This the item.72 responses total.
Last night the Associated Press posted on their national newswire a list of
73 "suicide bombing attacks," carefully and pointedly noting for each attack
the number of Israelis, if any, that were killed. (See list below.)
The Associated Press releases regular summaries of Palestinian attacks on
Israelis; for a previous example, see last month's "Chronology of suicide
attacks against Israel"
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/06/19/bombings-glance.htm).
However, we have yet to find a single AP summary detailing for the same time
period a history of Israeli attacks against Palestinians, with accountings
for each of the 1,768 Palestinian deaths. For that matter, we have yet to see
on the AP any of the following:
* Overviews of the 148 Palestinians killed by Israel's illegal policy of
assassination of Palestinian political leaders;
* Checklists describing the circumstances of the wounding of over 7,000
Palestinian children (this is UNICEF's estimate);
* Dated flowcharts accounting for the 2,500 Palestinians permanently
disabled by Israeli attacks, 500 of them children;
* Chronologies of Israeli attacks on Palestinian Emergency Medical
Personnel & Services, and Israeli Shelling of Palestinian Hospitals;
* Timelines of the 15 on-duty Palestinian doctors and ambulance drivers
murdered by Israeli forces, and the 180 Red Cross Emergency Medical
Technicians attacked;
* Checklists on the 64 Palestinians who have died due to Israeli
prevention of access to medical treatment;
* Charts describing the 167 journalists attacked by the IDF;
* Overviews of the roughly 15,000 Palestinians arbitrarily detained in
mass detentions over the last 2 months alone;
* Timelines examining the Israeli shelling and demolition of over 1,600
Palestinian homes. *(all above stats from The Palestine Monitor)
Data for these categories is readily available from various sources, such as:
* The Palestine Monitor
* The Palestine Center for Human Rights
* The Palestinian Crescent Society
http://www.pmwatch.org/pmw/cast/ap.asp
This item is an oxymoron: there has never been an independent state called "Palestine" and ergo no part of it can be "occupied", let alone "illegally". Odd that while Oval criticizes one aspect of the AP's coverage of this issue, she then engages in such shameless and onesided propaganda herself. For example, Israel has not "assassinated" political leaders but rather top leaders of illegal MILITANT groups who, under internatinal law, are "terrorists". By definition, this does not consitute "assassination" nor is it illegal under international law. In contrast, intentionally targeting and bombing civilians is illegal and Human Rights Watch now categorizes this as a Crime against Humanity. http://hrw.org/press/2002/11/isrl-pa1101.htm The AP has often engaged in anti-Israel reporting. Yet oval is so one sided that she's gone so far as saying that because she dislikes me she will dislike all Jews. As if her PREJUDICE was on my head, and as if this wasn't a reversal of causality. So it comes as no surprise that whereas Oval is outraged that Israel will at times preclude ambulances from a region, it is not surprising that she fails to mention that this is because those ambulances refuse to allow Israel to inspect them (as it is allowed to do under the Geneva Conventions). Given that Red Crescent Ambulances have been caught transporting not just weapons and bombs but also used as terrorist taxis, one can understand Israel's concern. Either the ambulances Israel wished to inspect had something to hide, or its crews figured that the propaganda value of allowing someone to die and fault Israel outweighed the need to save the life. (Lest anyone think this is far fetched, consider that the death of 12-year old martyr poster-child Mohammed Al-Dura was possibly staged for this reason. See Agora45 Item 146 or read about this here: http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2003/06/fallows.htm Also consider that Palestinian Arabs who suggested that school children should not be bussed to violent demonstrations were called a "fifth column" in official newspapers, a clear indication to keep silent if they didn't want to be treated as "collaborators".) As far as casualty analysis is concerned, oval seems not to care that more Israeli women, girls and elderly have been intentionally murdered by Arab terrorists than have been UNintentionally killed by the IDF's battle against these terrorist murderers. For a more complete analysis of casualty figures, see: http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=439 Most devastatingly, oval seems more interested in demonizing Israel than in ending the violence. If we are to turn to "news", once again today we have headlines that Hamas, IJ and other terrorist groups MIGHT agree to a ceasefire in a few days. Even the PA is so frustrated by this process that it turned to the European Union to ask them to exert more pressure on Hamas.
