Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Israel, Hamas truce begins

  1. Jun 19, 2008 #1
    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.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 19, 2008 #2
    Don't count on it. A lot of people stand to profit on this thing continuing to be messy.
     
  4. Jun 24, 2008 #3
    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
     
  5. Jun 24, 2008 #4

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    :frown: Seems so hard to make forward progress...
     
  6. Jun 25, 2008 #5
    This is very true, the peace was stalled alot 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.
     
  7. Jun 25, 2008 #6
    Like who?
    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.
    Of course, because they know Israel could stomp them in to the ground.
     
  8. Jun 25, 2008 #7
    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.
     
  9. Jun 25, 2008 #8
    How will they profit? Are you speaking strictly monetarily? or some other way?
     
  10. Jun 25, 2008 #9
    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.
     
  11. Jun 25, 2008 #10
    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, unfortunately, I'm well aware of how much power those people have.
     
  12. Jun 25, 2008 #11
    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.
     
  13. Jun 25, 2008 #12
    Really..?? When did that happen. {not being a smart a$$, I don't know alot about the history}
    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.
     
  14. Jun 25, 2008 #13
    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.

    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.
     
  15. Jun 25, 2008 #14
    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 alot of support after that. Not at all. They caught alot of flak for the collateral damage that ensued.
     
  16. Jun 25, 2008 #15

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

    During 2006

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-United_States_relations
     
  17. Jun 25, 2008 #16
    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.
     
  18. Jun 25, 2008 #17
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2008
  19. Jun 25, 2008 #18
    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.
     
  20. Jun 25, 2008 #19
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=8fQV4NLDlT4

    Oops?
     
  21. Jun 25, 2008 #20
    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!
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Israel, Hamas truce begins
  1. Hamas wins! (Replies: 79)

  2. Hamas in a Showdown (Replies: 23)

Loading...