Irsael & Hamas Agree to a 72 hr Cease Fire

[Muslima]

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima, even Ban Ki-Moon said Hamas broke it. You sure lose credibility when you quote Hamas. Not exactly the authorities of truth!

Jeff, the Jeffrey Goldberg piece is actually really good. You should finish reading. Regardless where Hadar was abducted, things are not going to get better. Israel will do anything to get their people back.

This is what Ban Ki Moon said :

" This would constitute a grave violation of the cease-fire, and one that is likely to have very serious consequences for the people of Gaza, Israel and beyond," said. "Such moves call into question the credibility of Hamas' assurances to the United Nations."

Noting that the UN has no independent means to verify what happened on ground, Ban said he is deeply concerned about the resumption of Israeli attacks on Gaza and the killing of over 50 Palestinians this morning. 

"Instead of giving both sides, especially Gazan civilians, a much needed reprieve to let them attend to their injured, bury their dead and repair vital infrastructure, this breach of the ceasefire is now leading to a renewed escalation," Ban's spokesman said. 

"The Secretary-General urges both sides to show maximum restraint and return to the agreed 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire that tragically lasted such a brief period of time," he said. 

Talk about selective quoting. Here is a link to the statement, right from the UN itself:

http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=7901

The Secretary-General condemns in the strongest terms the reported violation by Hamas of the mutually agreed humanitarian ceasefire which commenced this morning. He is shocked and profoundly disappointed by these developments.

The Secretary-General notes that the UN has no independent means to verify exactly what happened. According to the latest reports, two IDF soldiers were killed and one taken captive after the humanitarian ceasefire came into effect. This would constitute a grave violation of the ceasefire, and one that is likely to have very serious consequences for the people of Gaza, Israel and beyond. Such moves call into question the credibility of Hamas' assurances to the United Nations. The Secretary-General demands the immediate and unconditional release of the captured soldier.

The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about the resumption of Israeli attacks on Gaza and the killing of over 70 Palestinians this morning. Instead of giving both sides, especially Gazan civilians, a much needed reprieve to let them attend to their injured, bury their dead and repair vital infrastructure, this breach of the ceasefire is now leading to a renewed escalation.

The Secretary-General urges both sides to show maximum restraint and return to the agreed 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire that tragically lasted such a brief period of time. He also urges those with influence over the parties to do everything to convince them to observe the humanitarian ceasefire.

Waiting to hear Jeff criticize Muslims for improper use of sources. That is just shameless if you want people to listen to you, you need credibility.

Muslima, not Muslims.

Whatever you're drinking, keep drinking more of it! What exactly is the difference between what I cited and whatever you copied pasted? Wow!

Seriously!? You edited the quote to fit your argument. If you can't see the difference between what was actually said and the fiction that you created than forget credibility, there is no point in even engaging you since it clear that you're not interested in arguing in good faith.

Really? I do not have time to edit quotes to fit an argument. I quoted exactly what was on the article that I read, word for word. The full statement as you noted is available not the UN site. My quote is from an ARTICLE that I read. No, I am not interested in arguing as Im not here to argue.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Really? I do not have time to edit quotes to fit an argument. I quoted exactly what was on the article that I read, word for word. The full statement as you noted is available not the UN site. My quote is from an ARTICLE that I read. No, I am not interested in arguing as Im not here to argue.

I edited your quit by removing the earlier posts, as they are not relevant to the response. You are reading very biased sources. Your sources edited the quote to make it less damaging to Hamas. The part specifically calling out Hamas was removed.

Now, we are about 24 hours later, and it is clear (according to the washington post):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hamas-says-missing-israeli-soldier-in-gaza-hadar-goldin-is-likely-dead/2014/08/02/92562694-56cd-48c0-921b-b851fb2eca09_story.html?hpid=z1

1) Israel was continuing to dismantle the tunnels, which was allowed under the cease fire.
2) Hamas militants emerged from the tunnel (not sure of the location), killed two IDF soldiers and kidnapped one other soldier.
-- that is the action that ended the cease fire.
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command.