Leer on, perhaps you don't understand history, but Palestine was a state as much as any other place in the region. Additionally, don't think we don't understand your anger towards oval; you just hate women.
Despite the attempts of international law to cast anyone who operates
out of the informal concept of "civilized" warfare as a "terrorist" - a label
that surely would've been assigned to Sabbah's hashishins or American
revolutionary snipers had it existed at the time - there's really not much
difference between being shot by a uniformed soldier or being injured by
shrapnel from a bomber's package, to the injured party.
The Israelis seem to have better control of where their rounds go, and
care considerably more about collateral damage, but they also have a great
deal more leeway to do so and still achieve their objectives. But saying that
the elimination of a terrorist leader is different than the assassination of
a politician involved defence decisions or a officer in an army is really just
trying to use semantics to cast one side as without blame and the other as
composed entirely of it.
Leeron is homosexual?
He's a total fag.
Who's going to Toronto for Pride. Wanna do coffee? John, you could also minimize the difference between someone getting run-over in a car accident as being no different to the injured party from being intentionally run-down with a car. Our value system (both domestic and international law) does distinguish between inadvertant deaths in war and the intentional murder of innocent civilians by terrorists. Make no mistake about it. These terrorists INTENTIONS are to murder as many innocent civilians as possible. They are the TARGET. On the flip side, these civilians hide behind the civilian population, thus they are the ones endagering those civilians. Israel does what it can to prevent them harm, sometimes at great cost to its own forces (e.g. sending soldiers into the death-trap of Jenin rather than bombarding the terrorist strongholds with artillery or from the air). I also think there is a huge difference between assassinating a democratically elected civilian leader (e.g. JFK or the late Israeli Minister of Tourism Ze'evi) and the pre-emptive killing of illegal combatants who are engaged in the business of murdering innocents. Phil, please enlighten me as to what you're being taught in history class. When did a state of "Palestine" ever exist (other than as a League of Nations Mandate following WW I and until 1948)? As a follow-up homework assignment, when did Arabs last control the territory that is now Israel proper?
Don't tell me what to do, punk.
ya leeron, you can't ask him to use his brain! It might expand with dire consequences.
I am so sick of whining ass Palestinians. I remember them dancing in the street on 9-11.I hope the jews kill everyone of those bastards. Perhaps they should drink from the same cup the Jews did during Hitler's rule.The Jews have one tiny piece of land right in the middle of nations that have vowed her destruction.The arabs on the otherhand have vast amounts of space. I hate Islam and the opression it stands for. It's a religion created by the Devil himself to foster hate and destruction.Piss on "ALLAH" who is nothing more than the arabic "moon god".I am sorry for being so bitter but this kind of topic totally pisses me off. Muslims are the most despicable poeple on the planet. If they had thier way the would force us all to obey thier devilish theology. They would oppress all other religions for the sake of thier lies..
Re #4: The Israelis have better control, certainly, but they do seem to feel Palastinian lives are cheap. Otherwise they wouldn't have fired multiple missile rounds from helicopters into a busy intersection in an attempt to hit a single person.
bigot.
Is #10 serious at all?
i hope it's a joke, but it ain't funny.
As is the case in most wars, gull, one side thinks that the lives of many of its civilians are more worthy than the POTENTIAL collateral damage of the opponents. There is no moral equivalence here. The Geneva Conventions allow attacking targets despite the possibility of some danger to the civilian population. Yet the intentional targeting and bombing of innocent civilians is murderous terrorism and a crime against humanity. Poly, aside from the British Mandate in that name, when was there ever an Arab state of "Palestine"? When was the last time Arabs controlled this land and what was their status? I can't believe he doesn't know something so basic. Can anyone help him?
