Israel pounds Gaza, death toll well over 100 and climbing

Canaduh

Derailing Threads
Mar 7, 2008
304
2
18
Southwest WA
I tend to agree. In any disagreement it isn' wise to lose sight of the fact any side could be wrong however unlikely it may seem.

In war, however, rhetoric will greatly help to win the day. Once a side has won it is free to make of history what it wants. This is a very poor incentive for civilized behaviour.

Winners do right the history books, its as simple as that. America, Britain and Russia weren't exactly samaritans in WW2 and America sure as hell wasn't in Vietnam or either desert storm (or any other conflict, including overthrowing democracitally elected governments).
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC
Winners do right the history books, its as simple as that. America, Britain and Russia weren't exactly samaritans in WW2 and America sure as hell wasn't in Vietnam or either desert storm (or any other conflict, including overthrowing democracitally elected governments).

That's right. So there is only incentive to win and by any means available. This is why all wars have become wars of attrition. It's very unfortunate that most of us are so easily fooled and care so little for history and even less for accuracy. So we have a nation like America convinced it won WWII and willing to write as many inaccurate books, and similarly make movies, as possible to realize that as fact. It is so convinced of its goodness that it can refuse independent reporting on its battles and its citizens are oblivious that the only reason for such actions is that its military must be committing war crimes and don't wish to be found out.

The only conclusion I can come to is that people are, as a species, blithering morons. I am an impossibilist, in that free will IMO is impossible, and so accept the condemnation of the species easily. When I see groups of people it has been my observation that they act and behave almost precisely the same way groups of ducks or wolves or some other uninteligent creature would. Certainly as individuals we seem more inteligent than ducks (often just more) but collectively we are idiots and poorly behaving idiots at that. With alarming frequency we behave so badly that even a passing shrew would have to pause and take notice.

There is little else for it in my oppinion except to conclude that we are a failed species. The petry dish is almost exhausted and like the dirty little viruses we are, once all the sugar is gone we will die out enmass.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
Well, you are right that we are full of our own crap and are (as a species) really stupid and behave badly. I'm holding my bet on a total die off quite yet, but I would ad that we are too belligerent not to take everything else with us if and when we do go (we'll go out with a bang).

As for free will, I think there are a few who can rise above total manipulation. The other day though, I said to a friend that those who are totally brainwashed by the media will kill you if you try to point that out to them.
 

Canaduh

Derailing Threads
Mar 7, 2008
304
2
18
Southwest WA
If the USA invaded Canada

What do you mean "if". American company's already own or shadow run most Canadian company's. Most Canadian food, vehicle and daily items are over seas built/ made.

Luckily, Palestinians have shown great restraint even though this is not being reported by the right wing media.

Its more to do with the fact the Arabs are too useless and infight like a pack of animals rather than "restraint" that they cant put up a real fight.
 

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
There you go Risus prooving your nothing but a bigot and a rascist exactly the dirt you fling at others to mask your own foul proclivities, and in your haste to heap **** on others you never stopped to consider that your heroic Israelis live in that part of the world. Yours is the mindset that neads resolution.

Listen to who is the racist and bigot, lol.
I have never said the Israeli's are my heros. Only that they are justified in what they are doing. And, yes, their mindset is skewed like the rest of those in the middle east.
My mindset is fine, can't say the same thing about yours...
 

Zzarchov

House Member
Aug 28, 2006
4,600
100
63
Ghandi, Martin Luther King Jr and Nelson Mandela are people I admire and wish to emulate.

Side note, not justifying Palestinian militant attacks by "But think of the desperation", or "they can die on their knees or on their feet" or "the rockets didn't kill anyone, isn't this disproportianate" would be a good start to emulating them.

If you notice all of them shared in common that they didn't use force to achieve their aims and found it counter productive.

They would rather one die (yes on their knees) rather than kill. And in doing so one would acheive their victory.

And Israel being a democracy, you know what? They would. But they don't want peace, or independance, or equal rights.

They want to kill and destroy. That isn't paraphrasing, that is literally their mission statement.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
When people perpetuate the circle of violence, the situation won't be solved. One attacks the other and the other has to retaliate and around and around they go. It is stupid and wasteful.

Thanks L Gilbert. I wholeheartedly agree.

So far the death toll is:

Gaza 363 dead 1750 wounded
Israel 4 dead unknown wounded

Hamas and the other militant groups have lost a few members but not much more than the number Israel killed during the "truce". 64 of the dead in Gaza were women and children. Unlikely they are militants. Probably an equal number of men were also innocent victims killed in the cross fire. Among Israel's first targets was a police academy during a graduation ceremony. No one claims Gaza police are involved in firing rockets at Israel, but these casualties were armed and technically counted as militants.

By now, Israel's bombs are more likely to kill civilians than militants.

There is no "right" side in the current conflict. Both sides are guilty of crimes against humanity. The smart thing to do is not support one side or the other. Donate to charity, give blood, post objective facts on forums like this... but don't take sides.

By the way a recent international poll found the majority of most nations support neither side in this conflict, including the US:

...
There sure is a lot of agreeing going on -- one might describe it as "absolute." The degree of mandated orthodoxy on the Israel question among America's political elites is so great that if one took the statements on Gaza from George Bush, Pelosi, Hoyer, Berman, Ros-Lehtinen, and randomly chosen Bill Kristol-acolytes and redacted their names, it would be impossible to know which statements came from whom. They're all identical: what Israel does is absolutely right. The U.S. must fully and unconditionally support Israel. Israel does not merit an iota of criticism for what it is doing. It bears none of the blame for this conflict. No questioning even of the wisdom of its decisions -- let alone the justifiability -- is uttered. No deviation from that script takes place.
By itself, the degree of full-fledged, absolute agreement -- down to the syllable -- among America's political leaders is striking, even when one acknowledges the constant convergence between the leadership of both parties. But it becomes even more striking in light of the bizarre fact that the consensus view -- that America must unquestioningly stand on Israel's side and support it, not just in this conflict but in all of Israel's various wars -- is a view which 7 out of 10 Americans reject. Conversely, the view which 70% of Americans embrace -- that the U.S. should be neutral and even-handed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict generally -- is one that no mainstream politician would dare express....

George Washington's warnings and U.S. policy towards Israel - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

I recommend reading the oped above. Clearly what American leaders are saying and what American news in general broadcasts does not reflect the opinion of a majority of Americans. The majority
American viewpoint has little to no voice. How much clearer can it be that people with pro-Israel agendas control the US and the news and that we are being manipulated to support war crimes yet again????
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
9
Aether Island
The earth_as_one mused, "How much clearer can it be that people with pro-Israel agendas control the US and the news and that we are being manipulated to support war crimes yet again????"

Unlike certain Central Europeans after WW2, we cannot plausibly use the excuse "We didn't know!"

Shame on us all!
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Side note, not justifying Palestinian militant attacks by "But think of the desperation", or "they can die on their knees or on their feet" or "the rockets didn't kill anyone, isn't this disproportianate" would be a good start to emulating them.

If you notice all of them shared in common that they didn't use force to achieve their aims and found it counter productive.

They would rather one die (yes on their knees) rather than kill. And in doing so one would acheive their victory.

And Israel being a democracy, you know what? They would. But they don't want peace, or independance, or equal rights.

They want to kill and destroy. That isn't paraphrasing, that is literally their mission statement.

I have never said I support Hamas or any militant group. I have said on many occasions that militant rockets fired randomly at Israel are war crimes. But I have also tried to clear up many misperceptions people have regarding this conflict.

For example Risus and others believe that rockets fired from Gaza during the truce had killed Israeli citizens and therefore Israel's response to Israeli deaths were justified. I pointed out that this is a misperception. Rockets fired from Gaza during the truce were in response to Israeli violence in Gaza or the West Bank and did not kill a single Israeli. The first Israeli casualties from rocket attacks since the truce ended occurred after Israel had already killed more than 200 Gazans.

