Israel pulls out of Gaza leaving 110 dead

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Israeli tanks and infantry moved out of Gaza before dawn today after a five day operation to kill militants that left more than 110 Palestinians dead, including 22 children.

Hopes that the incursion had ended the barrage of Palestinian rockets raining down from Gaza on Israeli border towns proved in vain, however, when three missiles hit the resort town of Ashkelon this morning, damaging an apartment building. No-one was hurt.

Israel said that its withdrawal did not mean it was scaling back its operation against the Islamists, but merely suspending it temporarily for a two day visit by Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State.

"This very limited (Gaza) operation was intended to show Hamas what could happen, what you may call a ’prequel’," said an Israeli official.

"If they decide they’ve seen enough and stop the rockets, if they get the message, then we may get into a period of quiet. If they continue to fire the rockets, then there will be more operations like this one, or worse."

more

[bemildred]

1. Hopes .. the incursion had ended .. Palestinian rockets .. from Gaza .. proved in vain ..

So you got a public relations black-eye for nothing. Hamas thinks this is great, you know. It's like a gift to them. They get to be the good guys.

[Fredda Weinberg]

2. Only to those not paying attention ... let's face it, Jews will never have

friends in this world.

[bemildred]

5. Not this way, that's for sure.

If Israel "showed restraint", or used a "proportionate response", then Hamas would get to be the bad guys, or still be the bad guys.

[Fredda Weinberg]

13. Didn't do any good between '48 and '67, did it?

Please don't pretend you ever will consider Israel's sworn enemies the bad guys.

[bemildred]

15. That depends on what sort of "good" you have in mind.

If you think this situation now is "good", then you have an argument. If you think the results of the Second Lebanon War were "good", then you have an argument.

And yes, I love Hamas, there is nothing like Sharia law to pump me up. I look forward to the stonings and honor killings. :sarcasm:

[bemildred]

16. It also seems worth pointing out that there was no Hamas back then.

No Hizbullah, either. So where did they come from anyway?

[MaryCeleste]

17. They are fronts for Syria, Saudia Arabia, and others

Without oil money, Hamas and Hezbollah would not exist.

[bemildred]

21. So basicly, you think it's just a job for unemployed Palestinians?

"What do you do for a living? I'm an employee of Syria, Saudi Arabia and others working for their Hamas subsidiary?"

It is certainly true that without money and resources Hamas would not exist, but you can say that about anybody, about Israel, about the government in the green zone in Iraq. It doesn't tell you anything. It's like saying without air they could not breath. The question was WHY are people giving them money and resources? WHY are people willing to die fighting for them? WHY are people willing to blow themselves up in support of the cause? Do you think it's just for the money?

[winter999]

24. Oooooo, can I answer your WHY questions?

Could it be religious extremism? Indoctrination of the Palestinian youth?

[bemildred]

27. Saudis give money to Palestinians because Palestinian youths are indoctrinated?

I'm not sure what religious extremism is supposed to cause here, but in any case it seems worth asking what causes religious extremism? Does it just pop up like a toadstool here and there, like a mass psychosis, or is there something behind it?

[winter999]

29. Let's see if we can run down some of the causes...

1) A militant religion that hasn't gone through an "enlightenment" or "reformation".
2) Religious leaders who have total control over their flocks, both in public and in private.
3) Religious leaders who want to keep power, no matter the cost.

Oh, and for the record, Arabs didn't claim any Palestinian land until Mohamed declared the holy land was Muslim land. It can be argued that any land that was conquered by the early Muslims is Muslim land. There are still claims on Spain, the Balkans, and parts of Greece. Do we even need to mention Morocco, Libya, Egypt, Turkey, Algeria, and Kashmir.

[bemildred]

30. A description is not a cause.

Where did it come from and why is it popular? Do you think some guy just imposed himself on everybody else? By his magic thought waves or something?

And are you admitting that there was "Palestinian land" back then, but the Arabs didn't claim it until they conquered it? So the Palestinians as a people predate the Arab conquest? Or what do you mean?

[winter999]

19. weren't they created by instruction from some religious zealot?

Something called the First Intifada. This is where an Islamic Extremist claimed that Israel is Arab land per the Q'ran.

[bemildred]

26. You can trace the origins back to the Muslim Brotherhood, and

resistance to the British occupation of Egypt, quite a long time ago now. There are numerous offshoots from that group, that time and place, in the modern Middle East. You can trace it back to other things too, it all depends on where you want to start. The notion that Arab land belongs to Muslims goes back quite a ways too, much like the notion that Chinese land belongs to China, or European land belongs to Europeans, etc. But none of that becomes a practical issue unless there are large movements of populations. Then you get trouble. Did you know that Japan exported a lot of people to the USA before WWII, and there was a lot of political trouble here in the states over that, people wanting to stop Japanese immigration and quotas and stuff? People ALWAYS get annoyed about being displaced or having too many "outsiders" around.

[Fredda Weinberg]

31. You're joking ... right? I mean, you really need an organization named

Hamas to find those determined to destroy the Zionist entity?

[bemildred]

34. Well, I'm shocked that you would use that term.

But no, you don't need Hamas, there are plenty of them. But the question was, given it's political and religious agenda, why is it proving so difficult to stomp it out? The place was pretty much a sleepy little agrarian backwater, along with the religious tourism business, before all this got started. Why are they running Gaza now despite the best efforts of almost everyone to stomp them out? Doesn't that seem odd to you? Doesn't it require some explanation that is more than a circular "they are fundies because they are fundies and fundies do that?"

[Fredda Weinberg]

47. It's not circular ... merely persistent. And why would you be shocked that

I know what my sworn enemy calls my people?

As for feeling odd, you have no idea. People who looked like just me died before I was born because of what they were ... Jews. So no, I don't need an explanation - merely acceptance of reality.

Hamas running Gaza? I wish. If they could, they'd have their own prosperous tourist trap on the Med. Instead, they manage to get themselves kicked out of Egypt ... the shopkeepers on the other side of Rafah actually shuttered their gates. Does this seem odd? Not to me.

[bemildred]

50. Quibble, quibble. You explain nothing.

You say "accept reality" when you mean doggedly cling to your own point of view.

I'm not shocked you know it, I'm shocked you use it. I deliberately avoid using or referencing sites that use that sort of language. Am I wasting my time?

[Fredda Weinberg]

60. You're not going to change my point of view, if that's what you mean

by waste of time. I find it interesting to hear opposing viewpoints - but don't delude myself into thinking we'll negotiate peace here.

Why avoid using the term Zionist entity? I think it reflects nicely the problem my opponents have with my nation's existence. After all, Jews have no problem living in Islamic societies as long as we have no political aspirations of our own.

[bemildred]

61. No, I meant avoiding sites that use certain kinds of language by

wasting my time. I have to go find alternative sources or not post things when I can't. Usually when I can't, it's a good sign that it's not "news" anyway. Certain sites are prohibited here, and certain kinds of speech. I try to get with the program about that. I know it's futile, but I do it anyway. If you want to go around calling Israel the "Zionist entity" that's fine with me, you can hang out with Ahm-an-idjit and the "Jews run the world" crowd. You seem to think more like they do than I do anyway, even if you are on opposite "sides".

[Fredda Weinberg]

62. Not seem ... I was raised devout and retain that perspective

Growing up in the 60's, it was fascinating to see a generation seeking the spiritual experiences I'd gotten in my childhood. So if you wonder whether a lifestyle is worth fighting and dying for ... yup, both sides have it and I certainly understand those who can't bring themselves to call Israel by her proper name. I suffered from that rigid thinking once.

I don't hang out with my former yeshiva classmates and frankly, don't care much for secularists either - except the yeshiva boy I married. I spend my time with tolerant people who find satisfaction in their relationships.

[bemildred]

63. It's always a pleasure when we can agree. nt

[winter999]

3. Hmmmm. No rockets means no reprisal...

Seems to me that the people of Gaza decides life or death.

[subsuelo]

4. Or you could argue: No massacres no rockets

Everyone step up and pick a side, excuses will be distributed on a case by case basis...