This response has been erased.
yes it is a joke dark humor has it merits. It a way of venting frustration at an on-going issue that will never be solved.Actually I'm tired of the Israeli position also.The constant bickering between the two have become a burden that the whole world must bear.You know the deal..first a suicide bombs the Jews..then Jews bomb the Arabs whih causes another suicide attack which then causes another reprisal form the Jews which then causes another sucide attack(whew). The cycle seems to be unstoppable.I do however fault the Arabs I never heard of a Jewish suicide bomber or a Jewish terrorist act. I suppose an Arab bigot would claim that the Jewish reprisals are terror attacks. They are are however reactions from a legit albeit frustarated goverment.Oval you are the pot calling the kettle black. Your anti-semite rambling and dripple proved your own bigotry '."
Uhm, you have to be pretty good to succesfully post sarcasm or very
dry humor online.
"News from Illegally Occupied Palestine" The occupied lands are a just compensation for several sneak attacks by surrounding nations. I support full Israeli annexation of said lands.What IS illegal are the constant terror attacks by deluded fananitics. Most Americans have little sympathy for the palistinian cause.We watched them dance in the streets and burn our flag when the twin towers fell.
Perhaps I was too pessamistic Hamas, Islamic Jihad OK Truce With Israel see here for details: http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/ISRAEL_PALESTINIANS?SITE=TNMEM&S ECT ION=US
Leer-on, I of course know the answers to those questions, but I also know something you perhaps don't if you're not being honest with yourself: You're simply trying to waste time and tarnish my honourable reputation.
This response has been erased.
This response has been erased.
Because the Pakistanis supposedly were going to help the US find Bin Laden. Can't let that go unrewarded
And because it wasn't the policy of the Pakistani government, nor did it reflect the majority opinion of Pakistanis necessarily. (Which is also true for the photos of Palestinians cheering -- it wasn't a widespread thing.)
Re #15: So you'd be okay with, say, the police deciding to end a car chase in your neighborhood with air-to-ground missiles? I mean, as long as they get the bad guy the collateral damage is okay, right?
This response has been erased.
to #26 yes if they actually help to #26 wasn't widepsread you say? sure seemed so to me. At least as far as "widespread can get in a nation that size. As for policy of the Pakistani goverment well....I was referring to Palestine.Of course it's not there "official" policy...that political suicide...you can bet your ass that it's an "unofficial" policy however. Why else have we been pushing to get Arafat out of power. I'm telling you these people hate our guts and we love to see us all die. And that my friend it the Majority opinion in Palestine.
This response has been erased.
Re #29: When you watch news footage of protests and demonstrations in the Middle East, you have to remember that people there have perfected the art of filling in the field of view of a TV camera. What looks on camera like a massive protest may have empty street on either side of it.
That of course is very true. A perfect example was the crowds shown cheering Saddam when they were under attack. As a matter of fact they didn't even do too good a job in that case. It was obvious. In Paletine's case however I think you'll find the general view is that America is the great satan and should be destroyed.You have to remember that they blame us for supporting Israel and beleive we are the only reason that it even exists.Your statement is akin to saying that most Palestinains don't hate Israel.If fact they do.
we are the only reason israel exists.
If that is the case, it's easy to see why the Palestinians have so much animosity toward Americans
This response has been erased.
Egads, the Jews are blamed for everything else.... Phil, aside from the British Mandate in that name, when was there ever an Arab state of "Palestine"? When was the last time Arabs controlled this land and what was their status? Do you want me to answer my own questions? > Re #15: So you'd be okay with, say, the police deciding to end a car > chase in your neighborhood with air-to-ground missiles? I mean, as long > as they get the bad guy the collateral damage is okay, right? Of all the brain-dead comparisons! If that "driver" happens to be a suicide bomber who was about to blow himself up at Whole Foods, or if this was during war-time and the "driver" was someone who dispatched waves of suicide bombers to attack and murder innocent civilians, then I think that the police have an obligation to do what they can to prevent that act from being perpetrated.
This response has been erased.
Well that's a pretty clear cut case of (x people will die) versus (x+y
people will die). A pretty easy call.
This response has been erased.
re 36 who areyou calling "Phil"?
look at all this news from palestine coming in!