I did say "its better to live fighting on your feet than to die begging on your knees." I imagine Palestinian dictator and Israeli collaborator Abbas would disagree as he has profitted handsomely by begging from the US and Israel. But the part of Palestine under his US and Israeli supported control has continued to suffer settlement expansion, abductions, torture and assassinations. I mention this because people here claim Israel would live peacefully with their neighbors if they stop fighting. Abbas collaboration with Israel proves that's simply not true. Israel's leaders will keep stealing land from Palestinians until they are all imprisoned in concentration camps and forced to live on international aid. (Like the 1.5 million people being starved into submission in the Gaza concentration camp)

Its been going on for more than 60 years:
Ghada Karmi: Where is the global outcry at this continuing cruelty? | Comment is free | The Guardian

While I don't support violent resistance to Israel's crimes against humanity, I fully support the non-violent Palestinian resistance movement. I consider these people as bravely fighting on their feet. They have no weapons and risk their lives to bring about justice by non-violent resistance.
Bil'in - Palestinian protests against barrier turn savvy

So far this movement has accomplished far more than all the rockets fired from Gaza. But in order for this movement to be effective, people around the world have to be aware of it and the violent response it provokes from Israel. Our pro-Israel media covers only the violent Palestinian resistance but does not cover this effective form of resistance. Therefore our news supports Israel's crimes against humanity rather than contributes to a peaceful non-violent resolution to this conflict.
 
Last edited:

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Additionally, Ghandi and the others never advocated begging or dying on your knees. You obviously don't understand how non-violence works. You stand tall, look your adversary in the eye and refuse to submit to their injustice and oppression. You make your opponent see you as a fellow human being who can feel pain and suffer.
Nonviolence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If a soldier is wise, they will lower their weapon and refuse to harm a non-violent protestor. If they don't consider the consequences of their violent actions carefully, they may harm or even kill a non-violent protestor. But that's when non-violent resistance becomes the most effective.

People who harm or kill unarmed non-violent people will be haunted by their conscience. You know in your heart that what you did was wrong. The guilt and shame follows you around your entire life like a weight on your neck. Over time, it eats at your very soul. People have been known to commit suicide just to escape the painful burden.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
The earth_as_one mused, "How much clearer can it be that people with pro-Israel agendas control the US and the news and that we are being manipulated to support war crimes yet again????"

Unlike certain Central Europeans after WW2, we cannot plausibly use the excuse "We didn't know!"

Shame on us all!

I agree.

Shame on us all!
 

DurkaDurka

Internet Lawyer
Mar 15, 2006
10,385
129
63
Toronto
Israeli's and Palestinians killing each other.... old news. I'm beyond even caring what they do to each other anymore. Let em at it....
 

no color

Electoral Member
May 20, 2007
349
98
28
1967 World's Fair
And Hamas never kept rockets from being fired into Israel.

Hamas is itching for a fight, its starting a fight, its getting one and your problem seems to be that its losing.

If it doesn't want to be on the receiving end of Israeli firepower, maybe it shouldn't use violence to try and solve its problems.

Well put. I'll add to it by saying that Hamas started this with the rocket attacks after the ceasefire was over. Also, whether we be Americans or Canadians, Hamas is our enemy as both of our governments have classified Hamas as a Terrorist organization.

Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorist activity which was started by a terrorist group.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Its been four days now and what I noticed is that neither PM Harper nor President elect Obama have commented about Israel's bombing campaign.

I found this related oped from the Star:

Facilitating a turkey shoot
Dec 30, 2008

On Israel's 60th anniversary last April, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised Canada's "unshakable" support for Israel.

At the time, this struck me as odd. It would be understandable for a prime minister to offer Canada's "unshakable" support for principles – democracy, the rule of law, human rights, etc. But for a country? A country is led by a government, and a government is always fallible. Why would Canada promise its unqualified support for any country?
Such unqualified support is particularly problematic when the country is locked in a bitter struggle with millions of people whose land it has held under military occupation for more than forty years.

The problematic nature of Harper's promise has taken on a new dimension with Israel's intense bombing of the Gaza Strip, which has left more than 300 Palestinians dead.

Even before the bombing began on Saturday, the 2-year-old Israeli blockade had largely sealed Gaza's borders, creating one of the world's worst humanitarian crises.

Early this month, UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk reported that Israel's siege of Gaza was allowing "only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease." He described Israel's action as "collective punishment."

