Message
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:[Look, I'm trying to get at practical solutions here. I promise to answer this question if you answer mine first: If Israel ends the blockade, how can they ensure that Hamas will not immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel?
Did you read Hamas' s reform documents? This is what they said about their goals : " the aim is to
achieve equality before the law among citizens in rights and duties; bring security to all citizens and protect their proper- ties and assure their safety against arbitrary arrest, torture, or revenge; stress the culture of dialogue . . . ; support the press and media institutions and maintain the right of journalists to accessandto publishinformation; maintain freedomandinde- pendence of professional syndicates and preserve the rights of their membership."
Do I think Hamas is the solution ? No, but I think it is up to the Palestinian people to decide who their leader should be, that is the most basic of democratic rights.....
I don't understand -- how would this minimize the risk that Hamas would immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel? Let me try to get at this another way - would you support lifting the blockade but requiring full access to all imports/exports by third-party monitors?
Yes but this brings us back to the double standard issue I've been raising. Why is it okay to monitor Gaza while Israel has been buying weapons freely since it was created? Why is it okay for Israel to be military strong while Gaza has to use rockets ?
Honestly? Because if Israel wanted to eliminate Gaza, it could do so today, in about 12 hours. It's had the ability to do so for years. And Gaza is still here.
Do you really believe that, if Hamas had a nuke, it wouldn't launch it at Israel at the first opportunity?
I have heard this rhetoric, and it is simply not true that if Israel wanted, they can eliminate Gaza in 12hours. This is simply not True. Israel doesn't dare eliminating Gaza. There are billions of people watching, and you think the world will just sit and watch while Israel launches nukes on an entire nation? They do not Dare, and this is the only reason why Gaza is still standing and this is why they try to kill it little by little so the world doesn't notice but people are waking up. Israel is not sparing Ghaza out of morals or ethics, ahhha
Anonymous wrote:[Look, I'm trying to get at practical solutions here. I promise to answer this question if you answer mine first: If Israel ends the blockade, how can they ensure that Hamas will not immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel?
Did you read Hamas' s reform documents? This is what they said about their goals : " the aim is to
achieve equality before the law among citizens in rights and duties; bring security to all citizens and protect their proper- ties and assure their safety against arbitrary arrest, torture, or revenge; stress the culture of dialogue . . . ; support the press and media institutions and maintain the right of journalists to accessandto publishinformation; maintain freedomandinde- pendence of professional syndicates and preserve the rights of their membership."
Do I think Hamas is the solution ? No, but I think it is up to the Palestinian people to decide who their leader should be, that is the most basic of democratic rights.....
I don't understand -- how would this minimize the risk that Hamas would immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel? Let me try to get at this another way - would you support lifting the blockade but requiring full access to all imports/exports by third-party monitors?
Yes but this brings us back to the double standard issue I've been raising. Why is it okay to monitor Gaza while Israel has been buying weapons freely since it was created? Why is it okay for Israel to be military strong while Gaza has to use rockets ?
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
10:06 PP here - let's concentrate on my parenthetical. How would you recommend Israel eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians?
I can't focus on your parenthetical because I don't believe Israel has a right to eliminate Hamas. Who gave it that right? The real question is , does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation and the answer is No
Ok, let's say Israel doesn't have the right to eliminate Hamas. How would you recommend Israel protect its citizens from the rockets Hamas fires? From their other attacks?
Israel’s very posture is offensive, and it cannot claim to be engaging in “self-defense” against the very people whose land it has been illegaly occupying for decades. If Israel wants to protect their citizens, they need to end the occupation, siege , blockade ect.
To personalize this for a moment, imagine a bully sitting on a smaller child, and every time someone objects to the fact that the bully is beating the smaller child with an iron rod, the bully exclaims, “Well, he tried to slap me, so I was forced to defend myself.” No, you can’t claim that you’re beating the smaller child with an iron rod in self-defense, especially when you can end the entire confrontation simply by getting off him.
If Israel ends the blockade, how can they ensure that Hamas will not immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel?
And how do we ensure Israel doesn't use weaponery on Gaza and Hamas? Why does Israel have a right to arm itself but nobody else can? Why would Israel have the monopoly on owning weapons?
Look, I'm trying to get at practical solutions here. I promise to answer this question if you answer mine first: If Israel ends the blockade, how can they ensure that Hamas will not immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel?
Did you read Hamas' s reform documents? This is what they said about their goals : " the aim is to
achieve equality before the law among citizens in rights and duties; bring security to all citizens and protect their proper- ties and assure their safety against arbitrary arrest, torture, or revenge; stress the culture of dialogue . . . ; support the press and media institutions and maintain the right of journalists to accessandto publishinformation; maintain freedomandinde- pendence of professional syndicates and preserve the rights of their membership."