Todd: re: flight 97 (or was it 87)? The passengers in that plane
were already dead.
Re #36: I'd say there's a big difference between someone who you know is on the verge of carrying out an actual attack, and someone who you believe might help plan one in the future. In the latter case, it seems to me that it'd be more prudent to wait for them to be in a less heavily populated area. Unless, of course, you believe that the lives of the civilians around them don't matter.
Perhaps if the terrorists cared about these civilians they wouldn't hide amongst them, wouldn't establish bomb-factories in civilian apartment blocks, wouldn't recruit them as disposable suicide bombers. Again, these are not people who "might" one-day engage in attacks, these are people who are involved on a daily basis in planning terrorist attacks. In recruiting, training, arming and dispatching murderers whose only intention is to kill as many innocent civilians as possible.
ATTACK!
RE:#44 I agree totally. I will also go far as to say that if these "innocent" civilians allow such scum to hide among them without contacting the proper authorities then they make themselves guilty by association.That makes them deserving of the same retribution.And don't say "they CAN'T snitch them out thier lives would be in jeopordy" Blah..blah..blah.That's a lame excuse. The truth is these "civilains" as you call them are in TOTAL agreement with the murdering scum.I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.I make sure a do a little DANCE everytime one of them is served his just dessert. LONG LIVE ISRAEL!!!!!! may her enemies ROT.(and no I'm not jewish)
Ah, good old "guilt by association".
re 46 sabre, are you an air cadet?
It really doesn't matter that the late 19th Century (a christian term) colonization of the region in question was conducted by Europeans who had no less and no more of a "right" and happened to share a little comonality with a few residents that happened to already be there and whom they demonstrably looked down on at the time and currently. It doesn't matter that the major paymasters of such are themselves even less legitimate holders of the land they colonized. (The USA taxpayers for the stupid who pay for the whole schtick by and large) It all doesn't matter. The facts of the boots on the ground are that the current state known as Israel owns the ground known as "the west bank" and "gaza" outright by right of conquest. Israel owns what is proposed to be Palestine.
Oh, therefore it cannot be illegally occupied as it is already legally owned.
Hamas is definitely a terrorist organisation and EVIL. There is no excuse for killing innocent civilians. Any organisation or state doing so or sponsoring such activities should be labelled terrorist. I am taking a look at archives from June 8th onwards. Not too far back. On June 11th, GAZA CITY Abdul Aziz Al Rantissi, a senior Hamas leader, was wounded in an Israeli helicopter raid yesterday in Gaza City. One of Rantissi s bodyguards was killed as well as a 50-year-old woman, medical sources said, while an eight-year-old girl was critically wounded in the head and kept alive artificially. On June 12th, two members of Hamas armed wing, were killed when two Israeli Apache attack helicopters attacked a car in Gaza City s eastern Shajayah neighbourhood, Palestinian medical and security sources said. They said two members of the Ezzedin Al Qassam Brigades, Massud Titi and Soheil Abu Nahel, were among those killed. Two women were also killed and some 20 people wounded. On June 13th, Helicopters fired six missiles into Gaza City, reducing a Subaru car to charred metal and injuring more than 40 bystanders, witnesses said. Palestinian sources identified the dead as Yasser Taha, a senior member of Hamas s military wing wanted by Israel. The sources said his wife and one-year-old daughter also died in the strike. They had earlier said the child was three years old. On June 14th, A Hamas fighter was killed and 26 other people were injured, many of them children, when Israeli helicopter gunships fired missiles at a car in Gaza City late yesterday, Palestinian sources said. The missiles hit the car in the city s eastern Al Sabra sector, gutting it and killing Adel Al Lidawi, 26, according to Hamas sources. Among the wounded were eight children under the age of 10, said medical sources at the city s main Al Shifa hospital, adding that three were in critical condition. On June 25th, Israeli helicopters fired missiles into a car in the Gaza Strip town of Khan Younis, killing two people and injuring 15. The Israeli army said it had targeted a member of the militant group Hamas, who was injured in the attack. However the people who were killed - named by Palestinian hospital officials as Arkram Yousef Abu Farhana, 30, and a 20-year-old woman - had no links to a militant group. In each attack, for every one or two Hamas militants, several civilians have either died or been seriously injured. This is not to say that all this while Hamas hasn't been killing innocent Israeli civilians but Israel's use of force also does not seem to be discreet.
