Israel proposes West Bank barrier as border - Polidicks

[QUOTE=sami-elite;34436794]I don't see why most people seem to be wanting to get involved in this. Why can't they just fight it out themselves like our own countries have done in the past, are still doing now, and will be doing in the future.[/QUOTE] A threat to peace anywhere is a threat to peace everywhere.

[QUOTE=Sickle;34436791]What. It's unnecessary to launch an airstrike with hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment on innocent civilians as payback for what a bunch of militants do.[/QUOTE] Except it isn't just "a bunch of militants". Many of these guys are part of Hamas, the government that runs Gaza. And yea, it is unnecessary to attack civilians, but terror doesn't justify terror.

[QUOTE=Sickle;34436674] Here's the retaliation for those rockets.[/QUOTE] 1. This does not justify shooting rockets at Israel. 2. These rockets are fired from civilian targets on purpose. On July 23, 2004 a palestinian family attempted to physically prevent the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades from setting up a Qassam rocket launcher outside their house. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/23/international/middleeast/23CND-MIDE.html?hp]Members of the brigade shot and killed one member of the family, an Arab boy, and wounded 5 others.[/url] They store a lot of their explosives and munitions in houses and mosques as well. Israel has the option of either not retaliating and taking the damage themselves, or shooting back and killing other people. You're from the US, so you're neutral to casualties on both sides, but if you were a commander in the Israeli airforce, who would you rather risk- Israeli civilians or Palestinians? [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sickle;34436791]What. It's unnecessary to launch an airstrike with hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment on innocent civilians as payback for what a bunch of militants do.[/QUOTE] Please, elaborate your brilliant plan on how to stop rocket teams before they launch strikes without the use of the air force. [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;34436549]And yet the Israeli government responds with coordinated airstrikes in the region, and blames Hamas for the actions of separate militant groups?[/QUOTE] Hey, I didn't say Israel doesn't pull bullshit as well sometimes. I mean, some militant group starts shooting during a ceasefire to destabilize the region for their own benefit, Israel retaliates with some strikes so that the public thinks their doing something useful, and Hamas is getting DP'd by both.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34436834]Except it isn't just "a bunch of militants". Many of these guys are part of Hamas, the government that runs Gaza. And yea, it is unnecessary to attack civilians, but terror doesn't justify terror.[/QUOTE] Really, I seem to recall one of the more recent airstrikes was in response to rocket attacks from militant groups while Hamas and the IDF were in a ceasefire, and Hamas publicly denounced the group launching rockets. Certainly Hamas are Islamists (or whatever the proper term may be), but blaming them for every terror-related action that goes on is nonsensical. [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;34436700]So it's alright to launch rockets at civilians as long as someone retaliates against it?[/QUOTE] No, certainly not, and the various groups who do launch rockets should not be doing so. But seeing as it [I]is[/I] happening, the Israeli government should not be responding with such disproportionate retaliation.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;34437045]Really, I seem to recall one of the more recent airstrikes was in response to rocket attacks from militant groups while Hamas and the IDF were in a ceasefire,[/quote] Let me make this clear. I'm not justifying Israel's retaliations or actions. Sickle is implying that these militants are somehow justified in their attacks on civilian targets. [quote]Certainly Hamas are Islamists (or whatever the proper term may be), but blaming them for every terror-related action that goes on is nonsensical.[/QUOTE] Well, Hamas is a terrorist organization. They aren't responsible for every attack but they are responsible for their fair share. They are also the ones in power which puts them in a similar position as Israel, the ruling party of a state(even though not officially a state) using it's power to attack civilians. This is wrong. It is wrong to attack innocent people [I]ever[/I], it doesn't matter who you are. [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Glorbo;34436893]1. This does not justify shooting rockets at Israel. 2. These rockets are fired from civilian targets on purpose. On July 23, 2004 a palestinian family attempted to physically prevent the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades from setting up a Qassam rocket launcher outside their house. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/23/international/middleeast/23CND-MIDE.html?hp]Members of the brigade shot and killed one member of the family, an Arab boy, and wounded 5 others.[/url] They store a lot of their explosives and munitions in houses and mosques as well. Israel has the option of either not retaliating and taking the damage themselves, or shooting back and killing other people. You're from the US, so you're neutral to casualties on both sides, but if you were a commander in the Israeli airforce, who would you rather risk- Israeli civilians or Palestinians? [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] Please, elaborate your brilliant plan on how to stop rocket teams before they launch strikes without the use of the air force. [editline]28th January 2012[/editline] Hey, I didn't say Israel doesn't pull bullshit as well sometimes. I mean, some militant group starts shooting during a ceasefire to destabilize the region for their own benefit, Israel retaliates with some strikes so that the public thinks their doing something useful, and Hamas is getting DP'd by both.[/QUOTE] Um you know the retaliation Israel uses only strengthens the resolve and raises support for these militant groups, right?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34437106]Let me make this clear. I'm not justifying Israel's retaliations or actions. Sickle is implying that these militants are somehow justified in their attacks on civilian targets. Well, Hamas is a terrorist organization. They aren't responsible for every attack but they are responsible for their fair share. They are also the ones in power which puts them in a similar position as Israel, the ruling party of a state(even though not officially a state) using it's power to attack civilians. This is wrong. It is wrong to attack innocent people [I]ever[/I], it doesn't matter who you are.[/QUOTE] And obviously what Hamas does in regard to that is, more often than not, antagonistic and hurts civilians, which is [I]not right.[/I] However, Israel needs to realize that by responding in such a way that it is encouraging further militant action. Now obviously the IDF can't just let militants run all over them, but the governments in Gaza and in Israel need to agree to a legitimate end of fighting.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34437106] Um you know the retaliation Israel uses only strengthens the resolve and raises support for these militant groups, right?[/QUOTE] There'es always a thin balance between the choice of damaging your opponent's infrastructure and getting support from the population. I think the Israeli leadership is doing these strikes because they need short term effects only (and these strikes do work at short term-not so much for helping the peace process, though).

