and of many previous governments, which is to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state. And they have built up their army and their armaments to implement that policy. And the difference between Hamas and the state of Israel is that the state of Israel is actually doing it. They’re actually implementing it, and they’re actually preventing a Palestinian state, which doesn’t exist. And millions of Palestinians live in this subservient position without rights and without security, without hope and without a future. That’s not the state of—the state of Israel is a very successful state, and happily Jews live there with a thriving economy and with an army whose main purpose is preventing that Palestinian state from coming into being. That’s their mandate.

AMY GOODMAN: Why would Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has said he supports a two-state solution, create a situation that makes it virtually impossible, since it leads to this second possibility, which is a one-state solution, to the possibility that he does not want, which would be a majority Arab country?
HENRY SIEGMAN: He obviously believes that a one-state—well, I said earlier in our conversation that he never meant—when he said in his Bar-Ilan speech that he embraces a two-state, that was totally contrived. It was dishonest. Or, in simple English, he lied. And I appreciated the fact that several weeks ago, two weeks ago, he had a press conference in which he said—he didn’t say, “I lied,” but he said, “There will never be a truly sovereign Palestinian state anywhere in Palestine.” So, it’s quite clear now, and one of his friends, the former editor of The Jerusalem Post, who now edits The Times of Israel, had this big headline: “Finally, Now We Know It.” We know he never meant it. He didn’t say this critically; he said this positively. “Finally, he’s back in the fold, and we know he will never allow a sovereign Palestinian state.” Now, what will he do with a majority Arab population? He will do what the head of HaBayit HaYehudi, Bennett, has been advocating and proposed.
AMY GOODMAN: That means Jewish Home party in Israel.
HENRY SIEGMAN: That means the Jewish Home, and the Jewish Home meaning everywhere. And what he has said is that we’ll solve this problem of a potential apartheid in Israel in the following way: We will allow certain enclaves where there are heavy population—heavily populated by Palestinians, in certain parts of the West Bank, and those enclaves will be surrounded by our military. In other words, a bunch of Gazas; there will be several Gazas. Gaza, of course, will be shed or will become one of those enclaves, so they’re not part of the population of Israel. All the rest of Israel—the Jordan Valley, Area C, all of Area C, which is over 60 percent of the West Bank—will be annexed unilaterally by Israel. So, we will have shed two million Palestinians from Gaza. We will have shed another million and a half that live in the cities and in the more populated urban areas, in those enclaves—in those, essentially, bantustans. And the rest, that there are—what did he say? There are 50,000 Palestinians who live in Area C. We will make them citizens, and voila, apartheid is solved. That is—I believed that for the longest time, but that is the plan of Bibi Netanyahu. He may have to settle for less than 60 percent of the West Bank, but essentially he thinks he can solve this problem, this demographic bomb, as it’s been described, in this manner.

[AltaGuy]

This Gaza "withdrawal" narrative has been proven false time and again. It's a giant open-air prison and it was too costly in terms of lives, image, money, and soldiers for Israel to stay.

The re-writing of the Gazan withdrawal by Israelis into some magnanimous gesture to "test" the Palestinians (which they *failed*) is baloney.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

This Gaza "withdrawal" narrative has been proven false time and again. It's a giant open-air prison and it was too costly in terms of lives, image, money, and soldiers for Israel to stay.

The re-writing of the Gazan withdrawal by Israelis into some magnanimous gesture to "test" the Palestinians (which they *failed*) is baloney.

Israel only controls their border with the Gaza. Egypt has control over the other border. The only involvement in Gaza that Israel maintains is over the airspace and the sea blockade. There is no airport in Gaza, so it's just the sea blockade. Israel has zero control over day to day lives in Gaza or the border with Egypt.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

Israel only controls their border with the Gaza. Egypt has control over the other border. The only involvement in Gaza that Israel maintains is over the airspace and the sea blockade. There is no airport in Gaza, so it's just the sea blockade. Israel has zero control over day to day lives in Gaza or the border with Egypt.

No intelligent person can possibly believe this, I'm sorry.

Israel's control has an immense impact on the day-to-day lives of people in Gaza. From food, construction, mobility, welfare, medical supplies, etc.

An absolutely ignorant thing to say.

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by blankall

Israel only controls their border with the Gaza. Egypt has control over the other border. The only involvement in Gaza that Israel maintains is over the airspace and the sea blockade. There is no airport in Gaza, so it's just the sea blockade. Israel has zero control over day to day lives in Gaza or the border with Egypt.

Half-truths. Egypt controls its border with Gaza because it is another country, of course.

Under Oslo there was supposed to be free movement between Gaza and the West Bank. Otherwise the Gaza blockade by Israel does indeed make it into a giant open-air prison with Gazans as the prisoners. They are Palestinians there, not Egyptians.

Israel would like nothing more than for Egypt to open that border and solve its apartheid problem for them.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No intelligent person can possibly believe this, I'm sorry.

Israel's control has an immense impact on the day-to-day lives of people in Gaza. From food, construction, mobility, welfare, medical supplies, etc.

An absolutely ignorant thing to say.

I didn't say that the blockade doesn't impact day to day life. Hamas has total control of everything that happens within the Gaza Strip. Israel has zero presence within the Gaza Strip. There is a major difference between having control over and impacting. Of course the blockade affects Gazans.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

Half-truths. Egypt controls its border with Gaza because it is another country, of course.

Under Oslo there was supposed to be free movement between Gaza and the West Bank. Otherwise the Gaza blockade by Israel does indeed make it into a giant open-air prison with Gazans as the prisoners. They are Palestinians there, not Egyptians.

Israel would like nothing more than for Egypt to open that border and solve its apartheid problem for them.

This is also a half-truth. Israel gained control of the territory when it was part of Egypt. Egypt annexed Gaza.

Egypts blockade goes well beyond movement. They too blockade Hamas for safety reasons.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

I didn't say that the blockade doesn't impact day to day life. Hamas has total control of everything that happens within the Gaza Strip. Israel has zero presence within the Gaza Strip. There is a major difference between having control over and impacting. Of course the blockade affects Gazans.

That seems like a relatively pointless position to hold, though. By heavily controlling what goes in and out of Gaza, Israel controls the day-to-day lives of Gazans. Israel presents the artificial idea of freedom from Israeli control, while heavily dictating the limits of that freedom. That's control.

If someone puts you in a room and says "live here for a month, here's 2 weeks of food, and here are the items you're allowed to have in your room, but you can do whatever you want in this room with what you have" are you actually going to argue that this person has no control over your daily life?

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by blankall

Egypts blockade goes well beyond movement. They too blockade Hamas for safety reasons.

Haha - can you imagine what Israel would do if they didn't? Iranian "goods" flowing through a normal border crossing?

Beyond that, your backtrack on "day-to-day" was embarassing.

[jayswin]

Yikes, blankall.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

That seems like a relatively pointless position to hold, though. By heavily controlling what goes in and out of Gaza, Israel controls the day-to-day lives of Gazans. Israel presents the artificial idea of freedom from Israeli control, while heavily dictating the limits of that freedom. That's control.

If someone puts you in a room and says "live here for a month, here's 2 weeks of food, and here are the items you're allowed to have in your room, but you can do whatever you want in this room with what you have" are you actually going to argue that this person has no control over your daily life?

I would state there's a clear difference. As Israel does not have any territorial ambitions over Gaza. There are people in here arguing that Israel is attempting to take over Gaza, which isn't true.

I even went as far as to state that Israel was using this as a false compromise to solidify control over the West Bank.