Perhaps not, but it is working.
Working?? Can you recall since how long this cycle of violence has been going on between Palestine (Hamas and other terrorist organisation) and Israel? And for how long has Israel been trying to eliminate these terrorists? If it had been working, Israel wouldn't need to come to negotiating table with PLO. And are we saying that indiscriminate use of violence is justified if that *might* solve the problem?? When you say "Perhaps not, but it is working", you seem to step down from the position that Israel can't do any wrong and saying that whatever indiscriminate violence is being resorted to, even if it is against innocent civilians, is justified.
re#51" There is no excuse for killing innocent civilians. Any organisation or state doing so or sponsoring such activities should be labelled terrorist." so acording to this, the US are also terrorists.
That's right. We killed many civilians in Iraq in our recent aggression there.
Somewhere in the neighborhood of 3500 Iraqis was the last number I heard. And 200 Americans. Don't know about the Brits.
Why are we involved in this? Where did Abraham come from? The fact is arabic and semitic languages and people are closely related - they're all the same lot. If they want to kill each other good luck to them but why the hell are we involved?
Because it tends to destabilize a region from which we import a significant amount of oil.
Arabic IS a semitic language.
sj2: It is tragic that innocents get killed in war, but the killing of people near legitimate targets is not "indiscriminant". As I've previously documented, this is within the confines of the Fourth Geneva Conventions. As noted previously, Israel takes great effort to avoid civilian casualties, sometimes to the detriment of its own troops. The best way to stop all death is to cease-fire, to stop all violence. Israel agreed to do so in the Sharm Agreement (October 2000) which Arafat failed to implement, in a unilateral cease-fire in May of 2001 following the release of the Mitchell report, in the Tenet Agreement a month later (never implemented by Arafat) and 5 or 6 other missions by Burns & Zinni, all of which were scuttled (and outrighly renegged upon) by Arafat. For the past 3+ weeks, the PA has been trying to get terrorist groups to abide a cease-fire. This is big news precisely because 32 months it failed to do so. Today an agreement was announced, but it is already being violated by Arab terrorists. Can anyone truly say that they are surprised? Some Palestinian Arabs do "snitch". They're known as "collaborators" and have a strange predeliction for turning up dead, hung in the public square. In the first intifada, roughly half of all Arab fatalities were (allegedly) "collaborators" who were murdered. Nonetheless what Sabre says is correct. The majority of the Palestinian Arabs support terrorism and are willing to "sacrifice" themselves as human shields for the terrorists who hide behind them. Polytarp, do you need an extension? Last chance for you to show us that you know the answers to these questions.... 1. When in history was there an Arab state known as "Palestine"? 2. When did Arabs last control the "holy land" prior to the sections seized by Egypt and Jordan in the 1948 war?
"sj2: It is tragic that innocents get killed in war, but the killing
of people near legitimate targets is not "indiscriminant". As I've
previously documented, this is within the confines of the Fourth
Geneva Conventions. As noted previously, Israel takes great effort to
avoid civilian casualties, sometimes to the detriment of its own
troops."
I just read the fourth Geneva convention. But is it ok with you? Would
it be ok if a couple of Arabs walked into a restaurant in US and
bombed it? Later they could claim that they are at war with the US.
Note here that the FGC (Fourth Geneva Convention) is applicable to "In
addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peacetime,
the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of
any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the
High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized
by one of them."
So the US need not necessarily recognise the war.
As you have pointed out above, its Palestinian terrorists who have
breached their promises time and again. But as I said in the first
line of my post that they are definitely terrorist and EVIL. I can
only hope that the latest cease-fire, due to be declared soon, works.
