Zionism

[thushan]

Mr Politiks reckons that there is an easy solution to stop Hamas from attacking - this way civilians need not be killed.

Upgrade the Iron Dome. Because Hamas' missiles are 'useless' and can easily be neutralised by an upgraded Iron Dome.

Is it really that easy?

He thinks its easy, and the only reason Israel are not doing it is to 'make sure there's enough deterrence to prevent existence of Palestine,' in his words.

Your thoughts? Esp to Enwiabe.

[MonsieurHulot]

"will not improve the rest of the world's view of you"

You're right. But...is it worth losing your reputation to protect your civilians (whilst killing other civilians?) Or leaving those civilians alone at all costs, allowing your civilians to get killed, whilst keeping your rep - with the motive of maintaining your rep?

Remember...obedience is doing what you are told, whether right or wrong. Morality is doing what is right, whether you are told to or told not to.

But...the problem is that you have to do one of two wrongs. Which wrong is it? Which is more wrong? I don't envy those who are in power at the moment.

I didn't mean so much Israel's reputation as the view of their actions. For example, the US provides $2 billion in aid per year to Israel, although the US is one of their closest allies, playing outside the rules could cost them vital money from other countries.

[thushan]

"will not improve the rest of the world's view of you"

You're right. But...is it worth losing your reputation to protect your civilians (whilst killing other civilians?) Or leaving those civilians alone at all costs, allowing your civilians to get killed, whilst keeping your rep - with the motive of maintaining your rep?

Remember...obedience is doing what you are told, whether right or wrong. Morality is doing what is right, whether you are told to or told not to.

But...the problem is that you have to do one of two wrongs. Which wrong is it? Which is more wrong? I don't envy those who are in power at the moment.

I didn't mean so much Israel's reputation as the view of their actions. For example, the US provides $2 billion in aid per year to Israel, although the US is one of their closest allies, playing outside the rules could cost them vital money from other countries.

Assuming the US acts out of morality and not their own vested interests.

[MonsieurHulot]

"will not improve the rest of the world's view of you"

You're right. But...is it worth losing your reputation to protect your civilians (whilst killing other civilians?) Or leaving those civilians alone at all costs, allowing your civilians to get killed, whilst keeping your rep - with the motive of maintaining your rep?

Remember...obedience is doing what you are told, whether right or wrong. Morality is doing what is right, whether you are told to or told not to.

But...the problem is that you have to do one of two wrongs. Which wrong is it? Which is more wrong? I don't envy those who are in power at the moment.

I didn't mean so much Israel's reputation as the view of their actions. For example, the US provides $2 billion in aid per year to Israel, although the US is one of their closest allies, playing outside the rules could cost them vital money from other countries.

Assuming the US acts out of morality and not their own vested interests.

True. Why are they so close to Israel? I've heard it's because there's a very powerful Jewish lobby in the US, but they must be extremely powerful to push the US and Israel's friendship almost to the point of alienation.

[thushan]

I've heard that too.

[ninwa]

Mr Politiks reckons that there is an easy solution to stop Hamas from attacking - this way civilians need not be killed.

Upgrade the Iron Dome. Because Hamas' missiles are 'useless' and can easily be neutralised by an upgraded Iron Dome.

Is it really that easy?

He thinks its easy, and the only reason Israel are not doing it is to 'make sure there's enough deterrence to prevent existence of Palestine,' in his words.

Your thoughts? Esp to Enwiabe.

Can I ask why you keep speaking on his behalf?

[thushan]

Not on that occasion. He discussed it with me, and it raised a question in my head, so that's why I put up on the other post.

[Mech]

It would be great to have an independent investigation into the IDF regarding these particular instances. However, I highly doubt soldiers were sanctioned to kill children and throw tear gas grenades at close range contravening alleged military protocol. I think we will all have scepticism about these incidences until there is some independent investigations. I agree these events are not evidence to say the IDF is systematically ethnically cleansing.

I can see both sides though of this argument regarding the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians see it as an attempt by Israel to cleanse the region, whereas Israelis probably sees it as creating space between Hamas-- removing the parasite that has buried itself amongst a civilian population. A 2007 report suggests that 62% of Palestinians have a positive view of Hamas (I am not sure how that has fluctuated) because they probably view them as freedom fighters for the autonomy of Palestinians. It upsets me that religious moderates have to probably barrack for radical group because they have no real choice (I believe about 75% of the population in Palestinian territories is Muslim and most of them, just like the new generations of Zionist Jews, want a place to live). 

