MasterNJ20
Posts: 66
Joined: 6/18/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hertz A couple of points... Firstly, Israel is a terrorist state. And a racist terrorist state at that. There can be no denying it. I will deny it, but like I said I wanted a discussion focused on Palestine because it is always on Israel The idea that 'the Palestinians' are terrorists is as objectionable as the idea that 'the Jews' are bastards. Hopefully, you will see the logic in this - painting a whole group of people as fascists isn't really accurate or helpful. Due to minor factions, Iran and syrian factions, as wel as independent terrorists, saying "Hamas" isn't helpful either, unfortunately. I was forced to use a more accurate term. Saying "the Israelis" are bombing civilians is in the same vein. That Hamas is a terror group cannot be escaped. Clearly any group which employs random attacks on civilians is engaged in terrorism. In this respect the Israelis and Hamas are not much different from each other. White Phosphorus is the weapon of choice of Israel as well as (recently) Hamas. There are many reports of Israel using White Phosphorus munitions in a way which endangers civilian populations. The use of this sort of weapon against civilians by both sides can only be deplored. Again going back to blame on Israel. Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world. It would be very difficult, if not impossible for any party within Gaza to conduct pseudo-military operations against Israel without doing so from areas where civilian populations live. Regarding the specific questions asked: quote:
How do you justify trying to bring in powers which are either A) Willing to fire rockets into civilian population centers Hamas were democratically elected by the Palestinians, who presumably felt that the corruption of Fatah and the long time failed diplomacy between Fatah and Israel needed to be challenged. In any case, targeting civilians is, as we have already discussed, a tactic employed by both sides of the argument. In order to censure one party, one should be willing to censure the other. Are you willing to censure Israel's targeting of civilians? Again, going back to Israel quote:
How do you justify trying to bring in powers which are... too incompetent to arrest and prosecute those who do? Again, this is an accusation that can be levelled at both sides of the argument. Israel is unwilling to prosecute its own war criminals, and when it does start a prosecution it usually finds in favour of the defendants or levies sentences which are insignificant. If one is willing to censure one side, then the other too should be given fair criticism. Again going back to Israel However, there is a major difference between Hamas and Israel in this respect. Israel has a fully functioning pseudo-democratic system which allows the chosen ones to make clear decisions about, and issue orders to instruct others to work on its behalf. Hamas does not have this luxury, because Israel continually kills the leaders of the party and damages and destroys the infrastructure which would allow a fully functioning 'government' to arise in Gaza. It should come as a surprise to no-one to see that Hamas is not fully in control of itself or its operatives and that since it is unable to police Gaza adequately, it cannot be held fully responsible for what happens there. In a sense, what we are seeing is a fully functioning state in conflict with a damaged and dysfunctional militia. Under these circumstances, peace is going to be impossible to achieve. During the lull before operation Cast Lead Hamas showed it ability to both slow the rate of rocket fire and even arrested one such independent group but released them with no charges.Hamas COULD be a very capable group, however chose to release the independent group and failed to stop other such groups. It was also criticized by Egypt for causing the escalation in November. quote:
How do you justify firing rockets from dense population centers as the Human Rights Watch has stated? How do you justify Israel launching heavy artillery into densely populated civilian areas, as the whole world has stated? Gaza is a densely populated ghetto. It is impossible to perform active resistance to Israeli attempts to destroy Palestine without acting from dense population centres. Again back to Israel, however this time with a point. I justify the firing into civilian areas with the kill ration I've discussed before. Israel kills 1 militant per 3 civilians since 2000, showing that they can clearly aim at military operations within civilian populations. There are open spaces for Hamas to use, or using Hamas buildings instead of schools and hospitals as rocket firing positions. quote:
How do you justify leadership which murders its own people and does not produce evidence that they did anything wrong? How does Israel justify its policy of murder and assassination abroad? Back to Israel. However killing a military commander (such as a Hamas officer) is legal in international law. According to the Jerusalem Post: quote:
“Those who handed themselves over will face fair trials,” Barawi pledged. “They will have to bear the consequences of their actions against the fighters of the Palestinian people.” jpost It seems Hamas favours the death sentence for its own members who collaborate with the enemy. In this respect, they are not so different from many other military organisations we might name. The US military, for example, can sentence a deserter to the death penalty, although it has not done so for a good many years. The point is not that Hamas is whiter than the driven snow - clearly it is not. But it is certainly no worse than each of the Israeli administrations. My point is there is so much criticism about Israel but even YOU are forced to argue "well Israel is the same or worse". This argument is invalid. If Hamas and other palestinian leadership is about as bad as Israel even from the pro Palestinian view point... why is criticism pointed at Israel? This is clear propaganda against Israel.
|