israel question

branie

Is there anyone here who supports the blockade of Gaza?

johngalway

Yep, me. I can't fault Israel for trying to stop certain items which could be used by their enemies against them reaching Gaza. The blockade certainly has unpalatable effects on people inside Gaza, but until they get their own house in order then Israel will most likely continue to assert it's right to defend itself.

Countries such as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, formerly Husseins Iraq support groups who wouldn't shed a tear at Israels complete destruction. I prefer a modern Israel to the other states mentioned in their current guises. There is no doubt they have rich histories and diverse cultures, but Israel fits in better with my beliefs than the other "regimes".

Fuhrer

branie wrote: »

Is there anyone here who supports the blockade of Gaza?

The Israeli Government seems to be in favour of it

A Dub in Glasgo

And most countries in the world considering their inaction

Paddy Samurai

Egypt does.

Meanwhile Egypt has temporarily opened its border with the Gaza Strip to allow aid, a government official said.
The move has prompted thousands of Gazans to rush to leave the normally closed territory, flocking to the Rafah crossing point in cars laden with luggage.Rafah is the only border post from Gaza not fully controlled by Israel and has been opened only sparingly by Cairo since Hamas seized control in Gaza three years ago

PeterIanStaker

Course I support it, I have to. If I criticise anything Israel does sure all of a sudden I'm a holocaust denying Nazi.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

*goes back to watching Sky News*

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

Countries such as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, formerly Husseins Iraq support groups who wouldn't shed a tear at Israels complete destruction. I prefer a modern Israel to the other states mentioned in their current guises. There is no doubt they have rich histories and diverse cultures, but Israel fits in better with my beliefs than the other "regimes".

As long as you realise that entails supporting colonialism, legalised torture and a semi-apartheid regime in the OT......

johngalway

Nodin wrote: »

As long as you realise that entails supporting colonialism, legalised torture and a semi-apartheid regime in the OT......

I don't have a problem with any of that given the circumstances Israel is in. A lot of people, myself included, are speaking on this topic from relative safety. We, thankfully, do not have to experience rockets being fired into our country as we go about our daily business. If it reduces the incidences of "Joe Soap down the road isn't the same jocular fellow since his wife/kids/dad/uncle got blown to smithereens" then well and good.

I realise Israel sends in tanks, jets, helicopters etc. I realise civilians on both sides die, for keeps. However this part of the world is quite simply dangerous. Who in their right minds vote in a shower like Hamas and expect sunshine and roses. There is a practical reality to this situation, and that is that Israel is the big dog in this neighbourhood. Palestinians & co. need to be more practical about this fact. This isn't Rock, Paper, Scissors, sling shots and katyushas quite simply don't beat F-16's & Apaches, especially when the will to use that technology is rock solid. Indoctrinating hatred into uneducated youths that it's better to die for Allah than have any even the slimmest glimmer of a future is unspeakable.

oncevotedff

branie wrote: »

Is there anyone here who supports the blockade of Gaza?

Yes.

Nodin wrote: »

As long as you realise that entails supporting colonialism, legalised torture and a semi-apartheid regime in the OT......

Fine by me. The guys who run the "OT" are far worse than the Israelis.

Another Israel thread?

Maybe someone should start a "We hate Israel" forum where all the Islamophiles can gather and emote about the poor Palestinians and how nasty the Jews are.

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

I don't (.......)of a future is unspeakable.

Theres no Israeli presence in Gaza, they just control access, resources and the like. The whole "semi apartheid..." thing refers to Arab East Jerusalem, the West Bank etc.

I take it you know about the settlements etc?

Nodin

oncevotedff wrote: »

Maybe someone should start a "We hate Israel" forum where all the Islamophiles can gather and emote about the poor Palestinians and how nasty the Jews are.

Glad to see your opinion of Palestinians doesn't change even if they adopt non-violence.

I'd suggest keeping remarks about "Islamophiles" and implications of anti-semitism to yourself, however.

johngalway

Nodin wrote: »

Theres no Israeli presence in Gaza, they just control access, resources and the like. The whole "semi apartheid..." thing refers to Arab East Jerusalem, the West Bank etc.