Secular Zionism, for me, seems to be missing the Messianic reasons behind its origins. I guess it has evolved due to new generations of Israelis. Either way, secular Zionists and non-traditionalists do seem to have a cultural affinity that converges with the religious Zionists regarding certain land. For example, East Jerusalem has the Dome and Foundation Rock; you could want to protect that for strong religious reasons or because you have a cultural ties to the land, the narrative (but, then again, some Zionists do not share that view and would relinquish the land; the Likud, Shas and Kadima political parties, however, will not agree with the relinquishing of certain land (i.e. Jerusalem and, for the most part, surrounding enclaves ) based on their professed Zionist platforms). For me, it is sort of upsetting that secular individuals are inadvertently serving a Zionist tradition that was once, and still largely remains, a form of Messianism. It is understandable, however, for new generations of Israelis who have a recent and rekindled cultural affinity with the land to want to protect their home. Although, I still disagree with the original agreements of 1947-48 in re-establishing a Jewish state (within Palestinian territory); it is just something we now have to deal with, somehow.

I am really conflicted on this whole discussion, but I feel hopelessly resigned to the fact nobody is going to budge on this issue. It is a circular conflict and I think it is only enabled by religious doctrine that has been secularised or remains openly religious, i.e. the distinction between Israeli and Palestinian governance.

[Russ]

He thinks its easy, and the only reason Israel are not doing it is to 'make sure there's enough deterrence to prevent existence of Palestine,' in his words.

Unless you've misquoted, I don't understand this.

[thushan]

He thinks its easy, and the only reason Israel are not doing it is to 'make sure there's enough deterrence to prevent existence of Palestine,' in his words.

Unless you've misquoted, I don't understand this.

As in, instead of fortifying the Iron Dome, they are attacking to try and prevent a push for the existence of Palestine - i.e. to get rid of Palestine altogether. And to prevent anyone from even thinking of making a Palestinian state. I think that's what he means...

[ninwa]

Probably better to get him to say what he meant

[thushan]

Mmm perhaps.

Anyway, my original question (and mine only) - is it actually that easy? If it were, I think it would have been done a long time ago. Is the solution to Hamas' attack simply to fortify the dome and all is hunky dorey? I doubt it somehow...but I can't place why...

[enwiabe]

Do you guys understand what Iron Dome is?

It's a series of laser guided missiles that try to intercept the rockets Hamas is firing.

It's not a matter of "JUST UPGRADE IT LOLZ"

The equations involved in determining the trajectories are insane and it's a modern miracle of engineering that they can intercept even 1/4 of the missiles. How churlish to say "just upgrade your defense systems so that when we attack you you can just swat us away". Through my contacts at the technion, I know that they are constantly working to upgrade it but it's extremely difficult. Turbulence is a random phenomenon so making these interception missiles 100% accurate is nearly impossible.

The fact that he said "fortify" it means he must literally think it's a dome made out of iron that the missiles are detonating into. Or something similarly absurd.

What do you think Hamas would do if their rockets became ineffective? They'd go back to suicide attacks and bus bombs. Why are they launching rockets at Israel in the first place? To terrorise people and to kill civilians. Do you think they'd just keep firing rockets if they had no effect? They'd either ask Iran for more stealthy rockets or they'd start resorting to other means.

The insinuation that Israel is letting rockets fall on itself so it can attack Palestine is nothing more than a half-baked conspiracy theory. What a disgusting thing to say that you think Israel would risk its own citizens dying so that it could have some sort of moral imperative to go to war. What an evil thought.

It's funny that mr.politiks should have a go at me for not providing enough evidence when everything he writes is either wild speculation or hearsay.

This was not a well-thought out proposition in any way.

I would also like to note that he is still dodging my questions which expose his previous arguments as bald-faced lies.

[thushan]

Point taken - I'll be honest, I didn't really understand what an Iron Dome is, hence why I posed the question.

[Truck]

The proposition that the IDF deliberately kills citizens is preposterous.

http://campaignfortruth.info/page.aspx?id=245877 - biased source but it says the truth. There is no policy in the Israeli government that calls for the death of civilians, and to suggest such a thing is to ignore every action the IDF has taken in the past 60 years to prevent the death of innocents.