News Is the Israel-Hamas truce a hopeful step towards lasting peace in Gaza?

[g33kski11z]

Under the agreement, Gaza's Hamas leaders agreed to stop attacks from all Palestinian militants, and in return, Israel would halt raids inside Gaza and and gradually ease its economic blockade if the truce holds.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/19/israel.hamas.truce/index.html

Hopefully this peace will hold. Unfortunately, I doubt it.. but I truly hope.

 

[WarPhalange]

Don't count on it. A lot of people stand to profit on this thing continuing to be messy.

 

[g33kski11z]

Three Qassam rockets fired from Gaza on Tuesday struck the Israeli border town of Sderot and its environs, causing no serious injuries but constituting the first serious breach of a five-day-old truce between Israel and Hamas, the Islamic group that controls Gaza

five days.. they couldn't stop fighting for five days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/world/middleeast/25mideast.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast&oref=slogin

 

[lisab]

Seems so hard to make forward progress...

 

[AhmedEzz]

Don't count on it. A lot of people stand to profit on this thing continuing to be messy.

This is very true, the peace was stalled a lot for this issue.

Hamas didn't fire those rockets it was another group. They said they fired it because Israel assassinated one of their deputies in the West Bank. Personally, I think its BS. Hopefully, the Israelis won't respond else that group's aim would be met - breaking the truce.

Shortly after the attack Hamas said that they are still holding to the truce. It is so obvious that some people just don't want peace, even for a while, in the area.

 

[g33kski11z]

...A lot of people stand to profit on this thing continuing to be messy...

Like who?

...Hamas didn't fire those rockets it was another group. They said they fired it because Israel assassinated one of their deputies in the West Bank. Hopefully, the Israelis won't respond else that group's aim would be met - breaking the truce...

The truce was already broken, don't you get that? This is the same story that has been given before. If the Palestinian government can not keeps its people from firing rockets at their neighbors, they should not be in power. Same goes for Israel or any other country for that matter.

...Shortly after the attack Hamas said that they are still holding to the truce...

Of course, because they know Israel could stomp them into the ground.

 

[AhmedEzz]

Like who?

Iran, Extremists, terrorists,etc...This is why those two rockets were fired, people like those don't want peace or any kind of cease-fire for that matter.

 

[g33kski11z]

...A lot of people stand to profit on this thing continuing to be messy...

Iran, Extremists, terrorists,etc...

How will they profit? Are you speaking strictly monetarily? or some other way?

 

[WarPhalange]

I was thinking Israel, too, actually. For all their talk they are pretty violent and get a lot of money from the US. The more they get attacked the more support they get from other countries. Or have you forgotten the Lebanon fiasco that backfired?

Weapons manufacturers for one, Iran yes, and of course the nuts who believe WW3 will make Jesus come and save us. These people have more power than you think.

 

[g33kski11z]

..The more they get attacked the more support they get from other countries..

Yea, I see that point. So you are talking strictly money. {no?} But if you balance what they are paid to deal with that against what they spend in attempt to prevent it, I wonder if they come out ahead.

..and of course the nuts who believe WW3 will make Jesus come and save us. These people have more power than you think..

No, unfortunately, I'm well aware of how much power those people have.

 

[WarPhalange]

Yea, I see that point. So you are talking strictly money. {no?} But if you balance what they are paid to deal with that against what they spend in attempt to prevent it, I wonder if they come out ahead.

No, not strictly money. They play the victim card and end up taking over more land. They also have a powerful lobbying force here in the US.

And if you try to criticize Israel, what happens? You get branded an anti-semite, even though Israel is more than just Jewish and you aren't even saying anything about Jews.

I mean look at Dershowitz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Dershowitz#Defending_Israel

This is a powerful man and he doesn't let you criticize Israeli tactics.

So I can totally believe Israel fired the first shot. But, it doesn't matter, because the other side (extremists, Iran, etc) have a lot to gain. You don't gain terrorist recruits when everything is peaceful. If someone walked into I don't know Orange County and asked kids if they want to become terrorists, they just ask "why?". Everything's fine where they live. You need conflict to recruit people to your cause; some sort of enemy. So it could just as well have been a false flag to "retaliate" and start up the conflict again.

 

[g33kski11z]

No, not strictly money. They play the victim card and end up taking over more land..

Really..?? When did that happen. {not being a smart a$$, I don't know a lot about the history}

So it could just as well have been a false flag to "retaliate" and start up the conflict again.

But wouldn't Israel have fired back? Honestly, I see your point about the "need for a bad guy" but it seems to me {outside looking in w/U.S. perspective} these extremists will pick a fight with anyone just to have some one to hate.

 

[WarPhalange]

Really..?? When did that happen. {not being a smart a$$, I don't know a lot about the history}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement

I mean, it's no different than what any country does. I'm just saying they have to gain from it when people are sympathetic to them.

But wouldn't Israel have fired back? Honestly, I see your point about the "need for a bad guy" but it seems to me {outside looking in w/U.S. perspective} these extremists will pick a fight with anyone just to have some one to hate.

No, that's what I meant actually. That terrorists will try to pick a fight with pretty much anyone, because they need to have an enemy in order to get new recruits.

 

[seycyrus]

...The more they get attacked the more support they get from other countries. Or have you forgotten the Lebanon fiasco that backfired?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you talking about the conflict in '06 in which Nasrallah admitted that the war started after hezbollah attacked an Israeli convoy in Israeli territory, and kidnapped two soldiers?

Israel didn't get a lot of support after that. Not at all. They caught a lot of flak for the collateral damage that ensued.

 

[AhmedEzz]

The United States government further responded by authorizing Israel's request for expedited shipment of precision-guided bombs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War

During 2006

On 14 July, the US Congress was notified of a potential sale of $210 million worth of jet fuel to Israel...it was reported in 24 July that the United States was in the process of providing Israel with "bunker buster" bombs, which would allegedly be used to target the leader of Lebanon's Hezbollah guerilla group and destroy its trenches...American media also recently questioned whether Israel had violated an agreement not to use American supplied cluster bombs on civilian targets...Economic Support Funds (ESF)...Foreign Military Financing (FMF)...For 2006, the Administration has requested $240 million in ESF and $2.28 billion in FMF. H.R. 3057

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-United_States_relations

 

[WarPhalange]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you talking about the conflict in '06 in which Nasrallah admitted that the war started after hezbollah attacked an Israeli convoy in Israeli territory, and kidnapped two soldiers?

Israel didn't get a lot of support after that. Not at all. They caught a lot of flak for the collateral damage that ensued.

Yes, keyword "backfired". The reason why it backfired is because trading POW's is a routine thing amongst them, so having Israel outright attack Lebanon for it doesn't make sense. It wasn't the first time it happened and everybody knows how to handle it.

 

[seycyrus]

Yes, keyword "backfired". The reason why it backfired is because trading POW's is a routine thing amongst them, so having Israel outright attack Lebanon for it doesn't make sense. It wasn't the first time it happened and everybody knows how to handle it.

Enough of this apologist propaganda!

Maybe someone decided it was time to change the "routine".

They admittedly crossed the border and took captives after an attack in which the fired rockets at a city as a distraction.

 

[seycyrus]

Spot on Ahmad!

Israel and the US use precision bombs to minimize civilian casualties, and suffer political throwback when collateral damage is not minimized.

On the other hand ... Hezbollah and Hamas intentionally use crude weapons that cannot be controlled and throw them into civilian centers and use them FROM civilian centers.

 

[WarPhalange]

Enough of this apologist propaganda!

Maybe someone decided it was time to change the "routine".

They admittedly crossed the border and took captives after an attack in which the fired rockets at a city as a distraction.

Spot on Ahmad!

Israel and the US use precision bombs to minimize civilian casualties, and suffer political throwback when collateral damage is not minimized.

On the other hand ... Hezbollah and Hamas intentionally use crude weapons that cannot be controlled and throw them into civilian centers and use them FROM civilian centers.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8fQV4NLDlT4

Oops?

 

[seycyrus]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8fQV4NLDlT4
Oops?

Sorry, but posting a link toa 1 ten minute video in which the speaker is obviously pro-Hezbollah, doesn't counter my arguments.

Which specific points did you think it addressed?

Certainly, it does not nullify Nasrallah's admission, nor does it refute the fact that Israel was held to task for an unusual (note the word *unusual*) amount of collateral damage in 2006.

Israel kills 500 military targets. - Ignored
Israel kills 1 civilian - Front page news.

Hezbollah kills 100 civilians - Ignored (par for the course)
Hezbollah hits one military targe t- Front page news!

 

[WarPhalange]

So you completely missed the part where Israel has been occupying Lebanon and they just want them out?

Also, if you want to talk about propaganda, what's with your hypothetical figures there? Part of the Israel-Lebanon war were the massive civilian casualties Israel inflicted. And why? Because there were terrorists there. That makes it okay to destroy hospitals, schools, and airports.

 

[Astronuc]

Israel and the US use precision bombs to minimize civilian casualties, and suffer political throwback when collateral damage is not minimized.

On the other hand ... Hezbollah and Hamas intentionally use crude weapons that cannot be controlled and throw them into civilian centers and use them FROM civilian centers.

Not quite.

I think the record shows that in the Iraq war, the smart bombs weren't so smart and many civilians were killed by bombs and missiles that missed the target. And of course, there were artillery barrages of civilian areas, ostensibly to get the insurgents amongst the civilians.

As for collateral damage in the Palestinian areas or in Lebanon.

LOCKHEED MARTIN of Florida and the Federal Laboratories of Pennsylvania have made quite a contribution to life in the municipality of Bethlehem. Or, in the case of Lockheed, death. Pieces of the US manufacturer's Hellfire air-to-ground missile lie in the local civil defence headquarters in Bethlehem less than two months after it exploded in 18-year-old Osama Khorabi's living room, killing him instantly. The missile engine, fuel pipe and shreds of the wiring system have been sorted into plastic bags by ambulance drivers and paramedics, alongside shrapnel from dozens of US-made fuses for shells fired by Israeli tanks into the Christian village of Beit Jalla.

. . . .

The Israeli tank crews routinely send shells into Beit Jalla when Palestinian gunmen fire Russian-made Kalashnikov rifles from the village at the neighbouring Jewish settlement of Gilo - itself illegally built on land belonging to the people of Beit Jalla - and most of these rounds have US fuses. All are coded: "FUZE P18D M549ACO914H014-014" (in some cases the last digit reads "5"). One of these shells killed Dr Harald Fischer, a German citizen living in Beit Jalla, last November. But the name of the firm making these fuses is not included in the code.

Lockheed has already been implicated in the massacre of four children and two women in Lebanon when an Israeli Apache helicopter, made by Lockheed, fired a Lockheed-made Hellfire 1 missile into an ambulance in southern Lebanon in 1996. Computer plates from the air- to-ground rocket - whose advertising logo read: "All For One and One For All"- were subsequently taken to the US by the Independent on Sunday and identified as a Hellfire, by Boeing executives who were then joint-makers of the missile.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20010415/ai_n14381754

Hamas and Hezbollah have what they have - inexpensive munitions. They do not have the largest economy sending jets, helicopters and guided missiles.

 

[Hurkyl]

Because there were terrorists there. That makes it okay to destroy hospitals, schools, and airports.

Consider these two acts:

(1) destroying a hospital because you want to destroy the terrorist den that operates within it,
(2) destroying a hospital because you want to destroy the hospital.

Can we at least agree that these two acts are significantly different?

 

[AhmedEzz]

Hospitals and schools are really good places for the terrorists to shoot and launch attacks on the Israeli army, its totally understandable why they would blow up the infrastructure of Lebanon...terrorists use those.

 

[seycyrus]

So you completely missed the part where Israel has been occupying Lebanon and they just want them out?

Oh, was that your point? You had to post a link to some Irish guy making that claim?

Since you posted those links in response to my post, one might assume that they addressed the points I raised.

BTW, Hezbollah was not supposed to be operating in Lebbanon.

 

[seycyrus]

Not quite.

Yes quite. The US and Israeli far outspend in both total magnitude and relative numbers other countries in their efforts to minimize collateral damage.

I think the record shows that in the Iraq war, the smart bombs weren't so smart and many civilians were killed by bombs and missiles that missed the target.

Weapon systems do not always work as intended. INTENT matters.

And of course, there were artillery barrages of civilian areas, ostensibly to get the insurgents amongst the civilians.

No *ostensibly* about it. If Israel intended to kill those civilians, they would be much more efficient about it.

As for collateral damage in the Palestinian areas or in Lebanon.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20010415/ai_n14381754

Yes, I am aware that there is collateral damage. What's the purpose of that quote. The US does supply technology, that was not in dispute.

Hamas and Hezbollah have what they have - inexpensive munitions. They do not have the largest economy sending jets, helicopters and guided missiles.

Enough of the apologist propaganda!

Hamas and Hizbollah purchase and utilize their weapon systems with no regard for collateral damage.

Search the web and show me where a Hamas or Hezbollah leader publicly apologizes for the death of an Israeli Jew. You'll be hard pressed.

 

[seycyrus]

Hospitals and schools are really good places for the terrorists to shoot and launch attacks on the Israeli army, its totally understandable why they would blow up the infrastructure of Lebanon...terrorists use those.

Certainly the "good old days" or terrorists stockpiling munitions seeking shelter, and launching attacks from hospitals and other civilian centers, and not expecting any reaction are over.

If you launch an attack from a civilian center YOU are responsible for any deaths caused in a response to your attack.

 

[AhmedEzz]

Well mate I don't see any reason for destroying bridges,roads and so in Lebanon. Moreover, Israel didn't use the high-precision bombs, it used cluster bombs in CIVILIAN areas.

When the count of unexploded cluster bomblets passed 100,000, the United Nation's undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs, Jan Egeland, expressed his disbelief at the scale of the problem.

What's shocking and, I would say to me, completely immoral," he said, "is that 90% of the cluster-bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution, when we really knew there would be an end of this.

http://www.international.ucla.edu/ar...parentid=56096

 

[Art]

Enough of the apologist propaganda!

.

You probably don't see the irony in your statement

 

[Art]

Certainly the "good old days" or terrorists stockpiling munitions seeking shelter, and launching attacks from hospitals and other civilian centers, and not expecting any reaction are over.

If you launch an attack from a civilian center YOU are responsible for any deaths caused in a response to your attack.

So which Israeli city bans IDF members as according to your rules of engagement any city they live in or pass through are valid targets.

 

[Art]

Yes quite. The US and Israeli far outspend in both total magnitude and relative numbers other countries in their efforts to minimize collateral damage.

You can't have it both ways. If they spend so much money and effort ensuring only the targets they want to hit are hit then given the huge number of civilian casualties that must mean they are deliberately targeting civilians.

In the past 18 months there have been over 600 Palestinians killed (mainly civilians) and 18 Israelis killed (mainly soldiers) almost makes one wonder which side has the precision weapons.

 

[seycyrus]

Well mate I don't see any reason for destroying bridges,roads and so in Lebanon. Moreover, Israel didn't use the high-precision bombs, it used cluster bombs in CIVILIAN areas.

I note that we are continuing to bypass the admission by Nasrallah as to the initiation of the war and continue to focus on an issue that has already been addressed.

Yes, the collateral damage was a mjor screw up. People overreacted. The Israeli populace held their leaders to the fire for this, and condemned the results. People lost their jobs and policies were rethought.

 

[Astronuc]

Yes quite. The US and Israeli far outspend in both total magnitude and relative numbers other countries in their efforts to minimize collateral damage.

Weapon systems do not always work as intended. INTENT matters.

No *ostensibly* about it. If Israel intended to kill those civilians, they would be much more efficient about it.

Yes, I am aware that there is collateral damage. What's the purpose of that quote. The US does supply technology, that was not in dispute.

Enough of the apologist propaganda!

