Zionism

[JellyDonut]

Note that Hamas is hardly considered the voice of the Palestinians. They won a still disputed election once and aren't in power anymore. It is unfortunate that Palestinians still have to carry that burden of 6 years ago. Negotiations are still possible

[mr.politiks]

One would have sincerely hoped a resolution was found before groups like Hamas came around.

I like that parallel with the French resistance.

As for the charter, it has been declared invalid by Hamas leadership and as far as I know is no longer found on their website. It is however very fashionable to quote it.

I think there is a small point to be made surrounding finer details. Often Hamas is stated to be a "terrorist organisation". This is, I think, too general. It is an organisation with a military wing that terrorises, or at least has the aim to terrorise. The line between legitimate resistance and terrorising is the line between non-civilian and civilian targets.

Problems arise when people fail to acknowledge that the Israeli Defence Forces also (and there is too much evidence for this) terrorise, though it would be far fetched to say they are terrorists. I think most people have a problem when people say, hey look Hamas is terrorist but the IDF isnt, to somehow signify that one side has a higher moral ground in the conflict. Many people see it as more just to label both sides as ones that terrorise the other.

It might also be of interest to note the actions of Jewish terrorist groups such as the Irgun that were in part responsible for a mass Palestinian exodus in the mid 20th century. For example, here is a listing of Irgun attacks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks.

Whilst terrorism is clearly immoral, the presence of terrorism on one side of the conflict shouldnt always be a cause for dismissing the moral credibility of the guilty side.

Hamas can be seen as a signal really, whereby the conflict itself has moved from the point where reasonable solutions through negotiations just dont seem to be achievable anymore. For some of us, who are generally impartial observers or commentators, it seems rational that both sides really just NEED to stop fighting. The realities on the ground, and its these that most of us are really unaware about, are probably much more different. One can think of it as, try telling the Palestininians in Gaza, DW guys that was all just collateral damage, and after years of opression, try telling the people actually facing the opression, hey guys, no need to support armed resistance, cos hey, we can just be reasonable and resolve it through negotations.

Negotiations have been tried, and have simply failed.

As for that appendix from the "case for israel" (i think its from that book), i claim to be no expert. THe book is quite controversial, and Norman Finkelstein, the same man who debunked a similar book titled "From Time Immemorial" (a book heavily referenced by Dershowitz who wrote the case for Israel), labelled the book "a collection of fraud, falsification, plagiarism and nonsense.". An independent investigation agreed with Finkelstein, though the plagiarism charges were not well supported.

I would recommend to not try to read history from a single source.

[mr.politiks]

mr.politiks,

you are misguided and shamefully antisemitic

Please guide me, in all sincerity.

[enwiabe]

I just have to respond to some of the bilge spewed by mr.politiks because it's so asinine and patently incorrect. Also, in the time it took you to write this, mr.politiks, 200 African children died of starvation and you did not give a shit.

As for the charter, it has been declared invalid by Hamas leadership and as far as I know is no longer found on their website. It is however very fashionable to quote it.

More rank hypocrisy from "mr.politiks". So it's not fair game to go after Hamas for their 1988 charter, but it is fair game to hold Israel to a UN resolution that expired around the same time? Cool beans

I think there is a small point to be made surrounding finer details. Often Hamas is stated to be a "terrorist organisation". This is, I think, too general. It is an organisation with a military wing that terrorises, or at least has the aim to terrorise. The line between legitimate resistance and terrorising is the line between non-civilian and civilian targets.

Problems arise when people fail to acknowledge that the Israeli Defence Forces also (and there is too much evidence for this) terrorise, though it would be far fetched to say they are terrorists. I think most people have a problem when people say, hey look Hamas is terrorist but the IDF isnt, to somehow signify that one side has a higher moral ground in the conflict. Many people see it as more just to label both sides as ones that terrorise the other.

There -is- a difference. Whenever civilians are killed in an IDF mission, that it is considered a failure of the mission.

Hamas actively targets civilians. Worse than that, they hide their bases in densely populated civilian areas so that it will be impossible for Israel to target Hamas installations without killing civilians. They're cowardly rats who use innocents as human shields.

For you to defend an organisation that a) is now a dictatorship (they have stopped all elections) and b) has the stated goal of killing babies shows a horrible moral failing on your part.

I would recommend to not try to read history from a single source.

And I would recommend not cherrypicking only a few sources to come to the conclusions that were brainwashed into you from before you could think for yourself. You're smarter than that.

[mr.politiks]

Whenever civilians are killed in an IDF mission that it is considered a failure of the mission.

Srs? If you can claim that with a straight face, then i think there is really no point of continuing this discussion.

For you to defend an organisation

I posted this. Strong defence:

Whilst terrorism is clearly immoral

[enwiabe]

Whenever civilians are killed in an IDF mission that it is considered a failure of the mission.

Srs? If you can claim that with a straight face, then i think there is really no point of continuing this discussion.

Israel does not target cvilians. They  target Hamas and other militia. Civilians are unavoidable casualties because Hamas uses them as human shields. You know Israel gives a shit because when they fuck up, there are top level inquiries held to make sure it doesn't happen again. If it's ever the case that a soldier gets trigger happy, they like any other country in the world, prosecute him within their court martial system. If there's a mission that can even be thought of as targeting civilians there is a full, independent inquiry.

If you can't acknowledge that, you are truly brainwashed. If you want me to post you links to these inquiries I can. But I'd rather you do some actual research of your own for once before mouthing off so blithely without knowing anything remotely resembling the facts.

Where are Hamas' inquiries into minimising civilian casualties? Oh wai-

Also: please respond to my calling you out for your hamas vis a vis the charter vs. the UN resolution? No response, yeah I thought so. You are so blinkered it's ridiculous.

[enwiabe]

Whenever civilians are killed in an IDF mission that it is considered a failure of the mission.

Srs? If you can claim that with a straight face, then i think there is really no point of continuing this discussion.

For you to defend an organisation

I posted this. Strong defence:

Whilst terrorism is clearly immoral

Yes, I know you equivocated so you don't seem like a monster. You still support Hamas who are a terrorist organisation. Clearly you're willing to look the other way. You support terrorism against Israelis by supporting Hamas. You are a supporter of terrorism. You support a fanatical dictatorship that kills its political enemies in the gaza strip and parades their bodies in front of their families. Those are the animals you support

[thushan]

Oi. Let's cut it out with the personal attacks shall we? Be constructive.

[mr.politiks]

You support terrorism against Israelis by supporting Hamas. You are a supporter of terrorism. You support a fanatical dictatorship that kills its political enemies in the gaza strip and parades their bodies in front of their families. Those are the animals you support

Please re-read my post. Never said it isnt fair game. That was an insinuation that you took to be the core of my opinion on the charter. Go and read about the charter, and go and read about what has been said about its current status. I read about the current status of the UN charter, and when i said i had criticised the UN resolution wrongly, i admitted a scandalous mistake. I posted a video that you might like to watch, and also stated that you can make your own conclusions or draw your own opinions.

As for the IDF conducting those investigations. Please give me the links, i would like to read them.

I think you take issue with this

Negotiations have been tried, and have simply failed.

I was, if you read my post, talking from the possible viewpoint of the Palestinian people.

Israel does not target cvilians. They  target Hamas and other militia. Civilians are unavoidable casualties because Hamas uses them as human shields. You know Israel gives a shit because when they fuck up, there are top level inquiries held to make sure it doesn't happen again. If it's ever the case that a soldier gets trigger happy, they like any other country in the world, prosecute him within their court martial system. If there's a mission that can even be thought of as targeting civilians there is a full, independent inquiry.

Please give me more independently verified information on this.

Civilians are unavoidable casualties

You seem to be framing your points by somehow claiming that when any Palestinain civilian dies, they either died because

1. they were used as a human shield

2. collateral damage

I wish that were the case too, but unfortunately it really isnt.

[enwiabe]

Oi. Let's cut it out with the personal attacks shall we? Be constructive.

People who support terrorism should be called out on it. It's not a personal attack to label somebody with their views.

[thushan]

You support terrorism against Israelis by supporting Hamas. You are a supporter of terrorism. You support a fanatical dictatorship that kills its political enemies in the gaza strip and parades their bodies in front of their families. Those are the animals you support

Please re-read my post. Never said it isnt fair game. That was an insinuation that you took to be the core of my opinion on the charter. Go and read about the charter, and go and read about what has been said about its current status. I read about the current status of the UN charter, and when i said i had criticised the UN resolution wrongly, i admitted a scandalous mistake. I posted a video that you might like to watch, and also stated that you can make your own conclusions or draw your own opinions.

As for the IDF conducting those investigations. Please give me the links, i would like to read them.

You mentioned that Israel also actively targets civilians Politiks?

[enwiabe]

As for the IDF conducting those investigations. Please give me the links, i would like to read them.

If you seriously didn't know about this, or needed me to give you links, it shows how little you know about the conflict, and how you are unwilling to find any information which might go against the conclusion you have already drawn. You know only one side, you know nothing of the other side. You are closed off to any reasonable opinion.

This is how I have to present the links for this: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=IDF+investigation+into+civilian+casualties

Let me google that for you. Because the first page alone has 10 goldmine links flush with information.

You aren't unable to find this information for yourself, you're simply unwilling. You have such a myopic view of the conflict that it's very ugly. That's why I keep posting, because your ignorance is frustrating, especially when I expect so much better from somebody so intelligent.

[pi]

Also, in the time it took you to write this, mr.politiks, 200 African children died of starvation and you did not give a shit.

In fairness, I don't really see the need to bring this up. I can't recall mr.politiks saying he didn't specifically care about the terrible happenings in Africa, and this thread isn't trying to construct a debate regarding those issues either.

[enwiabe]

Also, in the time it took you to write this, mr.politiks, 200 African children died of starvation and you did not give a shit.

In fairness, I don't really see the need to bring this up. I can't recall mr.politiks saying he didn't specifically care about the terrible happenings in Africa, and this thread isn't trying to construct a debate regarding those issues either.

I keep mentioning this to show the hypocrisy of moralising about Israel.

If you're going to condemn Israel and get morally outraged, why only Israel? I've never once seen him get angry at other injustices. It shows him to be blinkered and single-minded.

For that matter, mr.politiks, do you know about the oppression faced by Palestinian immigrants in other countries in the middle east? What about the refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria? Do you need me to give you some links again?

Have you read about what's going on there? Do you even care?

[thushan]

Maybe they're less personal to him. He might care, but this is more personal. It's like how one would be a lot more concerned with what's happening in one's family as opposed to what is happening on the other side of the world.