Re: Why is Israel not allowed to defend itself

**AnnaEsse** Fri 25 Jul - 17:26

katertaif wrote:
AnnaEsse wrote:
Iris wrote:Arguing with Palestinian supporters on social media is exactly like arguing with pro McCanns. The moment you start to rationally demolish their arguments, they turn to personal abuse and threats of violence. I was told on Facebook yesterday that "Hitler should have finished the job". Fortunately I don't let ignorant children like that upset me, although I know a lot of Jewish people who do.

I don't argue with them, Iris. I see people posting photos of children in Gaza. Hour after hour, more and more photos. I feel like asking them whether no adults were injured in Gaza and where are their photos? Apart from the fact that many of those photos are from other countries and not from Gaza, while I feel for those children, I think that using images of children to gain sympathy and encourage people to forget how all this started is contemptible.

Absolutely!!! Pictures of injured children are money in the bank to news casters and photographers. that isn't trivialising it, it's too horrendous for that, but as you say there are adult innocents as well. The other day I was looking at two pictures of dead children, allegedly killed by a cluster bomb attack by Assad forces in Syria. The other picture was allegedly of children dead in Gaza in the last day or two, killed by indiscriminate IDF fire. the only problem being it was the same picture. You mention that some of these dead children are not even from Gaza, and that one picture (and I'm sure there are hundreds like it) bears that out.

You say that showing those pictures is contemptible, How much more contemptible is hiding behind women and children in the first place as Hamas is doing? They are the murderers, no one else. Trying to get sympathy, and money from people by killing their own is beneath contempt.

I agree with everything you say here. I think it's bad enough that those children are being injured and killed, basically because Hamas uses them as shields and also because Hamas has not built any shelters for the people. Hamas has been firing rockets into Israel for years and now that Israel has had enough, Hamas attracts world-wide sympathy by parading the injured and dead children. Even dead, the children are pawns in the Hamas agenda. The people of Gaza are suffering because of the actions of Hamas. They need to be freed from Hamas.

katertaif Fri 25 Jul - 21:34

The leaders in the west are toning down their anti Israeli rhetoric, as the - for want of a better expression - common people can see who has done this. Our leaders have to respond or lose credibility and for them, that is more important than anything happening in Gaza. As you say, years of attacks, by Hamas have gone almost unnoticed, as Israel have tried to maintain some sort of peace. and those tunnels didn't build themselves yesterday. Hamas has done this before,, and broken every agreement including the 2012 peace accord. as well as the 2010 one. Israel had absolutely no choice but to do what she did, and people can see it. Hamas have overplayed their hand. I think they were banking on another coalition going to all out war. Israel has this evening rejected a cease fire that is true, but the reason for that is that Hamas has vowed to carry on. Again leaving Israel with no choice.

Most of us agree that Israel had no option but to launch air strikes followed by a ground assault. Hamas tried to counter that by putting women and children in the front line, and using schools and hospitals as rocket storage or actual launch sites. Women and children have been and will be killed and maimed, again because Israel has no choice in the matter. In the long run the Israeli action will save lives, not that Hamas cares about that. All you can really say about Hamas is that it takes a peculiar kind of courage to leave women and children to be killed, while themselves running around trying to whip up support (and of course get money for rockets) They apparently intend to fight to the last woman and child in Gaza. How brave.

wantthetruth Sat 26 Jul - 15:50

**malena stool** Sat 26 Jul - 19:50

A wonderful idea, but it takes at least two to discuss a worthwhile and everlasting peace and if one side simply uses a ceasefire to rearm and regroup and has done so time and again who can ever trust them not to do it again.

When the Palestinians are represented by politicians who carry pens not AK47s, perhaps the beginnings of an agreement could be reached.

Guest Sat 26 Jul - 20:07

Palestine was never a British Colony, and the Jewish people have been there for thousands of years - they didn't all just arrive at once. Also Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jewish Israelis, even down to their voting rights, there are Arab Muslim MPs in the Knesset. So the above video is a very nice production but it's full of glaring mistakes and mistruths, and a boycott of Israeli produce would only hurt the Palestinian people as well as the Israelis. It's just not that simple.

**fuzeta** Sat 26 Jul - 20:25

I agree, it was more or less like a story you would tell to children. It was a bit like a story I would be told in my Sunday school when I was about seven. Nothing is that simple in adult life I am afraid.

Guest Sat 26 Jul - 21:10

Sodastream have just sacked 60 Palestinian workers, due to industrial unrest - they were infiltrated by those with a hardline leftist agenda, spreading dissent and causing strikes. Also SodaStream have lost a lot of business - John Lewis and some other stores stopped stocking their product thanks to a boycott campaign, and they have had to close some of their retail outlets.

Considering that those Palestinian assembly line workers were on exactly the same terms, conditions and pay as their Israeli counterparts, it's very short sighted. They would have been on a fantastic wage by Palestinian economic standards, and they got fed as well. There should be more companies like SodaStream, because what Palestine really needs is paid work for it's citizens, so they can earn and contribute and then they would have a purpose in life other than building tunnels and firing rockets. But no, the knee jerk reaction would appear to be that if it is Israeli then it must be the work of Satan.

katertaif Sat 26 Jul - 22:01

malena stool wrote:A wonderful idea, but it takes at least two to discuss a worthwhile and everlasting peace and if one side simply uses a ceasefire to rearm and regroup and has done so time and again who can ever trust them not to do it again.

When the Palestinians are represented by politicians who carry pens not AK47s, perhaps the beginnings of an agreement could be reached.

Quite true but when are our alleged leaders in the west, and Ban Ki Moon et al going to realise that you cannot negotiate anything at all with someone who makes no secret of the fact that he doesn't recognise your country and wants you dead anyway? As you say until they carry pens, instead of guns and when they are prepared to admit that Israel does have the right to exist I do not see how we can get anywhere.

The Israelis have apparently discovered in these tunnels evidence that suggest a strong attack was to be launched while Israel was celebrating Rosh Hashanah. The new year falls this year on the 24th September. If the evidence they have found is accurate it suggests a force of more than 4,000 would be used. How can there be any negotiations with these people?

I imagine Shin Beth already had an inkling of this.

**AnnaEsse** Sat 26 Jul - 22:10

Iris wrote:Palestine was never a British Colony, and the Jewish people have been there for thousands of years - they didn't all just arrive at once. Also Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jewish Israelis, even down to their voting rights, there are Arab Muslim MPs in the Knesset. So the above video is a very nice production but it's full of glaring mistakes and mistruths, and a boycott of Israeli produce would only hurt the Palestinian people as well as the Israelis. It's just not that simple.

I have suggested several times on Facebook a way to assist those who wish to boycott Israeli products. So that they are not offended by their wishes being ignored, they should wear one of those Medicalert style pendants or bracelets, saying that should they fall ill, they are boycotting Israeli products and no equipment of Israeli design or any medical procedure developed by Israeli doctors and scientists should be used in their treatment.

**malena stool** Sat 26 Jul - 22:32

katertaif wrote:
malena stool wrote:A wonderful idea, but it takes at least two to discuss a worthwhile and everlasting peace and if one side simply uses a ceasefire to rearm and regroup and has done so time and again who can ever trust them not to do it again.

When the Palestinians are represented by politicians who carry pens not AK47s, perhaps the beginnings of an agreement could be reached.

Quite true but when are our alleged leaders in the west, and Ban Ki Moon et al going to realise that you cannot negotiate anything at all with someone who makes no secret of the fact that he doesn't recognise your country and wants you dead anyway? As you say until they carry pens, instead of guns and when they are prepared to admit that Israel does have the right to exist I do not see how we can get anywhere.

The Israelis have apparently discovered in these tunnels evidence that suggest a strong attack was to be launched while Israel was celebrating Rosh Hashanah. The new year falls this year on the 24th September. If the evidence they have found is accurate it suggests a force of more than 4,000 would be used. How can there be any negotiations with these people?

I imagine Shin Beth already had an inkling of this.

I would think the Israeli security services are well informed of the intentions and placement of much of Hamas' hardware and plans. I doubt there are very many targeted buildings that held no contraband, despite the truly harrowing scenes we are shown of civilian casualties. Assuming these photographs and reports are of casualties in Gaza.
Could the blatant bias shown by western leaders be seen as a form of appeasement to the constant protests and worse of some Arab states and individuals, much as European politicians did with Hitler's incessant demands in the run up to WW2?

wantthetruth Sun 27 Jul - 9:28

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/human-shielding-gaza-2014717154428830848.html

On 'human shielding' in Gaza

All fighting within cities and all bombardments of urban spaces, even the most "precise and surgical", is a potential death trap for civilians. Consequently, the permeation of war into cities inevitably transforms their inhabitants into potential human shields.

For Palestinians living in Gaza today, simply spending time in their own homes, frequenting a mosque, going to a hospital or to school has become a dangerous enterprise since any one of these architectural edifices can become at any moment a target. One can no longer safely assume that the existence of masses of human bodies - even the bodies of children - in civilian spaces can serve as defence of the weak against the lethal capacity of the hi-tech states.

"Where do Gaza terrorists hide their weapons?"
But since hi-tech states can and do kill hundreds or thousands of civilians, they have to provide moral justification for their action in order to preserve their standing in the international arena; they have to demonstrate that they are protecting the principles of liberal democracy. It is precisely within this context that we should understand the series of posters recently disseminated by the Israeli military through its Twitter account, Facebook and blogs.

The poster "Where do Gaza Terrorists Hide Their Weapons" is a paradigmatic example, where the subtext does the speaking: Houses, mosques, schools, and hospitals are legitimate targets because they are presumed to be weapon depositories.

"When is a house a home?"
This is also the message in "When Is A House a Home?" which simply zooms in on one of the images in the previous poster, showing how Palestinians presumably hide rockets in civilian homes.

The logic is straightforward: insofar as Hamas hides weapons in houses (illegitimate), Israel can bomb them as if they were military targets (legitimate). Within this framework, a single function (hiding weapons) out of many existing functions (home, shelter, intimacy, etc) determines the status of an urban site (in our case the house), so that the edifice's form loses its traditional signification.

The question "when does it become a legitimate military target?" is merely rhetorical. Its real meaning is: "All houses in Gaza are legitimate targets" since all houses are potentially non-homes.

"Isreal uses weapons to protect its civilians"
Not unlike colonial as well as other vastly asymmetrical wars, Israel's legitimisation for its indiscriminate bombing is premised upon a profound moral disjuncture between Israelis and Palestinians. In the poster "Israel uses weapon to protect its civilians. Hamas uses civilians to protect its weapons", Palestinians are depicted as barbarians who ignore the elementary grammar of international law.

Israel's warfare is, however, not only about the re-signification of architectural structures, but also about the transformation of human beings into collateral damage, subjects who can be killed without violating international law. This is the subtext of the poster featuring Israel's Chief of Staff saying: "Even as we carry out strikes, we remember that there are civilians in Gaza. Hamas has turned them into hostages."

"We remember that there are civilians in Gaza"
Again, the logic is clear. All civilians in Gaza are being held hostage by Hamas, which is considered a war crime and a gross violation of international law governing armed conflict. This, then, provides legal and moral justification against the accusation that Israel is the one killing civilians. Presumed human rights violations carried out by Palestinians against Palestinians - taking hostages and human shielding - thus become the legitimisation of lethal and indiscriminate violence on the part of the occupying force.

Hence, the use of human shields is not only a violation. In contemporary asymmetric urban wars, accusing the enemy of using human shields helps validate the claim that the death of "untargeted civilians" is merely collateral damage. When all civilians are potential human shields, when each and every civilian can become a hostage of the enemy, then all enemy civilians become killable.

"Some bomb shelters shelter people..."
In order for all this to be convincing, the Israeli military depicts the asymmetric context in which it unleashes its violence against a whole population as symmetric. This is carried out, for instance, through the poster "Some bomb shelters shelter people, some shelter bombs". Here a radically disproportionate situation is presented as if it were balanced.

The residents of Gaza are bombed by cutting edge F-16 fighter jets and drones, yet they do not have bomb shelters, and they have nowhere to flee. Israel's residents are bombed mostly by makeshift rockets, many of which have been intercepted by Iron Dome missiles. The majority of the population in Israel has access to shelters and can flee out of the rocket's range.

These powerful images, spread by the Israeli military through social media, attempt to transform the very presence of civilians as suspect in the areas it bombards, regardless of the fact that the areas it bombs are urban centres.

The crux of the matter is that in the context of contemporary asymmetric warfare, the weak do not have many options. When there are no bomb shelters, people remain at home during extensive bombardment. And if, like in the case of the Palestinians in Gaza, fleeing is not an option - because all exits from the strip have been closed, or because the neighbour's house is under the exact same threat as one's own, or because one is already a refugee and does not want to become a refugee anew - staying put, which the high-tech states term "illegal human shields," constitutes a form of resistance.

Neve Gordon is the author of Israel's Occupation.

Nicola Perugini is Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in Italian Studies and Middle East Studies at Brown University. His forthcoming book is entitled The Human Right to Dominate.

Follow Nicola on Twitter: @PeruginiNic

Quite beyond my comprehension that anybody could seriously believe that what Israel is doing is 'self defense'.......

katertaif Sun 27 Jul - 9:44

Good morning malena stool

I think you are right (again) Despite the harrowing scenes of children being killed and maimed, Israel is in fact conducting what John Kerry sarcastically referred to as a pinpoint operation. I believe it is much more accurate than Hamas dare admit. Besides that I mentioned the other day that one photograph purporting to show dead children was an out and out fake. That was only one picture out of hundreds. Of course it is fully in Hamas' interests to show these, and if children are in fact being maimed and killed, it is entirely down to Hamas, cynically using them for their own barbarous purposes.

I believe the constant appeasement, and the not quite out and out blaming of Israel is all about oil. Most of the countries who would side with Hamas are major oil producers and exporters. The west would be on it's knees in days if that flow were to be disrupted. Those same countries have heavily invested in western countries. So heavily that they could withstand the loss of revenue far better than we could withstand the loss of oil.

If we upset them too much they may place an embargo, much as the Saudis did to Holland a few years ago when to get the oil back, the Dutch government had to make a public apology, and pay a hefty fine. I forget who they had to pay it to, but the same thing could happen to the rest of us. Whatever the reasoning, our leaders are obviously desperate to avoid upsetting them.

katertaif Sun 27 Jul - 11:45

wantthetruth wrote:http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/07/human-shielding-gaza-2014717154428830848.html

On 'human shielding' in Gaza

All fighting within cities and all bombardments of urban spaces, even the most "precise and surgical", is a potential death trap for civilians. Consequently, the permeation of war into cities inevitably transforms their inhabitants into potential human shields.

For Palestinians living in Gaza today, simply spending time in their own homes, frequenting a mosque, going to a hospital or to school has become a dangerous enterprise since any one of these architectural edifices can become at any moment a target. One can no longer safely assume that the existence of masses of human bodies - even the bodies of children - in civilian spaces can serve as defence of the weak against the lethal capacity of the hi-tech states.

"Where do Gaza terrorists hide their weapons?"
But since hi-tech states can and do kill hundreds or thousands of civilians, they have to provide moral justification for their action in order to preserve their standing in the international arena; they have to demonstrate that they are protecting the principles of liberal democracy. It is precisely within this context that we should understand the series of posters recently disseminated by the Israeli military through its Twitter account, Facebook and blogs.

The poster "Where do Gaza Terrorists Hide Their Weapons" is a paradigmatic example, where the subtext does the speaking: Houses, mosques, schools, and hospitals are legitimate targets because they are presumed to be weapon depositories.

"When is a house a home?"
This is also the message in "When Is A House a Home?" which simply zooms in on one of the images in the previous poster, showing how Palestinians presumably hide rockets in civilian homes.

The logic is straightforward: insofar as Hamas hides weapons in houses (illegitimate), Israel can bomb them as if they were military targets (legitimate). Within this framework, a single function (hiding weapons) out of many existing functions (home, shelter, intimacy, etc) determines the status of an urban site (in our case the house), so that the edifice's form loses its traditional signification.

