WND was quoting Israeli channel 10 experts.
Here is the Jerusalem Post version.
Israel has bombed Hamas leaders homes in Gaza. They don’t all live in Qatar. Regardless, I said the exact opposite i.e. they don’t need to bomb them.
At this point virtually all of Hamas’ leadership is no longer in the Gaza Strip. I’m not sure why that would shock you since they’ve never been a nationalist movement, but are an internationalist movement.
Also, with all due respect, your view that Israel is immune to international criticism is frightfully provincial.
Without meaning to be rude, have you ever been to Israel or the occupied territories or talked to any citizens from there?
I ask because you seem to have a number of assumptions about them and their conflict that don’t really hold up to scrutiny.
Yes, Alessan’s position that Israel wouldn’t kill civilians because it wouldn’t be reasonable is rivalled only by Terr’s insistence that CNN is a Hamas mouthpiece and only Breitbart can be trusted.
And the idea that a raid on the civilian population of an occupied territory is self-defence in inherently absurd, although the worse idea is that the air-strikes were self defence even though they started before the rocket attacks they are meant to be defending against.
Both should stop bombardments, but if Hamas stop they get nothing. They don’t get a free state, they don’t get lessened Israeli controls, given that the Israeli air strikes started first there’s no reason to think they’d even get a cessation of the slaughter of their own civilian population. On the other hand how many Israelis have been killed by the rockets? Is it more than zero? Because they’ve evidently lost fifty men in the attack on Gaza. And they’ve reinforced their image to the world at large as puppy-murdering savages. So Israel would benefit themselves, spare the innocent and save the lives of their own people by just stopping. They’re just too blood thirsty to do it.
He might want to look up “hasbara”, or “Frank Luntz”.
You might want to google “Bomber Harris”. The duration of the second world war was full of bombing of civilians, indeed intentional carpet-bombing of civilian areas to eliminate workers. If you’re killing more civilians than a war where everyone intentionally tried to wipe out each others civilians then you’re committing genocide.
What is this thing you have for Frank Luntz?
Do you think he’s more loyal to Israel than the US because he’s Jewish?
It doesn’t shock me. You are just changing the subject basically, unless you honestly believe there is no leadership on the ground in Gaza and you need me to fetch you cites for Israel targeting leaders’ homes.
Without meaning to be rude, why not just address those supposedly erroneous assumptions instead of the contentless statement of smug superiority.
Utter stupidity. A journalist tells you that he can only report on something because he’s out of range of Hamas retaliation and you refuse to believe him. 50+ IDF soldiers killed - was it the “civilian population” that killed them? “Occupied territory” is especially stupid - maybe you should look up what the word “occupied” means?
Are you distorting the facts?
I wondered how Gary Kumquat would classify those specific deaths. You chose to assume that I had somehow implied he was distorting the obvious facts of that specific incident. Since Gary Kumquat had not yet discussed that particular incident, how could he have distorted the “obvious facts”???
Which in turn could be presented by Israel as examples of the evils of Hamas.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, it could - a good example.
OTOH if Hamas can put its rocket launchers in schools and hospitals and use its own citizens as human shields and still win the PR war, I would expect someone will come up with a way to blame Israel for Hamas’ use of threats and violence against those who accept help.
Regards,
Shodan
An Italian reporter who fled from Gaza yesterday confirmed an IDF account that it was an errant Hamas rocket rather than an Israeli strike that killed ten Gazans, mostly children, on Monday.
…
Barbati’s reference to “retaliation” is a reminder that reporter in Gaza are not free to report everything. Hamas has issued guidelines for social media in order to prevent reporters and bloggers from giving away possibly valuable intelligence. The Times of Israel reported earlier this week that “journalists currently working in Gaza have been harassed and threatened by Hamas for documenting cases of the terrorist group’s involvement of civilians in warfare against Israel.”
Also Barbati’s observation that “militants rushed and cleared debris,” is important because some reporters will report the absence of shrapnel as a sign that damage was not caused by a Hamas rocket. For example yesterday Jake Tapper asked Gaza based reporter, Karl Penhaul, in the video embedded below, about the possibility that misfires were responsible for any casualties. Penhaul responded that there was no debris that would have allowed him to identify the munitions responsible for the damage. Barbati explained why there would be no debris.
Hamas Sermon from the Gaza Strip: Our Doctrine Entails Exterminating the Jews
I think he’s more loyal to Israel because they pay his wages. Didn’t know or care that Mr Death Tax is Jewish.
Well, I said I didn’t agree with some of the arguments on my side…but I certainly very strongly disagree with everything you say here.
No, Israelis would not kill civilians without strong military necessity.
And the attacks on civilian areas is self-defense, because Hamas is positioning weapons there.
Israel is very much the lesser of the two evils here.
I disagree with much that Terr says, but I find Alessan to be one of the most moderate, reasonable, sensible, and well-educated people participating in any discussion of this issue.
So what IS Israel offering to give up for peace, other than occupation and oppression?
There was a discussion a while back about whether invasion of an occupied territory was war or not (in the context of deciding what rules of conduct applied to Israel). Gaza is no longer an occupied territory, so I think we can apply the rules of war. Can’t we (and the ruels of war do put some restrictions on civilian causalties, which probably have not been exceeded, assuming that the militants really are half to a third of the people killed)?
For example, America could go to war against the Bahamas and it would be grossly lopsided but I think it would still be war.
As long as Hamas keeps firing rockets and the IDF isn’t going around committing war crimes or raping people, I don’t see why they can’t root out their attackers with force.
IMO, the criticism of israel is much more meta than what is going on in this invasion.
No, thats murder.
Yeah, I don’t get that. What is vengeance rockets supposed to mean? It sounds like he is saying that hamas is justified in attacking israel because Israel has done something to earn vengeance.
:dubious: