Wtf ISRAEL??

[Crookbond]

One more try. They were never invited at the table and they never accepted or violated the ceasefire hence let the rocket firing continue.

Another stupid comment. Hamas didn't violate ceasfire equates to Hamas is entitled to launch rockets. Henceforth, don't try your hand at logic and also try some reading comprehension exercises.

[Sooda]

This thread is a microcosm of why Israel-Palestine is not worth focussing on. When a problem becomes unsolvable, then there is no point in trying to solve it. People have predictably slid into the whole 'who is worse/what caused this' angle to things. Those factors are important in determining 'what to do about this' but as usual, there is much less ideas and thought focussed from all parties- the israelis, the palestinians and everyone else- on simply what the eff to do that can/might work. The end goal should be to end the human suffering in the region once and for all. If that is the recognized primary goal, then the path towards it has to be investigated more dilligently. But reality is, that is not the goal. Not of the bystanders, not of Israel, not of the palestinian leadership itself. Their goal is to win ideological battles and land rights first and foremost. When all parties focus on the irrelevant factors ( how to win your side of the battle) and forget the prime directive of ANY society (to provide safety,security and free social mingling amongst its populace), then it becomes a problem that has no solution possible. Worst case scenario of Gaza-Palestine-Israel is probably 5-10 million Arabs-Palestinians dead or 5-10 million Jews dead. Yes, very very depressing but its not something we have never seen or heard of before but atleast that will be the end to neverending conflict.

Well said, youre right. Frankly none of us here know enough about the conflict and its history to propose a genuine, 2 state, solution.. like what the broders should be, the question of Jerusalem, etc

[Muloghonto]

Well said' date=' youre right. Frankly none of us here know enough about the conflict and its history to propose a genuine, 2 state, solution.. like what the broders should be, the question of Jerusalem, etc[/quote'] Fair enough, i dont know so much either especially post WWII Israel-Palestine. Atleast, i dont know what i know because its tough to seperate facts from propaganda from both sides. But what i do know is this: two state theory wont work. Ever. First off, they both want Jerusalem as their capital. They are not Italy-atican, all lovely dovey with each other doing it for Political-Theological reasons, they utterly hate each other. So reason #1 its not going to work. Secondly, there is not enough water to go around the regionIsrael currently hogs the entire water system of the region, something they will NOT give up control of. Period. Neither does it make much sense for them to do so- their agri-business depends on control of the Jordan, which as it happens Israel has little 'legal territorry' around. Without that, Palestine is unworkable as well in a survival sense of the word. So again, not going to work. Thirdly, there is no way possible for Palestine to be landlocked and still function. Israel will never ever make it 'easy' for them to trade through Israel and going through Syria or Iraq is a no-go. So now what ? I think we aught to come around to the notion of a one-state solution and how that one state solution can be implemented. The conflict oriented options are an Israel-only state or a Palestinian only state. By current levels, an immediate or near future resolution of this angle massively favours the Israelis, a long term option has decisive favour to the Palestinians. The non-conflict oriented options are to either let Israel absorb palestine-Gaza in a meaningful way, where the rights of all three parties- hardline jews, hardline muslims and irreligious can be constitutionally protected forever, or find a way to relocate palestinians/Israelis once and for all. The latter option is practically a non-starter but the one before that (relocation of the Palestinians) is another possible solution but it would require global help.

[Muloghonto]

TO understand the situation better lets look at it without the normal nomenclatures. Lets call Israel group A, Palestine group B. Group A and B are fighting over land C. 60 years ago, there was more of group B, much much more. But then more of group A arrived. Foreign ruler of A & B decieded to split the land between A & B. A accepts division, B does not B invades A B gets their backsides handed to them A takes over a lot of B's lands. A arms up, B whines to all the regional buddies, playing the ethnic/religion card. A fights regional buddies of B but somehow manages to beat them to a pulp too. Now, 50 years later, situation stands as such: A are people who've been living in land C just as long as group B (since now, 50 years later, almost all As are born in C, just like all Bs are born in C). B is being treated as a slave by a cruel master A. B lashes out at A in stupid rage, A promptly whacks the crap out of B some more. Both are still fighting over land C. C is a tinly land, with water supply and arable land problems and cannot really function as independent domains of A & B. That option looks very unlikely too, since B wont let A have all lands A has now and A will never ever let go of those lands. So what to do ?

[Filandering]

Wtf ISRAEL??

Another stupid comment. Hamas didn't violate ceasfire equates to Hamas is entitled to launch rockets. Henceforth' date=' don't try your hand at logic and also try some reading comprehension exercises.[/quote'] Chalo let's start the lessons now. I can learn from you. You seem to have lot of time too. Where did I say hammas violated the ceasefire ? How did you comprehend that ?

[Filandering]

^Come on, youre deliberately being obtuse. You know that is not what is being implied here. How about : Gaza is under an oppressive inhumane occupation with no end in sight, hence let the rocket firing continue...

So since the Israel has screwed over Palestinians badly. And I agree they have. Because there is no end in sight on this issue, you think launching rockets and leaving dense population open to retaliation is right way.

[Sooda]

^Unfortunately Hammas is in a position wherein they have to bend over and accept anything Israel does to them and not retaliate with Rocket fire because of the cost it has to their people if they do dare to fight back. In a perverse way they see it as win win- the more Palestinians die, the more global outrage against the Israelis, and the better it is for Hammas.

[Crookbond]

Chalo let's start the lessons now. I can learn from you. You seem to have lot of time too. Where did I say hammas violated the ceasefire ? How did you comprehend that ?

Another attempt to be intentionally obtuse. Desi Cartman : Why did Hamas violate ceasefire? Dexter : They didn't have a casefire. Filandering : Correct. They are completely entitled to keep launching rockets notwithstanding so called cease fire Your sarcastic comment indicates that I said it was OK for Hamas to launch rockets with/without ceasefire. Something, which I never said. Like I said - don't try your hand at logic.

[Marco Polo]

I don't get it when many people argue that Israel has lost only a handful of people in rocket attacks but Palestine has lost many lives. So, should Israel wait till their people also get killed in big numbers?

[velu]

TO understand the situation better lets look at it without the normal nomenclatures. Lets call Israel group A, Palestine group B. Group A and B are fighting over land C. 60 years ago, there was more of group B, much much more. But then more of group A arrived. Foreign ruler of A & B decieded to split the land between A & B. A accepts division, B does not B invades A B gets their backsides handed to them A takes over a lot of B's lands. A arms up, B whines to all the regional buddies, playing the ethnic/religion card. A fights regional buddies of B but somehow manages to beat them to a pulp too. Now, 50 years later, situation stands as such: A are people who've been living in land C just as long as group B (since now, 50 years later, almost all As are born in C, just like all Bs are born in C). B is being treated as a slave by a cruel master A. B lashes out at A in stupid rage, A promptly whacks the crap out of B some more. Both are still fighting over land C. C is a tinly land, with water supply and arable land problems and cannot really function as independent domains of A & B. That option looks very unlikely too, since B wont let A have all lands A has now and A will never ever let go of those lands. So what to do ?

nice summary muloghonto :two_thumbs_up: i was wrongly assumed that it was israel who initiated the war and occupied the arab land first..

[King Tendulkar]

Palestinians and Hamas don't want separate state. You guys are fools if you believe that. We all know what is wanted here. First separate state, then next project will be destroy Israel totally and hoist Islamic flag over Israel. Thankfully Israel know this as well and taking zero tolerance to defend itself from the start If Palestinians want to launch rockets from school, hospitals etc and shelter in them. Then repercussions are whats happening and palestinians cant cry about. Live by the sword, die by the sword

[Sooda]

Israel and the Zionists don't want separate state. You guys are fools if you believe that- settlements in West Bank are deliberately being built so that the two state solution is rapidly becoming impossible. We all know what is wanted here. To destroy Palestinians totally by continuing the brutal aparthiedesque occupation and declare the entire region the Jewish state that was promised to them in the Torah. Hammas know this as well and taking zero tolerance to defend itself Israel want to subject the Palestinians to this occupation and ignore calls to stop illegal settlements. Hammas are doing what any force resisting foreign occupation would, sadly they do not have $ 3 billion a year in Military and other aid from the United states, so it is a no contest

[Filandering]

Death in Gaza crosses 1000. But internet tells me technically Hammas did not break the cease fire and therefore need not stop firing rockets. I hop Hammas is eliminated and Israel is made to pay dearly for the atrocities.

[diga]

Death in Gaza crosses 1000. .

How many died in Syria in just the last week? selective outrage

[Crookbond]

Death in Gaza crosses 1000. But internet tells me technically Hammas did not break the cease fire and therefore need not stop firing rockets. I hop Hammas is eliminated and Israel is made to pay dearly for the atrocities.

I can't believe you're acting so dumb. No one supports Hamas firing rockets. The response was to counter the point that Hamas violated ceasefire - it doesn't, but just because we pointed out it didn't doesn't mean Hamas has the right to fire rockets. Like I said earlier , don't try your hand at logic.

[Sooda]

nice summary muloghonto :two_thumbs_up: i was wrongly assumed that it was israel who initiated the war and occupied the arab land first..

It is true but the obviously a lot more complex than, A accepts division, B does not B invades A For one thing... Palestinians and Arabs as a rule always reiterated that a partition was unfair: it gave the majority of the land (56%) to the Jews, who at that stage legally owned only 7% of it and remained a minority (33% in 1946[88]) of the population.[89] There were also disproportionate allocations under the plan and the area under Jewish control contained 45% of the Palestinian population. The proposed Arab state was only given 45% of the land, much of which was unfit for agriculture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

[velu]

It is true but the obviously a lot more complex than, A accepts division, B does not B invades A For one thing... Palestinians and Arabs as a rule always reiterated that a partition was unfair: it gave the majority of the land (56%) to the Jews, who at that stage legally owned only 7% of it and remained a minority (33% in 1946[88]) of the population.[89] There were also disproportionate allocations under the plan and the area under Jewish control contained 45% of the Palestinian population. The proposed Arab state was only given 45% of the land, much of which was unfit for agriculture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

read the same wiki page :P but israel too got negav desert which is of no use to them either .. but now B wants pre 1967 border which is less than what they got in 1948

[Marco Polo]

It seems that neither side wants to back down.

[jalebi_bhai]

It seems that neither side wants to back down.

Seems like Israel has agreed to extend the ceasefire for another 24 hrs........wonder how Hamas will respond......

[Alph]

Lets call Israel group A, Palestine group B. Group A and B are fighting over land C. 60 years ago, there was more of group B, much much more. But then more of group A arrived. Foreign ruler of A & B decieded to split the land between A & B. A accepts division, B does not B invades A B gets their backsides handed to them A takes over a lot of B's lands. A arms up, B whines to all the regional buddies, playing the ethnic/religion card. A fights regional buddies of B but somehow manages to beat them to a pulp too.

Actually, the Palestinians did not invade Israel. Neither did the Arab League armies attack sovereign Israeli lands. Israel was holding many parts of the territory assigned to the Palestinians when they declared the State of Israel. The Arab League armies were fighting Israel over Palestinian lands... and it was not really a concerted effort and with ulterior motives all around. Israel would have been in trouble if the Arab armies were serious about a sovereign Palestinian state.