quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Ignoring the longer history (since both sides took the land through violence in history)... isn't the short history of the current weeks fighting something like this:
1. Israel calls off ground offensive into Gaza in exchange for guarantee of no more rocket fire.
2. Hamas sporadically fires rockets targeting civilians in Israel (bears repeating that the rockets are not accurate to designate a target, just an area).
3. Israel delivers an ultimatum to stop
4. Hamas fires a barrage of rockets
5. Israel sends air strikes against the mobile launchers
6. Hamas fires large barrages of rockets targeting civilians in Israel
7. Israel bombs Hamas headquarters, check points, weapons depots, and mobile launches causing significant collateral damage.
8. Hamas fires larger barrages of rockets targeting civilians in Israel.
9. Israel invades Hamas held territory on the ground.
- - - -
I try desperately to understand the picture in the larger context, but in this instance what would you have done as Israel? What benefit did Hamas hope to gain from launching rockets into Israel other-than killing civilians, gaining praise from terrorist groups, and provoking a response? Frankly, if Hamas targeted Israeli soldiers, check points, and military installations instead of schools, pizza parlors, and buses they would be worthy of more consideration.
Israel is reactionary. The generation that currently lives there of BOTH groups has as much a right as the other to be there.
Then Israel over reactions...
Crappy deal for all the 'normal' people involved. I spoke to a "reserve" (I guess all former officers are reserve for a very long time) Israeli major yesterday who is going to school at TU and is worried that he will get called back. I'm sure there are plenty of Israeli's in fear of rocket attacks, Palestinians scared of occupation and areal bombardment, and other poor bastards stuck in the middle.
If both stupid sides would realize MOST the other side wants the exact same thing the "penis waiving" (mine's bigger/tougher than yous is!) could stop and people could go back to school/work and getting on with their lives.
I think you could go back one or two steps further. During the last cease fire, Israel kept building on, and announcing more settlements on, land that is supposedly part of what would be the Palestenian State. Not to mention the hassle and humiliation the average Palestenian often gets just trying to go anywhere outside the territories, etc.
When Hamas said they wanted to destroy Israel... From that point on they have "no ground" to stand on. That was wrong and stupid.
Back to the settlements. We focus on rockets, but let me tell ya from personal experience. Verbal abuse, mental abuse is just as bad, if not worse, than any physical abuse. When someone is stronger than you, and constantly abuses you psychologically. It can be a hell few of you can ever really imagine. I could probably kill most of you with nothing more than words. I have learned from the best. And when it starts when your a child, its all the more destructive for you never had the ability to gather any strength of your own, it was sapped from you from your earliest memories.
Now I am NOT saying that either is right or wrong in this situation. I am not going to get into that, who started it first or whatever. What I am trying to point out is that I am not seeing in this converstation or any other any real weight given to the fact that harm can be done to people, not just physically but mentally. So far most keep yacking about rockets as if thats the start and thats the measure of the situation. Its not the only measure. When your the more powerful, you can destroy the other without resorting to physical violence that "makes the news". You can destroy them in ways where no one else will really care. But to you, the pain is terrible.
quote... (I inserted bracket)
" Whenever one of the groups attacks another of the groups they should expect a response. From my perspective, and correct my ignorance if I am wrong, the last decade has been Israel making a concession or calling off an attack in exchange for peace...(while continually building more settlements and taking more and more land the Palestenians, and the Oslo accords, see as theirs, taking and bulldozing Palestenian homes and property in other places, etc.) followed about a year later by car bombings, rocket attacks, or suicide bombs on buses, markets, or temples. "
Its like Israel is hurting them little by little, death by a thousand cuts. But none of that makes the big news, the rockets do.
There are extremists on both sides. Some in Israel believe that ALL of Isriel should be theirs and the Palestenians gone. And we know what Hamas thinks. But there are also moderates on both sides. And from the Palestenian perspective, every time a cease fire goes into effect and there is a lull in fighting, they try negotiating and peace... Israel "cuts" them again. More settlements go in, and no doubt they do lots of other "little" things to hurt them. Nothing that makes the news and gets the rest of the world riled up, but thats what Israel can do. They are the more powerful party and can just keeeep cutting away and smiling. And thats exactly what they have done every time. It seems Israels bargain is that they can keep playing this and squeeze the Palestenians out. Israel can, over all, keep winning slowly and surely. While the Palestenians, no matter what they do, will keep losing. We dont stand up to Israel during the cease fires and say no to more settlements on what is supposedly Palestenian land, and taking of Palestenian property and all the other constant hassles. The "verbal" abuses are ok, its the "physical" we get upset about. And my contention is that they should be equally abhorred. They can both destroy. Give me one day with any of you and let me verbally abuse you. I guarantee you, that by the end you would pray to whatever god you have that I had beat the living sh@t out of you instead.
Not trying to say one or the other side started this or that. Just want to put in something that should have some weight, but that rarely seems to be discussed on here or in the news.