Falk, a Jewish-American law professor, called on the world community to take action to protect the 1.5 million people in Gaza, noting that "ome governments of the world are complicit by continuing their support politically and economically for Israel's punitive approach."

Canada, with its "unshakable" support, seems to fit into this category. Indeed, last March Canada signed an agreement with Israel establishing co-operation in "border management and security."
On Saturday, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon blamed the current violence squarely on militant Palestinian groups firing rockets into southern Israel. Cannon offered no criticism of Israel for dropping bombs on the densely populated Palestinian territory.

Ottawa's stance resembles that of the Bush administration, which has put all blame for the current bloodshed on Palestinians.
But, according to Falk, it was actually Israel that broke the truce between Israel and Hamas, the elected Palestinian government in Gaza. The truce had held for several months, Falk noted, until an Israeli incursion into Gaza last month killed several people. After that, Palestinian militants resumed their rocket attacks, which have killed two Israelis.

Ottawa and Washington have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself. Neither government has suggested any comparable right for the Palestinians – even though it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis, who are acutely vulnerable.

Israel has total air supremacy, and a large nuclear arsenal. The Palestinians are without any means of self-defence (beyond the crude rockets they fire into Israel).

This extreme military imbalance means that the current fighting is not really a military conflict (as it's often portrayed in the media), but rather a turkey shoot.

South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressed outrage at the lopsided nature of the fight: "In the context of total aerial supremacy, in which one side in a conflict deploys lethal aircraft against opponents with no means of defending themselves, the bombardment bears all the hallmarks of war crimes."

The Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel should also be condemned. They are violent acts against civilians, and Israel has a right to defend itself. But this isn't an open-ended right. It doesn't include the right to impose collective punishment or to bomb a defenceless population.

The Harper government, in providing "unshakable" support for well-armed Israel, is helping facilitate the turkey shoot...

TheStar.com | Opinion | Facilitating a turkey shoot
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Well put. I'll add to it by saying that Hamas started this with the rocket attacks after the ceasefire was over. Also, whether we be Americans or Canadians, Hamas is our enemy as both of our governments have classified Hamas as a Terrorist organization.

Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorist activity which was started by a terrorist group.

Would you advocate Israel nuking Gaza until all 1.5 million residents have been vaporized in response to militant rocket attacks which hadn't killed a single Israeli?

I don't think anyone would argue that Israel has no right to defend itself. But I personally believe Israel's response must be proportional to the threat.

I bet you never looked at this from the side of the people on the recieving end, so let's flip this around.

Israel violated the "truce" repeatedly. The rockets fired from Gaza were always in response to an act of violence committed by Israel. Israel also violated the "truce" by refusing to allow food and medicine into Gaza.

What should Hamas do in response to Israel's violence and mass starvation of 1.5 million Gazans? Their complaints about Israel's truce violations aren't considered newsworthy and have been ignored by the UN. In 60 years of war and occupation, Israel has never been held accountable for the war crimes and crimes against humanity they commit against Palestinians.

Should Gazans just shut up and starve in the dark?
 
Last edited:

Just the Facts

House Member
Oct 15, 2004
4,162
43
48
SW Ontario
The Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel should also be condemned. They are violent acts against civilians, and Israel has a right to defend itself. But this isn't an open-ended right. It doesn't include the right to impose collective punishment or to bomb a defenceless population.


What right does it include? The right to run and hide? The right to evacuate the country? The right to make really really angry comments?

I hate to burst Linda's bubble, but when you militarily attack a nation an a near daily basis for YEARS, that nation will eventually respond militarily. When it does, it's not collective punishment, it's war.

Ottawa and Washington have emphasized Israel's right to defend itself. Neither government has suggested any comparable right for the Palestinians – even though it is the Palestinians, not the Israelis, who are acutely vulnerable.

What a stupid comment. Seriously, I hate to disparage people, but that's just stupid. When you're vulnerable, you don't go picking a fight. Israel looked the other way for years. It even moved out of the neighborhood. The "vulnerable" kept coming and kicking sand in it's face.

Well, surprise!

Hey Linda, here's what it's REALLY all about:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/juice.jpg