Israel: Gaza Conflict Ends 'When Our Goals Are Realized'

[Purveyor]

Source: USA TODAY

Oren Dorell and Mariam Hamed, USA TODAY 1:34 a.m. EDT July 12, 2014

GAZA CITY — As the Palestinian death toll rose, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed Friday to continue to target members of Hamas with air strikes in Gaza until rockets the militant group has been firing into Israel from the southern border halt.

Addressing a news conference, Netanyahu brushed off a question about possible cease-fire efforts.

The Palestinians and their international supporters are discussing a U.N. draft resolution that would condemn all violence against civilians in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and call for "an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire," the Associated Press reported early Saturday.

"I will end it when our goals are realized. And the overriding goal is to restore the peace and quiet," Netanyahu said of the four-day-old conflict.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/12/israel-palestinians-gaza-un/12563379/

[Ash_F]

1. Nothing restores peace and quiet like bombing crowded neighborhoods! /nt

[delrem]

2. I expected no less from the biblically inspired Netanyahu.

Vengeance means "Vengeance", so saith The One True Lord.

[mwrguy]

3. genocide is their goal

Ultimately

[ellenrr]

4. mwrguy, you have a picture of Obama, how do you feel about him supporting

Israel's "right to self defense"?

(I agree with you that genocide is their goal. Their politicians have been clear about that for decades. Or ethnic cleansing. which amounts to the same thing.)

[newfie11]

5. +1

[7962]

6. If they're goal is "genocide", they're awful at it. 1000 strikes and 100 dead? Shouldnt it be 100K?

If that was REALLY their goal, dont you think they'd be killing on the level of Darfur or Rwanda?
I think their real goal is to make a handful of heads explode on DU.

[COLGATE4]

7. But..but..but... It's just so much more satisfying

to throw around loaded terms like 'genocide'. Helps to make their imaginary case.

[EX500rider]

9. +1 I doubt any other military could have as few casualties with as many airstrikes.

[The Magistrate]

11. True, Sir: Argument From Hyperbole Has Pitfalls

While it can be useful in getting a point across, the danger is that when people use it routinely, they can come to forget they are employing a rhetorical device, and fall to taking and presenting what began as deliberate exaggerations for effect as accurate description of observable fact.

[happyslug]

48. "Genocide" may be to harsh a word, but it is clear Israel wants these people gone..

Thus the position that these "Arabs" should be resettled in other Arab Countries, instead of the country they came from. The general international rule as to refugees, is they are to return to the country they came from when it is safe to do so. Furthermore it is the responsibility of that country to move them back and to care for such refugees till they can move back.

Israel has refused to accept either rule, they dare NOT say that publicly for that would be in violation of the UN Charter, but the US has supported Israel in they refusal to take these refugees back.

Now, the Refugees have constantly said they want to return to Palestine. Israel says it is NOT Palestine, but Israel is the legally accepted successor to Palestine and as such where these refugees should be returned to. Israel is also the ONLY Country these refugees can be sent back to. Thus unless Israel accepts them back they will die in these refugee camps. That appears to be want Israel prefers rather then the have them back. In cases where Israel has been in a position to have others kill off such refugees, that has occurred (remember Lebanon in the early 1980s?). Israel wants these refugees gone, but also does NOT want to get the blame for killing them. Thus they are left to fester and Israel slowly builds a case to destroy these camps. To many eyes are on Israel right now for Israel to do anything drastic, but the same could be said of Hitler in 1939. The Holocaust only started in 1942, after the US entered the war against Germany and with that declaration of war, Hitler no longer had any reason NOT to kill off the Jews. The same fore Israel, if the situation arrives where no one would punish Israel for destroying those camps, Israel will. Right now such a situation is not occurring, but Israel, like Nazi Germany in the 1930s, is building up an internal case for such a mass killing. Thus it is only international pressure that prevents a Palestinian holocausts. Whenever that pressure can no longer be applied, then this may get a mass killing, but not before. On the other hand if the US gets to involved in something else, then all bets are off.

[IronGate]

10. "genocide is their goal"

If that truly was their goal, then they really suck at it.
No, their goal is to stop the terrorist rocket attacks on their country, as any country would do.

Hamas needs to be wiped off the face of the earth.

[Comrade Grumpy]

12. What about the people who voted for Hamas? Them, too?

[Comrade Grumpy]

13. If I said about Likud what you said about Hamas, I would probably get a hidden post.

[IronGate]

14. Well, I wouldn't vote to hide it,

we are entitled to our own opinions.

[happyslug]

50. You have not read much about the Holocaust have you?

During the 1930s, the situation of Jews under Nazi Rule, while bad, was tolerable. You did have an occasional killing and during actual battle conditions in Russia in 1941, you had Jews gathered up and shot in mass, but now anything we would call a Holocaust today.

The Actual Holocaust started in 1942, after the US had declared war on Germany an everyone was either at war with or against Germany (Switzerland and Sweden were two exceptions, but both worked with the Nazis, the Swedes even leaving Nazi Troops cross Sweden to get to Finland, an ally of Nazi Germany, The Swiss and he Swedes both provided not only raw material but manufactured goods to the Nazis till 1945).

Once the war had become us vs them with no real neutrals, the Holocaust was possible. Switzerland and Sweden were in no position to stop shipping goods to Germany no matter what German did and with the US in the war, they was no way for anyone to apply pressure on Germany to prevent the Nazis from doing what they wanted to do. Thus the holocaust only started after the US declared war with Nazi Germany.

What Israel has done to the Palestinians is much like what the Nazis did to the Jews prior to WWII. The Nazis even smuggled Jews into Palestine to get the Jews out of Germany prior to WWII. Nazis would kill Jews, discriminate against them, burn they shops and homes down, but these were one time things, no real organized campaign to kill off the Jews till 1942. Under Nazi Germany in the 1930s, you would have days where Jews being killed, but most of the time Jews were just discriminated against.

On the other hand, Jews were forbidden not only access to weapons, but it was a crime for a Jew to defend him or herself against anyone else attacking them. Thus Jews did seem to try to fight back, but that was a crime in and by itself. The same with the Palestinians, if they protest against Israel, that is a crime. If they try to defend Gaza, that is a crime. The only thing that is NOT a crime is for the Palestinians to crawl up and die.

Yes, what the Israeli Government is doing to the people of Gaza is a war crime, it is collective punishment for NOT stopping these Rocker Attacks. Now, some of the more recent ones Hamas has taken credit for, but the earlier ones were done by others, that Hamas has no control over. Israeli is repeating what it did in its attack against Hezborah several years ago, claim that a Rocket Attack is from a Civilian Village, even if it was in a field a couple of miles away and attacking that village for permitting the attack to occur. This is collective punishment, it is punishing those people who live in an area where an attack comes from. No evidence that the people knew of the attack is required, all Israel is saying they should have known and thus they did and thus they are attacked.

In the war against Hezborah Israel made the same accusation, that the Attacks were from the center of Villages and Hezborah was using the Villages as cover, knowing Israel would NEVER hit such villages. The problems was Hezborah tended to have their weapons a long way from any villages, but Israel would hit those villages anyway for Israel wanted to punish any civilian in the area for leaving Hezborah launch an attack. The Nazis did the same things doing WWII, if a Germany unit was attacks by partisans or Guerrillas, they would then attack the nearest Village as punishment, even if the village had nothing to do with the attack. After WWII, such tactics were declared a war crime, but Israel did it in Lebanon in its war against Hezborah and appears to be doing it again in Gaza. The Village attacked tend to be the nearest village to where the rockets are fired from, even if the firing occurs one or two miles away. Israel is claiming such firing came from the village and thus why the Village was attacked, but in most cases it is just the nearest village to the rocket attack, the village had nothing to do with the attack other then being near the rocker launch site.