Do I think Hamas is the solution ? No, but I think it is up to the Palestinian people to decide who their leader should be, that is the most basic of democratic rights.....
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
10:06 PP here - let's concentrate on my parenthetical. How would you recommend Israel eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians?
I can't focus on your parenthetical because I don't believe Israel has a right to eliminate Hamas. Who gave it that right? The real question is , does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation and the answer is No
Ok, let's say Israel doesn't have the right to eliminate Hamas. How would you recommend Israel protect its citizens from the rockets Hamas fires? From their other attacks?
Israel’s very posture is offensive, and it cannot claim to be engaging in “self-defense” against the very people whose land it has been illegaly occupying for decades. If Israel wants to protect their citizens, they need to end the occupation, siege , blockade ect.
To personalize this for a moment, imagine a bully sitting on a smaller child, and every time someone objects to the fact that the bully is beating the smaller child with an iron rod, the bully exclaims, “Well, he tried to slap me, so I was forced to defend myself.” No, you can’t claim that you’re beating the smaller child with an iron rod in self-defense, especially when you can end the entire confrontation simply by getting off him.
So if Israel end the blockade of Gaza, there will never be another missile or attack on Israel and they will all live happily ever after? Does Israel get any sort of assurance or guarantee? Maybe a pinky swear?
What about from 2005-2007 when there was no blockade but there were many rockets?
This has been debunked:
Israel argues that its occupation of the Gaza Strip ended with the unilateral withdrawal of its settler population in 2005. It then declared the Gaza Strip to be "hostile territory" and declared war against its population. Neither the argument nor the statement is tenable. Despite removing 8,000 settlers and the military infrastructure that protected their illegal presence, Israel maintained effective control of the Gaza Strip and thus remains the occupying power as defined by Article 47 of the Hague Regulations. To date, Israel maintains control of the territory's air space, territorial waters, electromagnetic sphere, population registry and the movement of all goods and people.
Israel argues that the withdrawal from Gaza demonstrates that ending the occupation will not bring peace. Some have gone so far as to say that Palestinians squandered their opportunity to build heaven in order to build a terrorist haven instead. These arguments aim to obfuscate Israel's responsibilities in the Gaza Strip, as well as the West Bank. As Prime Minister Netanyahu once explained, Israel must ensure that it does not "get another Gaza in Judea and Samaria…. I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of theRiver Jordan."
Palestinians have yet to experience a day of self-governance. Israel immediately imposed a siege upon the Gaza Strip when Hamas won parliamentary elections in January 2006 and tightened it severely when Hamas routed Fatah in June 2007. The siege has created a "humanitarian catastrophe" in the Gaza Strip. Inhabitants will not be able to access clean water, electricity or tend to even the most urgent medical needs. The World Health Organization explains that the Gaza Strip will beunlivable by 2020. Not only did Israel not end its occupation, it has created a situation in which Palestinians cannot survive in the long-term.
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
10:06 PP here - let's concentrate on my parenthetical. How would you recommend Israel eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians?
I can't focus on your parenthetical because I don't believe Israel has a right to eliminate Hamas. Who gave it that right? The real question is , does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation and the answer is No
Ok, let's say Israel doesn't have the right to eliminate Hamas. How would you recommend Israel protect its citizens from the rockets Hamas fires? From their other attacks?
Israel’s very posture is offensive, and it cannot claim to be engaging in “self-defense” against the very people whose land it has been illegaly occupying for decades. If Israel wants to protect their citizens, they need to end the occupation, siege , blockade ect.
To personalize this for a moment, imagine a bully sitting on a smaller child, and every time someone objects to the fact that the bully is beating the smaller child with an iron rod, the bully exclaims, “Well, he tried to slap me, so I was forced to defend myself.” No, you can’t claim that you’re beating the smaller child with an iron rod in self-defense, especially when you can end the entire confrontation simply by getting off him.
If Israel ends the blockade, how can they ensure that Hamas will not immediately import sophisticated weaponry and use it on Israel?
And how do we ensure Israel doesn't use weaponery on Gaza and Hamas? Why does Israel have a right to arm itself but nobody else can? Why would Israel have the monopoly on owning weapons?
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:
I don't speak for Hamas, you can ask them why they don't have an updated charter on their website even though they have already said all their demands are available on the site. You are free to choose what to question, just like I am, my question wasnt directed at you. I don't speak for you, you are free to speak for yourself
That's a bit disingenuous, don't you think? Especially since you have plenty of guesses about other things.
If you had to guess why Hamas "has no charter" right now, why would you guess it is? Too busy?
