Israel says will act against Gaza rockets

[oberliner]

JERUSALEM (Reuters) -Israel will take military action against Palestinian rocket-launching squads in the Gaza Strip despite a month-old ceasefire, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said on Wednesday.

"A directive has been given to the defense establishment to take pinpoint action against the rocket-launching squads," Olmert's office said in a statement, a day after Qassam rockets wounded two people in southern Israel.

"In parallel, Israel will continue to maintain the ceasefire and work with the Palestinian Authority so that immediate steps are taken to halt the Qassam firings," the statement said, appearing to suggest no major offensive would be launched.

The statement was issued at the end of consultations between Olmert and security chiefs.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061227/ts_nm/palestinians_israel_dc

[Why Syzygy]

1. well something must be done

with all those expensive munitions. Fire away.

[Kagemusha]

2. While I sympathize with Israel here, the way this sounds...

Israel will fire on rocket-launching squads but will maintain the ceasefire.

Isn't that twisting words beyond all reason?

[Behind the Aegis]

3. As twisted as this...

....from the article....

Abu Ahmed, an Islamic Jihad spokesman, said Israel's decision to target rocket squads "will not stop us from continuing our resistance."

He said the truce should be extended to the West Bank "otherwise residents of Ashkelon and Sderot," two southern cities that have hit by rockets from Gaza, "will never feel secure."

Responding to the Israeli announcement, Saeb Erekat, a senior Palestinian negotiator, said maintaining the ceasefire was in the Palestinian national interest.

The ceasefire has been compromised over 50 times by the Palestinians, yet they still claim there is a ceasefire. Is that not "twisting words beyond all reason?"

[Kagemusha]

4. Only in the sense Saeb Erekat does not speak for Islamic Jihad.

I'm trying to make clear I don't regard the ceasefire violation by ANY Palestinians to be a good thing here.

But Saeb Erekat - who I didn't know even still had a job, after the change in government; guess he's too slick with the media to not land on his feet - doesn't speak for Islamic Jihad because Islamic Jihad is not under the authority of the Palestinian Authority, whatever the P.A. thinks of that or not. Israel's civilian government can at least be generally trusted to speak for all of the IDF (if not, say, settler groups, who at any rate, are not firing rockets into Palestinian areas so there's no equivalence there).

[pelsar]

5. hamas and fatah

have claimed responsibility for the firing of kassams.....and they also both claim they have a "cease fire".....so i guess this time we can claim "moral equivalence"

[Kagemusha]

6. I guess.

Not that Islamic Jihad is Hamas or Fatah but yeah, moral equivalence works for me here.

[barb162]

8. Erekat speaks for the government which does nothing about I.J.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Erekat is currently an aide for Abbas...

He is not the spokesman for Hamas, nor is he the spokesman for the PA. Or are you now claiming that Abbas must do something about the rockets?

[barb162]

16. Thanks for the big tip that Erekat is "an aide to Abbas" etc

Don't you think Abbas government has had plenty of time to clean out the people launching the rockets?

[Violet_Crumble]

21. Not a big tip, just correcting a comment you made about him...

As for yr question, why are you now calling the PA the 'Abbas' government? Are you confusing 'Abbas' with 'Hamas'?

[barb162]

25. No comment of mine about Erekat needs any correcting.

The only thing that needed correction was your assumption (or whatever that was you were doing) that you are bestowing some sort of tips, big or small, about Erekat. It was a non-tip

[Violet_Crumble]

26. 'Erekat speaks for the government' was wrong...

Uh, it was you who said I was bestowing a tip, not me making that assumption....

[eyl]

15. well, IF

the launchers are only from IJ, Israel wouldn't be breaking the ceasefire either by going after them, no?

[barb162]

7. "yet they still claim there is a ceasefire" It's not a ceasefire

[barb162]

9. The Palestinian govt does hold responsibility for this.

Just because a bunch of extremists demands to shoot off rockets daily doesn't mean the Palestinian govt has to or should be pandering to their wishes and doing nothing about them

[breakaleg]

10. Agreed. What can they do? Do they have the manpower or support to

fight them directly? If that brought them into a civil war, would that further their cause? Do we even want a civil war in Gaza?

