The Israeli Air Attack - Hundreds Dead - Israeli Ground attack on Gaza is now under way

BBC - Gaza conflict: Who is a civilian?

I think the Beeb have been generally good on this war. Here they go into the bombing of mosques schools etc., not to mention how much of a baby-eating terrorist the average Hamas member is.

I was thinking about the politics of the situation yesterday. If it's a political war (and I heard somewhere that the Israeli military had to rein in the bloodthirsty cabinet) then really I should be rooting for the Israelis. Bad as the current government are, they're supposed to be a whole lot better then the alternative: Likud.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/200915143237167997.html

It is desperate in Gaza, more and more people being killed. People with their children took shelter in a UN school and it was bombed.

The UN and Sarkozy are saying the bombardment should stop now, and Bush is giving more support for the action.

An Israeli peace activist is speaking on Al Jazeera calling on Obama to intervene.

Edo wrote:

...
Since we(Ireland) are part of the same hypocrisy as you endlessly remind us - I have no idea why you are still living here when the more pure pastures of Russia and South American Populist republics seem far more to your liking?

Sorry, I was going to snip this and proceed directly to the point I wanted to make, but it's not often (thankfully) you see the old "If you like xyz so much, why don't you go and live there" on Machine Nation so I just thought I'd highlight to you the sheer childishness of this device. There's loads more of such high-quality 'debate' to be found here. Enjoy.

Edo wrote:

Whether Israel will succeed is a good question - I have my doubts - leaving aside the rights and wrongs of the conflict - I dont think that it is possible to militarily defeat Hamas without a re-occupation of the Gaza Strip.

It is beyond belief that anyone thinks Hamas can be defeated militarily. The occupation of Gaza never ended, all they did was suspend the overt attempts at plantation. That is why Hamas persists with its depsicable rocketing.

Mr Green does a good job of demolishing the Sindonistas cheerleaders for Zionism here. The central point of which is, those bastards should know better.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaza-the-death-and-life-of-my-father-1225793.html

A Independent journalist writes about the death of his father in Gaza.

Background

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20081230&articleId=11526

John Ging, the Director of UNRA, is an Irishman. Does anyone know him? He is doing his utmost to get the message out that the assault on Gaza is illegal and has to be stopped.

The Israelis have been using both phosphorus, as is obvious from some of the casualties, and cluster bombs, both illegal.

Micheal Martin can be reached on

minister@dfa.ie

if anyone wants to contact him.

As is obvious isn't good enough. Back up both claims cactus. If they have, someone will have picked up on it.

Are cluster bombs illegal? Frowned upon certainly, completely counterproductive when you're pretending to all precise and civlian-avoiding.

905 wrote:

As is obvious isn't good enough. Back up both claims cactus. If they have, someone will have picked up on it.

Are cluster bombs illegal? Frowned upon certainly, completely counterproductive when you're pretending to all precise and civlian-avoiding.

Mostly from my own observation of what is hitting Gaza, plainly visible over the last week in Al Jazeera and France 24 television coverage. Phosphorus burnt bodies are a distinctive sight, also shown on television. Are you able to take a look yourself?

These are some people who have picked up on it in this and previous attacks - the doctors who have no time to give interviews are being quoted at second hand.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:bzj8HhrIETUJ:crooksandliars.com/taxonomy/term/672+cluster+bombs+phosphorus+uranium+tipped+Gaza&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=ie

There have been a number of allegations that uranium tipped bunker buster bombs have been used as well.

http://blog-reporter.blogspot.com/2009/01/cluster-bombs-depleted-uranium-and.html

http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_746.shtml

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Norwegian_doctor_in_Gaza_Israel_targeting_0105.html

There will be more in due course.

toxic avenger wrote:

The Israels broke the truce, no-one was killed until they invaded and killed a number of Palestinian militants in early November. Not that I have any time for the Islamofascists of Hamas.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

The Czech PM, Topolanek, speaking as President of the EU, has described Israel's actions as 'more defensive than offensive'. France has condemned their actions unequivocally.

http://www.africasia.com/services/news/newsitem.php?area=mideast&item=090103204619.k10mpyyi.php

Anyone still think CFSP is a good idea?

Well I would disagree with a lot of Hamas's policies but I don't think it's fair to call them Islamofascists. In many ways they're similar to an early pre-war-of-independence Sinn Fein.

Interestingly I heard Robert Fisk on radio 1 yesterday morning and he said Hamas was actually created (or very much helped into its infancy) by the Israelis, in order to act as an alternative to the secular PLO of the time?

Hamas obviously moved away from being Israel's favoured alternative, as this was just an early divide and conquer strategy used previously by the French and the British in the region. (the British helped the early zionists)

One important point about the Palestinian electorate is that they are amongst the most secular in the middle east, they look at what media they want, media similar to our own, and women can decide what to wear.

Meanwhile Hamas, unsurprisingly, do not want to create an Islamic Republic, or a Saudi style religious dictatorship.

It seems they were elected because of their ability to provide viable public services and given the choice of a quisling, corrupt, Fatah whose strings could so easily be pulled from Tel Aviv or Washington, then the choice had to be clear for the Palestinians.

So it's simplistic (and more than a tad racist imho when used in certain quarters, (but I don't use that against yourself toxic avenger in this instance)) to tar them with the lazy islamo-fascist rhetoric.

That term is part of the requirement to denigrate ones chosen enemies. Enemies who so frequently tend to be amongst the colonized and brutalised of this world.

Pax wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

The Israels broke the truce, no-one was killed until they invaded and killed a number of Palestinian militants in early November. Not that I have any time for the Islamofascists of Hamas.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

The Czech PM, Topolanek, speaking as President of the EU, has described Israel's actions as 'more defensive than offensive'. France has condemned their actions unequivocally.

http://www.africasia.com/services/news/newsitem.php?area=mideast&item=090103204619.k10mpyyi.php

Anyone still think CFSP is a good idea?

Well I would disagree with a lot of Hamas's policies but I don't think it's fair to call them Islamofascists. In many ways they're similar to an early pre-war-of-independence Sinn Fein.

Interestingly I heard Robert Fisk on radio 1 yesterday morning and he said Hamas was actually created (or very much helped into its infancy) by the Israelis, in order to act as an alternative to the secular PLO of the time?
Hamas obviously moved away from being Israel's favoured alternative, as this was just an early divide and conquer strategy used previously by the French and the British in the region. (the British helped the early zionists)

One important point about the Palestinian electorate is that they are amongst the most secular in the middle east, they look at what media they want, media similar to our own, and women can decide what to wear.

Meanwhile Hamas, unsurprisingly, do not want to create an Islamic Republic, or a Saudi style religious dictatorship.

It seems they were elected because of their ability to provide viable public services and given the choice of a quisling, corrupt, Fatah whose strings could so easily be pulled from Tel Aviv or Washington, then the choice had to be clear for the Palestinians.

So it's simplistic (and more than a tad racist imho when used in certain quarters, (but I don't use that against yourself toxic avenger in this instance)) to tar them with the lazy islamo-fascist rhetoric.

That term is part of the requirement to denigrate ones chosen enemies. Enemies who so frequently tend to be amongst the colonized and brutalised of this world.

Would you have any idea when/at what stage Fisk suggests that Hamas was Israeli-sponsored? Robin Cook said unequivocally that Al Qaeda was a creature of the CIA and that the name itself meant "data base". The use and fuelling of radical Islam by the US as a means of mobilising populations against secular democratic or soviet backed political movements is well established: division of Sunni and Shia is a bonus to them in terms of division of the Arab populations. The refusal of Israel to deal in any meaningful way with the PLO was one of the things that drove support for Hamas. It is hard to envisage that in the 1960s the arab countries were rapidly modernising states and economies, with women in minskirts and uncovered hair.

