# Please Debate The Merits Of This Article on Israel/Gaza **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 17, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782 "2009-01-17T21:17:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/61 "2009-01-18T21:12:32Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Sure, and Hamas will stop using human shields and agree to these pitched battles, right? > > You want a cite that if Israel put boots on the ground, they’d have to fight and there would still be rocket attacks? Exactly what’s happening right now? That’s not what happened. They bombed the fuck out of the place and _then_ went in. At that point it’s not enacting martial law to establish order. It’s full-fledged invasion and escalation. I’m talking about first shutting the place down, taking control of the government, and then (using the wonderful intelligence-gathering that people around here like to mention), surgically extricating/assassinating Hamas terrorists until the rocketing stops. Yes, bombing would be a part of the program and civilians would die, but it would be a much more managed, less total war-like situation. I’m asking you to give me some proof that this wouldn’t work. I’m not saying it necessarily would, but “I just know it wouldn’t” doesn’t convince me. I don’t pretend to understand everything about this conflict, so that why I’m asking for cites. I understand that Hamas is teh evil. But are they that powerful that Israel can’t neutralize it in the same way the Feds would do here if a local government went rogue and took its constitiuents hostage? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/62 "2009-01-18T21:20:44Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Which myth are you talking about here? The general narrative in my mind is that Jews immigrated into Palestine and created Israel over the objections of the preexisting population. > > I note that you didn’t address the other part of my post. The narrative that Jews came in intending to displace or marginalize Arabs. Jews initially moved into areas where there was little existing population (although as noted Arabs then moved there too, for the jobs) or where Jews already had a historic extant majority, such as Jerusalem (see [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem) for numbers of the Jewish majority there including during Ottoman rule). The land was not empty (as some of the Zionist mythmakers would have it) but it had plenty of large empty spaces. Total population before major Jewish immigration is a bit hard to know and vary with some putting it as low as 100K (I think way too low), but [Palestinian sources](http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story559.html) put pre-Mandatory Palestine’s total population at about 500K. Of those some unknown percent was migratory. There are now 8.5 million plus Palestinians in the same area. Over 900K Palestinians are currently Israeli citizens per that source. And of course over a million in Gaza alone. There are about 6.4 million Jews there now and all told the area now holds nearly 15 million people. Yeah, Jews thought they’d find room for a several thousands of them in the undeveloped regions of the territory that then held about at most 1/30th of what it now contains without forcing anyone out or marginalizing anyone. Maybe that was naive, but that was the thought. Again, the [Palestinian source](http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story638.html) as a citation about how at least many Jewish leaders saw it, at least from the Palestinian POV. Note, I may disagree with some of their conclusions but I think their quotes are likely accurate > [@](#): > > ``` > * He saw Zionism as just, and thought that Palestinians and the neighboring Arab states would benefit from Zionism, and that therefore, they would welcome the new Jewish immigrants. > * He envisioned that Jews from all over the world would immigrate to Palestine in great numbers, and that over time they would become a majority or a fact on the ground. > * He did not think that Palestinians had any collective rights whatsoever, such as the right of self-determination. He did not believe that they had any sense of nationalism, therefore, they could be ignored. Sometimes he argued that even if Palestinian nationalism did exist, that it could be bought or bribed. > * He contemplated Palestinian "transfer", where the use of force would not be necessary. He envisioned that Palestinians could be enticed to leaving their country in favor of the new Jewish immigrants. > * He did not envision Europe's Jews would die so quickly, and in such big numbers. > > ``` > > … > “Palestine is not an empty country . . . on no account must we injure the rights of the inhabitants.” Ben-Gurion often returned to this point … > … In 1928 he pronounced that “the [Palestinian] Arabs have no right to close the country to us [Jews]. What right do they have to the Negev desert, which is uninhabited?” Oh no question, as they note, he was no saint either. And his thinking changed as Jews were attacked there and more while the Holocaust raged. Again the Palestinian source (what some would call Palestinian propaganda, I guess :rolleyes:) > [@](#): > > “I am unwilling to forego even one percent of Zionism for ‘peace’—yet I do not want Zionism to infringe upon even one percent of legitimate [Palestinian] Arab rights” (Shabtai Teveth, p. 70) > > As the Nazis rose to power in Germany in the early 1930s, the need to save European Jewry became more acute. Ben-Gurion then recognized that Zionism could not be realized without infringing Palestinian rights. The shift in Ben Gurion’s opinion becomes clearer as you examine more quotes, especially the ones dated 1930 and onwards … No the intent was not to displace or to dispossess even if they were guilty of some arrogance and naivite, and hardened some as they saw it as a battle for survival. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/63 "2009-01-18T21:26:10Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > That’s not what happened. They bombed the fuck out of the place and _then_ went in. At that point it’s not enacting martial law to establish order. It’s full-fledged invasion and escalation. Yes, that’s exactly what happened. When you occupy a hostile region, you don’t just stroll in. And no, they didn’t “bomb the fuck” out of Gaza. If they had, we’d be seeing casualties like what happened during WWII. We’re not. There have been a number of fairly pinpoint strikes. You’ve also now drawn a distinction without a difference. The purpose of martial law wouldn’t be to establish ‘order’, it would be to stop terrorism against Israel. Which is exactly what’s being done. They took out Hamas C&C, destroyed Hamas weapons caches and ordinance, and put boots on the ground. How, exactly, are you claiming things would have been differently such than an invasion would have been avoided? How do you claim Israel can impose martial law on a hostile, armed populace through anything other than invasion? > [@monstro](#): > > I’m talking about first shutting the place down, taking control of the government, and then (using the wonderful intelligence-gathering that people around here like to mention), surgically extricating/assassinating Hamas terrorists until the rocketing stops. And how do you expect them to “shut the place down”, including taking control of the government (Ie. Hamas), without what you decry as " full-fledged invasion"? It’s also worth pointing out that they’ve _been_ doing their best to “surgically” take out Hamas members and mortars/rocket launchers. How do you envision them doing this differently? And again, how effective was Israeli intelligence during the Intifadas? Why would it be more effective now? What happened in Jenin when Israel tired to put boots on the ground? > [@monstro](#): > > I’m asking you to give me some proof that this wouldn’t work. I’m not saying it necessarily would, but “I just know it wouldn’t” doesn’t convince me. I haven’t said “I just know it wouldn’t”. I’ve pointed out why both history and current events falsify your claims. > [@monstro](#): > > But are they that powerful that Israel can’t neutralize it in the same way the Feds would do here if a local government went rogue and took its constitiuents hostage? Look, you’re comparing going in to a region in the same country, with a friendly government and citizenry, to going into a hostile region that isn’t in the same country where the government is hostile, militants are frequent and use civilian shields, many civilians are hostile, etc, etc, etc… Until you use a hypothetical which keeps the same dynamic, you’re going to be comparing apples to bowling balls again and again. It’s a bit like asking, say… “Why didn’t Great Britain just go in and pacify France during the 100 Years War if American governors can call out the National Guard to deal with rioters?” ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/64 "2009-01-18T21:27:11Z")
**monstro** the action you propose, a house to house search routing out terrorists would be bloodier than any bombing campaign Israel ever undertook. Think what just happened in America in Philadelphia when Police tried to displace just one [small radical group.](http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/MOVE-Phihladelphia-BombNYT14may85.htm) It isn’t so simple. They did not “bomb the fuck out of the place”, the bombing campaign was damn precise, taking out military targets with minimal civilian casualties. The vast majority of the dead were identified by the Palestinian side as militiants - and that with Hamas having purposefully placed targets in dense population centers. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/65 "2009-01-18T21:32:02Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The vast majority of the dead were identified by the Palestinian side as militiants - and that with Hamas having purposefully placed targets in dense population centers. Fight my ignorance here… I’ve been reading up on this pretty avidly, but I’ve seen the numbers disputed all over the place. The closest I’ve seen from an anti-Israel souce is the claim in an article I cited to you recently that put the ratio at just slightly over 1:1 for terrorists/civilians killed. Is it really true that Palestinian sources themselves have identified the vast majority of the dead as militants? I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong, but I haven’t come across anything quite so definitive in my personal research on the topic. Cheers. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/66 "2009-01-18T21:38:21Z")
> [@treis](#): > > You said: > > Your first statement is that the intention was not to create an independent nation. That is false, as demonstrated by the quote I supplied. > > I guess your second contention is now that they weren’t originally planning on settling in Israel. For one, this is ridiculous on it’s because the name of the organization is Zionist. Zionist, i.e. Zion the land around Jerusalem that they considered to be the ancient homeland of the Jews. It’s clear from the activities of the Zionists that they intended to settle Israel. For example: > > It was only after a few years after the first meeting, and after repeated failures to obtain Turkish permission to start immigration that other options were seriously considered. However, the idea was still to settle Israel as noted by Herzl in April of 1903: > > Then in May: > > Which indicates to me that Herzl changed his mind based on the idea of having a Jewish state somewhere is preferable to having none at all. However, there is no indication that he ever changed his mind about the preference of founding Israel in Palestine. It had to do with the practicality of the situation. Not to mention the fact that his proposal was rejected, and the WZO remained focused on founding Israel in Palestine. > > The statements and actions of the WZO all point to the overall goal of creating an independent Jewish state in Palestine. The fact that it was a hopeless ambitious goal doesn’t change the fact that it was their goal. But your own cites state otherwise. You have quoted as follows: > [@](#): > > Herzl changes his mind, and is inclined to accept the British offer to settle in Eastern Africa. The British suggest an area of 100,000 square kilometers and in a memorandum from the foreign ministry write: “The foreign secretary is giving serious consideration to offers regarding establishment of some kind of colony or Jewish settlement under conditions that will enable their people to perform their national traditions.” This is consistent, not with having an invariable goal of an independent state in what is now Israel, but with settlement of some sort of “Jewish colony” somewhere out of range of Czarist pogroms. Your original contention was that “Herzl is the founder of the World Zionist Organization, and Basle was their first meeting. It’s pretty clear that the goal from day 1 was a Jewish state …” and thus, that Herzl’s writings were an accurate summary of Zionist objectives. Now you claim that Herzl’s own adopted proposal - a Jewish colony in Uganda - was “ridiculous”, because they were called “Zionists”. Yet it is this same Herzl whom you claim as the very founder and representative of Zionism, and whose writings you base your theory as to the Zionists’ “secret plan”! So - how can Herzl be both “ridiculous” in one of his stances on Zionism, but the very founder and spirit of Zionism on another? It’s the same guy. I would say that the “statements and actions of the WZO all point to the overall goal” of using resettlement as the solution to Czarist pogroms. Other than that, there was no unanimous consensus on what Zionism was, utlimately, supposed to achieve. They certainlty did not anticipate overthowing the Turkish Empire (!) much less the British Empire (!!). It is an anacronism to see in the origins of Zionism a concerted plan of any sort, let alone an ethno-nationalist state complete with army, etc. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/67 "2009-01-18T21:42:07Z")
[Here.](http://prafulkr.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/gaza-death-toll-from-israeli-offensive-exceeds-375/) > [@](#): > > With Tuesday’s bombs, Israel appeared to extend its airstrike campaign in Gaza to a fourth day. > > The strikes, which Israel says are aimed at stopping the firing of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel, have killed more than 375 Palestinians, most of them Hamas militants, Palestinian medical sources said Tuesday. > > At least 60 civilians have been killed in Gaza, U.N. officials said. Although I first read it in CNN. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/68 "2009-01-18T21:52:36Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > [Here.](http://prafulkr.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/gaza-death-toll-from-israeli-offensive-exceeds-375/)Although I first read it in CNN. Dayum. I wonder if that would give pause to those who claimed that the opening days of the offensive saw “indiscriminate” bombing. (Shouldn’t hold my breath, should I?) Thanks for bringing that to my attention. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/69 "2009-01-18T22:10:57Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The narrative that Jews came in intending to displace or marginalize Arabs. Jews initially moved into areas where there was little existing population (although as noted Arabs then moved there too, for the jobs) or where Jews already had a historic extant majority, such as Jerusalem (see [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem) for numbers of the Jewish majority there including during Ottoman rule). The land was not empty (as some of the Zionist mythmakers would have it) but it had plenty of large empty spaces. Total population before major Jewish immigration is a bit hard to know and vary with some putting it as low as 100K (I think way too low), but [Palestinian sources](http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Palestine-Remembered/Story559.html) put pre-Mandatory Palestine’s total population at about 500K. Using 500k as the population, that roughly puts the population density between modern Colorado and Oklahoma at 50 people per square mile. Using wikipedia as a source, my calculations put England at 300 people per square mile and France at 190 at that time for a comparison. I’ve never been to Colorado or Oklahoma, but I’ve been to Iowa which is lower on the list, and I don’t see room to carve out a new country in Iowa. > [@DSeid](#): > > Yeah, Jews thought they’d find room for a several thousands of them in the undeveloped regions of the territory that then held about at most 1/30th of what it now contains without forcing anyone out or marginalizing anyone. Maybe that was naive, but that was the thought. > > Again, the [Palestinian