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34436822]A threat to peace anywhere is a threat to peace everywhere.[/QUOTE] That seems to be the leading belief that causes countries to go to war.

[QUOTE=Glorbo;34436041]Oh, I guess you wouldn't mind a 10-20 kg explosive charge detonated around you. That would be real fucking dandy. They also fire mortar shells. You know, actual stuff that people use to kill one another. And besides, even if losses in lives are low (because there are small concrete bunkers and walls every 20 meters or so), what about other damage? What about property damage caused by these mortars and rockets? (if you live in Sderot, there is actually a very low chance your house wasn't damaged by a rocket). What about psychological damage caused to every child living in there? I have seen children literally piss their pants and go catatonic when they hear alarms. What about the extra cost in shielding all of the schools, the houses, the bus stops, Iron Dome? What about the decline of real estate profit in cities targeted by those rockets? What about the departure of citizens and thus businesses from cities targeted by rockets? While not causing much loss in life, these "soda cans" caused immense economic damage to the whole west-southern Negev region.[/QUOTE] You don't oppress an entire nation's worth of people and wall them up and then get pissed because they scare your children. Most of the rockets are actually not equipped with explosive charges, I've seen news sources go over this again and again.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34436767]Fear of targeted areas drive property values down, population leaves, etc. - which destroys economic growth.[/QUOTE] I don't think that's the idea. In fact, when you mention "destroying economic infrastructure", that's almost as wrong as you can get. Check out [URL="https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/arts/18iht-bookfri.4249028.html"]The Utility of Force[/URL] or listen to [URL="http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/2007/11/12/utilityofforce.html"]this podcast[/URL] by the author. Something Hamas and other groups realize is how to fight a [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_among_the_people"]war among the people,[/URL] due to having no hope of fighting any other way. Read the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel#Motives"]stated motivations.[/URL] They don't do rocket strikes to cause specific economic damage, they do it to "convince the Israelis that their occupation is costing them too much", to serve as a "constant reminder that the occupier is in fact an occupier, and that no matter how they may engage in sieges, massacres, fence us in, deny us the basic human needs of life, we will continue to resist". It's tempting to deny this stuff as rhetoric, but think about it. You can't directly impact another nation's capacity to support a forceful occupation (or whatever the fuck you want to call it I'm not in the mood to be politically correct) without actually striking proper industrial and economic targets. "Poking" has the same effect as bad weather in the long run- people directly affected just harden up to it. This has been a basic accepted fact of industrialized warfare since forever. People grow back. Just killing people, unless it's on a ridiculous scale (see: WWII), typically does very little to a nation unless it's already in its death throes. And they know that. They're not idiots. They know the damage done, in economic and military terms, is a pittance, and they accept that. But the rockets are powerful as a [I]message.[/I] Rocket strikes get attention, keep media pressure on everybody, get both populaces riled up, and they keep the attackers' morale and ranks up by doing [I]something,[/I] even if it is not, in raw economic and military terms, potent. Theoretically, the rocket attacks could cause a change without actually impacting Israel's economy in a measurable way. That just isn't the point. [QUOTE=Glorbo;34436893]Please, elaborate your brilliant plan on how to stop rocket teams before they launch strikes without the use of the air force.[/QUOTE] Several badgers, a trebuchet, and a kilogram of cocaine. In all seriousness, though, weren't the IDF trying to get a mobile anti-missile defense system kinda like the Phalanx/C-RAM?

[QUOTE=Glorbo;34436893] Please, elaborate your brilliant plan on how to stop rocket teams before they launch strikes without the use of the air force. [/QUOTE] You're an idiot. The airstrikes killed civilians.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34435916]They are being used to cause terror.[/QUOTE] Israel is also causing terror.

[QUOTE=Sickle;34439317]You're an idiot. The airstrikes killed civilians.[/QUOTE] Both forms of attack from Israeli and Insurgents cause civilian casualties. Also you had stated that the use of air-power for strikes was unnecessary, so yes elaborate on an effective method to remove said people firing rockets that have been shown(with source) to use civilized areas as their staging grounds to fire rockets. Yes the loss of innocent lives is grave, but really how do you remove insurgents from civilian places with zero loss of innocent life?

[QUOTE=Miskav;34439694]Israel is also causing terror.[/QUOTE] They both terrorize each other. Therefore pointing out that one terrorizes the other for supporting an argument is kind of moot.

They need the military in the east to have a good line of defense.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34440632]They both terrorize each other. Therefore pointing out that one terrorizes the other for supporting an argument is kind of moot.[/QUOTE] Israel is the occupying power. [editline]29th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;34440655]They need the military in the east to have a good line of defense.[/QUOTE] From who? Do you honestly think Jordan and the other Arab nations will stage a re-attempt to take back Palestine

[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;34440655]They need the military in the east to have a good line of defense.[/QUOTE] Even if you believe this, it's irrelevant, as it is not the Israeli's to have.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;34440681]Israel is the occupying power. [/QUOTE] I don't see how that changes my statement, to be honest. You don't terrorize an "occupying force" by shooting rockets at its civilians, you do it at the occupying forces - the IDF in this case.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34440727]I don't see how that changes my statement, to be honest. You don't terrorize an "occupying force" by shooting rockets at its civilians, you do it at the occupying forces - the IDF in this case.[/QUOTE] You were comparing the occupying force to a dispossessed occupied people. They’re not “equally wrong”

[QUOTE=Starpluck;34441279]You were comparing the occupying force to a dispossessed occupied people. They’re not “equally wrong”[/QUOTE] Both terrorize each other. They damn well are equally wrong. [editline]29th January 2012[/editline] Israeli Civilians are not an occupying force, except the settlers.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;34440727]I don't see how that changes my statement, to be honest. You don't terrorize an "occupying force" by shooting rockets at its civilians, you do it at the occupying forces - the IDF in this case.[/QUOTE] In the same way that you do not retaliate directly onto the civilians of the rebellious force.

[IMG]http://i55.tinypic.com/2u8xt9u.jpg[/IMG] Sometimes I wonder what the fuck the UN was thinking. Putting Israel where it is. What idiot decided to put it where there's already people? They could have put it on Greenland. [video=youtube;U0WKVhIpgr4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0WKVhIpgr4[/video]

[QUOTE=yawmwen;34441778]Both terrorize each other. They damn well are equally wrong.[/QUOTE] You're not grasping the point. There is no “they are both equally wrong" There is an oppressive regime supported by a superpower and a stateless civilian dispossessed oppressed population. By using the 'both sides' rhetoric you are implying that we should apply the same standards on the oppressor as on the oppressed. The violence will always be viewed as a reaction to the colonialists' land grab and dispossession. Similar to the crimes against whites in Apartheid South Africa Africa, the Algerians in Algeria against the French and the Native Americans against the Europeans.

[QUOTE=Dysgalt;34440627]Both forms of attack from Israeli and Insurgents cause civilian casualties. Also you had stated that the use of air-power for strikes was unnecessary, so yes elaborate on an effective method to remove said people firing rockets that have been shown(with source) to use civilized areas as their staging grounds to fire rockets. Yes the loss of innocent lives is grave, but really how do you remove insurgents from civilian places with zero loss of innocent life?[/QUOTE] How about Israel actually listen to Palestine and go to the table with treating them with equals. STOP doing things to piss them off.

[QUOTE=Zacca;34443419][IMG]http://i55.tinypic.com/2u8xt9u.jpg[/IMG] Sometimes I wonder what the fuck the UN was thinking. Putting Israel where it is. What idiot decided to put it where there's already people? They could have put it on Greenland. [/QUOTE] The 1946 map is wrong because there was no autonomos state there was a british mandate. The UN partitioning plan was voted in and Israel accepted it but the Palestinians didnt starting the independence war thus the plan was never put into action. And finally the 1949-1967 is somewhat wrong because after the war of independence Jordan occupied Judea and Sameria thus there was no palestinian state all that time.

[QUOTE=Sovietzek;34444512]The 1946 map is wrong because there was no autonomos state there was a british mandate. The UN partitioning plan was voted in and Israel accepted it but the Palestinians didnt starting the independence war thus the plan was never put into action. And finally the 1949-1967 is somewhat wrong because after the war of independence Jordan occupied Judea and Sameria thus there was no palestinian state all that time.[/QUOTE] Okay, this point has been said until death. Just because Palestinian LAND wasn't recognised, doesn't mean there was no ownership of it.

Fatiguing discussion. Both sides can stick it up their ass. Everybody is a saint.

glorbo u should really stop your pathetic circlejerk. if i remember correctly ive seen you do this before and ever time you just get ripped apart

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;34444661]glorbo u should really stop your pathetic circlejerk. if i remember correctly ive seen you do this before and ever time you just get ripped apart[/QUOTE] I think this statement can go both ways.

what