Skip to main content

America is beginning to tune in more closely to the catastrophe unfolding in and around Gaza. And not a moment too soon. If we cannot stop this in 48 hours, the list of victims since it started on Nov. 14 - currently (Monday morningafternoon Israel-Palestine time) at 8097 Palestinians and 3 Israelis - will become much, much longer.

The Israeli government has announced the call-up of 75,000 reservists to expand this operation, dubbed in Hebrew "Cloud Pillar" but in English "Defensive Pillar". For reference, during the 2008-9 Cast Lead operation on Gaza, only 10,000 were called up. During the 2006 Lebanon war, which lasted 35 days and included massive armor vs. anti-tank and infantry battles, 60,000 were called up. So what are they planning?

Here at Adalah - a group of Arab, Jewish and other progressives who aspire towards a just resolution respecting the rights and dignity of both Palestinians and Israelis - we have posted at least one diary a day on the conflict. We hope to serve fellow Kossacks with reality-based, anti-violence and anti-war information and analysis. If you feel you need to catch up on what's going on there, please see our recent diaries list.

This diary has one main purpose. I will try not to communicate it angrily (working on my anger management). But I want to make sure we discuss this as a reality-based community.

Remember just before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, when MoveOn had to pay a fortune for newspaper ads - just to communicate to the public the simple fact that Saddam's Iraq and Al-Qaeda are not linked, not allies? That in fact, they are rivals? It didn't help. The majority of the public swallowed the lies and insinuations that they are linked, and this helped grease the wheels in the run-up to the war.

Now, I feel in a similar situation. I have been fielding comments in diaries, and reading elsewhere (including in the way Secretary Clinton describes it), about how this Israel-Hamas conflagration is a "tit-for-tat", or an Israeli "response" to something that happened a week or two ago, or even that this current bout of bloodshed is "a Hamas trap laid for Israel".

WRONG.

Before I continue, let me re-iterate that I see both Hamas and the Israeli government as negative, criminal actors in this story. If Hamas insists on firing rockets, it could have chosen to target the rather extensive military bases around southwest Israel, rather than towns. And Israel's government.... well, first let's understand what really happened.

In early November, there was an IDF-Hamas escalation. An airstrike killed a youth in Gaza; an anti-tank ambush hit an IDF patrol jeep injuring 3 soldiers; etc. Then, there were Egypt-mediated negotiations and an agreement to restore the calm. This type of ebb and flow of violence has been going on at the Gaza front, both before and after Cast Lead. In short, "tit-for-tat", "uptick, downtick", or "response" and "counter-response" are appropriate terms to describe what happened until last Wednesday.

Then, on Wednesday November 14, in a surprise air strike, the IDF assassinated Hamas' military chief, Ahmed Jabari.

This was something far, far bigger than anything since Cast Lead. Orders of magnitude bigger. The Israelis treated it as bigger, high-fiving their latest and greatest Shock and Awe all across the government and media circles, and immediately launching 24/7 media coverage. The Hamas treated it as bigger, immediately launching missiles at a pace unseen since Cast Lead. Over 4.5 days, Palestinians have fired more rockets into Israel than in the previous full year. The IDF, on its part, fully anticipated this response and started bombing the daylights out of Gaza as soon as Jabari was assassinated.

Now, this type of operation - and even Israel has called it an operation, right from its first moment - cannot be carried out as a short-term "response" to something that happened a week or two ago. This has been planned for months and years. The call-up of reserves, too, was clearly planned in advance.

So, to sum it up: what we are witnessing now in and around Gaza is neither an "escalation" that got out of hand, nor a "tit-for-tat". It is a large-scale, pre-planned Israeli operation.

One can wonder whether the intention is to take over and redesign Gaza (Israeli minister Avi Dichter actually said on the Israeli media, that Gaza "needs a reformatting") - or the somewhat more modest goal of reformatting the Israeli election campaign, which are scheduled for January and had just entered high gear when the operation started.

Prime minister Bibi, although favored to win, found himself contending on the inconvenient terrain of economic policy and social justice (his neoliberal "Bibinomics" are hated by most Israelis). His doppleganger, security minister Ehud Barak, is one of the most unpopular figures in Israeli politics, and his joke of a party was predicted to fail making the electoral cut, leaving him out of the parliament. The operation has already seen Barak's approval ratings soar.

Thanks to the operation, "Bibarak" have also made a caricature out of the leading opposition figure, Labor's Shelly Yechimovitch, who so far comes across as a lame and incoherent cheerleader for the operation (seriously, Miss Teen South Carolina lame). Moreover, Bibi's party hacks openly talk about postponing the elections.  

The suspicion of an election-motivated war arises naturally, once one realizes that there was really nothing in the events of the last couple of weeks, that would have prevented the government and military, had they so wanted, from waiting until after the elections before trying to assassinate Hamas' military chief and opening the floodgates of Hell on Gazans and their neighbors. Cast Lead, too, was carried out during an election campaign, and helped Barak (then still leader of Labor) improve his party's performance in the 2009 elections, compared with pre-war polls.

Finally, I want to return to the Iraq invasion build-up, and I have a confession. We arrived in Seattle from Israel in Fall 2002. Thanks to my involvement in anti-Occupation activism in Israel-Palestine before arriving, I made contacts with the local Seattle Israel-Palestine justice community. From October onwards, Iraq totally eclipsed Palestine on the local activists' minds, but I couldn't see why. It was clear to me, that all of Bush's posturing and threatening of Saddam, was a ploy to humiliate and embarrass Democrats and win the 2002 midterm elections. Just like Bibarak are doing right now to Israel's Labor party.

I was totally convinced, that once the 2002 midterms are over, the Administration will gradually find an excuse to climb off the tree and not invade Iraq. Not because I knew Bush or Cheney. Simply, because no one could be so dumb and reckless as to actually carry out the invasion.

The rest is a hundreds-of-thousands-dead, trillions-of-dollars lost, entire-nation-destroyed history.

Similarly, it might be that Bibarak announced the 75,000 reservist call-up as a bluff. Maybe they want Obama to step in and stop them before they invade Gaza (Obama has added the teeniest of nuances to his mostly one-sided statements on the matter, hinting he's indeed trying to stop a ground attack). Maybe.

But never underestimate a power-drunk politician's stupidity and recklessness. Especially the group running Israel right now, all of whom already have a solid track record of stupidity, recklessness and personal corruption.

So, as the diary title says: you are free to have your own opinion about this Israeli operation. You can pick "winners" and "losers", "good guys" and "bad guys", whatever. In case you're interested, I expressed my general opinion here. But it is still a pre-conceived, large-scale Israeli operation. Neither a "response" and nor a "tit-for-tat".

Thank you. And please help stop it.

8:55 AM PT: There seems to be some dispute and confusion related to the interpretation of "response" vs. "planned". Here's a copy-paste from my response to a comment below.

The operation is a "response" to a broader situation that Israel finds unacceptable.

Namely, that Hamas is still around and dominant in Gaza, and has increased its missile-launching capabilities.

Given that, Israel enjoys a rather expansive latitude and leverage space to choose whether to launch what might turn out to be Israel's largest war since 1982 (given the number of reservist call-ups) - and also when to launch it.

There is debate in Israel whether the timing is due to the election.

But no one seriously thinks this is a response to events of recent weeks. Those were puny in comparison to what's going on, and what's being talked about, right now.

Also, some readers are confounding a disagreement/confusion about what happened, which my diary tries to resolve,

with a "who started" blame-game. I am not going there in this diary. I am only pointing out that last Wednesday, Israel decided to roll out yet another of IDF's famous "shelf plans". It wasn't some localized escalation that got out of hand.

That's all. Feel free to continue bashing each other's heads - civilly, of course - in the thread below. I'm going off to work.


EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (131+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paleo, 420 forever, David54, Azazello, beltane, LaFeminista, SCFrog, Deward Hastings, Timaeus, poco, david mizner, stargaze, ask, greblos, ewan husarmee, Wee Mama, Karl Rover, One Pissed Off Liberal, InAntalya, bluedust, whizdom, don mikulecky, Aunt Martha, Brecht, ZenTrainer, sofia, ratcityreprobate, CT Hank, litho, sea note, glitterlust, No Exit, FischFry, muddy boots, cpresley, sfarkash, orson, OIL GUY, callmecassandra, skywriter, MrJayTee, wader, Montreal Progressive, letsgetreal, quill, mkor7, Diane Gee, Land of Enchantment, jnhobbs, dotdot, ScottAC, UniC, USHomeopath, Lost Left Coaster, ramara, Robobagpiper, dance you monster, Smoh, Garrett, SneakySnu, babatunde, Notreadytobenice, indie17, Flyswatterbanjo, protectspice, sujigu, Hayate Yagami, BradyB, artisan, UFOH1, corvo, SamSinister, PeterHug, tofumagoo, Buckeye Nut Schell, anodnhajo, Anorish, ColoTim, Keone Michaels, TX Unmuzzled, Eyz, rb608, IndieGuy, Timothy J, heathlander, cotterperson, 4democracy, krikkit4, rmx2630, Quicklund, skyounkin, just another vet, AgavePup, grollen, mookins, AoT, Lonely Texan, a2nite, Time Waits for no Woman, docmidwest, triv33, vacantlook, greycat, Dexter, DarkLadyNyara, chidmf, NanaoKnows, Lefty Coaster, roystah, KingGeorgetheTurd, Aureas2, TheDuckManCometh, angry marmot, Fire bad tree pretty, ImpeccableLiberalCredentials, Johnny Nucleo, lyvwyr101, Celtic Merlin, devis1, jayb, Carol in San Antonio, ubertar, pot, hnichols, native, fabucat, allenjo, jennylind, jj24, Larsstephens, Fireshadow
  •  Here's one opinion (42+ / 1-)
    We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.
    http://www.jpost.com/...

    Let all the Bush tax cuts expire

    by Paleo on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 06:21:54 AM PST

  •  It's good politics in Israel (12+ / 0-)

    to make a show out of this. Something liek 90% of Israelis support the strikes. Why? They don't know, but they know it must be good. On the other hand, the Israeli government would love to start a 3rd intifada to be able to justify a full scale war and crack down harder on imports. Hamas would love this too because it brings millions of dollars into Hamas run programs that do nothing for Gazan civilians but enrich the leadership.

    The whole situation is a mess and civilians are the ones paying the terrible price.

    •  I suspect 3-5 rocket attacks a day (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mannie, dcotler

      over the course of YEARS has something to do with their support of this action.

      As always, it's perfectly OK to murder Jews in their beds, but God forbid a Jew attack back.

      Frankly, I'm perfectly OK with disproportionate response in this case.

      Want to stop it? Let Hamas and all the Palestinian people renounce violence, let them swear by any oath anyone would take seriously that they will never again attack Israel and that Israel has a right to exist in perpetuity. Let the rest of the muslim world swear the same thing. Let Israel live in peace and security.

      And Israel will never again lift a finger in anger.

      Israel didn't sart this, but they have the power to defend themselves and they have every right to use it.

      •  Oh please (4+ / 0-)

        How many Israelis have died?

        3.

        How hundreds of Palestinians have been killed in retaliation? How many thousands more die from lack of food and medical care because of the inhumane blockade?

        Israel started this in 1945.

      •  what a stupid response..... (17+ / 2-)

        ....As if Israel had nothing to do with the current situation.  How can you not expect some sort of violent response from the Gazans when they have been repeatedly further and further to the margins.  When you pen up a large segment of the population and treat them like animals at least don't act surprised when they act out.  Or that your own actions didn't contribute.

        It would be nice if the Gazan's and Hamas renounced violence and stoically put up with Israel's economic suppresion and other worse actions but it is completely human and predictable that they don't.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:12:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  You claim if the palestinians stop the violence (12+ / 0-)

        then Israel will leave them alone. But this has not been the case in the West Bank. The land theft and settlements continue regardless of the palestinian's actions.

        Until Israel stops stealing land there is no reason for palestinians to stop their violence

        That quote about GDP by Robert Kennedy

        by erichiro on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:15:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, there is. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101

          Do you think terrorist attacks are actually going to stop Israeli policy?
          A much better tactic would be massive, non-violent demonstrations. This would almost force the Israelis to the peace table.

          •  protest has been tried already... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stargaze, Hayate Yagami, lyvwyr101

            ...didn't go so well for the protestors if i remember rightly.

            And it did nothing to change policy.

            We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

            by delver rootnose on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:15:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm talking about huge, and peaceful. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Aureas2, lyvwyr101

              Mass marches across the West Bank, covered by Western media, which includes no rock throwing or anything else violent whatsoever. It demonstrates that Palestinians are serious about non-violence, want peace now, and would change Western opinion to immediately demanding peace and giving the Palestinians their own state.

              •  I think you overestimate... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, lyvwyr101

                ...the ability for protest to occur and how the western media would cover it.  All they would have to do is show a line of scary people with signs supporting hamas or some other scarry palistinian group and then it wouldn't be a protest it would be called a riot of similar.

                The only protest that could have half a chance of succeding is an external one where Israel's economic systems are targeted like a boycott.  But that won't happen, at least not in the US and if not in the US then it won't be effective and any who participate will be labled antisemitic.

                We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

                by delver rootnose on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:35:53 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Have you seen a map of the WB? (5+ / 0-)

                How is anyone going to hold a mass march across it?  

          •  Or Force Israel to act like Mubarak in Egypt! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lyvwyr101

            Consider how much media makes it out of the West Bank and Gaza. Do you really think we can have an Arab spring style uprising if Israel just decides to open fire, mowing down crowds with bullets and using APCs to run over civilians?

            This sort of thing only works when the media coverage is significant enough to galvanize external pressure. It doesn't work if the U.S. never sees it and instead ups aid to Israel so it can "finish putting down those militants."

            The fact that the West Bank is like it is today is a sign that mass demonstrations would only promote mass graves. I would even wonder if there were enough Palestinians left to sustain that kind of a protest long enough to get outside notice.

      •  No one is disputing (14+ / 0-)

        that Israel has the right to defend themselves.  That's a cop-out argument used to shut down discussion.

        The problem is, if Israel has the right to defend themselves, then why don't the Palestinians also have that right?

        Now, you could argue that it's because they've elected a terrorist organization to lead them.  But you know what?  There have been elected Israeli leaders who were part of terrorist groups too.  Menachem Begin, just for one example.  So that argument doesn't hold up.

        See, this is my problem with the whole "Israel has the right to defend itself" argument.  Because I don't think most of the people on dkos disagree with that.  But it's a way to paint anyone who disagrees with Israel's actions as pro-Hamas or anti-semitic.  The problem is, when you just say they have the right to defend themselves, what it sounds like you're saying is that it's ok for the Israeli government to do it, but not for the people they're doing it against.  At which point, I would argue, it is no longer defending themselves.

        Your point about Israel not starting this has validity.  The problem is, this isn't 1945 anymore.  Israel has nuclear weapons.  Because of that alone, most of their neighbors aren't truly a threat to their existence.

        Further, the Palestinian people are boxed in.  They're occupied, and their territory is steadily decreasing because of settlements.  Israel has all the power.  There is no existential threat to the Israeli people from the Palestinians.  

        So please, explain how this particular operation, in which almost 100 Palestinians have been killed, compared to 3 Israelis, is Israel acting in self-defense.  Please explain to me how they are not the aggressor in this particular situation.  And when I say this particular situation, I mean I don't want to hear the historical arguments about all the times in the past that Arab nations tried to destroy Israel.  That's certainly true, but that's not what's going on here.

        •  This is a great post: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Celtic Merlin

          the right to self-defense is a cop-out---here.

          Israel is a heavily--militarized--nuclear capapcity--world power--attacking a nearby ghetto---which does have some weaponry.

          Note the diffrerence.

          And I do not believe that Israel DOES want peace.

          What they want is Gaza---and this has been on the boards for a while.

          "If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns."--Cheryl Wheeler

          by lyvwyr101 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 05:04:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hey, I have an idea! (0+ / 0-)

            First, we ship everyone out of Gaza. Let Israel have it.

            Then we find some country in the Middle East that nobody of consequence is using right now, and we could arm all the people from Gaza and have them invade it and take it over.

            Everybody's happy!

      •  Just curious (0+ / 0-)
        Frankly, I'm perfectly OK with disproportionate response in this case.
        One wonders where exactly you think the line should be drawn, then?

        You're fine with killing Palestinian militants, and fine with collateral damage that kills innocent Palestinians. So how many Palestinians is too many?

        This is not an attempt at rhetorical entrapment or anything. I will take it as a given that you're not okay with Israel just walking in and killing every single man, woman, and child in Gaza, or you'd be vocally advocating for that. But if you're 'perfectly OK with disproportionate response', then where does 'disproportionate response' end and 'wholesale slaughter' begin? If one Israeli citizen dies, are you okay with killing ten Palestinians? A hundred? A thousand?

        Want to stop it? Let Hamas and all the Palestinian people renounce violence, let them swear by any oath anyone would take seriously that they will never again attack Israel and that Israel has a right to exist in perpetuity. Let the rest of the muslim world swear the same thing. Let Israel live in peace and security.
        But what you're saying there, of course, is 'give up and leave Gaza'. Because unopposed, Israel has shown again and again that they will simply continue their settlement, continue slowly pushing the residents out of their homes, until there is nothing left. You wouldn't just give up your weapons, just unilaterally disarm and walk away from your home forever, if you felt that your country had been invaded and you were being oppressed and felt you were being pressured to leave your ancestral homeland and go... where? Nowhere. Just... leave. Would you?

        I understand that you think that Israel is righteous in all things in this conflict, that they are the ones offended against and that they are simply asserting their right to defend themselves. But the absolute inability of you and people like you to see this from anyone else's point of view, your unwillingness to acknowledge that anyone who has a different view of the situation from yours could be in the possession of the same set of facts as you have and yet have come to a different conclusion, is probably the biggest reason that this conflict hasn't actually been solved. And absent such a faculty suddenly spontaneously coming into being in the brains of about 80% of Israelis and 20% of Palestinians (the other 80% are currently too poor, beaten-down, and utterly powerless to matter), y'all are fucked.

  •  Good grief! (16+ / 0-)
    The Israeli government has announced the call-up of 75,000 reservists to expand this operation, dubbed in Hebrew "Cloud Pillar" but in English "Defensive Pillar". For reference, during the 2008-9 Cast Lead operation on Gaza, only 10,000 were called up. During the 2006 Lebanon war, which lasted 35 days and included massive armor vs. anti-tank and infantry battles, 60,000 were called up. So what are they planning?
  •  Actually, no. (6+ / 0-)

    Your summary of the history and implications of the current escalation is correct for one key point. This operation did NOT come out of the blue. I don't know why you felt to emphasize that point, because your analysis is fine (and can actually be strengthened) without it.

    Starting the Friday before the targeted assassination, Hamas and other terrorist groups inside the Gaza strip significantly increased the number of rockets that they were shooting at Israeli civilians. This put pressure on Netanyahu to respond, but the IAF didn't do very much in response. Then the day of the air strike, the rockets seemed to be calming down, talks of a ceasefire were reported, and Israel seemed to be refocusing on Syria. This might have been a head fake on Netanyahu's part. THEN the airstrike happened, and things went straight to hell.

    Just to compare, there were around 800 rockets fired this year before the current escalation, 200 on the weekend before the airstrike, and around 1000 since.

    •  Most of Republicans *still* think (17+ / 0-)

      Saddam and Al Qaeda were connected.

      Count yourself among them.

      I will not dignify your logic beyond that.

      •  Yes, I'm pro-Israel. No, I'm not stupid. (4+ / 0-)

        I'm not even saying that the Israeli attack was necessarily justified at the time it was started, since things seemed to be calming down on both sides.

        Essentially, all that needs to be taken into account was that the attacks were tit-for-tat (as much as civilian vs. military attacks can be so) until that Friday, when there was an escalation. Your analysis is fine including it, and I actually agreed with many of your points. Why is that so difficult to add into the narrative?

        •  Inside Israel, no one pretends this is a direct (25+ / 0-)

          response to recent events.

          This is purely a foreign-language export story line for propaganda purposes.

          Coupled with the misunderstanding of people abroad who were not tuned in, it seems to work wonders.

          •  Killing the Hamas leader (4+ / 0-)

            in charge of rocket attacks had absolutely nothing to do with the increase in such attacks over the past few days? Really, you think so?

            There is nothing that "all" of Israelis think. There must be a grand conspiracy on the Hebrew-language websites too in order to deceive all foreigners, because somehow I read the same things and opinions on those sites. Maybe I'm rerouted to a "foreign" Hebrew-language website?

            The Israeli government does not control its media, and haaretz isn't a front for secret propaganda. Really, you had some good points before you devolved into CT.

            •  just stop (5+ / 0-)

              trust me, it's not worth it.

              i agree with you completely, but it's very clear which side has a majority on this site. you will never, ever, ever convince people on this site that any israeli action is justified. it's just not worth the anguish.

              •  Well, at least in allows me to vent about it. n/t (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL
              •  Because (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mkor7

                they are not.

                ...any israeli action is justified.

                Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid. You step out of line, the man come and take you away. - S. Stills

                by ask on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:05:21 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  see ^^^ (3+ / 5-)

                  in the views of most people on the site, not all, hamas could bomb 1000 rockets a day at israel and it would be justified, but any israeli response would be overboard and a war crime.

                  •  Let's see (7+ / 0-)

                    More than 1000 bombing sorties in a week.

                    At the moment, 94 Palestinians killed - over 50 of whom are women and children - and who is to say that the males killed were all Hamas, very unlikely.

                    No wonder Israel is despised, and by a number growing every day.

                    Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid. You step out of line, the man come and take you away. - S. Stills

                    by ask on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:16:31 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  so are you trying to argue (2+ / 5-)

                      that hamas intentionally targeting ONLY civilians is OK because they're not very good at it?

                      should israel just let the rockets continue until hamas learns how to target pre-schools better?

                      oh, and israel is despised because the rest of the middle east, and portions of the rest of the world wish the nazi's succeeded. the goal of hamas is not peace, it's not freedom, it's the death of all jews. that must always be remembered, hamas never wants peace, only time to reload.

                      •  Are you ready (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo, Hayate Yagami

                        to go all Godwin now?

                        oh, and israel is despised because the rest of the middle east, and portions of the rest of the world wish the nazi's succeeded. the goal of hamas is not peace, it's not freedom, it's the death of all jews.

                        Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid. You step out of line, the man come and take you away. - S. Stills

                        by ask on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:30:04 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  it's not goodwin (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Kane in CA

                          when hamas has publicly stated their goal is to kill jews. and that it is a fact that most middle east countries support hamas, either privately or publicly.

                          and i will stand by my statement that hamas does not want peace.

                          "Hamas is not hostile to Jews because they are Jews."

                          israel has its own bevy of stupid warmongering quotes. some of them have come in recent days. but to say anything other than hamas' goal is to kill jews would be a lie.

                      •  I can assure (6+ / 0-)

                        you that I harbor no such sentiments and I know no one else with such thoughts either.

                        I am encouraged by the large number of Jews that are highly critical of the Israeli state and its actions. I live with one of them.

                        Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid. You step out of line, the man come and take you away. - S. Stills

                        by ask on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:34:06 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  No we are arguing that terrorism is wrong (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        mahakali overdrive, corvo, lyvwyr101

                        On both sides.  Neither is remotely justified

                        This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

                        by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:02:18 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  While I have a certain sympathy for that position (0+ / 0-)

                          I have to ask: what would you have the Palestinians do?

                          Let's say they renounce all violence, effective today. What should their tactics be?

                          Israel has showed that they will quash nonviolent protest effectively and brutally, several times. It is simply not an option in Gaza today. Even if the organizational ability existed to mobilize large numbers of people for it, Israel has shown that they are fully willing to indulge in mass political arrests of the leaders (and the occasional shooting, although I am willing to believe that those may not be official policy, just an ill-considered response from the officer on the ground, who then goes on to not be punished for it). And, of course, beating in the heads of quite a few of the followers, too.

                          The only other solution, then, requires them to simply wait and suffer. Given the current leadership of Israel, it seems hardly realistic that, if the violence stopped, settlement would be curbed; indeed, it would probably proceed more quickly. And the Gazans would become more desperately poor, be shoved off of all the desirable land, and eventually end up refugee camps. Many of them would die.

                          As it is, the rocket attacks do them little good, except to remind Israel that they can't be pushed around entirely without consequence.

                          Killing innocent civilians is never justifiable. But when people like you keep acting like it is incomprehensible, you're doing no one on any side any favors. If you are unwilling to try to understand why your opponents do what they do, and instead resort to platitudes ('they all hate Jews', 'they hate us for our freedoms', 'their religion is evil'), the best outcome you can hope for is a continuation of the violence forever.

                          I'm not sure if the worst would be all-out war between Israel and a united Middle East, or the Jews of Israel waking up, after fifty years of slow Gaza settlement and murder-by-poverty of the Palestinians, and realizing what they have become.

                      •  "intentionally targeting"? (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo, lyvwyr101, RJDixon74135

                        I didn't know the Palestinian rockets could be targeted.  

                        Since most of the time they end up landing in empty fields or in the water, it would seem the best the Palestinians can do is point them in the general direction of Israel; which is hardly what I would call "targeting."

                    •  97 Palestinians (12+ / 0-)

                      Many of whom were children. It is ghastly and inhumane. Perhaps even a War Crime.

                      But also, Hamas needs to stop shelling also. They may be thwarted by the Iron Dome, but when they shoot at Eilat, they are equally trying to kill civilians. If they were recognized as a State -- which I support -- they would also be guilty of a War Crime.

                      Still, the situation isn't parallel because of superior military strength and resources. Although both have allies who have good power.

                      Most civilians on both sides of the conflict want both sides to knock it off.

                      This just won't be the path to the liberation of Palestine without a great deal of damage to both sides. Not right now. Not in this way. Tony Blair spoke with some top Palestinian official this morning and the guy was shocked that Blair taled on and on about how this wasn't a way to achieve statehood; the official's concern was not having bombs launched into cramped civilian corners. For despite Isreal's initial attempts to be strategic with their missiles, that was rendered ineffective when they killed their first civilian. As the side with greater military strategery and official governence, they bear a responsibility to Gazans (and the West Bank) even if they wish to otherwise act as if they aren't still under their governance.

                      •  Well, Israel doesn't rule Gaza anymore. (0+ / 0-)

                        But what I find puzzling is that you don't see a difference in magnitude between intentionally targeting civilians and killing them accidentally as bystanders. Can you explain?
                        Also, Hamas doesn't have to be a state to be guilty of war crimes.

                        •  Not accidental (6+ / 0-)

                          It is most definitely calculated to instill terror in the population. Collateral damage is just a convenient excuse.
                          They know what they are doing.

                          Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid. You step out of line, the man come and take you away. - S. Stills

                          by ask on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:47:12 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Both are intentionally targeting civilians (4+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          PeterHug, beltane, lyvwyr101, native

                          This is factually evident from the targets of both Hamas and the Israeli Government. They are so readily available that they're not worth itemizing. Both have clearly intended, or not discounted the possibility of, civilian casualties.

                          •  The Israeli government doesn't believe in civilian (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            corvo, lyvwyr101, native

                            vs military targets. Every Palestinian is a potential military target to the IDF. This is a fact. They can claim all they want that they are only targeting military targets, the truth is that means whatever the IDF wants it to mean.

                          •  So can you explain (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL

                            why Israel hasn't flattened several apartment buildings now, killing hundreds of people in each?
                            The fact that there's a 1:1 ratio of military to civilian deaths says something about who Israel is targeting. And that's including the 12 people who died from airstrike on the wrong building, which Israel is already investigating.
                            Only one side is intentionally killing civilians, because only one side benefits from it. And that's Hamas.

                          •  They have. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            protectspice, corvo

                            Or don't the Al Daloo family count?

                            http://www.dnaindia.com/...

                            4 children. Age 7. Age 6. Age 4. Age 2.

                            And I guess the Salam family doesn't count either.

                            The morning saw the funerals of three-year-old Tamir Salam and his two-year-old sister, killed as they slept in bed with their parents when their house was hit in an F16 strike at 2am. They were the only children of Salam Ibrahim and his wife.
                            But only Jewish civilians are dying. 1 to 1 right?

                            Fuck you.

                          •  Did you read my post (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            hester

                            where I mentioned the airstrike on the wrong building? That was the al-Dalo family, and yes, it was tragic. I'll look into the second story you mentioned.
                            Doesn't change the fact that even though every death is tragic, a 1:1 ratio is still very low from a military standard when terrorists are hiding inside civilian buildings. If Israel wanted to, it could ignore civilians and rack up a much higher death toll. It doesn't, for a variety of reasons.
                            Again, I'm not trying to sound callous, but very few civilians have died and we should be grateful for that.

                          •  Exactly, but don't fret if rationality does (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            hester

                            not serve to sway some.

                        •  Because there is not much difference legally (4+ / 0-)

                          Between intentional targeting and willful disregard for human life and disproportionate response.   Both are war crimes .

                          I disagree with Mahakili here.  These are unequivocal text book war crimes.  

                          This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

                          by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:07:05 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Hrm? (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            poco, lyvwyr101

                            I feel they are war crimes too. From Israel, they are, by definition. From Palestine, if it were recognized as a state, likewise would they be considered war crimes (as a non-state, they can't be defined that way internationally).

                            This is the legal definition.

                            The ethical one will vary from person to person, but my ethical position is clear: I support no killing of civilians at all.

                        •  Not in form. But in function. (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Tonedevil, DarkLadyNyara, lyvwyr101

                          Gaza is an open-air prison, cage, concentration camp--whatever nomenclature you prefer.

                          It is a hermetically-sealed poverty zone. By design.

                          Israel is in de facto control, if not de jure.

                          If you mean there are no "Israeli" prefects there at present, then yes, but your mangling of language is to put words into a position beyond meaning. It's pure hasbara.

                          To label any subject unsuitable for comedy is to admit defeat. -- Peter Sellers

                          by krikkit4 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:49:47 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  See (4+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          stargaze, corvo, Tonedevil, lyvwyr101

                          the problem with that argument is this: Israel has more advanced weapons, and should be able to avoid killing and wounding as many civilians as they have in the last 4 days or so.  At the very least, the fact that there HAVE been as many casualties implies the Israeli government isn't terribly concerned about such things.

                          •  Actually there have been relatively few (0+ / 0-)

                            civilian deaths. About a 1:1 ratio between militant and civilian, so I would say that Israel is trying to minimize civilian damage. Unfortunately, there are also a lot of civilian injuries.

                          •  hard to avoid it (0+ / 0-)

                            when the hamas members specifically hide behind women and children, so when they are killed the cameras can get video of civilian casualties.

                            rockets are fired from hospitals, schools, media buildings, homes and apartments. it's the hamas way.

                  •  So true. It is almost impossible for the majority (2+ / 3-)

                    to even acknowledge that civilians in Israel are being deliberately targeted for rocket attacks.

                    They see nothing wrong with this kind of terrorism.

                    I wonder if it were happening to them and their families if the feeling would be the same.

                    Any attacks targeting civilians is reprehensible and to defend or downplay such immoral acts is as well.

                  •  When it is overboard and a war crime (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Tonedevil, WattleBreakfast

                    It will be called that and only a few apologists will defend the indefensible

                    This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

                    by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:01:14 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Complete BS (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    WattleBreakfast

                    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” ~ John Kenneth Galbraith

                    by Lefty Coaster on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 11:53:44 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Grammer misunderstanding (0+ / 0-)

                  Trobone meant any one israeli action is justified. You read and and all israeli action is justified. Of course the latter isn't true.
                  Can we shake hands on this one point please?

              •  You'll have a better chance of convincing (7+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                UniC, Brecht, Smoh, corvo, Lefty Coaster, jayb, pot

                If you present a plausible case backed by facts and historical lessons, and not by Israeli Foreign Ministry talking points.

                It also helps when your case is compatible with members' values on most other issues.

                •  You still haven't told me (0+ / 0-)

                  anything that's wrong with my logic. Care to start?

                •  wow, in the last couple days (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, indie17, hester

                  i've been told to leave the site
                  been told that i'm a war criminal
                  been told that i'm a republican
                  and now been told that my values don't match the site

                  all of that for simply pointing out that israel has a right to respond to foreign attacks and a responsibility to tis citizens to defends them from rockets.

                  •  Likewise, more or less (11+ / 0-)

                    and I support a two-state solution and am a pacifist who doesn't believe in military solutions when diplomatic ones are possible, and also, my empathy for Palestinians is deep and very old. Additionally, I have respect for Israelis, although I don't approve of their Government, nor do I likewise approve of Hamas, with their genocidal charter.

                    Nonetheless, there is so much polemic that if you don't fit into a pro-Israel or pro-Palestine box, people say you are "talking out of two sides of your mouth" when you are, instead, expressing the complexity of the situation and a refusal to take "sides," since taking sides leads to blame, and blame leads to more justification for violence, unending, and violence is the very thing we should all be seeking to end so that there can, indeed, be a CONVERSATION and a SOLUTION.

                    Under the current terms, that's going to be forced, at best.

                    We ought not be so quick to brand or dismiss one another.

                    •  here's my issue (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Diamond Mind

                      i don't see a diplomatic solution at this time

                      peace terms have been turned down so many times by both sides no one will accept peace until both sides redo their entire leadership.

                      •  The U.S. is going on a diplomatic mission (0+ / 0-)

                        to Gaza today. I have a keen eye on whether it remains a diplomatic mission too. I know the U.N. has been there.

                        This time, it may all be just a little different. That's what many key analysts are saying, at any rate.

                        We'll see. Things are unfolding fast and furious.

                        Neither side is backing down at this point, nor are they saying they will. Some analysts are saying that Israel will lose support from the International Community if they don't back down. At any rate, it looks like a staring match. Most are saying that one side just needs to agree to stop shooting first at this point.

                        I hate the WaPo, but they give an okay overview here; there's probably a better one in another paper, but it's 5:45 am here, so I'm in no mood to go poking around yet, sorry! http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

                    •  Sounds to me like you are branding and dismissing (8+ / 0-)

                      I'm sorry, but there is a well-justified sensitivity towards false equivalencies on this issue.

                      I might have fired back too soon and too hard on a number of occasions.

                      But it doesn't help when you post 20 comments on the same diary, all preaching the "both sides do it" sermon with a pacifist twist.

                      Maybe you didn't mean that, but this is how it came across.

                      I consider myself pretty high on the pacifism scale. I never played with guns before or after the times when I had to bear them by law. I volunteered to combat out of duty, but hated pretty much every moment of it. So I respect your basic perspectives, I really do.

                      Just as frustrating as it is for you to be given an abrasive treatment on some threads, it is frustrating for me and others to be painted as some one-dimensional fanatics - especially when a government over there seems to be planning and beginning to implement an Armageddon scenario.

                      Back to late 2002: a young activist I knew went with a couple of friends and blocked Interstate 5 to protest the escalation into war. I told him gently he might have overdone it.

                      He didn't. There were just not enough people with him, on enough Interstates.

                      •  I understand (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Diamond Mind, Trobone, Assaf

                        and feel my views are my own and are part of this conversation, are not projecting false equivalencies, and that the basic premise of finding blame is very much at the core of what creates violence. If all you hear is "both sides do it" plus a pacifistic sermon, you aren't listening to me.

                        It would benefit this discussion to not insult those with positions which, as you say, paint you by some as a one-dimensional fanatic. That would make me a two-dimensional fanatic, I suppose. Actually, I'd like to think we're both three-dimensional human beings capable of rational thought and subtlety without being run over by trucks on the interstate or our own occasional views which push us into flaccid conformity.

                  •  That's why (8+ / 0-)

                    they assassinated the leader who was working on a long-term cease-fire?  

                    The question of who benefits is still valid.  The citizens of Siderot and Beersheba and the other towns do not benefit in any significant way.  The citizens of Gaza most certainly do not.  The only people who benefit are the current Israeli government and the Hamas leaders who can hold power when there is such reason for hatred.

                    Israel has been responding to rockets with soldiers entering Gaza for attacks and with more rocket fire.  What they are doing now is absolutely counter-productive to anything like normal life for its citizens.  Assaf's interpretation take account of all this, and make sense.

                    Republicans want to make government small enough to fit in your vagina..

                    by ramara on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:06:18 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  do you really believe (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Diamond Mind

                      the mind behind kidnapping and murders all of a sudden had a change of heart and said "i'm going to put my killing behind me"?

                      it's a big step to take.

                      but yes, i agree, the current over-reaction is counter-production. the same as it has been when israel over-reacted in the past.

                      •  asdf (3+ / 0-)
                        do you really believe the mind behind kidnapping and murders all of a sudden had a change of heart and said "i'm going to put my killing behind me"?
                        More pertinent is that Israel wasn't going to take the chance that he might indeed have been willing to put his killing behind him.
                        •  even if he was (0+ / 0-)

                          suddenly making a change of heart.... there is zero evidence that hamas as a whole was behind the effort.

                          was the killing politically smart, no. was in done in an appropriate way, no. do i think he really wanted peace, possibly, but i lean toward no. does hamas as a whole want peace, hamas says no.

                      •  You may as well be talking about Israel (5+ / 0-)

                        do you really believe the mind behind kidnapping and murders all of a sudden had a change of heart and said "i'm going to put my killing behind me"?Why is it that you are fine defending a nation where the standard procedure across all parties that have gotten in power is to kidnap and kill Palestinians, or allow Israeli settlers to do so. Are we really to believe that not shooting rocket would magically make Israel treat Palestinians like humans, because that hasn't worked before.

                        The revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                        by AoT on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:31:33 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Look on the bright side! (3+ / 0-)

                    Your views are not only mainstream Democratic, but party orthodoxy as well.  The President and just about every member of Congress not named Ron Paul have your back too.

                  •  You have done considerably more (5+ / 0-)

                    You have defended the wanton disregard for human life.  Israel's right to self defense does not extend to cover the kinds of actions being engage in now or over the last 60 years.  

                    It is no more defensible than arguing that missile attacks into civilian cities are justified by Palestinian rights to self defense against Israel.  

                    This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

                    by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:11:56 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  i have done no such thing (4+ / 0-)

                      i have never advocated a "wanton disreguard for human life"

                      i have said repeatedly that israel is over-reacting right now. I have said repeatedly that they have done so in the past. i have said multiple times that peace is the best end-result, and it's what I want in the end.

                      •  My apologies then (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Trobone, lgmcp, Diamond Mind, exreaganite

                        This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

                        by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:28:44 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  You show a wanton disregard for Palestinian life. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo, UniC

                        Sure, you put in some caveats, and make some token feints towards reasonable balance. Just like Fox News.

                        Many of your comments are just offensive, and should be HRed. For the most part, you are bringing far more hate and confusion to the debate than fair reasoning.

                        Almost all of these recent Gaza diaries would be improved if you took a vacation this week.

                        Do us all a favor: go have a nice Thanksgiving with your family.

                        "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

                        by Brecht on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:48:42 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Perhaps you are usually more reasonable, and are (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          poco, bluedust

                          emotionally overwrought because of what's happening in Gaza and Israel right now. If your uglier recent comments do not indicate the foundations of your thinking, if you're just having a week from hell, than I apologize for overstating my case. I will have to observe your future comments and see.

                          When you say:

                          israel is despised because the rest of the middle east, and portions of the rest of the world wish the nazi's succeeded. the goal of hamas is not peace, it's not freedom, it's the death of all jews. that must always be remembered, hamas never wants peace, only time to reload.
                          that makes me believe that your worldview is based more on fear and hate than on evidence and human sympathy.

                          Yes, there are plenty of Israel haters in "the rest of the middle east" - but not all of them. Each Arab individual thinks for themself, and there are thousands struggling against violence and despair to make things better.

                          How can we ever reach a better place in the Middle East if we deny that, as you do?

                          "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

                          by Brecht on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:14:38 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  yes, every arab thinks for (0+ / 0-)

                            him or herself.

                            but the governments have been proven to fund and arm hamas with the sole intention to go after israeli citizens (not military, but civilians).

                            go look at the remarks by middle east leaders other than Egypt and Turkey. Go look at the UN votes. It's pretty obvious what side the governments, and militaries are on. Yes, it is based on fear. Yes, I truely believe that if given the chance much of the middle east would try to destroy israel politically and through violence. the reason i believe that is the statements being made now, and the historical record. people who deny the fact that israel is always under sttack in one way or another dumbfound me, i just don't get it.

                            I do get overly upset when people blame everything on Israel, when people claim that israel intentionally tries to kill palestinian children, when people suggest i need to tell friends and family in israel to just accept that rocket attacks are a part of their lives and that they should encourage their government not to react.

                            I cannot, in good faith tell friends in the israeli military that the best route is to open up the gaza borders and just pray that hamas doesn't carry out 1000 suicide bomb attacks a day. I can't do that because it's not how reality works. hamas' stated goal is to kill jews, not to achieve peace.

                            the majority of the palestinian people I'm sure are good natured and want peace, i'm not against them. but I'm 100% against hamas, and unless hamas rejects its charter, and everything that goes along with it, that won't change.

                          •  You are decrying the same thinking I accuse you of (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Trobone, corvo, poco, Assaf

                            You're just pointing it in the other direction:

                            I do get overly upset when people blame everything on Israel, when people claim that israel intentionally tries to kill palestinian children
                            You know what, Trobone? So do I. When anyone blames everything on Israel, they're over-simplifying and accusing a whole population for the errors of most of their leaders.

                            I blame Netanyahu, and many other Israeli leaders, and sometimes branches of the government and the forces. Blaming Israel as a monolithic whole is wrong, and hateful.

                            But you frequently fall into a similar error. When you complain of "remarks by middle east leaders" and "UN votes", I know exactly what you're talking about, and we can have a rational debate on the points.

                            But when you say "much of the middle east would try to destroy israel", even with that qualifier "much", you are still losing focus, and making simplistic overstatements. That kind of exaggeration is fuelled by fear and hate, and fuels fear and hate in turn. It obstructs clear thinking, and detracts from the debate and work needed to achieve any shared understanding or progress in the Middle East.

                            Here in this diary, we are going uphill already. You should be more careful not to put boulders in the way.

                            That said, thanks for a pretty reasonable response, in this instance.

                            "Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth" Samuel Johnson

                            by Brecht on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 11:10:21 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  i try to be reasonable (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Brecht, hester

                            i don't always succeed.

                            i still stand by my "much" statement. But I should have clarified to say much of the governments in the middle east" and not make it seem like the population as a whole.

                  •  You'll get used to it. Or you will get sick of the (0+ / 0-)

                    name calling and leave.

                    It is a pattern as old as the site.

                  •  Welcome to Daily Kos. nt (0+ / 0-)

                    Unapologetic Obama supporter.

                    by Red Sox on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 12:45:39 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

        •  One of the problems over the last thirty years is: (10+ / 0-)

          There has been a purposeful propaganda campaign to conflate Judaism and Isreal as one and the same.  Any attack on the political policies of Isreal is seen as an attack on Jews themselves.

          Just because you believe that the country of Isreal is acting like the neoconservatives from the Bush era on steriods does not reflect how you feel about Jews.  It is like saying that because the Bush regime were war mangers, you do not like the American people.  

          We had one major terrorist attack eleven years ago and many of the American people wanted to round up all of the Muslims and eliminate them, Isreal faces terror attacks daily and they no longer consider Palistinians human.  We have Fox news, along with other networks and they have Fox news like networks on every station and in every newspaper.  The people of Isreal and Jews in general are not the problem, it is their Dick Cheney-esque government.

          Palistinians and Isrealis have to get back to the point where each side believes and respects the other side as being real live human beings with mothers and fathers and brothers and sisters and children and friends.  Each side wants to be safe from harm, they want food and shelter and they want hope.  The governments of both sides are nothing more than opportunistic heathens who profit politically from their hardline policies and grandstanding.  The only difference is that the people on one side have nuclear weapons and the people on the other have nothing to lose.  I do not know which is more dangerous.

          "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

          by Buckeye Nut Schell on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:51:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I am sorry (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corvo

          There is someone engaged in military strikes?   It seems clear the main targets are civilians on both sides.

          This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

          by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:59:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Then why is there a 1:1 ratio (0+ / 0-)

            of militant to civilian death from Israeli airstrikes?

            •  Is there? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              corvo, lgmcp

              Says who?   This sounds like the usual "any male is a military guy" stuff.   What has the Red Cross said?

              This has been a golden age for confirmation bias. - David Brooks

              by Mindful Nature on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:27:50 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not sure if there are any official numbers (0+ / 0-)

                But if you read this: http://www.cbsnews.com/...
                A few paragraphs in it says: "These attacks have led to a sharp spike in civilian casualties, killing 24 civilians in just under two days and doubling the number of civilians killed in the conflict, a Gaza health official said."

                Doubling the number means 12 were killed before, for a total of 36. Let's round it up to 40. That means out of a total of 97 deaths, 40 are civilians.

                Again, the loss of life is tragic, but I think these numbers show that Israel is taking significant precautions attacking Hamas. Granted, there are a lot more civilian wounded because of how these attacks are made, but I don't think that refutes my point.

      •  Retract your insulting lie (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Diamond Mind, Trobone, Johnny Nucleo

        Saddam and Al Qaeda were not connected

        Hamas and Al Qaeda are not connected

        We of course know that

        But Israel is STILL justified in responding to the hundreds of rocket attacks. It would have been justified with the very first rocket.

      •  Saddam/al Qaeda (3+ / 0-)

        This ad hominem attack on a community member, who largely agrees with you, undermines your objectivity, in my opinion. I agree with your premise that we are not entitled to our own facts. I'm mystified why you ignored the escalation in rocket attacks that preceded the Jabari killing. As others have stated, Israel has an inherent right to respond to rocket attacks, especially those targeting civilians. That's a fact. Hamas knows that rocket attacks will provoke air attacks and lead to suffering in Gaza. Another fact that cannot be ignored.