Children hit hard as Gaza toll rises - BBC


Children make up third of Gaza dead: medics - Sydney Morning Herald


Twenty children killed in Gaza fighting: official - Sydney Morning Herald


...The death toll passed 535 as planes, helicopters, artillery and tanks pounded the Palestinian territory for a tenth day... Daily Mail


http://djiin.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/annapolis-was-a-success/


http://bloggingknight.wordpress.com/2008/12/29/stop-this-israel-you-cannot-expect-peace-with-guns-and-bullets-in-you-hands/

Will Israel be charged with war crimes ? (Al Jazeera (?) report)

Steinitz gave a series of smirks, then shifted in his seat uncomfortably, after letting that one slip! (about 10 1/2 minutes in)

Looks like Israel would've found any old 'McGuffin' of a reason to attack.

It's easy to see the futility of Hamas's rockets and to decry it, but Hamas's tactics need to put into the perspective that Israel was always planning the attack/invasion anyway.

Palestinians seem to have the choice of either agreeing to die quietly, and/or allowing the dispossession of their land and of their dignity, without protest.

Pax wrote:

It's easy to see the futility of Hamas's rockets and to decry it, but Hamas's tactics need to put into the perspective that Israel was always planning the attack/invasion anyway.

Palestinians seem to have the choice of either agreeing to die quietly, and/or allowing the dispossession of their land and of their dignity, without protest.

Ah, but seeing as it's making the news here, are we not to assume that it comes as a surprise to the Palestinians too? Did they stock up on a hunch?

905 wrote:

Pax wrote:

It's easy to see the futility of Hamas's rockets and to decry it, but Hamas's tactics need to put into the perspective that Israel was always planning the attack/invasion anyway.

Palestinians seem to have the choice of either agreeing to die quietly, and/or allowing the dispossession of their land and of their dignity, without protest.

Ah, but seeing as it's making the news here, are we not to assume that it comes as a surprise to the Palestinians too? Did they stock up on a hunch?

Not sure what you mean.

Russia Today is reporting that the US delivered "smart bombs" to Israel in December that have been used in Gaza and is now sending a ship to deliver 3,000 tonnes (I think) of armaments to Israel from Greece. Also reported on Al Jazeera.

There is reasonable suggestion (from me) that these bunker buster bombs, said to be a new type, would be the sort of weapon that might be used against Iranian supposed/real nuclear installations.

The UN SC has proven to be powerless/indifferent/in the control of the US or in support of the attack.

The Israelis are leafletting Gaza that they are about to intensify the war. http://www.breakingnews.ie/World/mhsnmhsnmhcw/

Something is going to give.

cactus flower wrote:

The UN SC has proven to be powerless/indifferent/in the control of the US or in support of the attack.

The Israelis are leafletting Gaza that they are about to intensify the war. http://www.breakingnews.ie/World/mhsnmhsnmhcw/

Something is going to give.

Seeing as the Security council has passed a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and ultimate withdrawal of Israeli troops I doubt it's the latter four options.

According to this (The Guardian - US abstention stuns security council) the Americans were due to vote for the resolution too, but abstained at the last minute. Remember,they could have vetoed it. The resoultion was dismissed anyway by both sides

905 wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

The UN SC has proven to be powerless/indifferent/in the control of the US or in support of the attack.

The Israelis are leafletting Gaza that they are about to intensify the war. http://www.breakingnews.ie/World/mhsnmhsnmhcw/

Something is going to give.

Seeing as the Security council has passed a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and ultimate withdrawal of Israeli troops I doubt it's the latter four options.