This tells me that there is no one for the international community -- UN, US, Egypt, etc to negotiate with. But Israel is the bad guy.

[Anonymous]

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima, even Ban Ki-Moon said Hamas broke it. You sure lose credibility when you quote Hamas. Not exactly the authorities of truth!

Jeff, the Jeffrey Goldberg piece is actually really good. You should finish reading. Regardless where Hadar was abducted, things are not going to get better. Israel will do anything to get their people back.

This is what Ban Ki Moon said :

" This would constitute a grave violation of the cease-fire, and one that is likely to have very serious consequences for the people of Gaza, Israel and beyond," said. "Such moves call into question the credibility of Hamas' assurances to the United Nations."

Noting that the UN has no independent means to verify what happened on ground, Ban said he is deeply concerned about the resumption of Israeli attacks on Gaza and the killing of over 50 Palestinians this morning. 

"Instead of giving both sides, especially Gazan civilians, a much needed reprieve to let them attend to their injured, bury their dead and repair vital infrastructure, this breach of the ceasefire is now leading to a renewed escalation," Ban's spokesman said. 

"The Secretary-General urges both sides to show maximum restraint and return to the agreed 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire that tragically lasted such a brief period of time," he said. 

Talk about selective quoting. Here is a link to the statement, right from the UN itself:

http://www.un.org/sg/statements/index.asp?nid=7901

The Secretary-General condemns in the strongest terms the reported violation by Hamas of the mutually agreed humanitarian ceasefire which commenced this morning. He is shocked and profoundly disappointed by these developments.

The Secretary-General notes that the UN has no independent means to verify exactly what happened. According to the latest reports, two IDF soldiers were killed and one taken captive after the humanitarian ceasefire came into effect. This would constitute a grave violation of the ceasefire, and one that is likely to have very serious consequences for the people of Gaza, Israel and beyond. Such moves call into question the credibility of Hamas' assurances to the United Nations. The Secretary-General demands the immediate and unconditional release of the captured soldier.

The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about the resumption of Israeli attacks on Gaza and the killing of over 70 Palestinians this morning. Instead of giving both sides, especially Gazan civilians, a much needed reprieve to let them attend to their injured, bury their dead and repair vital infrastructure, this breach of the ceasefire is now leading to a renewed escalation.

The Secretary-General urges both sides to show maximum restraint and return to the agreed 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire that tragically lasted such a brief period of time. He also urges those with influence over the parties to do everything to convince them to observe the humanitarian ceasefire.

Waiting to hear Jeff criticize Muslims for improper use of sources. That is just shameless if you want people to listen to you, you need credibility.

Muslima, not Muslims.

Whatever you're drinking, keep drinking more of it! What exactly is the difference between what I cited and whatever you copied pasted? Wow!

Seriously!? You edited the quote to fit your argument. If you can't see the difference between what was actually said and the fiction that you created than forget credibility, there is no point in even engaging you since it clear that you're not interested in arguing in good faith.

Really? I do not have time to edit quotes to fit an argument. I quoted exactly what was on the article that I read, word for word. The full statement as you noted is available not the UN site. My quote is from an ARTICLE that I read. No, I am not interested in arguing as Im not here to argue.

Well then your sources are obviously biased. If you can't see that, then you're not an effective advocate for your cause.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command. .

You are misunderstanding this point. Hamas lost contact with the cell during heavy Israeli bombing of the area after the attack. Hamas believes that both its cell and the Israeli soldier were killed in the bombing. If the cell members were still alive, they would be in contact with Hamas.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command. .

You are misunderstanding this point. Hamas lost contact with the cell during heavy Israeli bombing of the area after the attack. Hamas believes that both its cell and the Israeli soldier were killed in the bombing. If the cell members were still alive, they would be in contact with Hamas.

So if they had the ability to be in contact with Hamas why did they take the soldier before the bombardment?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command. .