Coming back to the FGC, it says
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character
occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties,
each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the
following provisions:
1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members
of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de
combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in
all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction
founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or
any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any
time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned
persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds,
mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and
degrading treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions
without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court,
affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as
indispensable by civilized peoples.
Re. #54. I am posting a few facts from a report. I leave it to you to
decide whether the US can be labelled as a terrorist nation and can be
charged with genocide.
====================================================================
The military power arrayed and employed by the US, Britain, and their
allies was grotesquely disproportionate to Iraqi defences. Evidently,
the intent was to punish Iraq so severely as to create an
unforgettable object lesson for any nation contemplating defiance of
US wishes. The Gulf War s aerial bombing campaign was the most savage
since Vietnam. During 43 days of war, the US flew 109,876 sorties and
dropped 84,200 tons of bombs. Average monthly tonnage of ordnance used
nearly equaled that of World War II, but the resulting destruction was
far more efficient due to better technology and the feebleness of
Iraq s anti-aircraft defenses. ("Airpower in the Gulf War," Air and
Space Power Mentoring Guide Essays II, pp. 72-73 (U.S. Air Force 1999)"
While war raged, the US military carefully managed press briefings in
order to suggest that the bombing raids were surgical strikes against
purely military targets, made possible by a new generation of
precision-guided smart weapons . The reality was far different.
Ninety-three per cent of munitions used by the allies consisted of
unguided dumb bombs, dropped primarily by Vietnam-era B-52 carpet-
bombers. About 70 per cent of bombs and missiles missed their targets,
frequently destroying private homes and killing civilians. (John
MacArthur, Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War,
1993, p. 161) The US also made devastating use of anti-personnel
weapons, including fuel-air explosives and 15,000-lb. daisy-cutter
bombs (conventional explosives capable of causing destruction
equivalent to a nuclear attack-also used by the US in Afghanistan);
the petroleum-based incendiary napalm (which was used to incinerate
entrenched Iraqi soldiers); and 61,000 cluster bombs from which were
strewn 20 million bomblets, which continue to kill Iraqis to this
day. ("US urged to ban cluster bombs," Boston Globe, 18/12/02)
Predictably, this style of warfare resulted in massive civilian
casualties. In one well-remembered incident, as many as 400 men,
women, and children were killed at one blow when, in apparent
indifference to the Geneva Conventions, the US targeted a civilian air
raid shelter in the Ameriyya district of western Baghdad. Thousands
died in similar fashion due to daylight raids in heavily-populated
residential areas and business districts throughout the country.
(Needless Deaths in the Gulf War: Civilian Casualties During the Air
Campaign and Violations of the Laws of War, Human Rights Watch 1991)
According to a UN estimate, as many as 15,000 civilians died as a
direct result of allied bombing.
The US tried to limit the definition of "humanitarian goods" to food
and medicine alone, preventing the import of items needed to restore
water supply, sanitation, electrical power, even medical facilities.
Among the items kept out by American veto, on the grounds that they
might have a military application, were chemicals, laboratory
equipment, generators, communications equipment, ambulances (on the
pretext that they contain communications equipment), chlorinators, and
even pencils (on the pretext that they contain graphite, which has
military uses). "
"Sanctions impinge on the lives of all Iraqis every moment of the day.
In Basra, Iraq s second city, power flickers on and off, unpredictable
in the hours it is available.... Smoke from jerry-rigged generators
and vehicles hangs over the town in a thick cloud. The tap-water
causes diarrhoea, but few can afford the bottled sort. Because the
sewers have broken down, pools of stinking muck have leached through
the surface all over town. That effluent, combined with pollution
upstream, has killed most of the fish in the Shatt al-Arab river and
has left the remainder unsafe to eat. The government can no longer
spray for sand-flies or mosquitoes, so insects have proliferated,
along with the diseases they carry.
There is no room for doubt that genocide was conscious US policy. On
May 12 1996, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked by
Lesley Stahl of CBS television: "We have heard that half a million
children have died. I mean, that s more than died in Hiroshima. And,
you know, is the price worth it?" Albright replied: "I think this is a
very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."