I take it you know about the settlements etc?

Yes @ Gaza.

"Semi Apartheid", what do you do? People wrap explosives around their bodies and walk into shops/nightclubs/bus stops/restaurants and blow themselves up.

Thought it may not seem so to some, I am all for living peacefully. But, you got to draw a line and say no further when confronted by suicide bombers/rocket & mortar attacks. If that discommodes the general population where these bombers come from, then I believe it's put upon that population to have a really good think about supporting the terrorists.

It's just not working for them. The place is often compared to Northern Ireland. The IRA gave the British Army excellent training. The IDF is getting the same thing. The difference is that Israel simply isn't bothered about world opinion compared to the survival and safety of it's citizens.

Until the general population of the Occupied Territories realise that talking Israelis to death instead of bombing them to death is a better option, this merrygoround will just keep turning.

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

Yes @ Gaza.

"Semi Apartheid", what do you do? People wrap explosives around their bodies and walk into shops/nightclubs/bus stops/restaurants and blow themselves up..

Well for one thing, its been that way since 1967, and the first suicide bomb occurred in Israel in the early 1980's, I think. I'm not sure what denying people equal access to justice, resources etc would do to change anyones mind. Certainly Apartheid didn't become more popular with black Africans when it was more strictly applied.

johngalway wrote: »

Thought it may not seem so to some, I am all for living peacefully. But, you got to draw a line and say no further when confronted by suicide bombers/rocket & mortar attacks. If that discommodes the general population where these bombers come from, then I believe it's put upon that population to have a really good think about supporting the terrorists.
..

That seems to be justifying security. Do you not think that the ongoing building of civillian colonies within the West Bank (an area thats been peaceful for years) is an aggressive and perhaps a provocative act on Israels part.

johngalway wrote: »

It's just not working for them. The place is often compared to Northern Ireland. The IRA gave the British Army excellent training. The IDF is getting the same thing. The difference is that Israel simply isn't bothered about world opinion compared to the survival and safety of it's citizens.
..

...because of the US veto at the UNSC.

johngalway wrote: »

Until the general population of the Occupied Territories realise that talking Israelis to death instead of bombing them to death is a better option, this merrygoround will just keep turning.

....there hasn't been an attack launched from the West Bank for many years. Its not governed by Hamas. Fatah actively persecute Hamas members there

karma_

johngalway wrote: »

Yep, me. I can't fault Israel for trying to stop certain items which could be used by their enemies against them reaching Gaza. The blockade certainly has unpalatable effects on people inside Gaza, but until they get their own house in order then Israel will most likely continue to assert it's right to defend itself.

Countries such as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, formerly Husseins Iraq support groups who wouldn't shed a tear at Israels complete destruction. I prefer a modern Israel to the other states mentioned in their current guises. There is no doubt they have rich histories and diverse cultures, but Israel fits in better with my beliefs than the other "regimes".

I find your stance shocking and very troubling, also immoral, given that collective punishment is against laws of war and is in contravention of the Geneva Convention.

Collective punishment is basically something that should always be considered unpalatable.

johngalway

I'll be honest, I'm not here to go arguing with anyone. The question was asked regarding the blockade and I have answered it from my point of view, what I would find acceptable if put in the same situation.

Rights, justice & resources are great. There are people in this fine world of ours who use those to kill others. Considering that from all points of view, I find Israel as an entity to be much more compatible with my views than their enemies.

This isn't a popularity contest. Containing and harming terrorist organisations isn't a pretty thing. If I lived in Israel I would only be delighted that my Government went to such lengths to keep me and mine safe, that's the be all and end all of it. If it's a choice between my family staying alive, or some other people I don't know, I'll pick my family every time.

A Dub in Glasgo

johngalway wrote: »

I'll be honest, I'm not here to go arguing with anyone. The question was asked regarding the blockade and I have answered it from my point of view, what I would find acceptable if put in the same situation.

Rights, justice & resources are great. There are people in this fine world of ours who use those to kill others. Considering that from all points of view, I find Israel as an entity to be much more compatible with my views than their enemies.

This isn't a popularity contest. Containing and harming terrorist organisations isn't a pretty thing. If I lived in Israel I would only be delighted that my Government went to such lengths to keep me and mine safe, that's the be all and end all of it. If it's a choice between my family staying alive, or some other people I don't know, I'll pick my family every time.

What would you do if you were put in the same situation as the Palestinans?

Unless you have a vested interest in the Israeli state, how can you have such empathy for Israel and none for the Palestinans?

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

I'll be honest, I'm not here to go arguing with anyone. The question was asked regarding the blockade and I have answered it from my point of view, what I would find acceptable if put in the same situation.

Rights, justice & resources are great. There are people in this fine world of ours who use those to kill others. Considering that from all points of view, I find Israel as an entity to be much more compatible with my views than their enemies.

This isn't a popularity contest. Containing and harming terrorist organisations isn't a pretty thing. If I lived in Israel I would only be delighted that my Government went to such lengths to keep me and mine safe, that's the be all and end all of it. If it's a choice between my family staying alive, or some other people I don't know, I'll pick my family every time.

Thats all well and good, however it was this - the last part in particular, that I found worrying.

Countries such as Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, formerly Husseins Iraq support groups who wouldn't shed a tear at Israels complete destruction. I prefer a modern Israel to the other states mentioned in their current guises. There is no doubt they have rich histories and diverse cultures, but Israel fits in better with my beliefs than the other "regimes".

Theres rather a lot more going on there than self defence against Hamas, and I'd be suprised if most peoples beliefs included colonialism and the regime I outlined earlier.

Mrmoe

I do not like all or nothing situations like this. Israel has the right to inspect anything going into Gaza and I would say a lot of people would agree with this. However, what I do not understand is why certain items are not allowed in. I have no problem with waepons being restricted and it is logical for Israel to block these but why do they have to block food items? Why is this?

Nodin

Mrmoe wrote: »

I do not like all or nothing situations like this. Israel has the right to inspect anything going into Gaza and I would say a lot of people would agree with this. However, what I do not understand is why certain items are not allowed in. I have no problem with waepons being restricted and it is logical for Israel to block these but why do they have to block food items? Why is this?

To make the population suffer, essentially. They hope that it will turn them against Hamas, despite the fact that the harshness of the years of occupation was one of the factors that created Hamas' support in the first place.

johngalway

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

What would you do if you were put in the same situation as the Palestinans?

Unless you have a vested interest in the Israeli state, how can you have such empathy for Israel and none for the Palestinans?

Palestinians can fight or they can talk. I believe talking is the better option in the long run. There is no perfect solution to this, where both sides do XY&Z and the whole history of the thing goes away like magic. It's a nasty, vicious war and it will take a very long time to work out a livable settlement for both sides.

To answer your question on empathy directly. I find Israel to be more compatible with my idea of a good place to live when compared to the countries that support it's enemies.

johngalway

Nodin wrote: »

Thats all well and good, however it was this - the last part in particular, that I found worrying.

Theres rather a lot more going on there than self defence against Hamas, and I'd be suprised if most peoples beliefs included colonialism and the regime I outlined earlier.

Having a little trouble with your post, you'll have to be a bit more specific if you'd like me to answer

Nodin

It is, if you're a member of a certain group. And your conscience isn't bothered by what might be called a 'plantation' taking place within driving distance of your home.

I might add that as sanctions have been blocked for decades by the US, talk has rather been barred as a method of progress. Certainly the only thing that the one sided measures in place have led to is an increasingly desperate and radicalised Palestinian population. In my life time I've seen the gradual ebbing of secular forces, and the rise of the extremist religous movements.

Nodin

johngalway wrote: »

Having a little trouble with your post, you'll have to be a bit more specific if you'd like me to answer

The whole thing about "Israel fits in better with my beliefs..". I find it hard to see how somebody can be ok about the colonial expansion into the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem, and the treatment of the population there.

This is from an Israeli organisation, which explains things in more detail.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Settlements/

johngalway

A person doesn't need to be a member of any group to have an opinion on a conflict involving that and other groups.

Israel is doing what it needs to to keep it's citizens safe. I agree with that. I believe when Sharon was in power he started having settlements dismantled, I agreed with that. The Palestinians need to be listening less to the nut jobs, it's more likely to yield benefits.

This is the second time it's been bandied about that seeing as I support Israels stance on the blockade of Gaza I must have connections with Israel. I find that a slight on the person saying it, not on myself, as the accusation is ridiculous.

Talk can still go on, it has done in the past, with the same US sitting at the same Security Council.

johngalway

Nodin wrote: »

The whole thing about "Israel fits in better with my beliefs..". I find it hard to see how somebody can be ok about the colonial expansion into the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem, and the treatment of the population there.

This is from an Israeli organisation, which explains things in more detail.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Settlements/

But, you're putting words in my mouth there, if we're talking about oranges then talk about oranges, don't talk apples and call them oranges I agreed with the blockade of Gaza, I didn't mention the settlements - until my post above this one.

halkar

johngalway wrote: »

Palestinians can fight or they can talk..

Unfortunately Israel is making both options difficult for Palestinians.

Fight? With what? They do not even allow pencils to Gaza.
Talk? To whom? What will happen if both Gaza and West Bank vote for Hamas in the next elections? West Bank is land locked, they have no connection to outside world. Not to mention thousands of Israeli checkpoints and numerous scattered settlers.
What will happens to Al Aqsa after Israel eventually annex Jerusalem? After all illegally they call Jerusalem as their capital.

I posted this map to another thread. Take a look and think how it can ever be possible to have two state in that part of the world.

Unfortunately to me the only solution for both Israelis and Palestinians is to put their differences aside and live peacefully as one country.

Israel's only enemy is her own fear.

Mrmoe

Nodin wrote: »

To make the population suffer, essentially. They hope that it will turn them against Hamas, despite the fact that the harshness of the years of occupation was one of the factors that created Hamas' support in the first place.

Thats what I do not understand. This blockade tends only to radicalise a population turning them away from the intended direction. Is there evidence anywhere in the world that such a blockade is even successful? If Israel wants to increase its security they should stop the blockade of items except for weapons. It is fairly simple and clear in my mind.

Scofflaw

oncevotedff wrote: »

Yes.



Fine by me. The guys who run the "OT" are far worse than the Israelis.



Maybe someone should start a "We hate Israel" forum where all the Islamophiles can gather and emote about the poor Palestinians and how nasty the Jews are.

Banned for general slur on everyone in the forum who fails to agree with you. People, don't play the anti-Semite card on thread. If someone is being anti-Semitic, report it.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Iwasfrozen

I think you guys just don't seem to understand the gravity of Israels situation that Israel finds itself in. Israel is fighting a lone war against numerous neighbours who want to see it wiped off the map. The Palestinian people have made clear their support of a pan-Arabic movement against Israel.

In 1967 Israel toke control of this tiny piece of land fourty one km long and six km wide by force. After its victory in the six day war. They tried to subdue the population but failed. They realised their failure and pulled out in 2006. But in 2007 Hamas toke over the area and used it as a post to attack Israel.

Israel had to responde and in 2008 during the Gaza War Israel invaded, using heavy haded methods to crush Hamas. Unfortunately Hamas being the cowards that they are, had hidden the majority of their weapons and bases among the living quarters of palestinian people. And Israel had to bomb these areas to clear Hamas out.

I am no fan of Israels latest actions, I am not anti-Arabic, and I agree that the IDFs methods are a bit full on sometimes but everything Israel has done it has done to survive.

sponsoredwalk

johngalway wrote: »

Who in their right minds vote in a shower like Hamas and expect sunshine and roses. There is a practical reality to this situation, and that is that Israel is the big dog in this neighbourhood

Correct me if I'm wrong but Hamas was voted in in a democratic election devoid of any tinkering or any problems whatsoever.