Israel has put itself against the wall. Israel has refused to open up its border with Gaza, and then blockade any other way to get goods into Gaza. Thus Gaza is a slum and as a slum they residents look to people who can get them out of the mess they are in. Right now that is the people firing the Rockets and thus the people of Gaza have no incentives to stop them. If Israel would open up their borders, permit more trade in and out of Gaza, you would build up a pool of people who values that trade and will try to protect it by stopping the rocket attacks. Right now, no matter what the people of Gaza do, they get bombed and given that choice they prefer people who are doing something (Firing the Rockets) to people who do nothing (The PLO). You have to get that economy going and you can NOT do that by blocking all the ports. It take a few years, and in the first years a lot of rockets will be imported, but if the border is opened and people can move across it AND make money in doing so, then the economics will lead to more trade and a more peaceful overall situation. It would take time, but it would work, but Israel has to accept that fact it can NOT bomb its way to peace. Israel must accept some risks, including a few years of increased rocket attacks before the rocket attacks just die away. Israel has to work to improve Gaza and the Life of the Palestinian (including the Refugees) but that takes political guts, something I do no see in the present Politicians of Israel.

[christx30]

8. Maybe the Palestinians

could start to help Israel find and destroy the rocket launch sites, given Israel's tendency to go nuts when it comes to self defense and retaliation. I mean, if I'm at a peaceful protest and some asshole next to me starts throwing rocks at the police, I'm going to punch his lights out and flag down a cop to turn him in. Because I know that once the cops find out where the rocks are coming from, I stand a good chance of getting arrested or killed in the fray.
As much as I would like to see the Palestinians get their own homeland, Israel isn't going anywhere. And no one is going to get rid of them with untargeted rockets fired into their territory.

[7962]

15. Good answer, except if they do that, Hamas will kill them & probably their family.

A lot of their rule is by intimidation, although they are elected. A suspected collaborator will be killed even without proof of guilt. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/world/middleeast/suspected-collaborator-with-israel-executed-in-gaza.html?_r=0

This is from a couple years ago, but there are many similar stories out there. This is how they operate.

[peoli]

17. Their goals are to eliminate Palastinians. Nothing More. Nothing Less.

[IronGate]

18. If that was Israel's goal,

then they suck at it, they've had over 60 years to attain that alleged goal and so far.......................

[peoli]

21. Because they are taking their sweet time means they are not doing it? Uh, Ok.

[IronGate]

23. Uh, yeah, ok.

If that was their goal, they wouldn't have waited for over 60 years, they would've already accomplished their goal.
Israel could eliminate the Palestinians any time that wanted, but they haven't so far, all Israel wants is to have peace on their borders, but with the terrorist group Hamas in the Gaza strip shooting rockets into Israel, that won't happen.
Hamas needs to be removed for any chance of peace.

[peoli]

25. If Isreal wanted peace it would have happened long ago.

They are hiding behind terrorism to grab land and resources. Sound familiar?

[IronGate]

26. Yeah, right, sure.

We'll just have to disagree on this subject.

[peoli]

27. Isreal creates more terrorists than it kills.

[IronGate]

28. Suuuure it has.

These people would hate Israel whether or not Israel defends itself.

[peoli]

29. That is a projection and propaganda, which seems to be your M.O. today.

[IronGate]

30. Projection and propaganda are often the truth. nt.

[IronGate]

33. Insults and name calling are usually the last resort of one who has lost the debate. nt.

[cpwm17]

49. You clearly don't know your history or anything about this conflict

The Zionists think their religion somehow gives them a special right to the Palestinians' land, land in which the Palestinians already live. That is a holy war.

Israel is a brutal Apartheid state. Israel is colonizing land that doesn't belong to them and treating the Palestinians like crap. Gaza is a prison camp and has been before the rockets. To collectively punish all of the Palestinians for behavior that Israel provoked in the first place is unfair and hypocritical.

Israel and the pre-Israel Zionist Jews started this crap by punishing the Palestinians for belonging to the wrong religion.

[The Magistrate]

19. If So, Sir, They Are Doing a Damn Poor Job Of It

In 1948, there were a bit over 1,300,000 Arabs in Palestine; the population of Arab Palestinians today runs about three times that number.

It is reasonable to argue Likud policy at present is to eliminate Palestine, or in other words, to eliminate any political control, or even semblance of political control, by Arab Palestinians over any portion of the former Mandatory territory, but that is not quite the same thing as eliminating Palestinians....

[peoli]

24. You are right, it is not quite the same thing as eliminating Palestinians....

..just as forcing Native Americans onto reservations and taking away their land and entire way of life is not quite the same as eliminating Native Americans.

Thank you for clarifying.

[The Magistrate]

34. Nor Does It Really Amount To That, Sir

Again, the population figures tell the tale. During the period of enclosure in the American West, Native American population dropped, owing to sickness, malnourishment, and outright murder in great number.

You are simply arguing by hyperbole, which is an extremely poor tactic.

[peoli]

35. I'm not arguing with you at all.

I should have said Palestine instead of Palestinians.

[The Magistrate]

36. That Would Have The Virtue Of Some Contact With Reality, Sir

[The Magistrate]

22. It Has Been Around For A While, Sir

The problem with it is definitions shift between panels.

The first indicates land which Jews owned title too, but lumps state land in as titled land when indicating Arab Palestinian ownership. Nor does it indicate much about actual population, and where it was located and how densely. Jews were a bit over a third of the population by then.

The second is the original U.N. Partition boundaries, which was intended as a framework for two states. That, as all know, is not what happened.

The third, by being labeled '67, suggests the differences between the previous panel and the new are cionsequences of the '67 war. They are not; the basic boundary indicated is the Armistice Line of '49. Between '49 and '67, what is labeled Palestine in the east was occupied and annexed by Jordan, and what is labeled Palestine to the south was occupied by Egypt.

The fourth indicates the various Palestinian Authority governates from the Oslo accords, the areas where they have at least some semblance of political authority.

[broiles]

37. +1

[HeiressofBickworth]

44. A picture is worth a thousand words.

The 4 maps tell the entire story without the necessity of narrative.

[Bigmack]

45. Thanks for this post.

Israel's goal is to seize ALL Palestinian land. NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. And writing that does NOT make me anti-semitic. There are many good, thoughtful Israelis who are protesting this genocidal policy of their government. But their protests do as much good in Israel as our do protests of OUR government's aggressive, deadly policies. Makes me weep to see what is happening to the Palestinians. Read "Mornings in Jenin" - lovely book by a Palestinian woman. Ms Bigmack

[nolabels]

51. Thanks peoli, bookmarking this, very informative

Every time i hear how Israel is so abused i will refer back to this this, again thanks so much

[7962]

52. You could look at THIS map too, and see Israel is a lot SMALLER than it was long before '47

A few thousand years before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#mediaviewer/File:Kingdom_of_Israel_1020_map.svg

Your map of '46 conveniently leaves out the land that now constitutes part of Jordan, whose borders were formed along with Israel's. Why isnt Jordan considered "seized land"?

[awake]

38. 'When Our Goals Are Realized' is that like "the finale solution"

Both side are too interested in imposing their will on the other to hear the others view point. I am afraid until all parties want to live in peace with each other more than they want to wipe out the other side then we are doomed to have a endless war

[yurbud]

40. it is not an equal fight or even close.

Israel has one of the most advanced militaries in the world and occupies Palestinian areas at will.

I haven't heard of too many Palestinian fighter jets or attack helicopters bombing Israeli cities or settlements, nor of Palestinian troops patrolling the streets of Israeli neighborhoods.

The Geneva Convention says that after you invade territory, you have to either give it back its sovereignty or incorporate it into your own country in a reasonable amount of time, but in neither case can you drive people from their homes and settle on their land at will.

[awake]

41. Good point it is not an equal fight but that does not matter to the dead civilians

[yurbud]

42. correct. But it does matter in terms of being an "honest broker" which our gov't is not

[awake]

43. Well said

[Bigmack]

46. NOPE

It sure is NOT an even vaguely honest broker and NEVER has been. Ms Bigmack

[yurbud]

39. I thought he was going to slip and say their territorial goals.

[olddad56]

47. they are bullies and whiners

bad combination.