Gaza situation discussion

[hongi]

Well, actually thinking about it a bit further, if the family was allowed to leave, they could notify militants about the position of the troops. So that makes sense.

[Serafina]

It sounds reasonable that they are not allowing civilians to leave, because they could notify the enemy.
But they are putting civillians into the line of fire - its not the thought that counts, its the result.

If you want, you can justify all kinds of atrocities. "We are bombing civillian houses, because they are working in weapon factories". "The hospital is treating enemy soldiers". "If we treat the wounds of POWs, they may escape and fight on". "We are shooting everyone in sight, they COULD carry a weapon".

I do not care if there is a good reason to do so, if the actions lead to civillian suffering.
Nobody perfect, and there are civillian casualties in every war. But its a huge difference if they happen by accident, or if you are willingly taking actions that will result in civillian casualties.

[MKSheppard]

Link

I won't post the whole thing but this excerpt:

A senior IDF officer estimated Saturday that roughly 300 Hamas men have been killed since the army launched its ground incursion in the Gaza Strip. The military official said IDF troops were able to wipe out whole battalions belonging to the Gaza terror group.

"Hundreds of people were killed in the various combat sectors," the officer said. "Some Hamas companies and battalions were simply wiped out. We also see cases of desertions and unauthorized leaves, while some terror activists are scared to undertake moves that would jeopardize them vis-à-vis IDF troops."

Earlier Saturday, the IDF killed Hamas' rocket chief in the Gaza City area, Amir Mansi. The senior officer said that shortly before his death Mansi clashed with his subordinates, who refused to come out of their hideouts. The rocket chief was left with no choice but to launch mortar shells himself, and was killed after being identified by the army.

[Stormin]

The longer this goes on though the less effective it's going to get. I hope the IDF has some actual attainable goal before the pullout this time.

[Force Lord]

I'm rather pessimistic of Israel's chances of achieving anything in Gaza. Sure, Hamas is getting hit, but so are many civilians. In fact, I'll expect to see even more radical groups such as Islamic Jihad (if it's still around) to grow more prominent.

That's my inner skeptic talking, at any rate.

P.S.: Are there any other groups in Gaza besides Hamas?

[Master of Ossus]

I'm rather pessimistic of Israel's chances of achieving anything in Gaza. Sure, Hamas is getting hit, but so are many civilians. In fact, I'll expect to see even more radical groups such as Islamic Jihad (if it's still around) to grow more prominent.

That's my inner skeptic talking, at any rate.

P.S.: Are there any other groups in Gaza besides Hamas?

Not really any big ones. Hamas wiped out or drove out most of the other militant groups after it was elected. I'm sure there are still some Fatah-aligned fighters around, but after their shooting war I'm not sure they're going to jump in against the Israelis, particularly since their movement is largely directed at NOT shooting at Israel.

[ray245]

JERUSALEM – Israel said Saturday it was shocked and distressed by a senior Vatican cardinal's likening of Gaza under Israel's military offensive to a concentration camp.

A spokesman for Israel's Foreign Ministry said the cardinal, whose remarks appeared in an interview Wednesday, adopted the kind of language that Hamas and other Islamic militant groups have used to demonize Israel and equate it with Nazi Germany.

"It was shocking to hear the same kind of terminology from such a high-ranking member of the church," Israeli spokesman Yigal Palmor said Saturday.

Cardinal Renato Martino, a former Vatican envoy to the United Nations and now Pope Benedict XVI's top official on issues of peace and justice, said in the interview that Gaza now resembles a "big concentration camp."

Commenting on Israel's two-week military offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Martino told the online newspaper Il Sussidiario.net that both sides were concerned only with their own interests.

"But the consequences of this selfishness is hatred, poverty, injustice. It is always the defenseless populations that pay," he was quoted as saying. "Look at the conditions in Gaza: It looks more and more like a big concentration camp."

Vatican spokesmen have declined to comment on the remarks, saying instead that it was more important to note an appeal by the pope on Thursday for a cease-fire.

Martino, an influential prelate who heads the Vatican's Council for Justice and Peace, seemed to want to balance his remarks in another interview published Thursday in Rome daily La Repubblica in which he condemned the Hamas rocket attacks that prompted the Israeli offensive.