The question "when does it become a legitimate military target?" is merely rhetorical. Its real meaning is: "All houses in Gaza are legitimate targets" since all houses are potentially non-homes.

"Isreal uses weapons to protect its civilians"
Not unlike colonial as well as other vastly asymmetrical wars, Israel's legitimisation for its indiscriminate bombing is premised upon a profound moral disjuncture between Israelis and Palestinians. In the poster "Israel uses weapon to protect its civilians. Hamas uses civilians to protect its weapons", Palestinians are depicted as barbarians who ignore the elementary grammar of international law.

Israel's warfare is, however, not only about the re-signification of architectural structures, but also about the transformation of human beings into collateral damage, subjects who can be killed without violating international law. This is the subtext of the poster featuring Israel's Chief of Staff saying: "Even as we carry out strikes, we remember that there are civilians in Gaza. Hamas has turned them into hostages."

"We remember that there are civilians in Gaza"
Again, the logic is clear. All civilians in Gaza are being held hostage by Hamas, which is considered a war crime and a gross violation of international law governing armed conflict. This, then, provides legal and moral justification against the accusation that Israel is the one killing civilians. Presumed human rights violations carried out by Palestinians against Palestinians - taking hostages and human shielding - thus become the legitimisation of lethal and indiscriminate violence on the part of the occupying force.

Hence, the use of human shields is not only a violation. In contemporary asymmetric urban wars, accusing the enemy of using human shields helps validate the claim that the death of "untargeted civilians" is merely collateral damage. When all civilians are potential human shields, when each and every civilian can become a hostage of the enemy, then all enemy civilians become killable.

"Some bomb shelters shelter people..."
In order for all this to be convincing, the Israeli military depicts the asymmetric context in which it unleashes its violence against a whole population as symmetric. This is carried out, for instance, through the poster "Some bomb shelters shelter people, some shelter bombs". Here a radically disproportionate situation is presented as if it were balanced.

The residents of Gaza are bombed by cutting edge F-16 fighter jets and drones, yet they do not have bomb shelters, and they have nowhere to flee. Israel's residents are bombed mostly by makeshift rockets, many of which have been intercepted by Iron Dome missiles. The majority of the population in Israel has access to shelters and can flee out of the rocket's range.

These powerful images, spread by the Israeli military through social media, attempt to transform the very presence of civilians as suspect in the areas it bombards, regardless of the fact that the areas it bombs are urban centres.

The crux of the matter is that in the context of contemporary asymmetric warfare, the weak do not have many options. When there are no bomb shelters, people remain at home during extensive bombardment. And if, like in the case of the Palestinians in Gaza, fleeing is not an option - because all exits from the strip have been closed, or because the neighbour's house is under the exact same threat as one's own, or because one is already a refugee and does not want to become a refugee anew - staying put, which the high-tech states term "illegal human shields," constitutes a form of resistance.

Neve Gordon is the author of Israel's Occupation.

Nicola Perugini is Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in Italian Studies and Middle East Studies at Brown University. His forthcoming book is entitled The Human Right to Dominate.

Follow Nicola on Twitter: @PeruginiNic

Quite beyond my comprehension that anybody could seriously believe that what Israel is doing is 'self defense'.......

None of this changes or alters any basic truths.#

You say Gaza is heavily populated, and any strike must result in the death of innocents. That while being true, does bot absolve Hamas from using schools and hospitals as storage sites/launch pads for rockets. That is a war crime in itself.

Speaking of those rockets. At the 2012 peace agreement, Hamas claimed that it's stocks of rockets had been so depleted as to be insignificant. That is a fact, yet in the past couple of weeks they have fired over 2,000 into Israel, where did they get them? Were they lying in 2012, or more probably have they spent the last couple of years stocking up again. Once again that is an act of aggression,, an act that none of the apologists seems willing or indeed able to answer.

Israel has been a willing signatory to several cease fires in the last couple of weeks since Hamas began their attacks again. Hamas has refused any such cease fire. Yet some are trying to paint them as almost innocent by standers.