To be honest, my guess is they don't have a charter because there might be some disagreements among their members and they can't agree on what their charter should be. They will of course not admit internal discord publicly because that would weaken their organization in the eyes of their "ennemies". Hamas is a huge organization, but this is just my guess, do not quote me on it, I do not have any insider info on the issue
Ding ding ding! I think you are entirely correct. I also think it's not going too far to say that at least some of the disagreement is over whether they should kill all the Jews or not.
Now, do you really not think that it impairs diplomatic relations when the elected party cannot amongst themselves even agree to simply not killing Jews?
See why Israel might be a wee bit hesitant about accepting Hamas as a partner in peace?
I never said Hamas was the perfect party to lead the Palestinians. But the same goes for Israel, why should they be trusted? For more than two decades, Palestinians and Israelis have been engaged in a so-called peace process, which aims to establish a Palestinian state on the occupied territories, the small areas from which Israel is legally required to withdraw. But that peace process failed time and again because Israel was never serious about allowing a viable Palestinian state to exist, and insisted on swallowing up more and more Palestinian land through relentless settlement expansion, in direct violation of international law. More recently, Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu candidly(though only in Hebrew) ruled out the possibility of allowing a sovereign Palestinian state to exist.
But because global perceptions are important, Israel is always looking for a way to deflect responsibility for the failure of the peace process onto the Palestinians. One of the talking points used to that end is theclaim that there is “no partner for peace” on the Palestinian side because the leadership was divided. So when Hamas and the Palestinian Authority agreed to end their division in recent months, Netanyahu’s government freaked out and demanded Western governments boycott the new united Palestinian leadership. When, to Netanyahu’s bitter disappointment, the U.S. insisted on dealing with the new Palestinian government anyway, Israel seems to have opted for a direct confrontation with Hamas to break up the unity government. One can see the cynical exploitation of the teens’ kidnapping to this end simply by looking at the Jerusalem Post headline, which reads: “Netanyahu to Kerry: PA’s Hamas-backed unity government to blame for missing teens.” Evidence for this sort of nonsense, of course, is nowhere to be seen.
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
10:06 PP here - let's concentrate on my parenthetical. How would you recommend Israel eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians?
I can't focus on your parenthetical because I don't believe Israel has a right to eliminate Hamas. Who gave it that right? The real question is , does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation and the answer is No
Ok, let's say Israel doesn't have the right to eliminate Hamas. How would you recommend Israel protect its citizens from the rockets Hamas fires? From their other attacks?
Israel’s very posture is offensive, and it cannot claim to be engaging in “self-defense” against the very people whose land it has been illegaly occupying for decades. If Israel wants to protect their citizens, they need to end the occupation, siege , blockade ect.
To personalize this for a moment, imagine a bully sitting on a smaller child, and every time someone objects to the fact that the bully is beating the smaller child with an iron rod, the bully exclaims, “Well, he tried to slap me, so I was forced to defend myself.” No, you can’t claim that you’re beating the smaller child with an iron rod in self-defense, especially when you can end the entire confrontation simply by getting off him.
my answers are in bold
Which part is not true?
-terrorist organization? They are a designated terrorist organization. This is indesputable. Correction: They are designated a terrorist organization by the US, Israel, and some European countries. The United Nations doesn't recognize them as a terrorist org.
-eradicating Israel? It is right in their charter. Also indesputable. Correction, as noted in previous posts above, Hamas doesn't use that charter and has said it was irrelevant and not what they believe in
-establishing an Islamist regime in the region? Haven't they done so in the Gaza Strip? Outlawed alcohol? Enforced modesty? Relied on Sharia? Please see response above
What exactly is untrue?
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:
I don't speak for Hamas, you can ask them why they don't have an updated charter on their website even though they have already said all their demands are available on the site. You are free to choose what to question, just like I am, my question wasnt directed at you. I don't speak for you, you are free to speak for yourself
That's a bit disingenuous, don't you think? Especially since you have plenty of guesses about other things.
If you had to guess why Hamas "has no charter" right now, why would you guess it is? Too busy?
To be honest, my guess is they don't have a charter because there might be some disagreements among their members and they can't agree on what their charter should be. They will of course not admit internal discord publicly because that would weaken their organization in the eyes of their "ennemies". Hamas is a huge organization, but this is just my guess, do not quote me on it, I do not have any insider info on the issue
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
10:06 PP here - let's concentrate on my parenthetical. How would you recommend Israel eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians?
I can't focus on your parenthetical because I don't believe Israel has a right to eliminate Hamas. Who gave it that right? The real question is , does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation and the answer is No
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
Do you think it's okay that Jew-killing is an explicit part of Hamas's charter?
I'm a new poster here and am deeply conflicted. I am a Jew. I am absolutely NOT OKAY with killing civilians and children. Duh. But I also think that Palestinians are suffering for having elected a party that has as part of its platform killing another ethnicity. Can we stop ignoring that? Can we stop pretending that Hamas wouldn't bomb the hell out of Israel if they could?
If Hamas explicitly disavowed violence towards Jews -- or heck, even just eliminated it from its charter -- I'd feel a lot more convinced that Israel had another option.
That's not true. Again, the more I'm on these boards, the more I see how people are misinformed. Hamas denied that charter years ago, their leader came out and said that Hamas has grown from what they used to be and they don't want to kill Jews nor do they follow that charter any longer. Again, Hamas doesn't have a public charter at this time and hasn't had one for years. Their leader came out and said unless you hear it from their mouth it is not from them. So please, stop quoting that charter that Hamas itself doesn't approve of. You can Google "current hamas charter" or anything related to see for yourself
The refrain that Israel has the right to self-defense is a red herring: the real question is, does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation? The answer is no.
Okay, if the only charter that is out there for them is so very inaccurate... Why don't they take a few minutes to update it? By, you know, doing a big control-x on the Jew-killing? Because I bet that would help, a lot. It would allow moderate Jews to support them without explicitly supporting violence against our families.
Also, you don't get to choose for all of us what the "real question" is.
I don't speak for Hamas, you can ask them why they don't have an updated charter on their website even though they have already said all their demands are available on the site. You are free to choose what to question, just like I am, my question wasnt directed at you. I don't speak for you, you are free to speak for yourself
Israeli soldier admits killing of civilians was a pre-planned act of revenge
Former Israeli military commander and Breaking the Silence researcher Eran Efrati has posted a statement to Facebook on his talks with IDF soldiers in Gaza, and reveals the deliberate killing of Palestinians by sniper fire in Shuja’iyya neighborhood as punishment for the death of soldiers in their units.
reports from soldiers in the Gaza Strip who leak information out to me. I am in the process of publication of two big stories in major U.S. newspapers, but there are some things I can share with you right now: Soldiers in two different units inside Gaza leaked information about the murdering of Palestinians by sniper fire in Shuja’iyya neighborhood as punishment for the death of soldiers in their units.
Source : http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/29/israeli-soldier-admits-murdering-palestinian-civilians-was-a-pre-planned-act-of-revenge/
Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal indicated to Robert Pastor, senior adviser to the Carter Center, that the Charter is "a piece of history and no longer relevant" Hamas do not use the Charter on their website and prefer to use their election manifesto to put forth their agenda.[85][86] Pastor states that those who quote the charter rather than more recent Hamas statements may be using the Charter as an excuse to ignore Hamas.[84]
British diplomat and former British ambassador to the United Nations Sir Jeremy Greenstock stated in early 2009 that the Hamas charter was "drawn up by a Hamas-linked imam some [twenty] years ago and has never been adopted since Hamas was elected as the Palestinian government"[88]Ahmed Yousef, an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh, has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time.
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
Do you think it's okay that Jew-killing is an explicit part of Hamas's charter?
I'm a new poster here and am deeply conflicted. I am a Jew. I am absolutely NOT OKAY with killing civilians and children. Duh. But I also think that Palestinians are suffering for having elected a party that has as part of its platform killing another ethnicity. Can we stop ignoring that? Can we stop pretending that Hamas wouldn't bomb the hell out of Israel if they could?
If Hamas explicitly disavowed violence towards Jews -- or heck, even just eliminated it from its charter -- I'd feel a lot more convinced that Israel had another option.
That's not true. Again, the more I'm on these boards, the more I see how people are misinformed. Hamas denied that charter years ago, their leader came out and said that Hamas has grown from what they used to be and they don't want to kill Jews nor do they follow that charter any longer. Again, Hamas doesn't have a public charter at this time and hasn't had one for years. Their leader came out and said unless you hear it from their mouth it is not from them. So please, stop quoting that charter that Hamas itself doesn't approve of. You can Google "current hamas charter" or anything related to see for yourself
The refrain that Israel has the right to self-defense is a red herring: the real question is, does Israel have the right to use force to maintain an illegal occupation? The answer is no.
Anonymous wrote:Muslima wrote:Anonymous wrote:Muslima, how would you recommend Israel eliminate Hamas (or at least eliminate their ability to attack Israeli civilians) without any adverse effect on Gaza's civilian population?
Why do you think Hamas needs to be eliminated?
Because they are a terrorist organization with the primary goal of eradicating Israel and establishing an Islamist regime in the region.
That's not true.