But he did not back away from his earlier comparison and said, "Look at the conditions the people are living in."

A man who answered the phone at the cardinal's residence on Friday and identified himself as his private secretary said the prelate would not comment further on the Gaza remark.

"Using this excessive language is not doing justice and is not bringing peace any nearer and he should know better," Palmor said. "This kind of speech is deeply distressing."

Palmor said, however, that the cardinal's remarks would not harm relations with the Vatican or disrupt plans for a visit sometime this year by Benedict.

"These declarations by Cardinal Martino have nothing to do with our overall relations with the Holy See. The pope is still very welcome in Israel," Palmor said.

The Vatican and Israel have had a delicate relationship since establishing diplomatic ties in 1993.

Most recently, they have clashed over the legacy of Pope Pius XII, who some historians say did not do everything in his power to prevent Jews from being deported to concentration camps during World War II.

That dispute centers on a caption of a photo of Pius at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem that says Pius did not protest the Nazi genocide of Jews and maintained a largely "neutral position."

The Vatican says Pius made every effort to help Jews and other victims through quiet diplomacy and wants Yad Vashem to change the caption.

There are also unresolved differences over the status of expropriated church property in Israel and tax exemptions for the church. The Vatican has also protested Israeli restrictions on the movement of Arab Christian clergy to and around the West Bank.

I wonder if Israel realize they have lost this PR war by now. In previous conflict, they get a favorable public relation support. However, in this conflict, from what I have read all over the internet, more and more news outlet is taking a stance against Israel.

P.S. I don't know if this post is against the IvP Moratorium, given that I am only talking about the current PR war being waged.

[Darth Yoshi]

Ray, got a link?

I don't see how the Israeli gov't can object to someone calling like it is. Regardless of personal stance on the whole issue, the fact remains that the IDF contributes a great deal towards the Palestinian territories remaining a third-world shithole.

[TheMuffinKing]

Ray, got a link?

I don't see how the Israeli gov't can object to someone calling like it is. Regardless of personal stance on the whole issue, the fact remains that the IDF contributes a great deal towards the Palestinian territories remaining a third-world shithole.

The fact also remains that the Palestinians themselves contribute to their shithole status. Palestinian people need to find a way to peacefully co-exist.

[Darth Yoshi]

Granted, of course. I just find it stupid that the Israelis would act so surprised, as if people aren't paying attention or some shit.

[ray245]

Ray, got a link?

I don't see how the Israeli gov't can object to someone calling like it is. Regardless of personal stance on the whole issue, the fact remains that the IDF contributes a great deal towards the Palestinian territories remaining a third-world shithole.

Oh, sorry about that.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_ ... el_vatican

[hongi]

Consider this: the ceasefire went into effect on July 19.

Error. It went into effect on the 19th of June. Rocket attacks continued apparently, but at a vastly lowered level. So Hamas breaks the ceasefire first, by not cracking down completely on the rocket attacks.

The biggest break comes in November, as Wiki states:

On 4 November 2008, Israeli troops raided a border area of the Gaza Strip, where the Israeli military claimed Hamas had built a tunnel which they claimed Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers. Six members of Hamas were killed.[102] Hamas considered this attack a "massive breach of the truce,"[103] and Hamas rocket attacks increased sharply in November 2008, approaching the pre-truce levels.[104]

Then:

On 13 December 2008, Israel announced that it was in favor of extending the cease-fire, provided Hamas adhered to its conditions.[105] The conditions posed by a Hamas delegation in Cairo on December 14, were that the parties return to the original Hamas-Israel ceasefire arrangement. Hamas would undertake to stop all rocket attacks against Israel if the Israelis would lift the siege of Gaza by opening up the border crossings, not reduce thereafter commercial traffic, and pledge not to launch attacks in Gaza. At an Israeli Cabinet meeting on December 21, Yuval Diskin, the head of Israel's internal security agency, confirmed the seriousness of Hamas’s interest in maintaining the truce. Israel rejected these terms.[106]

Hamas wanted the border crossings open and Israel to not attack Gaza, which were the original conditions of the broken ceasefire. Israel probably thought that though the ceasefire had brought much lower levels of rocketfire, Hamas still didn't cut it all off, and suspected that Hamas was using that time to build their strength.

[The Grim Squeaker]

Hamas wanted the border crossings open and Israel to not attack Gaza, which were the original conditions of the broken ceasefire. Israel probably thought that though the ceasefire had brought much lower levels of rocketfire, Hamas still didn't cut it all off, and suspected that Hamas was using that time to build their strength.

Not thought/supposed, fact. Hamas stated it, it's not a speculation, they built increased infrastructure, training, and weapons. (Including the rockets which are of great range).

[Guardsman Bass]

That poses a question - suppose Israel had, for one reason or another, allowed the opening of the crossings to a greater extent, and Hamas had used the opportunity to re-arm to a greater degree. Would it only have been a matter of time before they broke the ceasefire, or would they have acted like Hezbollah is right now?

[Coyote]

I don't see how the Israeli gov't can object to someone calling like it is. Regardless of personal stance on the whole issue, the fact remains that the IDF contributes a great deal towards the Palestinian territories remaining a third-world shithole.

You're right, it is exactly like the time Dachau prisoners fired rockets into nearby German villages, forcing the SS to invade.

Oddly enough, I think one of the best things that happened to the MidEast peace process was a few years ago in the Fatah-governed West Bank when a big casino opened up in Jericho. It has closed down since, I think it was damage din a uprising or something at one point, but for awhile there it was a popular money maker and, like the US Indian tribes found out in the West, a way for the Palestinians to start businesses and be responsible for their own welfare.

Hamas needs to take the resources it pours into confrontation and try to manage things in Gaza instead, maybe take responsibility for things, like they were elected to do. There were goods and an economy down there, not very much, but I do wonder if the UN providing so many social services lets Hamas off the hook so they can run around and be a glorified street gang.

[Coyote]

wonder if Israel realize they have lost this PR war by now. In previous conflict, they get a favorable public relation support. However, in this conflict, from what I have read all over the internet, more and more news outlet is taking a stance against Israel.

Unfortunately, Ray, Israel always loses the PR war, every time. They haven't had favorable PR for some time; certainly not in the 2006 Lebanon War, or in 1982. In the media, any time you have a powerful, well-trained and professional mechanized army fighting rag-tag guerrillas, there is a weird wellspring of sympathy for the guerrillas because, even if their cause is questionable, they appear brave, gritty and determined. Plus, there's the suspicion that any government that would send in tanks or troops against civilians is automatically in the wrong.

[Kanastrous]

Rocket attacks continued apparently, but at a vastly lowered level. So Hamas breaks the ceasefire first, by not cracking down completely on the rocket attacks.

^ that sounds rather as though the rocket attacks are being launched against Hamas' desires, by people unconnected to Hamas, whom Hamas is intensely interested in finding, and stopping.

As opposed to being carried out largely by Hamas operatives, themselves, acting on behalf of Hamas, or people whom Hamas is willing to let go about their business.

If Hamas can successfully reduce Fatah personnel in the Strip to the status of virtual bystanders (disarming them, registering them, threatening them into inaction), then it's a tough sell to suggest that Hamas can't achieve the same when it comes to Islamic Jihad people, or members of any other group that might choose to join Hamas' guys in launching attacks from their turf.

[ray245]

wonder if Israel realize they have lost this PR war by now. In previous conflict, they get a favorable public relation support. However, in this conflict, from what I have read all over the internet, more and more news outlet is taking a stance against Israel.

Unfortunately, Ray, Israel always loses the PR war, every time. They haven't had favorable PR for some time; certainly not in the 2006 Lebanon War, or in 1982. In the media, any time you have a powerful, well-trained and professional mechanized army fighting rag-tag guerrillas, there is a weird wellspring of sympathy for the guerrillas because, even if their cause is questionable, they appear brave, gritty and determined. Plus, there's the suspicion that any government that would send in tanks or troops against civilians is automatically in the wrong.

Really? I guess I have forgetten about that.

I wasn't aware that Israel have bad press in the 82 war. Think I have read too much stuff from the US perspective.

[MKSheppard]

Link

A preliminary investigation into the fatal shooting by the Israel Defense Forces into a United Nations building in northern Gaza on Tuesday reveals the Israeli troops firing on the building missed their targets by some 30 meters.

Hamas is claiming the mortar fire killed 42 people and left dozens wounded, but senior IDF officers say the figures are dubious and that Hamas is inflating the numbers.

The probe, which was conducted by the Paratrooper Brigade whose troops were responsible for the area, found that the army's location system to pinpoint launch sites indicated that militants had launched a Qassam rocket into Israel from within a yard adjacent to the courtyard of the UN building.
Advertisement

The troops had intended to launch a smart missile to take out the Palestinian launch team but a technical malfunction made this impossible, according to the probe. The commanders of the force instead decided to fire on the Qassam team with mortar shells equipped with a Global Positioning System for accurate fire.

However, the GPS element has an error margin of 30 meters and one of the three rounds fired by the paratrooper force slammed into the building owned by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA.

Two of the rounds hit the yard used to launch rockets into Israel, killing two members of Hamas' military wing who probably belonged to the squad that fired the rockets.

Nonetheless, in discussing the incident with Haaretz, some IDF officers say the force should have refrained from using mortar rounds and relied instead on more accurate fire. Military sources said the UNRWA building was marked on the maps of forces operating in the area.

Other officers said they found the death toll published by Hamas grossly exaggerated, pointing out that a week ago only three IDF soldiers were killed when a tank fired two rounds - which have a much larger impact than mortar rounds - into a building which was occupied by 50 IDF soldiers.

Officers interviewed for this article pointed out that Hezbollah resorted to similar inflation tactics after an IDF bomb landed on a UN post in Qana in southern Lebanon in 2006.

I find this very interesting, that Israel now has GPS guided mortar bombs. I recall reading on a various presser release that IMI was working on a 120mm GPS Guided mortar bomb; with "peliminary development" to be finished by 2009. I guess they either finished early, or turned over pre-production examples to the IDF.

[Broomstick]

This little gem from CNN is related because, of course, it was a pro-Palestinian rally, but I think it also illustrates the "poor us, authority is mean to us" mentality that really does harm the Palestinians. It by no means limited solely to Palestinians, of course, other people posses it in ample measure as well.

NEW YORK (CNN) -- At least nine protesters were arrested in a pro-Palestinian rally Sunday afternoon in New York that injured seven police officers, authorities said.

The extent of injuries varied from minor to serious, New York police said. Two officers sustained head injuries.

Detective Cheryl Crispin said the protesters taken into custody faced charges ranging from disorderly conduct to reckless endangerment.

In a statement, the NYPD said the officers were injured when trying to break up a fight between two demonstrators.

"While attempting to separate the males, several others joined in and began to assault the officers," the statement said.

This is the Middle East in miniature - two people start fight, someone else tries to break it up, and everyone else piles in.

The demonstrators had gathered on Manhattan's West Side on Sunday afternoon to protest the Israeli incursion in Gaza. The rally began peacefully, but skirmishes between police and demonstrators eventually broke out, witnesses said. iReport.com: Hundreds march, shout at rally

Steve Sherman, coordinator of security for United for Peace and Justice and a demonstrator at the rally, said police maced demonstrators.

"The police pushed us out onto the avenue, and as we were walking down the avenue ... they charged with horses on the sidewalks and they charged with their own bodies and pushed in, and a riot started," he said.

"Charged" with horses? Somehow, I think not. If they had there probably would have been a higher injury rate. What, most likely, happened was that they used their horses to herd people off the sidewalk and into the street as crowd control measure and to make it more difficult to vandalize property and storefronts. If horse pushes you, you will move. That's not a cavalry charge, though, that's legitimate crowd control. Likewise the police officers pushing in with their own bodies - it's considered a pretty low-key crowd control. I suspect the riot had already started or was imminent, that's why they were using these techniques.

Mike Eilenfeldt, another demonstrator, said confrontations between the police and protesters appeared to escalate after a police officer had fallen to the ground.

"He's laying on the street, and from that point on it's a police riot where they start attacking the young people," Eilenfeldt told CNN.

Right. Mr. Police Officer just happened to be taking a nap on the ground during a protest. It is reasonable to assume somebody in that crowd was responsible for the police officer being injured. Saying that crowd control used after that incident is a "police riot" is disingenuous. There had to be some sort of violence in that crowd or that police officer wouldn't have been injured, the riot was either already underway or well on the way to getting started. Oh, poor "young people" attacked by the police when obviously one of the "young people" seems to have attacked a policeman. It's rather like one group firing rockets into the territory of another, then acting surprised and upset when their targets react. There seems to be a meme that the poor oppressed little people can throw rocks (or rockets) at the authorities, or at some other people, and their targets are just supposed to stand there and take it. Any move to respond is seen as an "attack" on the poor oppressed "peaceful" little people. This is really not a viable attitude to have long term.

As for what happened in New York.... I think a riot was starting, I don't think it ever really got rolling. The ratio of arrested to injured officers (9:7) is pretty low - there have been actual riots in US cities where dozens or hundreds were arrested. We don't have dozens or hundreds of injured civilians. Despite the accusations of cavalry charge, the crowd control techniques were probably pretty tame (mace being somewhat in dispute) compared to, say, tasers, water hoses, dogs, or gunfire

Police denied the allegations of mace being used on protesters

You know, whenever we get one of these "the police used mace"/"no we didn't" bits going I always wonder if someone in the crowd used mace or pepper spray which was then blamed on the police...

[Ryan Thunder]

Unfortunately, Ray, Israel always loses the PR war, every time. They haven't had favorable PR for some time; certainly not in the 2006 Lebanon War, or in 1982. In the media, any time you have a powerful, well-trained and professional mechanized army fighting rag-tag guerrillas, there is a weird wellspring of sympathy for the guerrillas because, even if their cause is questionable, they appear brave, gritty and determined. Plus, there's the suspicion that any government that would send in tanks or troops against civilians is automatically in the wrong.

That's it?

They've almost never appeared to me to be brave, gritty, or determined. Only bothersomely, persistently, and--all too often--irredeemably stupid for believing they can do much more than die pointlessly.

Police denied the allegations of mace being used on protesters

You know, whenever we get one of these "the police used mace"/"no we didn't" bits going I always wonder if someone in the crowd used mace or pepper spray which was then blamed on the police...

Hah. Morons. I wouldn't put it past them.

[Kanastrous]

Well, 'brave, gritty and determined' is almost the same as 'suicidal, dirty and fanatical...'

[Gil Hamilton]

Not really any big ones. Hamas wiped out or drove out most of the other militant groups after it was elected. I'm sure there are still some Fatah-aligned fighters around, but after their shooting war I'm not sure they're going to jump in against the Israelis, particularly since their movement is largely directed at NOT shooting at Israel.

With the amount of bad blood between Fatah and Hamas, I'm sure Fatah fighters would do nothing but get a silly grin on their faces with news that the IDF is gunning for Hamas. Hamas getting slaughtered is nothing but good news for them, really.

[Siege]

I haven't seen many people sympathize with the "brave, gritty and determined" Hamas recruits who get killed en masse. Rather, people seem to sympathize with Joe Gaza and his family who have to -again- camp out in a warzone marked by rapidly dwindling supplies of food, water and medicine.

If there is a reason Israel is losing the PR war it isn't because of people's innate sympathy for underdog Hamas: it's because all the other Palestinians who are killed or are otherwise affected during the hunt for Hamas. I know all about collateral damage, the repulsive human shield tactics employed by Hamas, and how Israel does a lot to avoid civilian casualties, but it's kind of hard not to feel sympathy for the average citizen of Gaza City right now.

[The Grim Squeaker]

I haven't seen many people sympathize with the "brave, gritty and determined" Hamas recruits who get killed en masse. Rather, people seem to sympathize with Joe Gaza and his family who have to -again- camp out in a warzone marked by rapidly dwindling supplies of food, water and medicine.

If there is a reason Israel is losing the PR war it isn't because of people's innate sympathy for underdog Hamas: it's because all the other Palestinians who are killed or are otherwise affected during the hunt for Hamas. I know all about collateral damage, the repulsive human shield tactics employed by Hamas, and how Israel does a lot to avoid civilian casualties, but it's kind of hard not to feel sympathy for the average citizen of Gaza City right now.

But not for the average Arab/(Bedouin) or Jewish or Christian (Israeli) citizen of the Israeli South.?