Rocket attacks continue after Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza

[winter999]

6. I don't recall hearing of a massacre between the time

Gaza was handed over and the time the first rockets began falling.

[Tom Joad]

18. Handed over? except it was blockaded on land, on sea,

even by air. It was and remains, an occupied land.

[winter999]

23. There were no blockades except for weapons shippments.

The border was open until the rockets started.

Also, describe for me exactly how Gaza is "Occupied". No Israelis on the ground. No checkpoints. Open elections. Foreign Aid.

The whole "occupied" line only works if you're referring to the arabs' claim to the land of Israel being occupied land.

Just ponder this. No Israeli strikes in the West Bank. Why? Could it be no rockets?!

[MaryCeleste]

48. Explain this blockade statement of yours

1) There is no seaport in Gaza bigger than one for fishing boats. Nothing that can handle commercial traffic
2) There is no inherent right of movement into or through another country (in this case Egypt and Israel). At worst its a boycott.
3) There is not commercial airport in Gaza. In theory one could be built, but geography alone makes it uneconomical. The Saudis could put one in, but they seem to prefer their Palestinian cousins remain penniless and dependent

Israel was supplying food, power, and fuel. There were under no obligation to continue to do so.


The underlying reality is that Gaza can not be self sufficient without open borders and trade. That means that they will have to have good relations with their neighbors, Egypt (who doesn't want them) and Israel (who they attack daily). Until that happens the misery will continue.

[Violet_Crumble]

64. Of course Israel still has obligations...

But first I thought I'd comment on the irony of this:

3) There is not commercial airport in Gaza. In theory one could be built, but geography alone makes it uneconomical. The Saudis could put one in, but they seem to prefer their Palestinian cousins remain penniless and dependent

Yasser Arafat International Airport (Arabic: مطار ياسر عرفات الدولي‎; transliterated: Matar Yasir 'Arafat ad-Dowaly) (IATA: GZA, ICAO: LVGZ), formerly Gaza International Airport and Dahaniya International Airport, is located in the Gaza Strip, in Rafah close to the Egyptian border.

It is owned, and was operated, by the Palestinian Authority, and served as the home airport for Palestinian Airlines. The airport was able to handle 700,000 passengers per year and operated 24 hours and 364 days a year (closed on Yom Kippur). The airport opened in 1998, but it closed in 2001 after being severely damaged by Israeli military forces.

The airport was built with funding from Japan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Spain, and Germany and designed by Moroccan architects (modeled after Casablanca airport) and engineers funded by Morocco's King Hassan II.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasser_Arafat_International_Airport

Now, back onto Israel's obligations towards the people of Gaza. This is from B'Tselem:

Despite Israel 's extensive control over the Gaza Strip, in its decision on the disengagement plan, the government stated that implementation of the plan would "invalidate the claims against Israel regarding its responsibility for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip." In response to several petitions filed in the High Court of Justice following implementation of the disengagement plan, the State Attorney's Office has argued that, with the termination of the military government in the Gaza Strip, Israel has no obligation whatsoever under international law toward residents of Gaza, who should now direct all their claims and requests to the Palestinian Authority. Implicit in this claim is that Israel 's control over the lives of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, described above, exists in a normative vacuum in which Israel is not responsible for its acts and their consequences. As we shall see below, the argument is baseless, both under international humanitarian law and under international human rights law.

One source of the obligations imposed on Israel toward residents of the Gaza Strip is the laws of occupation, which are incorporated in the Hague Convention (1907) and in the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949). These laws impose general responsibility on the occupying state for the safety and welfare of civilians living in the occupied territory. The laws of occupation apply if a state has "effective control" over the territory in question. The High Court has held contrary to Israel 's claim, stating that the creation and continuation of an occupation does not depend on the existence of an institution administering the lives of the local population, but only on the extent of its military control in the area. Furthermore, a certain area may be deemed occupied even if the army does not have a fixed presence throughout the whole area. Leading experts in humanitarian law maintain that effective control may also exist when the army controls key points in a particular area, reflecting its power over the entire area and preventing an alternative central government from formulating and carrying out its powers. The broad scope of Israeli control in the Gaza Strip, which exists despite the lack of a physical presence of IDF soldiers in the territory, creates a reasonable basis for the assumption that this control amounts to "effective control," such that the laws of occupation continue to apply.

Even if Israel 's control in the Gaza Strip does not amount to "effective control" and the territory is not considered occupied, Israel still bears certain responsibilities under international humanitarian law. IHL is not limited to protecting civilians living under occupation, but includes provisions intended to protect civilians during an armed conflict, regardless of the status of the territory in which they live. Given that Israel contends that an armed conflict exists between it and the Palestinian organizations fighting against it, which has continued even after the disengagement, such provisions apply. These provisions are found, for example, in the Fourth Geneva Convention, pursuant to which Israel must protect the wounded, sick, children under age fifteen, and pregnant women, enable the free passage of medicines and essential foodstuffs, enable medical teams to provide assistance, and refrain from imposing collective punishment.

Another legal source for Israel 's responsibility towards the residents of the Gaza Strip is derived from international human rights law. The founding instrument of this branch of law is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Its principal provisions have been enshrined over the years in six international conventions that have been adopted by the United Nations and ratified by Israel . These conventions recognize the right of every person to freedom of movement, to work, to an adequate standard of living, to education, to adequate health care, and to family life. Each party to the conventions undertakes to carry out the provisions not only inside its own sovereign territory, but also as regards persons under its control.

According to the UN Human Rights Committee, which is composed of independent experts from around the world, the main question in determining a state's responsibility relating to a certain act is not whether the act was carried out in the state's sovereign territory, but the nature of the relations between the individual harmed and the state. In other words, the responsibility of a state to respect the human rights of a particular population is a function of the state's control over the population, and not necessarily the status of the territory in which the population lives. This conclusion is also inevitable in light of the universal principle that, in the language of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."

Thus, Israel cannot evade its legal responsibility to respect the human rights of residents of the Gaza Strip in those areas of life that Israel controls. Even after the disengagement, Israel continues to bear legal responsibility for the consequences of its actions and omissions concerning residents of the Gaza Strip. This responsibility is unrelated to the question of whether Israel continues to be the occupier of the Gaza Strip.

http://www.btselem.org/english/Gaza_Strip/Israels_obligations.asp

[eyl]

65. Ironically enough

if this

The High Court has held contrary to Israel 's claim, stating that the creation and continuation of an occupation does not depend on the existence of an institution administering the lives of the local population, but only on the extent of its military control in the area. Furthermore, a certain area may be deemed occupied even if the army does not have a fixed presence throughout the whole area. Leading experts in humanitarian law maintain that effective control may also exist when the army controls key points in a particular area, reflecting its power over the entire area and preventing an alternative central government from formulating and carrying out its powers. The broad scope of Israeli control in the Gaza Strip, which exists despite the lack of a physical presence of IDF soldiers in the territory, creates a reasonable basis for the assumption that this control amounts to "effective control," such that the laws of occupation continue to apply.

is accurate (I don't have time to start looking for and reading the petitions involved at the moment) runs contrary to a ICJ decision (Uganda vs the Republic of the Congo), which defined occupation much more narrowly

[subsuelo]

22. Israel just got done massacring Gazans

been in the news the past few days.

[winter999]

28. Read closer... between the handover and the first rockets.

Israel was simply retaliating. If the militants fire first, then hide amongst their civilians, who's fault are the resulting deaths?

[subsuelo]

33. "The first rockets"?

Rockets have been going for a long time. Killings of Gazans have been going on for a long time. Both sides are just bombing away at each other. Israel has no moral high ground in this.

Both sides can argue it was "simply retaliating". Why is this such a difficult concept to comprehend around here?

[bemildred]

36. IIRC, the rockets go back several years before the "withdrawal".

It was predictable that absent some sort of cease-fire agreement they were going to continue after the withdrawal, and that the technical means employed would improve. In fact I remember telling a poster who shall remain nameless exactly that around the time of the "withdrawal".

Edit: there was a lot of blather at one time about how the IDF would have a free hand in Gaza once the settlers were removed, and how that would be used to suppress the rocket fire, using artillery counter-battery fire and the IAF and the like. We can see now how well that has worked out.

[Vegasaurus]

8. The Hamas militants (and all their hundreds or thousands of splinter groups)

have got to be the stupidest people on earth.

More rockets on Ashkelon?

They will deserve the reprisal that they get. STOP SHOOTING ROCKETS AND THERE WILL BE NO INCURSIONS OR RESPONSE! Why are they SO stupid that they don;'t understand this?

[azurnoir]

10. They ?

of course you mean Hamas or militants, not the people of Gaza including children, babies, and those not involved in hostilities?:eyes:

[Vegasaurus]

12. Do you have reading comprehension issues?

I said the HAMAS MILITANTS. That is who the "they" is.

And yes, I do think they are stupid. They are playing with the lives of thousands and thousands of innocent people.

[azurnoir]

42. Far more then "they" are recieving the reprisals

and hundreds or thousands of splinter groups would encompass a large percentage of the population of Gaza.

[Tom Joad]

20. NO, he means all of them.

"They ALL want the same thing

Hamas is just more honest about their goals and aspirations.

And why anyone thinks Israel owes food or fuel, or open borders, fewer restrictions, etc. is beyond me. The more open the border, the more Israelis die. I say put up a huge wall on the Sinai border now too."
Vegasauras -- Feb 4th

Ain't that just the most honest thing you ever heard?

[azurnoir]

43. " downright special" n/t

[azurnoir]

7. yeah like the people of America

got to decide to go to war with Iraq

[winter999]

9. And what's that got to do with the price of tea in China???

If you're trying to imply that the Gazan people are being victimized against their will by Hamas, I'd respectfully disagree.

[azurnoir]

11. I am sure you will

as doing so makes killing children OK

[winter999]

14. So when Hamas uses a school as a base to launch rockets,

who's to blame when kids are killed?! If parents are putting their children in harms way (there are MANY photos and videos of children dressed as suicide bombers, terrorists, and playing "Palestinians and Zionists").

I don't hear a peep when it comes to the Israeli children who are being killed. At least the Jews are taking steps to protect their families instead of loading them up with bombs and sending them to the enemy.

[Tom Joad]

32. I have posted several times about Israeli children who victims of this violence that

stems from the Israeli war on Palestinians, but no one seems to notice.

[Vegasaurus]

38. And you ignore the nonstop

Palestinian violence on Israelis, making this a one-sided war.

You are nothing if not consistent, Tom.

[Tom Joad]

49. why are u making things up?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=161575

One-sided war?? It's not. Many Israelis have suffered also.

120 Israeli children and the 980 Palestinian children have lost their lives since the year 2000

[azurnoir]

41. So Gazan's are not supposed to send their kids to school?

As far as not hearing a peep goes that is untrue, but if the pro Palestinian side of this forum were to make the same types of comments about the deaths of Israeli kids that are made about the deaths of Palestinian kids there would be apoplexy at the very least.

[hifalutin]

51. This may be a stupid question but

WHY does Hamas use schools and other civilian locations from which to send off their rockets?

Surely they know they are putting their people in danger, don't they?

[Howardx]

53. who says they do?

besides the israeli govt, who is clearly biased on the topic.

[hifalutin]

56. In reference to

post #14

[MaryCeleste]

57. This I can answer

Rockets, mortars, SAMs, and artillery (which rockets are) work best in open areas. It allows for better aiming and any back blast disperses well. Schools tend to have soccer fields or other open and flat areas. That makes for good launching sites. They can also be scouted ahead of time, so azimuth and elevations can be precomputed (makes for faster setup). School buildings make for quick cover since the crews need to shoot and scoot (yes its actually called that). From a tactical sense shooting from a school soccer field makes a lot of sense. All of the above is why cluster munitions are the best tactical choice against artillery sites, but that is another discussion with its own set issues.

The other reason is that there is some hope that their enemies will not use counter battery fire since there would be children nearby. Using civilians as cover is a violation of the rules of war, not that it matter much in the ME.

[hifalutin]

58. This should not be a risk worth taking

I thank you for the explanation as (ashamed to say) I don't know a whole lot about this issue
except that it seems to have been going on since the year dot.