[barb162]

11. They certainly have the manpower... they have thousands of cops

I think the civil war issue is a phony one; It has been the Abbas line for a long time now. Any time a society (if it is a society) cannot control its population to the point of not getting the entire society into war situations with other countries, it should probably be risking civil war. The alternative is the entire "society" suffers as it will be in constant wars with others because it can't or refuses to control these elements. No nation should be expected to sustain constant rocket attacks on it.

[Englander]

14. Like Lebanon?

No nation should be expected to sustain constant rocket attacks on it.

[barb162]

17. Thanks for bringing up the hundreds of Hezbollah rockets that were

being shot into Israel, hitting Israeli hospitals, houses, etc. Correct, Israel should not have been expected in that case to sustain constant rocket attacks on it just as with the Palestinian rockets being shot into Israel daily .

[Englander]

34. That's completely irrelevant.

Try actuallly reading what's posted before abusing language/logic/history.

Here's what was posted;

No nation should be expected to sustain constant rocket attacks on it.

Isn't that clear enough? Is there some part of the comment that is too oblique?

You can apologize whenever you like, for getting my pov so horribly wrong.

Since there's zero mention of the massive destruction of the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon,
here's a report that should be educational;

Israel/Lebanon
Deliberate destruction or "collateral damage"? Israeli attacks on civilian infrastructure

>snip

Deliberate destruction or ‘collateral damage’?
During more than four weeks of ground and aerial bombardment of Lebanon by the Israeli armed forces, the country’s infrastructure suffered destruction on a catastrophic scale. Israeli forces pounded buildings into the ground, reducing entire neighbourhoods to rubble and turning villages and towns into ghost towns, as their inhabitants fled the bombardments. Main roads, bridges and petrol stations were blown to bits. Entire families were killed in air strikes on their homes or in their vehicles while fleeing the aerial assaults on their villages. Scores lay buried beneath the rubble of their houses for weeks, as the Red Cross and other rescue workers were prevented from accessing the areas by continuing Israeli strikes. The hundreds of thousands of Lebanese who fled the bombardment now face the danger of unexploded munitions as they head home.

The Israeli Air Force launched more than 7,000 air attacks on about 7,000 targets in Lebanon between 12 July and 14 August, while the Navy conducted an additional 2,500 bombardments.(1) The attacks, though widespread, particularly concentrated on certain areas. In addition to the human toll – an estimated 1,183 fatalities, about one third of whom have been children(2), 4,054 people injured and 970,000Lebanese people displaced(3) – the civilian infrastructure was severely damaged. The Lebanese government estimates that 31 "vital points" (such as airports, ports, water and sewage treatment plants, electrical facilities) have been completely or partially destroyed, as have around 80 bridges and 94 roads.(4) More than 25 fuel stations(5) and around 900 commercial enterprises were hit. The number of residential properties, offices and shops completely destroyed exceeds 30,000.(6) Two government hospitals – in Bint Jbeil and in Meis al-Jebel – were completely destroyed in Israeli attacks and three others were seriously damaged.(7)

In a country of fewer than four million inhabitants, more than 25 per cent of them took to the roads as displaced persons. An estimated 500,000 people sought shelter in Beirut alone, many of them in parks and public spaces, without water or washing facilities.

Amnesty International delegates in south Lebanon reported that in village after village the pattern was similar: the streets, especially main streets, were scarred with artillery craters along their length. In some cases cluster bomb impacts were identified. Houses were singled out for precision-guided missile attack and were destroyed, totally or partially, as a result. Business premises such as supermarkets or food stores and auto service stations and petrol stations were targeted, often with precision-guided munitions and artillery that started fires and destroyed their contents. With the electricity cut off and food and other supplies not coming into the villages, the destruction of supermarkets and petrol stations played a crucial role in forcing local residents to leave. The lack of fuel also stopped residents from getting water, as water pumps require electricity or fuel-fed generators.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde180072006

[Englander]

35. I was hoping for an apology -

clearly that's too much to ask.

[breakaleg]

19. You don't seem to have very much regard for the citizens of Gaza.

And it's easy to view this from a safe home far away and say they should risk a civil war.

But let's not forget that it's come to this point because Israel is dangling a carrot to Abbas and the price is getting rid of Hamas, even though they were democratically elected. And to condone this is to support a country tampering with another countries elections, should they not like the outcome.

[pelsar]

20. just israel?

And it's easy to view this from a safe home far away and say they should risk a civil war.

But let's not forget that it's come to this point because Israel is dangling a carrot to Abbas and the price is getting rid of Hamas, even though they were democratically elected. And to condone this is to support a country tampering with another countries elections, should they not like the outcome.

is this just aimed at israel or also Egypt, Iran, US, EU...as it seems they too are "tampering" with gaza as well

[breakaleg]

23. Please don't try to misconstrue what I'm saying.

Palestinians held elections and now that Israel doesn't like the results, they've demanded something else. I don't support Hamas any more than Israel does. But if you are trying to push democracy on a people then at least set a good example. The last thing you need to do is to force them to have a second election because some non-Palestinians didn't like the outcome of the first one. From what I've read, calling for another election right now may not even be legal.

[pelsar]

30. tunnel vision?

to begin with the palestenains dont have a democracy, never had. Democracy is far more than mere elections. Freedom of speech, etc the many facets that the PA could have developed and never did.

No one is "forcing" Abbas to make new elections....its his decision, whether its legal or not, its up to their own political system to decide, be it within a court or gun.

I just find your "Its israels meddling"...kind of lame, when you ignore the fact that Egypt just sent guns to the Fatah...doesnt that fall under the catagory of "demanding something else"?

How about the US and Europe withholding donations?.....

[breakaleg]

31. I guess in light of all the things Israel has done that you mange to defend, then

meddling with an election would seem trivial. It all depends on where you stand. The US and Europe are just as culpable and they will also pay for this mistake in terms of their reputations abroad. I don't think it's something they care about. A little something the US has in common with Israel - they both do what they want with little regard for the other guy.

[pelsar]

33. i was just commenting on your approach...

as far as that goes, the palestenians have always "meddled in israeli politics as well." During israeli elections the palestenains always have direct influence. (guess you didnt know about that...or dont care to)

a bit off topic but:

what ever happended to the discussion that we had about "israel needs the westbank to steal the water' issue?...i believe you claimed you did some research to show its true (what i understand is that the main acquifers of the westbank reach under pre 67 borders), you never did get back to me on that one.

[Tom Joad]

29. Why can't Israel control its settlers? They attack Palestinians with impunity.

http://tinyurl.com/ymlw75 post #36
Pelsar says they beat up Palestinian grandmothers. If this society ("if it is a society", to use your line, although, yeah, i guess that is offensive applied to anyone, isn't it) cannot control its population, to the point where its civilians are beating up old ladies and school children and destroying crops while its police/military looks on, international Human rights workers are being brutally attacked... there must be something wrong don't you think?

Why is this such a problem for a nation that has accomplished so much, that has a per capita income pretty much the same as much of Europe, and is not under military occupation.

By the way, there are grassroots community groups (see Yesh Din http://www.yesh-din.org/site/index.php?page=about.us&lang=en in Israel who are working on this, But... where is the govt? They certainly have the manpower, they have thousands of cops

but the excuse that somehow the Israeli police wont enforce the law because they are afraid, is really a "phony one"

[pelsar]

32. be careful tom...

your quoting me......keep that up and you might end up seeing "middle israel", those people who are israeli politicians, those people who serve in the IDF as "real people" who are not just racists, but secular liberals in a very complex situation.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[barb162]

18. That wasn't a ripoff, that was sarcasm. Sorry you didn't get it

[Violet_Crumble]

22. There was nothing there to get...

Sarcasm has some sort of point and doesn't involve clumsily copying another posters words and changing a few names in them when whatever point it is that the copyer thinks they're making is only visible to the copyer...

[barb162]

24. Again, you show you don't get it, crumb

which is not at all unusual

[Violet_Crumble]

27. Then feel free to explain it in detail...

Which I strongly suspect you can't do...

[Violet_Crumble]

28. You copied my post word for word and changed one or two names...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x161035#161292

My post at least made sense in the context it was in :)