We could go on and on but to no purpose. We could talk of the faked photographs of dead children, the tunnels which did not dig themselves, and were certainly not dug for any peaceful purpose. Of the thousands of tonnes of concrete used in those tunnels that could have been far better used to improve the lives of the Palestinians. There is no need, There is one question which I doubt has an answer. Hamas does not recognise Israel's right to exist, and many times has said so. Jews are to be driven out of Palestine, or killed. How is it possible to negotiate any lasting peace with such people? They have proved after 2012, 2010 and agreements before that,, they simply cannot be trusted to keep their word indeed why should they? They are not dealing with equals, Hamas are dealing with a people who should not (in their eyes) exist at all. When we can get an answer to that one,, there may be a basis for a lasting peace. until there is there can be no meaningful negotiation. After each confrontation, Hamas will simply gear up for the next one, hopefully the time will come when another coalition can be persuaded to attack Israel again.

wantthetruth Sun 27 Jul - 12:40

Well said John Snow. Why is Israel not allowed to defend itself - Page 6 307691

**Claudia79** Sun 27 Jul - 16:00

Speaking of tragedies:

Why is Israel not allowed to defend itself - Page 6 Gaza110

**Claudia79** Sun 27 Jul - 16:05

wantthetruth wrote:

Well said John Snow.

katertaif Sun 27 Jul - 16:34

wantthetruth wrote:

Well said John Snow.

**Badboy** Mon 28 Jul - 23:55

THERE ARE REPORTS OF A PALISTINIAN GUNMAN KILLING 4 ISRAELI SOLDIERS,ISRAELIS SAY THEY CAPTURED GUNMAN.

Guest Tue 29 Jul - 9:05

Claudia79 wrote:Speaking of tragedies:

The BBC certainly are a tragedy. This is absolutely disgraceful. There is nothing even remotely funny about people being killed, whether they are Gazans or Israeli soldiers, most of whom are only 19 or 20 and are conscripts. Who the hell thought that broadcasting a hiss-take like this was a smart idea? They should be fired immediately.

katertaif Tue 29 Jul - 9:20

Iris wrote:
Claudia79 wrote:Speaking of tragedies:

The BBC certainly are a tragedy. This is absolutely disgraceful. There is nothing even remotely funny about people being killed, whether they are Gazans or Israeli soldiers, most of whom are only 19 or 20 and are conscripts. Who the hell thought that broadcasting a hiss-take like this was a smart idea? They should be fired immediately.

Absolutely Iris. It isn't in the least amusing.

katertaif Tue 29 Jul - 9:31

Badboy wrote:THERE ARE REPORTS OF A PALISTINIAN GUNMAN KILLING 4 ISRAELI SOLDIERS,ISRAELIS SAY THEY CAPTURED GUNMAN.

Good morning Badboy

It's a win win situation for a Palestinian terrorist. If killed, he's guaranteed paradise, and if captured, there is always the chance of a prisoner swap.

**Claudia79** Tue 29 Jul - 16:11

Iris wrote:
Claudia79 wrote:Speaking of tragedies:

The BBC certainly are a tragedy. This is absolutely disgraceful. There is nothing even remotely funny about people being killed, whether they are Gazans or Israeli soldiers, most of whom are only 19 or 20 and are conscripts. Who the hell thought that broadcasting a hiss-take like this was a smart idea? They should be fired immediately.

Apparently there was nothing else more serious than this to report at the time. If there was, a twisted ankle couldn't be news, could it? And certainly not the breaking kind.

Guest Tue 29 Jul - 16:20

This has since been exposed as a Photoshop hoax. It's still not funny.

**Claudia79** Tue 29 Jul - 16:42

Iris wrote:This has since been exposed as a Photoshop hoax. It's still not funny.

Are you sure? I hope it is. If it isn't, there should be someone fired. No, not funny at all.

**fuzeta** Tue 29 Jul - 18:18

My view of it from the start is that it was a photoshop hoax. I don't think even the BBC would sink to that level. Mind you I had to give it some thought!!

Sponsored content