======================================================================
You can also read the Human Rights Report on the Gulf war here:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1991/gulfwar/
The report is very detailed in its reporting of not only how coalition
attacks killed thousands of civilians but also utterly destroyed the
civilian infrastructure of Iraq.
======================================================================
My father worked as a mining engineer at a Cement factory near Al-Qaim
near the Syrian border. About a dozen or so dump-trucks were bombed
with precision-guided munition. So my own guess is that the coalition
forces bombed every bit they even remotely suspected could be used for
any military purposes.
Re #51: I don't think you're going to get anyone to argue that Hamas isn't evil. The problem is they've been put in a position of great power by Israel's policies. All it takes is one Hamas suicide bombing to veto any potential peace agreement. Israel has effectively given Hamas a seat at the table, and anything they do, the PA gets blamed for.
This response has been erased.
re: "#62 (gull): ... All it takes is one Hamas suicide bombing to veto any potential peace agreement...." We believe your analysis is incorrect. The "potential peace agreement" will not be "vetoed" by the Hamas terrorists. It will be vetoed when the PA fails to respond by apprehending those responsible and punishing them appropriately.
Exactly. It is the PA, not Israel, who has put Hamas in a position of power by failing to act against them, by failing to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure (same holds true for Islamic Jihad and the PFLP). In the case of the Al Aqsa Brigades, the PA's complicity has been proven far greater, for not only did they fail to move against this terrorist group, they funded, armed and supported it. All this even before Israel moved against the PA Police for its failure to do so. The numbers speak volumes. The PA Police numbers about 50,000 men. The various terrorist groups, at the height of their power, were about 5% of that. Arafat remains the most popular person within the PA. All he had to do, over the course of 32 months, was to tell the terrorists to stand down and for his forces to make sure that happened. No, this wouldn't have prevented all attacks right away. But many would have been aborted while others prevented. And if those who persisted were punished, that would have spoken volumes. Instead, month after month, the PA Police managed to prevent 0% of all terrorist attacks. Not because it couldn't but because it wouldn't. The problem has always been a lack of desire and therefore a lack of effort. The PA has now assumed security control over areas of Gaza frm which Israeli troops have withdrawn. As I noted before, they don't resort to gull's excuse that they are incapable of acting because Israel bombed some empty offices and because they have suffered a few hundred casualties (of which many were involved in fighting). If the PA is serious about preventing attacks on Israel, the cease-fire will succeed (it's next test will be in 3 months). If attacks are allowed to continue without no real effort to prevent them, then the cease-fire will be proven a sham and will fail.
You talk as if dismantling an underground organization is an easy thing. You only have to look at the persistance of drug rings and organized crime in the U.S., in spite of massive amounts of money spent trying to control them, to realize that's not the case.
Well, it must certainly be considerably more difficult to achieve results if one does not even try!
re#66: in the case of the PLA its not exactly a secret of who all the terrorist are. They know even better than the Israelis know and the Israelis know quite a bit. Its is a fair to say the PLA has not been exactly trying before now. It will be interesting to see if they actually attempt to police themselves in the future.
Exactly. For the 17th time, David, no one has demanded 100% success. That's no excuse for 0% effort. Given that the PA has armed and funded these "underground organizations", it shouldn't be too difficult for the PA to locate them. In fact, part of the problem is that these terrorists organizations had no need to go underground during the past 32 months. They continued to operate above ground with impunity. They roam the streets in broad daylight, armed, etc. Again, unlike its western apologists, the PA seems confident that its security organizations are up to the task.
Sr. PA official: If Israel doesn`t decide to release all detainees, PA will withdraw from roadmap July 6 Haaretz News Ticker, 09:06
Which does make it sound like Hamas is, in good Mohammedian tradition, using the cease-fire to build up its forces. Wouldn't it make more sense to hold on to these terrorists until after the conclusion of the peace treaty? Why let them out to fight it, again?
Gives the IDF another fair chance to put a bullet through their brain, at the risk of more innocent Jewish grandmothers and infants.
You have several choices: