Is Israeli Action in the Conflict Creating More Terrorists?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hurkyl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the impact of Israeli actions in the ongoing conflict and whether these actions contribute to the creation of more terrorists. Participants explore various perspectives on the responsibilities of Israel and the organizations opposing it, touching on themes of military response, international resolutions, and the consequences of occupation.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Israeli military actions have resulted in more harm to Palestinians than to their intended targets, suggesting a need for addressing the underlying issues for the benefit of both Israelis and Palestinians.
  • Others challenge the notion that there is a lack of desire to confront terrorist organizations, questioning the framing of the debate as one-sided against Israel.
  • There are claims that international bodies, such as the UN Security Council, have been reluctant to condemn both Israel and terrorist organizations equally, which some participants see as a political maneuver.
  • Concerns are raised about the proportionality of Israeli responses, with specific examples cited of civilian casualties and destruction, leading to the assertion that such actions may foster further resentment and terrorism.
  • Some participants reflect on the historical context of the occupation, suggesting that the prolonged nature of the conflict has escalated tensions and violence, complicating the path to peace.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether Israeli actions are justified or if they contribute to increased terrorism. Disagreement persists regarding the framing of the conflict and the responsibilities of both sides.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific events and resolutions without providing detailed context or clarity on the implications of these references. The discussion reflects a variety of assumptions about the motivations and actions of both Israeli forces and Palestinian groups.

Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
14,922
Reaction score
28
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5225418

They even managed to hurt more of their "own people" than their enemy, and they even did it as the Israelis were leaving.

Why is there even any doubt that these organizations need to be dealt with? Not just for the good of the Israelis, but for the good of the Palestinians too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I wonder, where did you get the idea that anyone doesn't want such organisations dealt with?
 
Your one sided attacks against Israel without ne'er a mention of those organizations or the countries who sponsor them. That's where.
 
kat said:
Your one sided attacks against Israel without ne'er a mention of those organizations or the countries who sponsor them. That's where.

I believe I have mentioned my opinion of terrorist groups in the past. If other readers are ill-informed, and too lazy to read all relevant information, it's hardly my fault. Grow up.
 
Lol, riiiiight.
 
Adam said:
I wonder, where did you get the idea that anyone doesn't want such organisations dealt with?


Because when we proposed that the last resolution condemning Israel should condemn hamas for their suicide bombings, EVERY OTHER member of the security council vetoed or abstained.
 
phatmonky said:
Because when we proposed that the last resolution condemning Israel should condemn hamas for their suicide bombings, EVERY OTHER member of the security council vetoed or abstained.

Which one was that then? ANyway it is very rare, esp for the security council to condemn groups that aren't represnetives of a government as they are not bound by the UN charter. Israel has alos used this is in the past as a mealy-mouthed way of avoiding their UNSC mandated obligations by citing the failure of other groups to live up to the same resolutions meaning that most countries are reluctant to have UNSC reslutions that ask for action of Israel and Palestinain groups in the same resoltuions.
 
Also note in the lastest attack they were atatcking a legitmate miltary target as indeed they did when they ambushed the soldiers. This can only be seen as a turen for a bettre as few would deny an occupied country the right to use deadly forvce against soldiers and settlers.
 
jcsd said:
Which one was that then? ANyway it is very rare, esp for the security council to condemn groups that aren't represnetives of a government as they are not bound by the UN charter. Israel has alos used this is in the past as a mealy-mouthed way of avoiding their UNSC mandated obligations by citing the failure of other groups to live up to the same resolutions meaning that most countries are reluctant to have UNSC reslutions that ask for action of Israel and Palestinain groups in the same resoltuions.

I don't remember the number.It was very recent. We responded with a veto to the condemnation of Israel only.
At this point, I'm fairly apathetic to any reasoning on WHY no one wants to condemen the terrorist groups and Israel at once. They both need it, and if this whole situation is only going to be politics then I care even less.

Either way, the question to me was "where did you get the idea that anyone doesn't want such organisations dealt with". The inaction on everyone's part but Israel says that is the case to me.
 
  • #10
The problem is that Israel's action is disproportionate, 13 of their soldiers die so they kill 41 people including at at a peaceful protest and 3 children shot in cold blood by snipers and demolish dozens of houses, a lot of them just to widen the streets to allow their tanks to go down them.

It's actions like these that only serve to create more terrorists you'd be a liar if you were a Palestinain after everything the Israelis have done to them over the years, you would not feel sympathetic to the suicide bombers.

There can never be peace will Israel is occupying the Wset Bank and Gaza because it is natural for people to fight occupation with any means they have. The terrorism situation was never anything approaching as bad as it is was in the 30 years of occupation before the current intifada and in those in those 30 years the occupation the Israelis never tried to justify the occupation by citing terrorism until now. Israel had many long years to leave the Gaza and the West Bank of it's own accord.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
13K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K