Israeli assault targets symbols of Hamas power

[DeadPoolX 9]

If the US did not take react against Israel for this incident, then the logical conclusion is that the USS Liberty was not completely "honest" either. If I wanted an intelligence agency on my side, providing me information, it would be Mossad. If the USS Liberty was attacked and the USA did not respond, something about the situation was not "kosher".

And if you think the US is one-sided when it comes to Israel, think back to the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when it was President Nixon who advised President Brezhnev of the Soviet Union that Israel had tactical nuclear weapons live and ready to go, should the Egyptian army set one foot on Israeli soil.

I'm not quite sure what the problem is here. Israel does have active nuclear capability and if cornered, I believe they'd use them. I can't help but agree. If it's a lose-lose situation (i.e. my country and people were going to be exterminated), I'd want to take out as many enemies as possible. The U.S. would do the same.

The victory is that you accomplish your objective....i.e. make the enemy stop launching rockets into Israel.

Israel has been pounding the hell out of Palestine-Gaza-Hamas-Whoever you want to name the target--through military offensives (or defensives), through cutting off gas, electricity, food, and medical supplies--and have the rockets stopped being launched into Israel?

Even with the overwhelming military might of one dominant power, one cannot just beat the enemy into submission... at least not in the case of Palestine... all it breeds is more pain, more resistance, more opposition, and in this case, more rocket launches...

There are no clean hands in this conflict.

Both the U.S. and the Soviet Union learned this lesson with Iraq and Afghanistan. Both had superior firepower and technology, but in the end, it's not enough. It never has been. Look at the colonists versus the British Empire during the American Revolution or the U.S. during Vietnam, when pitted against the VC and NVA.

[mawilson 2,133]

The victory is that you accomplish your objective....i.e. make the enemy stop launching rockets into Israel.

Israel has been pounding the hell out of Palestine-Gaza-Hamas-Whoever you want to name the target--through military offensives (or defensives), through cutting off gas, electricity, food, and medical supplies--and have the rockets stopped being launched into Israel?

They haven't, actually... until now. We'll see if this military operation stops the rockets.

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah, the delicious irony of the situation.

How many people on here realise that the state of Israel was founded on the back of terrorism? My father was serving with the Royal Air Force in Palestine when the Irgun blew up the King David Hotel in 1946.

Who was their leader at the time? One Menacham Begin, future Prime Minister of Israel.

Hamas would do well to learn from the Israelis themselves how to progress from terrorism, because terrorism alone will get them nowhere.

To be fair, the target of so-called Israeli terrorism was the British military. The King David Hotel was being used as a command station for the British there and the Israelis called in (several times, I might add) to warn of the impending attack. The British didn't listen -- they didn't consider the Israelis to be much of a threat. So the King David Hotel was blown up.

The difference I see here is that terrorism against a military target is not terrorism at all. The military is fair game while civilians are not. If this weren't true, then every action taken in war since the beginning of time were acts of terrorism. I don't agree with that idea, but perhaps some might think that way.

The USS Liberty did not have that benefit I suppose.

If the US did not take react against Israel for this incident, then the logical conclusion is that the USS Liberty was not completely "honest" either. If I wanted an intelligence agency on my side, providing me information, it would be Mossad. If the USS Liberty was attacked and the USA did not respond, something about the situation was not "kosher".

And if you think the US is one-sided when it comes to Israel, think back to the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when it was President Nixon who advised President Brezhnev of the Soviet Union that Israel had tactical nuclear weapons live and ready to go, should the Egyptian army set one foot on Israeli soil.

The ship was where it was on a very specific intelligence-gathering purpose much like its done elsewhere with other allies. About our Navy not fully disclosing, well, its all up to them and the chain of command to report what non-bellicose gathering activities they were up to in international waters. All that is evident is that the cover up was quite an embarrassing one to give our allies a free pass after they clearly recognized the Stars and Stripes of their allies on a ship whose flag is quite different from that of Egypt.

[Pooky 3,355]

Ah, the delicious irony of the situation.

How many people on here realise that the state of Israel was founded on the back of terrorism? My father was serving with the Royal Air Force in Palestine when the Irgun blew up the King David Hotel in 1946.

Who was their leader at the time? One Menacham Begin, future Prime Minister of Israel.

Hamas would do well to learn from the Israelis themselves how to progress from terrorism, because terrorism alone will get them nowhere.

To be fair, the target of so-called Israeli terrorism was the British military. The King David Hotel was being used as a command station for the British there and the Israelis called in (several times, I might add) to warn of the impending attack. The British didn't listen -- they didn't consider the Israelis to be much of a threat. So the King David Hotel was blown up.

The difference I see here is that terrorism against a military target is not terrorism at all. The military is fair game while civilians are not. If this weren't true, then every action taken in war since the beginning of time were acts of terrorism. I don't agree with that idea, but perhaps some might think that way.

The USS Liberty did not have that benefit I suppose.

If the US did not take react against Israel for this incident, then the logical conclusion is that the USS Liberty was not completely "honest" either. If I wanted an intelligence agency on my side, providing me information, it would be Mossad. If the USS Liberty was attacked and the USA did not respond, something about the situation was not "kosher".

And if you think the US is one-sided when it comes to Israel, think back to the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when it was President Nixon who advised President Brezhnev of the Soviet Union that Israel had tactical nuclear weapons live and ready to go, should the Egyptian army set one foot on Israeli soil.

The ship was where it was on a very specific intelligence-gathering purpose much like its done elsewhere with other allies. About our Navy not fully disclosing, well, its all up to them and the chain of command to report what non-bellicose gathering activities they were up to in international waters. All that is evident is that the cover up was quite an embarrassing one to give our allies a free pass after they clearly recognized the Stars and Stripes of their allies on a ship whose flag is quite different from that of Egypt.

If the USS Liberty was gathering intelligence from Israel, then it is quite possible the Israelis might not want that. I'm sure they have information they don't want the Americans to know. If the US Navy covered it up, however badly, then my bet is that someone, somewhere miscalculated and upset the Israelis. As the Americans proved to the British in 1982 during the run up to the Falklands, when they very publicly changed a vote of support to an abstention in the UN Security Council, even best friends have days when self-interest is more important than friendship.

When the Israelis attacked the USS Liberty, they knew damn well it wasn't an Egyptian vessel. They did it to make a point. And from the fall-out afterward, I'd reckon it was a point well made, as nothing of the sort has happened since.

[HAL 9000 96]

Ah, the delicious irony of the situation.

How many people on here realise that the state of Israel was founded on the back of terrorism? My father was serving with the Royal Air Force in Palestine when the Irgun blew up the King David Hotel in 1946.

Who was their leader at the time? One Menacham Begin, future Prime Minister of Israel.

Hamas would do well to learn from the Israelis themselves how to progress from terrorism, because terrorism alone will get them nowhere.

To be fair, the target of so-called Israeli terrorism was the British military. The King David Hotel was being used as a command station for the British there and the Israelis called in (several times, I might add) to warn of the impending attack. The British didn't listen -- they didn't consider the Israelis to be much of a threat. So the King David Hotel was blown up.

The difference I see here is that terrorism against a military target is not terrorism at all. The military is fair game while civilians are not. If this weren't true, then every action taken in war since the beginning of time were acts of terrorism. I don't agree with that idea, but perhaps some might think that way.

The USS Liberty did not have that benefit I suppose.

If the US did not take react against Israel for this incident, then the logical conclusion is that the USS Liberty was not completely "honest" either. If I wanted an intelligence agency on my side, providing me information, it would be Mossad. If the USS Liberty was attacked and the USA did not respond, something about the situation was not "kosher".

And if you think the US is one-sided when it comes to Israel, think back to the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when it was President Nixon who advised President Brezhnev of the Soviet Union that Israel had tactical nuclear weapons live and ready to go, should the Egyptian army set one foot on Israeli soil.

The ship was where it was on a very specific intelligence-gathering purpose much like its done elsewhere with other allies. About our Navy not fully disclosing, well, its all up to them and the chain of command to report what non-bellicose gathering activities they were up to in international waters. All that is evident is that the cover up was quite an embarrassing one to give our allies a free pass after they clearly recognized the Stars and Stripes of their allies on a ship whose flag is quite different from that of Egypt.

If the USS Liberty was gathering intelligence from Israel, then it is quite possible the Israelis might not want that. I'm sure they have information they don't want the Americans to know. If the US Navy covered it up, however badly, then my bet is that someone, somewhere miscalculated and upset the Israelis. As the Americans proved to the British in 1982 during the run up to the Falklands, when they very publicly changed a vote of support to an abstention in the UN Security Council, even best friends have days when self-interest is more important than friendship.

When the Israelis attacked the USS Liberty, they knew damn well it wasn't an Egyptian vessel. They did it to make a point. And from the fall-out afterward, I'd reckon it was a point well made, as nothing of the sort has happened since.

Oh I think Washington definitely got the point. Newer technology allows us to collect the same information we collected on the Liberty in other, less volatile ways. What should be concerning is that President Johnson ordered Secretary McNamara to stand down any further accusation due to that alliance that under other circumstances would have been sent to hell in a dime. And then the state of Israel would likely not exist today as a result.

What should have happened is that those pilots, one of which later fessed up, should have been shot down. But alas, the crew of the Liberty wasn't expected to fire upon a friendly.

Regarding the Brits and the Argentines... well... when you have a Cold War and Argentine military juntas to support in their Dirty War against their own people... even the Queen's Mum had to go it alone. Besides, as a colonial power itself, the USA probably didn't want to get accused further of being as such.

[AlHayatZween 2]

Israel has been pounding the hell out of Palestine-Gaza-Hamas-Whoever you want to name the target--through military offensives (or defensives), through cutting off gas, electricity, food, and medical supplies--and have the rockets stopped being launched into Israel?

They haven't, actually... until now. We'll see if this military operation stops the rockets.

Yes, you are right... "military offensives" isn't the right term to use. i guess i was referring to the decades of violence during the occupation, the Intifadas, settler violence, etc... i am not disputing the causes or who's to blame for these of these strikes & counterstrikes, just that Palestinian casualties have always outnumbered that of the Israelis.

But you are right, this is the first "military offensive" so to speak.

i guess my point is that, even if the Palestinians are quelled for the time being--outbombed, i guess--the conflict and destruction will only breed more hate and resentment, that coupled with the lack of political organization, poverty, lack of resources, it then becomes a ripe environment for more terror tactics and more violence.

[chaishai 1]

You are talking about human lives here. Where is the victory in killing so many innocents? The lack of value of human life is just disgusting.

The victory is that you accomplish your objective....i.e. make the enemy stop launching rockets into Israel. Did you just fall off a turnip truck or something??

exactly - and i think its hilarious to say that israel does not value human life - are we suggesting that the opposing "government" ie HAMAS does?!

Edited December 30, 2008 by chaishai

[Ban Hammer 12,848]

You are talking about human lives here. Where is the victory in killing so many innocents? The lack of value of human life is just disgusting.

The victory is that you accomplish your objective....i.e. make the enemy stop launching rockets into Israel. Did you just fall off a turnip truck or something??

exactly - and i think its hilarious to say that israel does not value human life - are we suggesting that the opposing "government" ie HAMAS does?!

they are hard at work, ain't they?

[chaishai 1]

You are talking about human lives here. Where is the victory in killing so many innocents? The lack of value of human life is just disgusting.

The victory is that you accomplish your objective....i.e. make the enemy stop launching rockets into Israel. Did you just fall off a turnip truck or something??

exactly - and i think its hilarious to say that israel does not value human life - are we suggesting that the opposing "government" ie HAMAS does?!

they are hard at work, ain't they?

I am just sick over the whole thing. I need to stay away from forums like this where people sit on their cushy desk chairs and babble on saying arent HAMAS lives equal to the life of an israeli. Um, no they are not. Their life isnt worth the baby toenail of an upstanding israelis life. One rocket hit two doors down from my brother in laws new house last night then as he moved into beer sheva today with my MIL and FIL and sat down to dinner to celebrate the fact that he is alive another rocket hit one block away from their place. Not to mention they use their own palestinian people as human shields. Dispicable.

EDITED TO MAKE SENSE.... im a little upset....

Edited December 30, 2008 by chaishai

[HAL 9000 96]

Or they could declare two separate nations- Israel and Palestine. No strings attached; no illegal settlements in Palestinian lands.

[Ban Hammer 12,848]

Or they could declare two separate nations- Israel and Palestine. No strings attached; no illegal settlements in Palestinian lands.

but i have to wonder if that will really stop the rocket attacks.

[HAL 9000 96]

Or they could declare two separate nations- Israel and Palestine. No strings attached; no illegal settlements in Palestinian lands.

but i have to wonder if that will really stop the rocket attacks.

Only one way to find out. Of course. If you have two international equals, with one being overtly aggressive towards its neighbor... hint hint... then you have a recipe for real military action. Not to mention Israel could probably carry out an actual campaign against a foe responsible for invading within its borders as an act of war.

Of course... any other aggression against Palestinians and its government (likely not Hamas) would have to cease as well.

[mawilson 2,133]

Or they could declare two separate nations- Israel and Palestine. No strings attached; no illegal settlements in Palestinian lands.

Yeah, tried that already, wasn't enough for them.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

"But today's horrific attacks mark only a change in Israel's method of killing Palestinians recently. In recent months they died mostly silent deaths, the elderly and sick especially, deprived of food and necessary medicine by the two year-old Israeli blockade calculated and intended to cause suffering and deprivation to 1.5 million Palestinians, the vast majority refugees and children, caged into the Gaza Strip. In Gaza, Palestinians died silently, for want of basic medications: insulin, cancer treatment, products for dialysis prohibited from reaching them by Israel.

What the media never question is Israel's idea of a truce. It is very simple. Under an Israeli-style truce, Palestinians have the right to remain silent while Israel starves them, kills them and continues to violently colonize their land. Israel has not only banned food and medicine to sustain Palestinian bodies in Gaza but it is also intent on starving minds: due to the blockade, there is not even ink, paper and glue to print textbooks for schoolchildren."

It is more likely that some of the blame for medical neglect of Palestinians falls upon the Arab community itself. It is none too surprising to me that Israel has attacked yet again, and Hamas needs to accept its responsibility for its own actions. Once a terrorist organization, always a terrorist organization...

"Palestinians everywhere are asking for solidarity, real solidarity, in the form of sustained, determined political action. The Gaza-based One Democratic State Group reaffirmed this today as it "called upon all civil society organizations and freedom loving people to act immediately in any possible way to put pressure on their governments to end diplomatic ties with Apartheid Israel and institute sanctions against it."

The global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement for Palestine (http://www.bdsmovement.net/) provides the framework for this. Now is the time to channel our raw emotions into a long-term commitment to make sure we do not wake up to "another Gaza" ever again.

Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse (Metropolitan Books, 2006).

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10055.shtml"

I question your source, and the verbiage used to describe the situation... Neither side is blameless entirely, but only one side has been eternally vowing to wipe the other from the earth, the Israeli's seek merely to exist preferably in peace, and the Israeli's actually treat wounded opponents in a humane manner.

[mawilson 2,133]

Only one way to find out. Of course. If you have two international equals, with one being overtly aggressive towards its neighbor... hint hint... then you have a recipe for real military action. Not to mention Israel could probably carry out an actual campaign against a foe responsible for invading within its borders as an act of war.

That's what happened in Lebanon in 2006. Two international equals, an act of war, real military action.

Israel was still the bad guy.