• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

War in Israel

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
So much to unpack from this thread, been a busy week at work though.

Still a bit surprised by both the fact that Israel and their border security had grown so lax and complacent. There are several stories about current or former soldiers, to include at least one retired General, hopping in their cars and driving down from Tel Aviv or elsewhere to lead counterattacks hours after the Hamas attacks began. And you gotta wonder about the thought process of having a rave just across the border?

I've seen a lot of speculation about about why Hamas may have done this, and as of right now it just looks like they wanted to kill and capture Israelis which is pretty much their stated reason for being. It wasn't an overly complex plan but a well planned and executed one, so I think speculation that it was planned in conjunction with Iran or that it was part of some larger scheme to derail Israeli-Arab relations are just theories right now.

Israel doesn't really have a choice but to respond to this attack, and unfortunately Hamas has entrenched itself into Gaza so firmly that civilian casualties are all but unavoidable. It is going to be a mess.

As for who is ultimately responsible for the mess that is the Israel-Arab conflict, it is a bit of the case where everyone sucks to one degree or another. I do believe we are on the right side, as flawed as Israel is, but Israel does shoulder a lot of blame for backing the Palestinians into a corner with very few if any options to get out of it. Why is it a surprise when you give folks no options? They will act out like they have nothing to lose...because they don't...and you get a very severe response. History is replete with examples of what happens when you give folks no real options.

But...none of that excuses what Hamas did. As I mentioned earlier it appears so far the main purpose of the Hamas attack was to kill Jews, period. Didn't matter the age, if they were a threat or even if they were Jewish (several third-country workers were killed too). They just wanted to kill, and they gleefully did it while filming it all in HD. In a broader sense, the continued internal exile of Palestinians to refugee camps along with rampant and casual anti-Semitism across the Arab world don't really help things much either.

We used nukes on Japan so that we could beat the Russians to invastion.

This is history 101.

Not really. People seem to forget that we dropped the nukes as soon as we made sure it was a viable weapon, we didn't really waste any time at all when you look at the time it took to deliver the two bombs we used and the targeting process. As I saw someone put it in an article about the decision to drop the bombs, can you imagine the shitstorm that would have ensued if Truman didn't utilize a weapon that could have ended the war almost immediately and saved thousands of American lives? He did, and it did and thousands of lives on all sides were saved.

That's a bit disingenuous. We weren't looking for a nuclear bomb, but the things we did eventually find (that you've noted) weren't evidence of an active program. At the end of the day, what the Bush admin claimed was there wasn't. That's just not debatable.

Brett has already addressed most of it, but the vast majority of stuff we did find in Iraq after invading was left over from before the Gulf War in '91. Their weapons accountability was so poor they didn't honestly realize that they still had shells with chemical weapons warheads still in bunkers. Simply put, their WMD programs were either non-existent or on hiatus when we invaded in '03.
 

taxi1

Well-Known Member
pilot
Brett has already addressed most of it, but the vast majority of stuff we did find in Iraq after invading was left over from before the Gulf War in '91. Their weapons accountability was so poor they didn't honestly realize that they still had shells with chemical weapons warheads still in bunkers. Simply put, their WMD programs were either non-existent or on hiatus when we invaded in '03.
I pictured Saddam with that noose around his neck saying, "Haha, jokes on you I didn't have any WMDs...uh oh"
 

IRfly

Registered User
None
I pictured Saddam with that noose around his neck saying, "Haha, jokes on you I didn't have any WMDs...uh oh"
I went to a dinner once with Michael Morrell, who was the deputy chief of the CIA for intelligence at the time. Asked him about this. His reply: "I got it wrong."

He went on to tell us that when he interviewed Saddam about it, Saddam was pretty incredulous...to paraphrase: "Of course I ACTED like I had dangerous weapons! I live in a rough neighborhood. But you're the CIA--I thought that you of all people would know exactly what I had and didn't have"
 

Random8145

Registered User
Contributor
It's Wikipedia, so read with caution, but it seems like a good summary to me: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_apartheid

Bottom line, it seems clear to me that Israel does not treat Palestinian and Jewish citizens the same under the law or in practice. Hell, if you live in Gaza, you can't even leave without very good reason and a specific permit, and then not even into Israel or the West Bank, but only Egypt. Do the Israelis have good reasons for these laws? Yes. Is it still a violation of intl law? Clearly. What should the Israelis do? I don't know.
I would be very careful going by Wikipedia. The article shows its bias right from the start, referring to Israel and "its ongoing occupation of the Palestinian territories." I would argue that Israel doesn't really "occupy" anything. The so-called "occupied territories" are lands that were taken from Israel during the 1948 war, which Israel only took back in the 1967 war when multiple Arab states (again) tried to destroy them. So I do not agree that they are really in violation of international law.
 

Random8145

Registered User
Contributor
As for who is ultimately responsible for the mess that is the Israel-Arab conflict, it is a bit of the case where everyone sucks to one degree or another. I do believe we are on the right side, as flawed as Israel is, but Israel does shoulder a lot of blame for backing the Palestinians into a corner with very few if any options to get out of it. Why is it a surprise when you give folks no options? They will act out like they have nothing to lose...because they don't...and you get a very severe response. History is replete with examples of what happens when you give folks no real options.
I am curious, but how has Israel backed them into a corner? Israel has repeatedly made peace offerings to the Palestinians. They have been repeatedly rejected. Mahmoud Abbas rejected every one of Ehud Olmert's peace offers (for example in 2008 when he offered 100% of the West Bank, the creation of a Palestinian state, and the Muslim parts of Jerusalem to be the capital of said state). And Gaza is overrun with Hamas terrorists. So I wouldn't even argue this is so much the Palestinians engaging in any severe response, it is Hamas just engaging in a killing spree.

The reason for Palestinian destitution is the decades and decades of Palestinian leadership who have preferred poverty and misery for the Palestinians vs accept any peace offering from Israel. They have had plenty of opportunity to build infrastructure for those people and make the area nice.
 

JTS11

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Is any of this really that hard to understand? There’s obviously a long and complex history to the conflict in that region. Try to see it from a perspective other than the Israelis.
But comments like the link below make it a little clearer (possible bluster, but certainly Israel can't take it as such). No doubt there is a nuanced history, but I don't understand how we expect Israel to react to Gaza and Hamas (who's charter calls for the destruction of Israel, the murder of Jews, and have recently done so), without overwhelming force. How that is done remains to be seen.

 

Random8145

Registered User
Contributor
Is any of this really that hard to understand? There’s obviously a long and complex history to the conflict in that region. Try to see it from a perspective other than the Israelis.
But how is it the Israelis don't give the Palestinians any options when they've repeatedly made offers for a Palestinian state? And the world has repeatedly sent money and supplies to the Palestinians only for the leadership to use it to enrich themselves and build a war infrastructure and tunnels into Israel for conducting war.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I am curious, but how has Israel backed them into a corner? Israel has repeatedly made peace offerings to the Palestinians. They have been repeatedly rejected. Mahmoud Abbas rejected every one of Ehud Olmert's peace offers (for example in 2008 when he offered 100% of the West Bank, the creation of a Palestinian state, and the Muslim parts of Jerusalem to be the capital of said state). And Gaza is overrun with Hamas terrorists. So I wouldn't even argue this is so much the Palestinians engaging in any severe response, it is Hamas just engaging in a killing spree.

The reason for Palestinian destitution is the decades and decades of Palestinian leadership who have preferred poverty and misery for the Palestinians vs accept any peace offering from Israel. They have had plenty of opportunity to build infrastructure for those people and make the area nice.

Mainly because Israel continues to take more and more Palestinian land beyond its internationally recognized borders no matter what the Palestinians do.

I am pretty sure that Israel has never offered 100% of the West Bank to the Palestinians since they occupied it in '67, the closest that they got to a peace agreement and one of the greatest missed opportunities in modern times is when Arafat declined to agree to the peace agreement that Clinton hammered out in the waning days of his presidency in '00. The Palestinians got 95% of what they wanted, to include a part of Jerusalem as their capital and a reduction but not elimination of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but Arafat didn't say yes or no. Ehud Barak's government was voted out not long after and the moment passed.

Part of the more recent reluctance on the part of the Palestinian's may be Netanyahu's increasingly hard line stance towards the Palestinians, along with the inclusion of some very hard right politicians in his more recent governments with some pretty extreme views towards the Palestinians. If the Israeli government and their agreements can change overnight, how much trust would you put in what a more peace-inclined government would agree to just to be reversed by Netanyahu?

The same can be said of the Israeli dealings with the Palestinians too, so the cycle continues...
 

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
I would be very careful going by Wikipedia. The article shows its bias right from the start, referring to Israel and "its ongoing occupation of the Palestinian territories." I would argue that Israel doesn't really "occupy" anything. The so-called "occupied territories" are lands that were taken from Israel during the 1948 war, which Israel only took back in the 1967 war when multiple Arab states (again) tried to destroy them. So I do not agree that they are really in violation of international law.
You fail to look at things from their perspective. Palestinians were living in that land, then the west decided to take it and give it to the Jews. That is why they are seen as occupiers, and why they argue any solution where that "wrong" is not undone is not acceptable.

Regardless, you have ignored every fact available to you in saying Israel is not in violation of intl law. If you research it and conclude that Israeli law and practice does not discriminate on the basis of race, then I can't help you. They have, for a very long time, created an open air prison in Gaza where the people feel they have no future. If one believes they have no future, then there's nothing mentally stopping them from doing everything they can to hurt those they feel are responsible.

But if the Israelis treat Gaza as just another part of Israel and try to live in peace, they will likely face a horrifying future as well. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. No good solutions that I see.
 

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
The Palestinians are pawns for

Topic drift, but the fact that 50% of the population is below 18 years old...they must believe something for their kids. Women are averaging 3.5 kids each in Gaza. That puts it way up on the list for growth rate among the nations.

I'm not sure I jump to that conclusion. There are a number of potential reasons for high population growth, not just optimism about the future. Religious values, limited access to birth control, and overexploitation of resources, to name a few.
 

Mirage

Well-Known Member
pilot
Topic drift, but the fact that 50% of the population is below 18 years old...they must believe something for their kids. Women are averaging 3.5 kids each in Gaza. That puts it way up on the list for growth rate among the nations.
@sevenhelmet said it already, and he's exactly right. Concluding that birth rate = optimism would mean devout Catholics, Muslims, Mormans, etc., plus the poorest people in society, must just have more kids because they're more optimistic about the future. That's silly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top