[MaryCeleste]

25. Key ommision in the article

Quasam rockets can not go much beyond Siderot, and can not reach Ashkelon or Ashdod. However, the Grad 122mm can. That those are now being fired is one of the reasons Israel is going to pound Gaza until it stops. Those are real cities and much harder to disperse and harden than SiderotT. here are claims of videos and such (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125436) but nothing has been released. However, the deep penetration really does speak for itself

[subsuelo]

35. Oh ok

Now I understand why Israel has decided to gun down Gazan women, children, and anything that moves.

Makes perfect sense now.

[MaryCeleste]

37. I did not offer it as justification, but as additional relevant background

Israel complained when the the wall between Gaza and Egypt went down that weapons, specifically rockets, were brought in along with the food and supplies. That there are now longer range rocket strikes tends to validate their position. Ashkelon and Ashdod are larger cities. Attacking them is a significant raise in the level of hostilities. An Israeli reaction was predictable.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

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

[MaryCeleste]

40. I have heard suggestions of automated counter battery fire via artillery or UAV

Those are the kind of things that will be coming if the rockets don't stop. It Hamas appears to have more Grad rockets, all of Gaza could be occupied. One has to wonder why their fellow muslims are so willing to sacrifice the Palestinians.

Everyone seems to be ignoring the lessons of peace between Israel and Egypt. There is peace, there is prosperity, people are safe and are prospering.

[azurnoir]

45. There were also negotiations

however Israel and Egypt were more evenly matched in military strength, Israel will apparently not negotiate with an entity it thinks it can crush.

[MaryCeleste]

46. Agreed, there was different construct to the relationship

But the same concept applies...Israel gave up the Sinai for peace, and Egypt kept up its end of the bargain and things have been successful. Hamas has continued to attack Israel, and the Israelis invade. Its pretty basic.

If Hamas would not launch rockets or serve as a base for suicide bombers or attacks into Israel, there would have been no cut back on power, food and fuel, more open borders etc.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dick Dastardly]

59. I have noticed you continually make such claims but

never provide any proof of your accusations at all

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[Vegasaurus]

54. Nothing to spin

Hamas's actions speak for themselves.

he aerial attacks by Hamas have escalated in recent weeks, largely for two reasons:

•As a radical and anti-Israel Islamic group, Hamas needs to divert attention from its part in the harsh living conditions of the 1.5 million Palestinians who live on a sandy strip along the Mediterranean that's only seven miles wide and 25 miles long. Elected to power in 2006, Hamas seems to act more like a political arm of Iran than a government seeking the social and economic well-being of its people.

•Hamas is intent on stopping Israel from making a separate peace with the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who barely rules the Palestinian lands in the West Bank.

It's won that last point so far. The peace talks were suspended Saturday by Mr. Abbas after Israel clumsily attacked a Hamas stronghold but not without also killing many civilians, perhaps children.

That Hamas's 35,000 fighters put civilians in harm's way on purpose is quite possible. Such a heinous act requires the world to have patience before condemning Israel in its limited attacks on the "governing infrastructure" of Hamas.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0303/p08s01-comv.html?s=yaho

[azurnoir]

55. No spin

but you must have forgotten this part

What is worth criticizing is Israel's strategy to strangle the Gazan economy in an attempt to hasten a Palestinian uprising against the group. Israel should have more faith in the inherent weakness of Hamas's iron-fisted theological rule and its own ineptness in governing while refusing to make peace with Israel. That weakness was in full view in January when more than 100,000 Gazans fled into Egypt through a breach in a border fence.

Israel's long-term solution lies in fully recognizing its post-1967 error of occupying portions of the West Bank. Ending Jewish settlement of Palestinian land would be a first step toward curbing not only Hamas's rockets but also Arab and Iranian enthusiasm to someday use large missiles on the Jewish state.

Israel's restraint in defending itself now against Hamas rockets will give it moral strength to find a solution and avoid Hamas's trap of forcing an overreaction.

Islamic radicals cannot be handed the high road.

I deleted a paragraph for brevity or just read the article