They’re from MEMRI who are well known for using high level translations. A friend of mine who’s a professor at Rutgers and vastly more critical of I am has used some of them.
However, they are very selective of what they translate and typicall scour the Arab and Iranian media for the most inflammatory stuff they can find.
Hey, let’s “scour” Israeli children TV programming for the “most inflammatory stuff you can find”. Find anything?
So what were they being used for? I don’t recall Palestinian incursions into Israel. I supsect they could have been used for that but were they?
You mean like the Deputy Speaker of the Knesset calling for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and to make “Gaza” like “Jaffa”.
Jaffa was a Palestinian town ethnically cleansed in 1948 for those who don’t know.
As someone upthread mentioned, they can only be used once or twice to send people into Israel to attack. They’d be found.
Why are you quoting my post if your response has nothing to do with it?
They were, several times - for military operations against Israeli soldiers and for kidnapping. There is speculation that a plan for a mass attack using the tunnels was, effectively, pre-empted.
Here’s an article on “tunnel warfare”:
Note that the article states “Not to be confused with Gaza Strip smuggling tunnels” - the mistake some here have made.
Smuggling tunnels:
See Gilad Shalit.
The tunnels into Israel were known to the IDF. Local residents complained about them and the IDF refused to do anything about it.
Prior to the current invasion there had been no military use of the tunnels that cross the Israeli border. The most likely product is narcotics - small packages, high value. You can bet that some were left untouched and are back in operation.
Crane
Do you have anything resembling proof for that? Everything I have read states the opposite.
Gilad Shalit.
Maybe Israel should drop it’s embargo on Gaza and let Hamas smuggle in all the weapons it can (while Israel quietly keeps track through any informants or double agents it has). Put up with the occasional rocket or kidnapping while Hamas prepares it’s version of the Tet Offensive.
THEN once the Big Push comes, thousands of Israelis are killed and Hamas’s leaders are proudly proclaiming their goal of genocide against the Jews, Israel should formally declare war against Hamas, move in and kill every last person in Gaza who wants to be a martyr (even making sure Hamas doesn’t run out of arms and ammo). Give all the die-hards the opportunity to die hard. IOW, give Hamas the chance to fully show just what bastards they are. Reduce Gaza to a nation of women, children and old men, and remind the current generation of Israelis what the stakes are.
Yes, that’ll go over there with the public. “Sorry, we can’t defend you because the world needs to see that the people shooting rockets at you actually do want to kill you.”
I’d be lying if I said I hadn’t had the same thought (minus the “reduce Gaza to women and children” part… that’s extreme). There’s just the small issue that the strategy requires sacrificial lambs, and you can’t ask your own citizens to be the lambs.
Thank you, Dr. Evil. Anyone else? Adolf, you had your hand up?
But in the end they never eliminated the resistance to their rule, and they lost their empire because even after centuries their victims still resisted them. If Israel wants to continue to dominate the Palestinians but not genocide them, then they are going to have to put up with resistance and attacks essentially permanently.
Part of what has caused Israel and America problems is that they have an unrealistic idea that they can conquer people and those people will just give up and take it passively, while the empires of old typically knew that resentful submission was the best they could get short of genocide.
The Palestinians can’t accomplish anything at all no matter what they do, except maybe kill a few Israelis. They are a society without hope, so have no reason not to take what revenge they can.
Next? No. But eventually yes, I think.
Obviously you haven’t heard the phrase “might makes right”
[/quote]
Of course I’ve heard the phrase; it’s a silly one. Are you going to argue that if a rapist gets away with his crime then his rape was a virtuous one? If an asteroid smashes Earth into lifelessness, was it therefore a virtuous asteroid?
They’ll just use guns and bombs instead. And I don’t see much evidence that the Israelis are uncomfortable about it.
The main difference between (say) the European colonialists of old on the one hand and the Americans in America / Israelis in Israel on the other, is that the latter have nowhere to go.
If the colonialists felt that their rule was too costly, or had moral qualms about ruling over others, they could simply go home. The latter cannot. They have no-where to go “home” to.
The Israelis have no wish to “dominate” Palistinians. They simply wish to be left alone by them. However, the Palistinians cannot leave them alone, without accepting the permanent loss of what they, the Palestinians, consider their homeland.
It may be fair to say that the Israelis must then live with the possibility of attacks by Palestinians. If Palestinians do not give up their dream of a homeland freed of whom the classify as invaders, and for that reason subject Israelis to attacks permanently, they must learn to live with permanent attacks from Israelis. The Palestinians are by far getting the worse of this deal.
You’re right, my mistake.
Maybe I was misuing the term right (as in privilege) rather than right (as in correct, moral, just, virtuous). I agree that Israel’s actions are not virtuous but a lot of them are defensible. Aside from the settlement activity, the near apartheid levels of discrimination and racism, and the reluctance to attempt to reach a just resolution to the Palestinian problem, I don’t really see the problem. I don’t really blame a country for defending itself, its not necessaarily being virtuously done but they are within their rights as are the fighters in gaza within their rights to attack Israel (although there are criticsm to be levelled at them for how they are conducting their fight against oppression).
I think they would be disturbed if IDF started pounding the West Bank. I think that if Gaza stopped attacking Israel, Israel would be happy to simply oppress them rather than kill them.
This is not true for all Palestinians. The West Bank and East Jerusalem seem to be more willing to reach some sort of accomodation. And things do not remain static. One day Palestinians may have the means to detroy Israel and Israel migth want to develop the sort of relationship it has with Egypt or Jordan before taht day comes.
Yes, but any sort of agreement would perforce have to include the Palestinians permanently giving up their claims to the land the Israelis are living on (with whatever border adjustments they work out between them). If they don’t, the Israelis cannot agree; they have nowhere to go.
Of course. I agree with that.
Thats why I support the Arab Peace Initiative rather than the Hamas charter. I go back and poke at the legitimacy of Israel’s origins because Israels negotiating position seems to be that they have done nothing wrong and they don’t seem to believe that the Palestinians have a justified grievance against them. Their reluctance to reach a “just settlement of the Palestinian problem” stems (I think) from their failure to realize that they bear much of the blame for everything that is going on.