In being voted in democratically I would wager the guess that Hamas was voted in precisely because of their willingness to stand up to Israel's craziness but Hamas are completely willing to enter negotiations, despite Israel's refusal's and continued adoption of Kissinger-esque stalemate.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4692114.stm
http://www.euronews.net/2006/03/27/hamas-presents-cabinet-and-says-it-is-willing-to-talk/
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/12/19/hamas.iview/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7354027.stm

Iwasfrozen, Israel is certainly not alone in this, the USA are completely allied wth Israel and have been for over 30 years.

Macha

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think you guys just don't seem to understand the gravity of Israels situation that Israel finds itself in. Israel is fighting a lone war against numerous neighbours who want to see it wiped off the map.

This siege mentality is not helping Israel at all. Firstly, Israel does have some allies in the region, including Egypt and Turkey. Israel has shot itself in the foot by damaging its relationship with bith Egypt and Turkey over its handling of recent events.

I agree that Israel has the right to defend itself, even if I don't agree that it ever should have been created. That is not the same as thinking Israel has the right to do whatever it thinks it needs to do to defend itself, regardless of the consequences on other people.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The Palestinian people have made clear their support of a pan-Arabic movement against Israel.

Can you honestly, honestly blame them? Israel is pushing them into their arms, and pretty much guaranteeing the radicalisation of future generations of Arabs, both inside Palestine and in the rest of the Arab world.

I primarly oppose the blocade because it has created and perpetuates a humanitarian crisis but I also don't think it is in Israel's best interest either.

johngalway

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong but Hamas was voted in in a democratic election devoid of any tinkering or any problems whatsoever.

In being voted in democratically I would wager the guess that Hamas was voted in precisely because of their willingness to stand up to Israel's craziness but Hamas are completely willing to enter negotiations, despite Israel's refusal's and continued adoption of Kissinger-esque stalemate.

I said who would vote Hamas in, not why would Hamas run or what kind of election would they participate in. I would similarly wager Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas due to it's craziness. And before I'm misquoted, I never said Israel and Hamas should talk.

wes

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I think you guys just don't seem to understand the gravity of Israels situation that Israel finds itself in. Israel is fighting a lone war against numerous neighbours who want to see it wiped off the map. The Palestinian people have made clear their support of a pan-Arabic movement against Israel.

Okay, some facts, which I should just copy and paste from previous posts from now on.

Firstly, Israel has peace deals, with both Jordan and Egypt.

Secondly, all the Arabs state made the following offer:

Text: Arab peace plan of 2002

Macha

johngalway wrote: »

I said who would vote Hamas in.

A people who has been forced to live in tents, who only receives 25% of the aid it needs, according to the UN, 90% of whose water is undrinkable, who doesn't have a functioning waste treatment system, whose sewage gets pumped into the sea and is then forced to eat fish from the polluted waters, etc etc.

Seriously it's just so blindingly obvious that these are the prime circumstances for radicalising a population. Hamas is a disease and it needs the right conditions to exist. Israel is doing a fantastic job making sure that those conditions exist within the Gaza strip.

johngalway

taconnol wrote: »

A people who has been forced to live in tents, who only receives 25% of the aid it needs, according to the UN, 90% of whose water is undrinkable, who doesn't have a functioning waste treatment system, whose sewage gets pumped into the sea and is then forced to eat fish from the polluted waters, etc etc.

Seriously it's just so blindingly obvious that these are the prime circumstances for radicalising a population. Hamas is a disease and it needs the right conditions to exist. Israel is doing a fantastic job making sure that those conditions exist within the Gaza strip.

Perhaps if they did not give support to organisations like Hamas they would not be in that situation. Terrorists need a certain level of support from the local population to operate and exist. As for radicalising the population, I'd say that's been done well enough before this. Israels job is to protect itself and it's citizens. The Palestinian people need to rethink how they view the organisations that purport to speak for them. Obviously - the effects of the blockade being the obvious bit - supporting the hardmen of Hamas "standing up to Israel" isn't having many benefits for the ordinary Palestinian on the street.

Macha

johngalway wrote: »

Perhaps if they did not give support to organisations like Hamas they would not be in that situation. Terrorists need a certain level of support from the local population to operate and exist. As for radicalising the population, I'd say that's been done well enough before this.

Your argument is coming down to form of the childish "she started it, miss". At this stage, it really doesn't bloody matter who started it, the point is that Israel's actions are consolidating Hamas's support.

I can take your argument and equally apply it to Israel - maybe if the Israelis did not vote in such right-wing parties, the situation would not be as tense. See how pointless that argument is?

johngalway wrote: »

Israels job is to protect itself and it's citizens. The Palestinian people need to rethink how they view the organisations that purport to speak for them. Obviously - the effects of the blockade being the obvious bit - supporting the hardmen of Hamas "standing up to Israel" isn't having many benefits for the ordinary Palestinian on the street.

And similarly, Israel might do well to consider the impact its actions has on support levels for Hamas. It is a lot easier for Israel to do this in the confort of its strong economy and world-class health service than it is for Gazans to do when they have to queue every day just to get food to survive. This is also veering more into the 'she was asking for it, miss' attitude.

Iwasfrozen

taconnol wrote: »

This siege mentality is not helping Israel at all. Firstly, Israel does have some allies in the region, including Egypt and Turkey. Israel has shot itself in the foot by damaging its relationship with bith Egypt and Turkey over its handling of recent events.

Can they really rely on the support of either Egypt or Turkey though?

Don't forget it was from Egypt that Israel captured the Gaza strip in 1967, in effect that makes the Palestinian people captured Egyptian citizens. Can you honestly say that Egypt wouldn't jump on the opportunity to strike Israel were it given the chance?

As for Turkey I admit that the relations between them has historically been very good. Turkey was the first secound muslim state to formally recognise Israel as a state. And Turkey has been dependent on Israel for Arms supply.

taconnol wrote: »

I agree that Israel has the right to defend itself, even if I don't agree that it ever should have been created. That is not the same as thinking Israel has the right to do whatever it thinks it needs to do to defend itself, regardless of the consequences on other people.

It's the Palestinians own fault. They shouldn't have attacked Israel. The Israelis had pulled out in 2006 only to have to re-invade in 2008 when Hamas came to power. Maybe it's better if Israel stays in control if it means sparing the Palestinian people of Hamas.

taconnol wrote: »

Can you honestly, honestly blame them? Israel is pushing them into their arms, and pretty much guaranteeing the radicalisation of future generations of Arabs, both inside Palestine and in the rest of the Arab world.

Yes I can. Israel didn't start this. The vast majority of the Palestinian people living in Gaza at the moment are in effect refugees from the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
A war that started because the Arabs could not accept a Jewish state. The attitudes of these people has not changed much today.

taconnol wrote: »

I primarly oppose the blocade because it has created and perpetuates a humanitarian crisis but I also don't think it is in Israel's best interest either.

What else do you think they should do ?

wes

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes I can. Israel didn't start this. The vast majority of the Palestinian people living in Gaza at the moment are in effect refugees from the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
A war that started because the Arabs could not accept a Jewish state. The attitudes of these people has not changed much today.

There was a conflict between Palestinians and Zionists going on for decades before 1948.

Also, I could easily say the entire mess started with Zionists colonists arriving in Palestine in the late 1800's, but the who started it nonsense doesn't really matter in the context of stopping the current conflict.

Iwasfrozen

wes wrote: »

There was a conflict between Palestinians and Zionists going on for decades before 1948.

Also, I could easily say the entire mess started with Zionists colonists arriving in Palestine in the late 1800's, but the who started it nonsense doesn't really matter in the context of stopping the current conflict.

It does when you are trying to administer blame.

Macha

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Can they really rely on the support of either Egypt or Turkey though?

Not if they continue along this track. Egypt and Turkey have large muslim populations and the opposition of these people must always be carfully balanced in domestic politics. Israel should be doing everything it can to preserve these relatiionships and not making it incredibly difficult for these countrys and basically embarassing them into removing their support for Israel.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Don't forget it was from Egypt that Israel captured the Gaza strip in 1967, in effect that makes the Palestinian people captured Egyptian citizens. Can you honestly say that Egypt wouldn't jump on the opportunity to strike Israel were it given the chance?

See above.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's the Palestinians own fault. They shouldn't have attacked Israel. The Israelis had pulled out in 2006 only to have to re-invade in 2008 when Hamas came to power. Maybe it's better if Israel stays in control if it means sparing the Palestinian people of Hamas.

More "she started it, miss". When are you going to stop with the broken record? You are completely missing the point - repeatedly.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes I can. Israel didn't start this. The vast majority of the Palestinian people living in Gaza at the moment are in effect refugees from the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
A war that started because the Arabs could not accept a Jewish state. The attitudes of these people has not changed much today.

More of the same "she started it miss". I'm not getting into a discussion on the creation of Israel because it is totally pointless and your attempts to steet the discussion back to the topic simply reflects your unwillingness to face up to the realities of Israel's situation today.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

What else do you think they should do ?

They should allow in humanitarian aid, that has been inspected by the UN. Have you looked at the list of things banned by the current blocade?

chickpeas? biscuits? toothpaste? Please explain why these are banned and what purpose they have.

http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/HiddenMessages/ItemsGazaStrip060510.pdf

And I'm sorry but there's no way around it: building materials are needed for the reconstruction of infrastructure. I don't see why Israelis should have the right to a decent built environment, lush full food markets and fresh drinking water and the Gazans should not. It is collective punishment and it is serving no purpose.

wes

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It does when you are trying to administer blame.

Fair enough, then if you want to administer blame, then you really need to know when the conflict between the Israeli's and Palestinians started, and that was not 1948.

johngalway

taconnol wrote: »

Your argument is coming down to form of the childish "she started it, miss". At this stage, it really doesn't bloody matter who started it, the point is that Israel's actions are consolidating Hamas's support.

I can take your argument and equally apply it to Israel - maybe if the Israelis did not vote in such right-wing parties, the situation would not be as tense. See how pointless that argument is?


And similarly, Israel might do well to consider the impact its actions has on support levels for Hamas. It is a lot easier for Israel to do this in the confort of its strong economy and world-class health service than it is for Gazans to do when they have to queue every day just to get food to survive. This is also veering more into the 'she was asking for it, miss' attitude.

It matters when a population continues to support an organisation hostile to your country, it very definitely matters. Stop supporting Hamas, stop supporting terrorism, then go and talk to the Israeli's. That would give Palestinians a lot more credibility in the Western world. It's rather difficult to feel sorry for the guy arguing against the blockade when he may well be involved with those firing rockets and mortars across the border.

Macha

johngalway wrote: »

It matters when a population continues to support an organisation hostile to your country, it very definitely matters. Stop supporting Hamas, stop supporting terrorism, then go and talk to the Israeli's. That would give Palestinians a lot more credibility in the Western world. It's rather difficult to feel sorry for the guy arguing against the blockade when he may well be involved with those firing rockets and mortars across the border.

At this stage you've just reverted back to your mantra. You haven't actually addressed any of the points I've made about the realities of the situation.

Just to reinforce how futile your attitude is, look at this sentence:

It's rather difficult to feel sorry for the guy arguing for the blockade when he may well be involved with causing 90% of your water to be polluted, forcing you to eat contaminated fish, forcing you to queue daily for food and has effectively made your country's economy disappear into thin air.

Pointless, pointless, pointless.

And I'm still waiting for a good explanation for why chickpeas have been banned.

A Dub in Glasgo

johngalway wrote: »

Perhaps if they did not give support to organisations like Hamas they would not be in that situation.

You have now gone from saying you understand where Israel come from to you supporting breaching the Geneva Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments

Personally, I have no time for those that advocate breaches of the Geneva Convention

johngalway

taconnol wrote: »

At this stage you've just reverted back to your mantra. You haven't actually addressed any of the points I've made about the realities of the situation.

Just to reinforce how futile your attitude is, look at this sentence:

It's rather difficult to feel sorry for the guy arguing for the blockade when he may well be involved with causing 90% of your water to be polluted, forcing you to eat contaminated fish, forcing you to queue daily for food and has effectively made your country's economy disappear into thin air.

Pointless, pointless, pointless.

The realities of the situation are clear. Israel is denying Hamas and whatever other militant organisations materials that could be used against them. It is a perfectly acceptable method to use in my belief. That you disagree with me doesn't make my opinion less worthy, except in your mind. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

johngalway

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

You have now gone from saying you understand where Israel come from to you supporting breaching the Geneva Convention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments

Personally, I have no time for those that advocate breaches of the Geneva Convention

I haven't changed what I said from the beginning of this thread, if you care to read back you will see that.

Macha

johngalway wrote: »

The realities of the situation are clear. Israel is denying Hamas and whatever other militant organisations materials that could be used against them. It is a perfectly acceptable method to use in my belief. That you disagree with me doesn't make my opinion less worthy, except in your mind. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

Chickpeas? Hamas would use chickpeas agains Israel?

Iwasfrozen

taconnol wrote: »

Not if they continue along this track. Egypt and Turkey have large muslim populations and the opposition of these people must always be carfully balanced in domestic politics. Israel should be doing everything it can to preserve these relatiionships and not making it incredibly difficult for these countrys and basically embarassing them into removing their support for Israel.

You ahven't adressed the point of my post. Israel cannot rely on the support of the country from whom it has captured the Gaza strip from in the first place. Also by your own admission Egypt has a large muslim population, this adds to the unstable nature of Egypts frindship with Israel.
Can you honestly say that Egypt wouldn't jump on the opportunity to strike Israel were it given the chance?

taconnol wrote: »

See above.

See above.

taconnol wrote: »

More "she started it, miss". When are you going to stop with the broken record? You are completely missing the point - repeatedly.

What do you mean by more? I joined this discussion half an hour ago. But don't you agree that it is important to asses the base of a mess rather then just skimming the surface?
Or would you rather just jump on the current political anti-Israel bandwagon while ignoring history?

taconnol wrote: »

More of the same "she started it miss". I'm not getting into a discussion on the creation of Israel because it is totally pointless and your attempts to steet the discussion back to the topic simply reflects your unwillingness to face up to the realities of Israel's situation today.

I have faced up to Israels actions today. By my own admission, "I am no fan of Israels latest actions, I am not anti-Arabic, and I agree that the IDFs methods are a bit full on sometimes but everything Israel has done it has done to survive".

You however seem adamant to ignore history and judge Israel based solely on todays actions. Which is wrong.

taconnol wrote: »

They should allow in humanitarian aid, that has been inspected by the UN. Have you looked at the list of things banned by the current blocade?

chickpeas? biscuits? toothpaste? Please explain why these are banned and what purpose they have.

And I'm sorry but there's no way around it: building materials are needed for the reconstruction of infrastructure. I don't see why Israelis should have the right to a decent built environment, lush full food markets and fresh drinking water and the Gazans should not. It is collective punishment and it is serving no purpose.

Israel had negotiated an agreement with the Irish department of foreign affairs that the ship Rachel Corrie should deck in Ashdod to have its cargo inspected by the IDF under the supervision of representatives of the Irish department of foreign affairs and the UN.

This shows that Israel is nto against the deliverence of aid to Gaza. But will not allow the clandestine smuggling of arms.

johngalway

taconnol wrote: »

Chickpeas? Hamas would use chickpeas agains Israel?

I don't have a problem with food being allowed through. Materials which could be used directly or indirectly to aid in the terrorists cause should be stopped at all points.

Iwasfrozen

johngalway wrote: »

I don't have a problem with food being allowed through. Materials which could be used directly or indirectly to aid in the terrorists cause should be stopped at all points.

Exactly hence the need of a blockade for Israel to inspect any and all goods brought into Gaza.

johngalway

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Exactly hence the need of a blockade for Israel to inspect any and all goods brought into Gaza.

Yep. I found it amazing someone complained during the week that the Israelis had no need inspect the cargo of a ship heading for Gaza as it had already been checked by Turkish authorities. If there had been weapons on board, it would not have been the Turks on the receiving end. No offense to the Turks.