source](http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story638.html) as a citation about how at least many Jewish leaders saw it, at least from the Palestinian POV. Note, I may disagree with some of their conclusions but I think their quotes are likely accurateOh no question, as they note, he was no saint either. And his thinking changed as Jews were attacked there and more while the Holocaust raged. Again the Palestinian source (what some would call Palestinian propaganda, I guess :rolleyes:)No the intent was not to displace or to dispossess even if they were guilty of some arrogance and naivite, and hardened some as they saw it as a battle for survival. I don’t doubt that there was much delusion about the native population of Palestine when Zionism was first started. I just don’t see how that delusion changes what happened, or what the necessary result of creating Israel was. I mean, you can say that the intent to displace the native population wasn’t there, but there was no other possible outcome from Zionism. To use an analogy, the difference is between murder and reckless homicide. The original statement that kicked this line of debate off was how would have it been possible to create Israel with displacing or marginalizing the current population. With all due respect, I don’t think you’ve offered anything to contradict that. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/70 "2009-01-18T22:15:49Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > This is consistent, not with having an invariable goal of an independent state in what is now Israel, but with settlement of some sort of “Jewish colony” somewhere out of range of Czarist pogroms. You placing “invariable” in this statement changes it to be different from any contention I’ve made. > [@Malthus](#): > > Your original contention was that “Herzl is the founder of the World Zionist Organization, and Basle was their first meeting. It’s pretty clear that the goal from day 1 was a Jewish state …” and thus, that Herzl’s writings were an accurate summary of Zionist objectives. > > Now you claim that Herzl’s own adopted proposal - a Jewish colony in Uganda - was “ridiculous”, because they were called “Zionists”. Yet it is this same Herzl whom you claim as the very founder and representative of Zionism, and whose writings you base your theory as to the Zionists’ “secret plan”! > > So - how can Herzl be both “ridiculous” in one of his stances on Zionism, but the very founder and spirit of Zionism on another? It’s the same guy. My goal is to make a million dollars a year and date Jessica Alba. The fact that I’ve accepted significantly less money and less attractive girls doesn’t mean I’ve changed my goal. It simply means that I’ve accepted the reality that a million dollars a year and Jessica Alba isn’t happening. Herzl appears to be the same way. His goal was an independent Jewish state in Palestine, but he accepted the reality that it wasn’t going to happen, and explored alternatives. > [@Malthus](#): > > I would say that the “statements and actions of the WZO all point to the overall goal” of using resettlement as the solution to Czarist pogroms. Other than that, there was no unanimous consensus on what Zionism was, utlimately, supposed to achieve. They certainlty did not anticipate overthowing the Turkish Empire (!) much less the British Empire (!!). It is an anacronism to see in the origins of Zionism a concerted plan of any sort, let alone an ethno-nationalist state complete with army, etc. I guess we will just have to disagree on this point. Every indication I’ve seen is that the ultimate goal of the WZO was an independent Jewish state in Palestine. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/71 "2009-01-18T22:20:36Z")
> [@treis](#): > > I mean, you can say that the intent to displace the native population wasn’t there, but there was no other possible outcome from Zionism. So all those Arabs who stayed and weren’t displaced are impossible? Who knew? > [@treis](#): > > The original statement that kicked this line of debate off was how would have it been possible to create Israel with displacing or marginalizing the current population. By granting them full citizenship and property rights. Oh, wait, that’s what happened. You still haven’t retracted your silly little fiction about how there was “majority Arab population” in the areas that became Israel, so I don’t exactly have high hopes that your argument will get accurate any time soon, eh? And, of course… you mean, once the Arab populace decided to go the racist route of prohibiting the Jews from being there or having self determination, it was much harder for any peaceful solution. Funny enough, your little bit of circular reasoning justifies and supports anti-Jewish racism since, due to that racism, Zionists had problems establishing Jewish self determination in the area. Gotta keep those darkies out, because when they want in, the racists get all upset. > [@treis](#): > > I don’t think you’ve offered anything to contradict that. Funny, you’ve offered nothing to support it and it’s gainsaid by the facts of the matter. Must be someone else’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/72 "2009-01-18T22:46:59Z")