Hamas and Hizbollah purchase and utilize their weapon systems with no regard for collateral damage.

Search the web and show me where a Hamas or Hezbollah leader publicly apologizes for the death of an Israeli Jew. You'll be hard pressed.

Not propaganda, but a successful refutation with facts of one's assertions, which btw are not supported by any evidence.

I'm opposed to and I condemn the violence of both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

 

[seycyrus]

So which Israeli city bans IDF members as according to your rules of engagement any city they live in or pass through are valid targets.

I'm sorry. Could you please rephrase that?

 

[seycyrus]

You can't have it both ways. If they spend so much money and effort ensuring only the targets they want to hit are hit then given the huge number of civilian casualties that must mean they are deliberately targeting civilians.

OR it could be that in the real world, systems don't always work as intended.

INTENT is the key word. To pretend that intent does not matter, is to backslide into a realm of fantasy.

In the past 18 months there have been over 600 Palestinians killed (mainly civilians) and 18 Israelis killed (mainly soldiers) almost makes one wonder which side has the precision weapons.

Well, we already know which side is shooting from behind the skirts of nearby civilians. The amazing thing is, that these peopel have managed to convince others that if their civilian shields get hurt, it is the other guys fault.

 

[seycyrus]

Not propaganda, but a successful refutation with facts of one's assertions, which btw are not supported by any evidence.

I'm opposed to and I condemn the violence of both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

There was no successful refutation. Not of any claim that I made at least.

I never claimed that the US didn't supply weapons OR that innocent Palestinians weren't being killed.

Notice I can use the phrase "innocent Palastinian".

Not supported by any evidence? Look at the targets of the rocket barrages. Look at Nasrallah's staement. Paraphrased..."...we fired rockets at the nearby city as a distraction..."

Note *nearby city*, NOT *the 798th artillery unit stationed wherever*. NOT *the 2100 infantry patrol*

The CITY.

Every single work are review I've attended highlights programs to minimize collateral damage.
Look at the nonlethal weapons programs being developed. Hint: Hezbollah and Hamas aint attending those conferences.

 

[AhmedEzz]

I would like to see a strong reference for such claims - and please try to find a credible one.

 

[seycyrus]

I would like to see a strong reference for such claims - and please try to find a credible one.

Which claims? I've made several posts.

 

[g33kski11z]

Useless bickering about who was wrong when, doesn't help anyone. There have been mistakes and bad choices on all sides. Neither side is "innocent", that's not the point.

If you ask me, the United States supports Israel because for a few reasons.. One, they like us, most of the ME doesn't. That's not a secret. Two, our friendship benefits both sides, they get some of our weapons, and we get some excellent intelligence. Seriously, the rest of the Middle East supports Hamas and Hezbollah.

The point is that we need to be able to move past these issues, reconcile our differences and focus on the forward progress of man. This is like two brothers fighting.. One brother can always blame the other brother for punching him first.

 

[AhmedEzz]

Seriously, the rest of the Middle East supports Hamas and Hezbollah

This is not true mate. The only countries in the Middle East that supports Hamas and/or Hezbollah is Syria and Iran. Even in Lebanon there's anti-Hezbollah movement. To further prove my point, Hezbollah took over Beirut weeks ago and they used their weapons against Lebanese people, so don't tell me Lebanon supports Hezbollah.

As for Hamas, it has no support except from Syria and Iran. Egypt for one despises the movement, it resembles the forbidden terrorist group of Muslim brotherhood in Egypt.

 

[g33kski11z]

..The only countries in the Middle East that supports Hamas and/or Hezbollah is Syria and Iran..

..As for Hamas, it has no support except from Syria and Iran.

Maybe publicly.. but I'm sure over the years Saudi Arabia and Iraq {before we invaded} help them behind the scenes.. No one in the middle east like Israel, and of course they will support whatever entity is raging a war against them.

 

[AhmedEzz]

Not all war is supported as you think. It was not of Lebanon's interest to go to war with Israel. It is not of Palestinian people's interest to be at war with Israel. Egyptians for one are working really hard to bring (fair) peaceful resolution to the region.

 

[WarPhalange]

If you ask me, the United States supports Israel because for a few reasons.. One, they like us, most of the ME doesn't. That's not a secret.

If we gave billions of dollars to any country in the ME I'm sure they'd like us, too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/world/middleeast/17israel.html
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html

 

[WarPhalange]

Not all war is supported as you think. It was not of Lebanon's interest to go to war with Israel. It is not of Palestinian people's interest to be at war with Israel. Egyptians for one are working really hard to bring (fair) peaceful resolution to the region.

I never said everybody likes war. I don't know why you'd think that. I said there are people who gain money and power from conflict. Whether it be terrorists, people who play the victim card, or straight up weapons manufacturers.

 

[seycyrus]

If we gave billions of dollars to any country in the ME I'm sure they'd like us, too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/world/middleeast/17israel.html

If the other ME countries were better allies, I'm sure they would get more money!

That being said, a couple of paragraphs into that link, it talks about the aid to Israel being part of a plan to give 20 billion in aid to Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

 

[g33kski11z]

If we gave billions of dollars to any country in the ME I'm sure they'd like us, too...

Did you read the rest of my statement? I don't think they are friends because we give them money, its the other way around.. if anything its probably payments for the intel they give us... its a mutually beneficial relationship.

Not all war is supported as you think...

I never said it was in any countries interest to go to war. I said that the middle east countries {generally speaking} support the Palestinian point of view.

 

[WarPhalange]

If the other ME countries were better allies, I'm sure they would get more money!

Did you read the rest of my statement? I don't think they are friends because we give them money, its the other way around.. if anything its probably payments for the intel they give us... its a mutually beneficial relationship.

Come on people, I KNOW you can do logic. It just takes some effort. Here, let me help:

Israel started up in May 1948 officially. In 1949 (I'm assuming FY49, so that's in October) we start giving them aid.

There is no time for them to give us intel and why would other ME countries be friendly when we've been screwing them over for oil at that time?

 

[quadraphonics]

If we gave billions of dollars to any country in the ME I'm sure they'd like us, too.

The United States has been giving roughly as much aid to Egypt as Israel gets for decades now, and the PA has largely been bankrolled by American funds. Saudi Arabia has had their security and economy provided essentially for free by the United States since the 1930's. Jordan is also a big, longtime recipient of US aid.

Israel started up in May 1948 officially. In 1949 (I'm assuming FY49, so that's in October) we start giving them aid.

The aid they received in the 1950's and most of the 1960's was small potatos, and mostly consisted of loans. Israel's main patron in the early decades was France, who wanted to use them as a vanguard for recolonizing the eastern Mediterranean (witness the consequent Suez Canal crisis, in which the United States shut down a joint Anglo/Franco/Israeli assault on Egypt). It was not until after the Six-Day War that American patronage of Israel took on its present outlines.

 

[AhmedEzz]

As of 2005, direct U.S. economic and military assistance to Israel amounted to nearly 154 billion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-United_States_relations

U.S. Aid to Egypt Totals $28 Billion in Three Decades

http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/features/egypt/ That is 154 billion $ vs. 28 billion $ ... how is that "roughly" equal?

 

[quadraphonics]

I said the amounts of money given per year were roughly equal, not that the total non-military assistance to Egypt equals the total amount of money (including military assistance) given to Israel. So, you either need to take the military aid out of the Israel column, or include military aid in the Egypt column, and you also need to look at it on an annual basis. Up until last year, both Israel and Egypt were receiving roughly $2 Billion a year in total aid (military + nonmilitary). Last year, it was decided to up Israel to $3 Billion in military aid, and cancel the non-military aid. Also note that Egypt has only been getting aid since about 1975, whereas Israel has been getting aid since 1950 (although not substantial aid until 1967). From about 1975 until last year, Egypt and Israel were getting roughly equal amounts of aid each year (and Jordan and the PA weren't getting left out either).

Note that American military aid to Egypt accounts for well over half of Egypt's military budget, whereas military aid to Israel accounts for less than 1/3 of their budget.