According to this (The Guardian - US abstention stuns security council) the Americans were due to vote for the resolution too, but abstained at the last minute. Remember,they could have vetoed it. The resoultion was dismissed anyway by both sides

At the end of the day, it was a non-runner, that had the agreement of neither Hamas nor the Israeli government and that has been ignored by the Israeli government and Hamas. An easy one to abstain on. I'm unconvinced by the exercise.

According to the Guardian it was not discussed with Hamas at all. Contrary to the constant stream of disinformation, Hamas are up for negotiating a ten-fifteen year truce with Israel. The hyperbole about Hamas wanting to slaughter the population of Israel or drive them into the ocean is nonsense. I have heard several Hamas interviewees confirm that the recognise Israel as a de facto State. Like the Irish for so long with unification, they are not able or ready to give up what they call "Their Dream" of return to all of their lands in Palestine.

Why is there such a hullabaloo over a few hundred palistinians. The Arabs killed 25000 of them and nobody batted an eyelid

youngdan wrote:

Why is there such a hullabaloo over a few hundred palistinians. The Arabs killed 25000 of them and nobody batted an eyelid

Black September? Plenty of eyelids were batted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan

In my view the Arab leaders, including the Eygyptian government getting 2 billion a year from the US, are just as much responsible for what is happening in Gaza as are the Israelis.

Paul Gillespie in today's IT talks about the real politics behind Gaza and where Obama is going.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0110/1231515461125.html

Can anyone tell me what is the difference between a palistinian and a jordanian

youngdan wrote:

Can anyone tell me what is the difference between a palistinian and a jordanian

Yeah, I agree, all those darkies look the same to me too.

cactus flower wrote:

905 wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

The UN SC has proven to be powerless/indifferent/in the control of the US or in support of the attack.

The Israelis are leafletting Gaza that they are about to intensify the war. http://www.breakingnews.ie/World/mhsnmhsnmhcw/

Something is going to give.

Seeing as the Security council has passed a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and ultimate withdrawal of Israeli troops I doubt it's the latter four options.

According to this (The Guardian - US abstention stuns security council) the Americans were due to vote for the resolution too, but abstained at the last minute. Remember,they could have vetoed it. The resoultion was dismissed anyway by both sides

At the end of the day, it was a non-runner, that had the agreement of neither Hamas nor the Israeli government and that has been ignored by the Israeli government and Hamas. An easy one to abstain on. I'm unconvinced by the exercise.

According to the Guardian it was not discussed with Hamas at all. Contrary to the constant stream of disinformation, Hamas are up for negotiating a ten-fifteen year truce with Israel. The hyperbole about Hamas wanting to slaughter the population of Israel or drive them into the ocean is nonsense. I have heard several Hamas interviewees confirm that the recognise Israel as a de facto State. Like the Irish for so long with unification, they are not able or ready to give up what they call "Their Dream" of return to all of their lands in Palestine.

That is all very well, but what happens at the end of the (say) twelve years? Unlike Fatah, I see no bend in Hamas at all. That is not to say that an agreement shouldn't happen, it must.

You could say the same in relation to negotiations with Sinn Fein.

If an agreement should and must happen and Hamas are open to negotiations, why are they being bombed along with all the people around them? Why is the social infrastructure of Gaza being pulverised?

What is the bend you see in Fatah, apart from being on the take?

More here about Fatah and the US, from Vanity Fair last summer:
Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.

Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of “engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory.” He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. “It looks to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen,” Wurmser says.

The botched plan has rendered the dream of Middle East peace more remote than ever, but what really galls neocons such as Wurmser is the hypocrisy it exposed. “There is a stunning disconnect between the president’s call for Middle East democracy and this policy,” he says. “It directly contradicts it.”
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804?currentPage=6

Posted elsewhere by Aragon, and giving the lie to the claims that Hamas broke the truce

Quote :

Well, to put an end to the difficulty here - Mark Regev, one of Ehud Olmert's senior spokespersons was skewered by a Channel 4 'More 4' journalist this week:


http://www.tamuchly.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/regev-more4.wvx