I am not going to get involved in this debate (learned my lesson long ago), but I just want to point out that the 375 death toll quoted by **DSeid** was about two weeks out of date at the point of quoting it. The same (pro Palestinian blog) source, though I think it was pasting CNN anyway, today claims [more than 1,170 dead](http://prafulkr.wordpress.com/2009/01/17/more-than-110-killed-in-gaza/) - graph of claimed death toll included in that article - of which 1/3 is claimed to be children. Meanwhile _The Daily Telegraph_ (conservative British broadsheet) reports [more than 1,300 Palestinian casualties](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4284748/Hamas-agrees-Gaza-ceasefire-as-Israeli-troops-withdraw.html) as of yesterday. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2009, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/73 "2009-01-18T23:33:38Z")
> [@jjimm](#): > > I am not going to get involved in this debate (learned my lesson long ago), but I just want to point out that the 375 death toll quoted by **DSeid** was about two weeks out of date at the point of quoting it. He was talking about the bombing campaign. The ground campaign began on January 3rd. Which means **DSeid** ’s cite was roughly two or three days behind the stats for the bombing campaign. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/74 "2009-01-19T01:38:43Z")
> [@jjimm](#): > > I am not going to get involved in this debate (learned my lesson long ago), but I just want to point out that the 375 death toll quoted by **DSeid** was about two weeks out of date at the point of quoting it. > > The same (pro Palestinian blog) source, though I think it was pasting CNN anyway, today claims [more than 1,170 dead](http://prafulkr.wordpress.com/2009/01/17/more-than-110-killed-in-gaza/) - graph of claimed death toll included in that article - of which 1/3 is claimed to be children. Meanwhile _The Daily Telegraph_ (conservative British broadsheet) reports [more than 1,300 Palestinian casualties](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/4284748/Hamas-agrees-Gaza-ceasefire-as-Israeli-troops-withdraw.html) as of yesterday. Well **Finn** beat me to it. But yes, he is right. The discussion was pertinent was to **monstro** ’s statement that Israel “bombed the fuck out of the place” before the ground campaign, and her proposing somehow “shutting the place down, taking control of the government, and then (using the wonderful intelligence-gathering that people around here like to mention), surgically extricating/assassinating Hamas terrorists until the rocketing stops” as a better option. My point was that the bombing was indeed fairly surgical and that the kind of operation she proposes would be much more violent and deadly for many more civilians than what was done. Much bigger than the ground campaign that was done - which I think was too far what was possible to gain. In short read the context man, not just the one friggin’ post. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/75 "2009-01-19T01:54:05Z")
> [@treis](#): > > … I don’t see room to carve out a new country in Iowa. Hmmm. [Iowa](http://www.netstate.com/states/geography/ia_geography.htm) has an area of 56,276 square miles. The original UN partition called for a Jewish state of 5,500 square miles. Tiny little thing it was (and yes, with a majority Jewish population). Yeah I’ve been to Iowa too. You could hide a state like that in between the cornfields totally away from any major roads and hardly even know it was there. If it wasn’t for having been immediately invaded by six Arab states Israel would have stayed that small (and probably failed really). ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/76 "2009-01-19T03:49:41Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > And you’re in support of the vile racism that would have sought to keep Jews from legally buying property and achieving self determination when the regional sovereign fell… and you support that racist position because of fabricated non-facts. There may, indeed, be a line of belief in this area that is racist and it may actually parallel the thoughts that **treis** has expressed. However, that is not the only possible interpretation one can put on those thoughts and this repeated association of **treis** ’s views with racism is not necessary or appropriate. This is particularly true since you are the one who introduced the issue of racism into this thread with your questions about chinks and darkies. You can dispute his views without dragging racism into the discussion. [/Modding] ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/77 "2009-01-19T04:11:51Z")
> [@](#): > > … my calculations put England at 300 people per square mile … Oh, you my want to check your source. [Here](http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_rate_page.jsp?u_id=10061325&c_id=10001043&data_theme=T_POP&id=0) is some data on England’s population density for example and a simple conversion (it’s 259 sq mi/hectare) comes to more like 520 people/sq mi in England. So yeah, by way of comparison, Palestine had less than 1/10th the population density of England of the time. There was room for that postage stamp of a country. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/78 "2009-01-19T04:22:07Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Oh, you my want to check your source. [Here](http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_rate_page.jsp?u_id=10061325&c_id=10001043&data_theme=T_POP&id=0) is some data on England’s population density for example and a simple conversion (it’s 259 sq mi/hectare) comes to more like 520 people/sq mi in England. > > So yeah, by way of comparison, Palestine had less than 1/10th the population density of England of the time. There was room for that postage stamp of a country. I was using the population of England in 1900. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/79 "2009-01-19T04:42:31Z")
Yeah? @ 2.2 person/hectare x 259 hectare/sq mile = @570 persons/sq mile. A small bit less if you include Wales. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782/80 "2009-01-19T16:58:03Z")
> [@American civilians are legitimate targets in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/american-civilians-are-legitimate-targets-in-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/479819/333): > > Calling a group or an action racist is permitted in this Forum, but calling other posters racist is name-calling and is prohibited. > [@tomndebb](#): > > There may, indeed, be a line of belief in this area that is racist and it may actually parallel the thoughts that **treis** has expressed. Wanting to keep a race out of an area and prohibiting property ownership by that race _might_ be a racist action? Demanding that members of a race couldn’t possibly be given self determination, even in the absence of a sovereign power, without disastrous consequences if someone else was in the majority, but when that race was in the majority they should still be denied self determination and be ruled over by politicians who helped design a program to exterminate them from the face of the Earth. _..might_ be a racist action? What, it might also be a trampoline? To be clear I am calling the action of trying to deny housing, immigration and self determination to a group, based on race, a racist action. I have not called Treis a racist, nor would I in this forum. But by your own moderating rule, I can point out that the _action_ of preventing Jewish immigration, property ownership and the self determination due to a fictional non-Jewish majority, while allowing those with Nazi ideology ruling over an actual Jewish majority, are racist _actions_. Would it be better if I’d simply done as you’ve done in this forum, and referred to it as institutional racism, since: > [@Crack Cocaine vs Powder Cocaine distinction in our laws is a terrible policy](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/69): > > The phrase “institutional racism” has been employed for nearly forty years to indicate a situation in which underlying assumptions are allowed to exist without serious analysis that result in negative actions or processes affecti9ng one or another perceived race. It explicitly is employed where the (unconsidered) assumptions occur in a situation where no one is actively attempting to behave in a racist manner, but the assumptions permeate the institution, (be it law enforcement, education, some other institution, or society at large). Would that be okay then? My mistake is to call the double standards, fictions and unanalyzed claims that would make it okay for Jews to be ruled by Nazis but horrible for Arabs to be ruled by Jews, racist instead of calling them, as you have called other actions, institutionally racist? Is this really a question of my being disallowed from pointing out that certain actions are racist, and instead having to point out that they represent institutional racism? > [@tomndebb](#): > > this repeated association of **treis** ’s views with racism is not necessary or appropriate. It’s quite necessary to point out that among all the people of the earth, the Jews are _still_ singled out as having committed some crime for _owning property and living somewhere_, and then not wanting to be ruled over by ideological Nazis when there was no regional sovereign. That even now, people argue that if Jews aren’t wanted somewhere, they should just go away, or at least accept being ruled over by Nazis. That if Jews, even in Jewish majority areas, try to achieve self determination while explicitly granting full rights to everybody, then it must have been a secret plot necessitating that they remove and marginalize the ‘native’ population (most of whom are just as much immigrants as the Jewish population, but using a single standard won’t be done). And yet, if non-Jews, even those whose leadership was allied with the Nazis and hoped to bring the Final Solution to the area… wanted to rule over places with a majority Jewish population, well, then that’s all fine. > [@tomndebb](#): > > This is particularly true since you are the one who introduced the issue of racism into this thread with your questions about chinks and darkies. No, the person who introduced the idea that it was okay to prohibit a race from immigrating based on their race because other people living there were racists and didn’t like that race moving into the neighberhood. That it was okay to prohibit them from owning property based on their race, and prohibit them from achieving self determination based on their race if someone else was a fictional majority. But that it was okay for a more another race to achieve self determination even if they’d rule over an actual, factual majority of another race while their own leadership had helped design a program to exterminate that actual majority from the planet…did that. In fact, the guy who has now repeatedly said that Jews shouldn’t have been allowed to live there _because_ their neighbors were racist and didn’t want Jews living there, did that. It is a racist action to want to prohibit Jews from immigrating simply because they were Jews, to prohibit them from buying land simply because they were Jews, and then stand against them achieving self determination if a fictional non-Jewish majority would be impacted… and then be totally okay with non-Jews immigrating, renting land and wanting to achieve self-determination even if an actual Jewish majority would be effected. It shows that the position revolves around a double standard where it’s wrong if Jews do it, but okay if others do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-debate-the-merits-of-this-article-on-israel-gaza/481782.md?page=5)