You are misunderstanding this point. Hamas lost contact with the cell during heavy Israeli bombing of the area after the attack. Hamas believes that both its cell and the Israeli soldier were killed in the bombing. If the cell members were still alive, they would be in contact with Hamas.

So if they had the ability to be in contact with Hamas why did they take the soldier before the bombardment?

You would have to ask them to know for sure. But, Hamas now says the soldier was captured before the ceasefire started. Another possibility that I suggested in another thread is that the ceasefire terms almost guaranteed that something like this would happen. The terms allowed Israel to continue searching for tunnels. However, Israel was not supposed to expand the ground it occupied. There were probably disputed areas that Israel thought it occupied and Hamas didn't think were occupied. If the Israelis started searching a tunnel in such an area, the Hamas cell could have considered it a ceasefire violation. A ceasefire in which one side gets to continue pursuing its prime objective is always going to be problematic.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command. .

You are misunderstanding this point. Hamas lost contact with the cell during heavy Israeli bombing of the area after the attack. Hamas believes that both its cell and the Israeli soldier were killed in the bombing. If the cell members were still alive, they would be in contact with Hamas.

So if they had the ability to be in contact with Hamas why did they take the soldier before the bombardment?

You would have to ask them to know for sure. But, Hamas now says the soldier was captured before the ceasefire started. Another possibility that I suggested in another thread is that the ceasefire terms almost guaranteed that something like this would happen. The terms allowed Israel to continue searching for tunnels. However, Israel was not supposed to expand the ground it occupied. There were probably disputed areas that Israel thought it occupied and Hamas didn't think were occupied. If the Israelis started searching a tunnel in such an area, the Hamas cell could have considered it a ceasefire violation. A ceasefire in which one side gets to continue pursuing its prime objective is always going to be problematic.

But it was a cease fire nonetheless and, according to the White House, Hamas violated it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
3) Hamas has no control of the cell that did the attack -- no military discipline. That means there is no real chain of command. .

You are misunderstanding this point. Hamas lost contact with the cell during heavy Israeli bombing of the area after the attack. Hamas believes that both its cell and the Israeli soldier were killed in the bombing. If the cell members were still alive, they would be in contact with Hamas.

So if they had the ability to be in contact with Hamas why did they take the soldier before the bombardment?

You would have to ask them to know for sure. But, Hamas now says the soldier was captured before the ceasefire started. Another possibility that I suggested in another thread is that the ceasefire terms almost guaranteed that something like this would happen. The terms allowed Israel to continue searching for tunnels. However, Israel was not supposed to expand the ground it occupied. There were probably disputed areas that Israel thought it occupied and Hamas didn't think were occupied. If the Israelis started searching a tunnel in such an area, the Hamas cell could have considered it a ceasefire violation. A ceasefire in which one side gets to continue pursuing its prime objective is always going to be problematic.

But it was a cease fire nonetheless and, according to the White House, Hamas violated it.

US ALSO blames Hamas for the violations

[jsteele]

I don't know how much to believe this guy, but he has sources claiming that Israeli forces killed Lt. Hadar Goldin to prevent his capture:

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/08/02/idf-censor-tells-ny-times-it-cannot-report-it-killed-2nd-lt-hadar-goldin/

Everyone seems to agree now that Goldin is dead and Hamas seems to believe that both the soldier and its cell were killed at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Likely scenario - fighters were in the tunnel during the ceasefire. They realize IDF is going to blow the thing up and rather than sit there and die they ambush the soldiers. Capture Goldin and run into the tunnel. IDF then blows up the tunnel to kill them all, following the Hannibal Directive.

[Anonymous]

Yes Hamas killed Hadar. That has been confirmed. He was engaged to be married in two months.

Yes, I'm setting myself up for all the anti Israelis and anti-Semites to go all Gilad on me. "But he's one person!" And there are a 1,000 Palestinians! No regard for eradicating terrorists. I hope you never have to fear rockets being fired upon you daily. Or your army needing to dismantle rocket storage tunnels which are booby trapped. That's how Hadar was killed.