How Do Fuel Cuts Impact Gaza Amidst Ongoing Conflict with Israel?

[jostpuur]

What reason is there to assume, that cutting fuel like this will reduce violence from Hamas?

 

[Yonoz]

what does that suppose to mean?

It means Art is repeatedly taking the conversation off topic, making inflamatory posts of no argumentive value, obsessed with comparisons to Nazis - hallmark trolling symptoms.
It certainly seems Art is entirely motivated by hatred, though he poses as a humanitarian.

 

[Hurkyl]

what does that suppose to mean?

One common usage of the word "troll" is to refer to a person who does not intend to contribute to discussion, but instead simply wants to provoke people into responding.

"Don't feed the troll" is an idiom that advises you to simply ignore the troll. I don't think it's appropriate advice here, since we have good moderation: if you believe someone is trolling, you should click on the "report" button on the left to report the troll to our P&WA mentors.

(If you are using the Nexus skin, the "report" button appears as an exclamation point)

 

[Hurkyl]

As I have mentioned earlier, what you call Israel response, reaction etc, is nothing but the continuous oppression of the Palestinian people.The question of "Israeli Reaction" does not even arise.

Should Isreal continue with this oppression : NO. Here are some facts to back up what I am saying

I didn't ask you why you think Israel shouldn't be doing what it's doing. I asked you why you think Israel should be doing nothing.

 

[novaa77]

Why?
Even in light of the oppression, why do you support attacks against Israeli civilians?

Let me make it very clear that I do not support attacks on any civilians, be it Israeli, Palestinian or citizens of any other country. On the other hand you seem to be OK with attacks on the Palestinian people.

Even in the light of oppression

You can't expect to put these people in a cage and expect them not to fight back. Since they do not have any army or airforce or any of the sophisticated arms possesed by the Israelis they resort to suicide bombings and launching rockets into Israel. Again, I do not state these facts in order to justify attacks against the Israeli civilians.

 

[novaa77]

I didn't ask you why you think Israel shouldn't be doing what it's doing. I asked you why you think Israel should be doing nothing.

I suggest you read through the links I mentioned in my post. How about answering my question, for a change?

 

[Yonoz]

Well, if that's your belief, then I hope that we won't be dragged into more wars (like one with Iran) by this cultural environment/shabby journalism that dragged us into invading Iraq for WMDs that didn't exist.

I hope so too, and I hope our cultural environments will focus less on images, rhetoric and public opinion shaping and more on genuine national interests.

And overall, you have merely made a list of unsubstantiated assertions to support your claim that the western media is against you because such stories sell articles and magazines. It gives me the impression that you don't believe in what is on the news at all.

Did I ever claim western media is against me? On the contrary, I have shown an alternative explanation for its bias. Which of the assertions I made are unsubstantiated? Your hint in the previous section suggests you share most of these assertions.
Your impression is false, I do believe much of what is on the news, but I try to remain aware that I am also being marketed.

And if you however do believe in the news, then because like you said, interested parties that have figured out the above (points you've made) manipulate the media to influence public opinion to further their agendas, you should be careful because there is no telling whether you are being fed news reports that have been manipulated by your government to influence public opinion on Israel, its neighbours and the rest of the world.

I agree one should be careful. I try to extract only the facts, and figure out who are the interested parties.
Also, one should be very aware of press freedoms. (Here too, one needs to sift through quite a bit to get the facts as these organisations are the embodiment of agenda journalism, for good and bad):
http://www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/227/

I did followed up on the story and I certain didn't base my judgement on just a single article. I also looked at articles from different countries since media in different countries usually present an incident in slightly different perspective.

Yet you were certain the reduction in supply "without doubt led to electricity cut", while in reality no electricity cut occured.

I made my judgement based on years of experience of interacting with the world, its people and their feelings/actions; based on 20+ years of education spanned over two culturally different countries; based on a good heart and intention.

You know what they say about good intentions...
Keep in mind Israel has democratic institutions and that the government legal advisor makes his judgement based on 20+ years of legal work.

I certainly do not think that those Israelis who are living under the cloud of random rocket attacks are any "better off" than those Palestinians who are suffering, or any African children in war-torn regions, rural China, India,... etc.

Then let's get back to the original subject - what in your opinion should be done by the Israeli government to put a stop to the rocket fire on its citizens?

Is it just me? but it sounds like you are no fans of the UN nor any diplomats nor any politicians except perhaps those who implement an agenda that's suit your taste.

That's off-topic, we can start another thread if you like. I'll just say that I am a fan of diplomats as they are usually realists, the type of personality our time sorely lacks. I wish Bismarck and Disraeli were around.

I don't think so. The Hamas militants plus probably the entire Palestinian populations are well-advertised as either terrorists, religious extremists, sympathisers or supporters in many parts of the world outside the Middle East: from USA, UK, Australia, Canada, many parts of Europe, to smaller countries like Hong Kong, Singapore...
their actions are well-known.

You complained of a dangerous precedent being set - but inaction (in favour of which I assume you argue, you haven't made that very clear) would set the same precedent, plus an even more dangerous, unacceptable precedent - that an elected government neglect its duties and do nothing to stop or reduce attacks directed at its citizenry.

 

[Yonoz]

You can't expect to put these people in a cage and expect them not to fight back.

I don't.

Since they do not have any army or airforce or any of the sophisticated arms possesed by the Israelis they resort to suicide bombings and launching rockets into Israel. Again, I do not state these facts in order to justify attacks against the Israeli civilians.

You have just justified attacks against civilians.

 

[Art]

It means Art is repeatedly taking the conversation off topic, making inflamatory posts of no argumentive value, obsessed with comparisons to Nazis - hallmark trolling symptoms.
It certainly seems Art is entirely motivated by hatred, though he poses as a humanitarian.

Off topic? The topic is Israel's collective punishment of the citizens of Gaza. It is senseless to discuss this action without discussing Israel's stated reasons for adopting the policy. This then opens up the policy itself for debate and whether or not it is justified which in turn much as you may dislike what it reveals, invites a comparison of who is doing what to whom in this conflict. To avoid accusations of media bias I have quoted Israeli sources in most of my posts. So what precisely is your problem other than you don't like what is being revealed?

You accuse me of hatred. Hatred of whom? Highlighting and condemning Israeli atrocities perpetrated against Palestinian civilians does not ergo mean I condone Palestinian militants attacks on Israeli civilians. I abhor all such violence but I do believe Israel's gov't is the chief architect of the unrest and that it is only by changing their policies that the consequent problems can be resolved. I have no problem at all with the average Israeli citizen and was heartened to see that many were shocked and saddened when informed of the behaviour of their armed forces in the report I referenced

The reference to the Nazis and the Warsaw Jews was to draw a parallel to challenge the false dichotomy that by accepting Israel had the right to retaliate against attacks on her, the acceptable scale of her response should be unlimited but of course Hurkyl knew that which is why he feigned ignorance of the event to avoid being forced to concede that there is such a thing as a disproportionate response.

 

[Art]

One common usage of the word "troll" is to refer to a person who does not intend to contribute to discussion, but instead simply wants to provoke people into responding.

Very ironic.

 

[novaa77]

Quote:
Originally Posted by novaa77
You can't expect to put these people in a cage and expect them not to fight back.

I don't.

Well in that case don't complain about attacks against Israeli civilians.

 

[Yonoz]

To avoid accusations of media bias I have quoted Israeli sources in most of my posts.

No you haven't, though you have quoted sources like Hal Turner and Conal Urquhart.
The only Israeli source you have (repeatedly) quoted is B'tselem, without providing a link.

You accuse me of hatred. Hatred of whom? Highlighting and condemning Israeli atrocities perpetrated against Palestinian civilians does not ergo mean I condone Palestinian militants attacks on Israeli civilians. I abhor all such violence but I do believe Israel's gov't is the chief architect of the unrest and that it is only by changing their policies that the consequent problems can be resolved. I have no problem at all with the average Israeli citizen and was heartened to see that many were shocked and saddened when informed of the behaviour of their armed forces in the report I referenced

That report is a typical example of my previous claims of agenda journalism. Conal Urquhart selectively ommitted the parts of the original article that do not serve his agenda. It is clear that the focus of his report are the tales themselves - not the response, as one would assume from the headline. The bias is made clear in the opening sentence:

A study by an Israeli psychologist into the violent behaviour of the country's soldiers...

"the violent behaviour" - not "violent behaviour" - asserting all Israeli soldiers behave violently.
The article then gives a brief introduction, and the bulk of it is composed of the soldiers' tales. Compare that to their relative size of the different sections of original article: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/909589.html. Only what can paint Israel in a bad light was quoted - the rest ommitted. Apparently, gruesome voyeuristic anecdotes are more important for this "journalist" than the actual core of the article - the reasons for this failure - which is the bulk of the original Ha'aretz article. Where are the "bitter controversy" and "awakened urgent questions"? If one wants to concentrate on the anecdotal evidence why not label the article accordingly? Why do so in pretense? And why not tell the whole story - about the conscientious soldiers who testified to the battalion commander? About the immediate removal of the abusive squad commander, Military Police investigation and subsequent trial and imprisonment? About the two soldiers then becoming officers and their return to reform the company? NOT A SINGLE MENTION of any of these.

The reference to the Nazis and the Warsaw Jews was to draw a parallel...

So much for your claims of lack of hatred, and "having no problem at all with the average Israeli citizen":

Your attempt to defend the indefensible demonstrates far better than I ever could the total lack of morality shown by Israeli Zionists in relation to the Palestinian victims of Israeli land grabs, ethnic cleansing, and their follow up so called 'security campaigns' designed to consolidate their theft through the application of fear and intimidation.

Israel through it's friends in the US gov't and media has created an Orwellian world where they, whilst brutal oppressors, are painted as the good guys and their victims are labelled as the bad guys who are constantly remonstrated with for not behaving like good little victims and dying quietly without fuss.

Looks like our "humanitarian" is quite the antisemite.

 

[Yonoz]

Well in that case don't complain about attacks against Israeli civilians.

There are plenty of military installations and forces around the Gaza Strip that can be attacked instead of civilians.

 

[Art]

No you haven't, though you have quoted sources like Hal Turner and Conal Urquhart.
The only Israeli source you have (repeatedly) quoted is B'tselem, without providing a link.

here you go though I'm amazed you couldn't find the link yourself http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Index.asp

That report is a typical example of my previous claims of agenda journalism. Conal Urquhart selectively ommitted the parts of the original article that do not serve his agenda. It is clear that the focus of his report are the tales themselves - not the response, as one would assume from the headline. The bias is made clear in the opening sentence:

"the violent behaviour" - not "violent behaviour" - asserting all Israeli soldiers behave violently.
The article then gives a brief introduction, and the bulk of it is composed of the soldiers' tales. Compare that to their relative size of the different sections of original article: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/909589.html. Only what can paint Israel in a bad light was quoted - the rest ommitted. Apparently, gruesome voyeuristic anecdotes are more important for this "journalist" than the actual core of the article - the reasons for this failure - which is the bulk of the original Ha'aretz article. Where are the "bitter controversy" and "awakened urgent questions"? If one wants to concentrate on the anecdotal evidence why not label the article accordingly? Why do so in pretense? And why not tell the whole story - about the conscientious soldiers who testified to the battalion commander? About the immediate removal of the abusive squad commander, Military Police investigation and subsequent trial and imprisonment? About the two soldiers then becoming officers and their return to reform the company? NOT A SINGLE MENTION of any of these.

I very much hope folk here do read the full report you referenced including the parts how the soldiers who reported the brutality feared for their lives from their comrades and were transferred for their own safety and how the brutal squad commander received only 3 months imprisonment about his subsequent emigration to the USA, the prisoner who was bound and gagged locked in a shower and 'forgotten' for 3 days, the sexual assaults on Arab women, the theft from Arab houses along with a long list of other atrocities omitted in the Guardian article.

The responses from Israeli writers are also worth reading such as

the writer David Grossman remarks that this is not a story of individuals but of hundreds and thousands "who carried out a kind of 'privatization' of a vast and general evil."

It will be interesting to see if this shock and horror exhibited by Israeli citizens translates into a change in policy and attitudes towards Arabs. At least no-one can now claim they were unaware of what the IDF were doing in their name and it gives lie to the worn out claim 'they hate us because they are evil'.

So much for your claims of lack of hatred, and "having no problem at all with the average Israeli citizen":

? I'm lost here. Explain by what leap of logic do you make this statement?

Looks like our "humanitarian" is quite the antisemite.

lol how utterly pathetic; it is you who are trying to justify horror attacks on Semites . You do know the Arabs are Semites don't you and that the majority of Semites are Arabs. It always amused me that if anyone stands up for the victims of Israeli oppression they are labelled anti-Semite when the victims are actually Semites.

I assume you actually read the Haaretz article? Do you not think the actions detailed in it constitute brutal oppression?

 

[Yonoz]

Don't you realize you are one and the same as these monsters you're portraying?
Take a look at your posts - a global Jewish conspiracy?!

Seek help.

 

[Art]

Don't you realize you are one and the same as these monsters you're portraying?
Take a look at your posts - a global Jewish conspiracy?!

Seek help.

Hint - Resorting to dissociative ranting coupled with personal attacks doesn't help your argument.

 

[Yonoz]

You're giving all the help my argument needs.

 

[mjsd]

Originally Posted by novaa77
Since they do not have any army or airforce or any of the sophisticated arms possesed by the Israelis they resort to suicide bombings and launching rockets into Israel. Again, I do not state these facts in order to justify attacks against the Israeli civilians.

You have just justified attacks against civilians.

I don't think so.
The act of analysing the mind of your enemies in an attempt to understand the motivations behind their actions should not be seen as a justification to their actions.

 

[Art]

You're wasting your time trying to reason mjsd. It's just banging your head against the classic 'If you're not with us you're against us' mindset.

Anyone who criticises Israel is automatically labeled either,

a) A Jew hater
b) Anti-Semitic (sic)
c) A terrorist sympathiser
d) A holocaust denier
or
e) Insane (sometimes even by PM )

As you may have noticed in this thread

 

[Hurkyl]

I suggest you read through the links I mentioned in my post. How about answering my question, for a change?

You have stated that you believe Israel should not make any sort of response. Given that belief, the logic is automatic: the Israelis have responded, and therefore they are acting wrongly.

 

[mjsd]

You completely misunderstood me.

I have one suggestion for you. Perhaps you can make your post less "cryptic" in the future and that you do use more than 1-2 lines when you want to avoid being misinterpreted. From what I see, you often end up spending half of your time clarifying your position than discussing the issue itself.

 

[mjsd]

You're wasting your time trying to reason mjsd. It's just banging your head against the classic 'If you're not with us you're against us' mindset.

perhaps after all this I understand what the following is hinting...

Originally Posted by Yonoz

You know what they say about good intentions...

 

[Yonoz]

mjsd, do you agree with the following statement by Art?

Israel through it's friends in the US gov't and media has created an Orwellian world where they, whilst brutal oppressors, are painted as the good guys and their victims are labelled as the bad guys who are constantly remonstrated with for not behaving like good little victims and dying quietly without fuss.

 

[Yonoz]

I don't think so.
The act of analysing the mind of your enemies in an attempt to understand the motivations behind their actions should not be seen as a justification to their actions.

novaa77, do you think rocket fire directed at Israeli towns is justified?

 

[Hurkyl]

I have one suggestion for you. Perhaps you can make your post less "cryptic" in the future and that you do use more than 1-2 lines when you want to avoid being misinterpreted. From what I see, you often end up spending half of your time clarifying your position than discussing the issue itself.

I, of course, thought the meaning was clear; otherwise I would have clarified it when I initially wrote the post, rather than after I got misinterpreted.

And I'm not even presenting a position on the issues! Gah! I'm fully aware that my opinions are not rationally based; so, IMO, they have no place in these discussions. My primary motivation in actually speaking in these threads is to rebuke the irrational junk that actually does appears here.


In case your curious, my opinion formed from these forms. After seeing dozens of discussions that look like

"You stole our land!"
"We siezed your land because you were using it to fire at us."
"You stole our land!"

and

"Give peace a chance!"
"We did; it didn't work."
"Give peace a chance!"

and

"Oh look, somebody died; the only possible explanation is that Israel is evil."

and all of the other stupid junk I see, it has become extremely difficult to take the Palestinian side of things seriously. There are some good points out there, I'm sure, but they get almost completely drowned out by the stupidity.

 

[novaa77]

Yonoz:There are plenty of military installations and forces around the Gaza Strip that can be attacked instead of civilians.

novaa77, do you think rocket fire directed at Israeli towns is justified?

Hurkyl:You have stated that you believe Israel should not make any sort of response. Given that belief, the logic is automatic: the Israelis have responded, and therefore they are acting wrongly.

Its disconcerting that this post has been reduced to a discussion on what targets are justified for attack. Can't you see beyond this violence? I have very clearly stated that I do not condone attacks on either Israeli or Palestinian civliians. How ever I sense a great reluctance on your part to do the same. Can you explain this double standard?

It also seems to me that you are either unable or unwilling to look at this problem from a historical point of view. There is no point in carrying on about the justification of attacks unless you are willing to look at this problem from the correct perspective.

What is happening in the west bank and gaza is very similar to what the chinese have done in Tibet, which is to take over the land by military might and then toture the locals into submission and quell every kind of revolt against the oppressors by use of brutal and excessive force.
Obvisously no one can be expected to submit to such torture.

As I have mentioned earlier what you term as "Israeli response" is basically the continuous and systematic destruction of the will and the life of the Palestinian people. This will eventually bring them to such a state where they will no longer be able revolt against the occupation of their land, and this is the actual aim of what you term "Israeli response".

 

[Art]

From the BBC today - confirmation of what I said above about the continuing theft of Arab land by Zionists not only in contravention of international law and UN resolutions but also breaking agreements Israel has signed. But heaven forbid if the Arabs complain or worse still react

BBC NEWS
West Bank settlements 'expanding'
Construction is continuing in dozens of Jewish settlements in the West Bank despite Israel's pledge to freeze their expansion, an campaign group has said.

Peace Now says Jewish population growth is three times higher in the area occupied in 1967 than in Israel itself.

It says settlers are bypassing a ban on using caravans to expand settlements by erecting pre-fabricated homes on site.

Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are deemed illegal under international law.

Israel had pledged to stop their construction as part of internationally-backed peace efforts.

Peace Now says there is continuing construction in 88 out of about 150 of the authorised settlements, in addition to the building of permanent structures in 34 unauthorised settlement outposts.

Settler leaders expressed pleasure about Peace Now's report, thanking it for "documenting their endeavour".

Violation

Peace Now's Director-General Yariv Oppenheimer said the Israeli military had stopped monitoring construction at the illegal outposts.

"There is no connection between what is happening in political negotiations and what is happening on the ground," he told Israeli Army Radio.

He accused Israel's political leaders of violating their commitments ahead of an international peace conference aimed at restarting negotiations with the Palestinians and hoping to set up a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Analysts say the chances of success at the US-sponsored Annapolis conference are limited by Israeli settlement activity, as well as major concerns over security and institution-building on the Palestinian side.

Peace Now's report says most of the construction is in large settlement blocs located on the west side of the barrier Israel is building in the West Bank.

It said natural increase and the relocation of ultra-Orthodox families to settlements had led to the three-times higher population growth compared with in Israel.

A source in the Yesha council which represents the Jewish settlement movement said Peace Now's findings proved it had achieved an unstoppable momentum.
Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/7082629.stm

Published: 2007/11/07 11:11:46 GMT

© BBC MMVII

Note the arrogance of the 'settlers'. They know they act with impunity through force of arms.

 

[Yonoz]

Its disconcerting that this post has been reduced to a discussion on what targets are justified for attack.

Seeing as the attacks themselves are the reason for the sanctions that are the subject of this thread, the only disconcertion is that you won't support your argument for Israeli inaction, or suggest an alternative means of stopping the rocket fire on Israeli civilians.

Can't you see beyond this violence? I have very clearly stated that I do not condone attacks on either Israeli or Palestinian civliians. How ever I sense a great reluctance on your part to do the same. Can you explain this double standard?

No double standard here. I condone attacks on Palestinian civilians. I would actually like to see all forms of violence come to an end.

It also seems to me that you are either unable or unwilling to look at this problem from a historical point of view. There is no point in carrying on about the justification of attacks unless you are willing to look at this problem from the correct perspective.

What is happening in the west bank and gaza is very similar to what the chinese have done in Tibet, which is to take over the land by military might and then toture the locals into submission and quell every kind of revolt against the oppressors by use of brutal and excessive force.
Obvisously no one can be expected to submit to such torture.

This is off-topic, you can start a different thread if you like.

As I have mentioned earlier what you term as "Israeli response" is basically the continuous and systematic destruction of the will and the life of the Palestinian people. This will eventually bring them to such a state where they will no longer be able revolt against the occupation of their land, and this is the actual aim of what you term "Israeli response".

The Gaza Strip is not occupied. If by "revolt" you mean attacking Israeli civilians then that is the stated aim.

 

[Art]

I condone attacks on Palestinian civilians

A Freudian slip?? Or rare honesty?

The Gaza Strip is not occupied

Really?? Who controls her borders? Who controls her airspace? Who controls her coastline? Who regularly bombs her? Who regularly sends tanks into 'punish' her inhabitants. Who seizes her tax revenues? Who decides what goods and what quantity of goods are allowed in? Who decides how much energy she is allowed?

The status of Gaza is far worse than being merely occupied, it is a giant prison for it's 1.5 million inhabitants. The guards have simply moved back outside the walls.

 

[mjsd]

No double standard here. I condone attacks on Palestinian civilians. I would actually like to see all forms of violence come to an end.

A Freudian slip?? Or rare honesty?

In the light of this, double standard, I don't think there is much point for me to reply to the following post (which is very off-topic anyway)

mjsd, do you agree with the following statement by Art?

Israel through it's friends in the US gov't and media has created an Orwellian world where they, whilst brutal oppressors, are painted as the good guys and their victims are labelled as the bad guys who are constantly remonstrated with for not behaving like good little victims and dying quietly without fuss.

...perhaps until you and some of your allies have found some new logic, new meanings to your so-called humanity, or perhaps until you guys have destroyed all who are against your ideals OR you have been destroyed by them, and as a result, have realized (albeit to late) the irony of self-defence by force/violence/intimidation.

I certainly hope that you (both Israel and Palestine) won't go down that path of self-destruction. But unfortunately, your fate is in your hands and not mine.

 

[slugcountry]

The status of Gaza is far worse than being merely occupied, it is a giant prison for it's 1.5 million inhabitants. The guards have simply moved back outside the walls.

Art - I've watched this discussion pretty patiently but this is just enough. Palestinian militants send rockets into Israel from crowded civilian areas, purposefully targeting israeli civilians, and then israel gets blamed for retaliating when a palestinian civilian dies. I mean really what the hell are they supposed to do, sit idly by and wait to get killed by the next rocket? Have you ever been to the middle east? You talk like someone who is completely biased and ignorant of the reality of the situation "on the ground".

Many Israeli's are all for a Palestinian state - its the Palestinian leadership that refuses to negotiate, and publically and officially CONDONES attacking Israeli civilians.

What's happening in Palestine is surely a tragedy, and its true that the Gaza strip is nothing short of an impoverished ghetto - but its a freaking stretch to put the blame on israel, which is quite literally surrounded by openly hostile nations on every side.

Jews have been historically persecuted for thousands of years, and now we have a country and a chance to fight back. We have a right to exist. And as a member of the diaspora I could not exist without Israel. If you do not understand this fact, only further education can help you.

 

[novaa77]

Seeing as the attacks themselves are the reason for the sanctions that are the subject of this thread, the only disconcertion is that you won't support your argument for Israeli inaction, or suggest an alternative means of stopping the rocket fire on Israeli civilians.

we are just going round and round in circles here. And once again you have very conveniently ignored the question of the historic perspective. If you did It would be impossible to justify Israeli actions.

This is off-topic, you can start a different thread if you like.

The only reason I mentioned the Tibet issue was in the hope that you would see from this example the true nature of the problem in the west bank and gaza.


The Gaza Strip is not occupied. If by "revolt" you mean attacking Israeli civilians then that is the stated aim.[/QUOTE]

By revolt I mean fighting for their very existence.

 

[novaa77]

slugcountry:Art - I've watched this discussion pretty patiently but this is just enough. Palestinian militants send rockets into Israel from crowded civilian areas, purposefully targeting israeli civilians, and then israel gets blamed for retaliating when a palestinian civilian dies.

Have you ever stopped to consider why the Palestinians are sending rockets into Israel

I mean really what the hell are they supposed to do, sit idly by and wait to get killed by the next rocket? Have you ever been to the middle east? You talk like someone who is completely biased and ignorant of the reality of the situation "on the ground".

What you should do is allow the Palestinian people to get on with their lives. What you should not do is to continue battering them into submission.

Many Israeli's are all for a Palestinian state - its the Palestinian leadership that refuses to negotiate, and publically and officially CONDONES attacking Israeli civilians.

What's happening in Palestine is surely a tragedy, and its true that the Gaza strip is nothing short of an impoverished ghetto - but its a freaking stretch to put the blame on israel, which is quite literally surrounded by openly hostile nations on every side.

Again may be you should ponder over the reason for this hostility.

Jews have been historically persecuted for thousands of years, and now we have a country and a chance to fight back. We have a right to exist. And as a member of the diaspora I could not exist without Israel. If you do not understand this fact, only further edccation can help you

No one denies the Jews the right to existence, I wish the same could be said when it comes to the Israeli attitude towards the Palestinians.

On the whole a very one-sided and prejudiced view of the entire situation. Exactly the attitude that will ensure an on going conflict.

 

[Hurkyl]

A Freudian slip?? Or rare honesty?

Do you really believe those are the only two possibilities?

 

[Yonoz]

Who controls her borders?

Gotcha. Israel doesn't control the Gaza-Egypt border, and the Rafah crossing was shut down by the EU.

Who regularly bombs her? Who regularly sends tanks into 'punish' her inhabitants.

No-one.

Who decides what goods and what quantity of goods are allowed in?

What's "allowed" has been irrelevant for some time.

Who decides how much energy she is allowed?

Israel decides how much fuel and electricity it supplies, while as you have been shown the EU cut its supplies a while back (funny, I don't remember such a big deal made out of that).

The status of Gaza is far worse than being merely occupied, it is a giant prison for it's 1.5 million inhabitants. The guards have simply moved back outside the walls.

I agree its status is worse than being occupied, but there comes a time when people need to take responsibility for themselves and stop blaming all their troubles on Israel.
Oh wait, how silly of me - I'm telling this to a person who thinks all that's wrong with the world is the fault of the Jooooos.