        Given Israel's military power, this is an asymmetric battle. Would it be more acceptable if Israel responded in kind, with hundreds of rockets aimed at Gaza's civilian population?

        There is plenty of fault with Israel in failing to move forward with a two state solution. That is not an point that can be fairly raised by Hamas or its sympathizers since Hamas mirrors Israel's own hard liners in objecting to a two state solution. Hamas wants Israel eliminated. Perhaps that's how some community members feel, but at least be honest about it.

    •  Key point indeed. (4+ / 0-)

      But even this acknowledgement of escalation seems to take the prior situation as normal:

      "Starting the Friday before the targeted assassination, Hamas and other terrorist groups inside the Gaza strip significantly increased the number of rockets that they were shooting at Israeli civilians . . . Just to compare, there were around 800 rockets fired this year before the current escalation,"

      Imagine the U.S. response to the first rocket launched at Texas from Mexico, regardless of the righteousness of the rocketeers' cause.

    •  And how many years of embargo by (9+ / 0-)

      Israel of Gaza?

      •  For how many years have rockets come from Gaza? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JNEREBEL

        The answers are 5 and 11, respectively.

        •  And how many years since the Gazan refugees (11+ / 0-)

          were ethnically cleansed from their homes in and around Haifa?

          Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
          ¡Boycott Arizona!

          by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:44:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And how many years since Egypt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Red Sox

            used Gaza as a staging point for Mujahideen to get into Israel for sabotage purposes, with the support of the population?
            Really, this could go on forever. What's the point?

            •  The point is that Israel's original sin (18+ / 0-)

              was to build its Jewish state in a territory where the majority of the population was not Jewish.  The Zionists knew quite clearly, and expressed to each other in writing, that population would have to be removed in order for their project to succeed.

              And that, my dear friend, is the root source of the violence we see today.

              Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
              ¡Boycott Arizona!

              by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:49:26 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  There are so many things wrong with this (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                delphine, Kane in CA, JNEREBEL

                that I don't even know where to start...

              •  The current root source (7+ / 0-)

                is that on Nov 15th, 1988, ISrael won that conflict and the Palestinian people surrendered the fight to recover all of Palestine and defeat Israel.  They accepted UNGA 181 Partition plan, and renounced violence.

                Trouble is, Israel wasn't done, and still isn't done in seeking territorial expansion.  

              •  What a disgustingly revisionist comment to make.nt (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Diamond Mind
              •  Litho, the problem I'm having with this (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Diamond Mind

                statement is that it denies the simultaneous longstanding Jewish ties to Palestine.  Yes, the Palestinian perspective on what occurred, prior to and including the Nakba, needs to be an integral part of the discussion, and that means including what you're referring to here, but it's not the entire picture.  It's not an either/or situation.

                •  I do not see how litho's statement (8+ / 0-)

                  reproduced herewith in its entirety:

                  The point is that Israel's original sin
                  was to build its Jewish state in a territory where the majority of the population was not Jewish.  The Zionists knew quite clearly, and expressed to each other in writing, that population would have to be removed in order for their project to succeed.

                  And that, my dear friend, is the root source of the violence we see today.

                  precludes, much less denies, "the simultaneous longstanding Jewish ties to Palestine."  

                  All it says is that the population was not majority-Jewish when the Zionist enterprise began, which seems fairly noncontroversial.

                  You do, of course, identify the reason why the particularly territory was chosen by the Zionist movement, which is entirely worth mentioning, but I'm not seeing anything of a "denial" in litho's comment.  Please elucidate.

                  •  Because the comment makes it seem (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    poco

                    as if it was completely arbitrary that the Zionists chose Palestine to build a state.  And it wasn't.  And to say that is by no means to deny anything about the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians that then occurred in order to make the Jewish state possible.

                    •  At some point I just assume (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Johnny Nucleo

                      that there's practically nobody who thinks that the site for the Zionist enterprise might have been chosen at random.

                      Even our least educated citizens tend to know a little about the Bible.

                      •  And you may be right. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        poco

                        But given the heat that P/I generates, I think it's good to err on the side of stating what might seem to be the obvious.  Even I, whose sympathies are well known, reacted a bit to what seems like an omission in litho's comment.

                •  There were plenty of Zionists (9+ / 0-)

                  who opposed the creation of a unitary Jewish state, most prominent among them probably Martin Buber:

                  He advocated a bi-national Israeli-Palestinian state and argued for the renewal of society through decentralized, communitarian socialism. The leading Jewish adult education specialist in Germany in the 1930s, he developed a philosophy of education based on addressing the whole person through education of character, and directed the creation of Jewish education centers in Germany and teacher-training centers in Israel....

                  From the beginning of his Zionist activities Buber advocated Jewish-Arab unity in ending British rule of Palestine and a binational state. In 1925 he helped found Brit Shalom (Covenant of Peace) and in 1939 helped form the League for Jewish-Arab Rapprochement and Cooperation, which consolidated all of the bi-national groups. In 1942, the League created a political platform that was used as the basis for the political party the Ichud (or Ihud, that is, Union). For his work for Jewish-Arab parity Dag Hammarskjöld (then Secretary-General of the United Nations) nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1959.

                  The point is that Herzl's and Ben Gurion's approach, to push out the Palestinians, expropriate their land and property, was not the only option considered by Zionist Jews -- Jews who felt that connection to Palestine you refer to.  Ben Gurion, however, wound up leading the state and, according to what is now the accepted view among Israeli historians, conducted an overt policy of ethnic cleansing in order to create a Jewish majority in the state.

                  Ben Gurion's policies have their logical conclusion in the policies pursued by Netanyahu and Barak today -- make life in Gaza unlivable, such that the Palestinians ultimately give up their resistance to the Jewish state.

                  Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
                  ¡Boycott Arizona!

                  by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:28:39 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And I don't disagree with what you're (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    poco

                    saying here.  But I think it needs to be made clear, and reiterated, that there was a longstanding Jewish relationship to Palestine.  What was done in the name of that relationship is despicable, and also needs to be made clear and reiterated, but it wasn't as if Palestine was randomly chosen as the location of the future Jewish state.  That's all I'm saying.

                    •  I'm talking about Israel's original sin (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      corvo

                      what it lives with today, and what it can never erase so long as retains its identity as a Jewish state.

                      Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
                      ¡Boycott Arizona!

                      by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:39:50 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  And again, I'm in large part in (0+ / 0-)

                        agrement with you.  But I still think that you're omitting why Palestine was chosen.  And I also think you're omitting the very real existence of anti-Semitism.  Israel could be a state of all its citizens, something I'm personally completely open to, and there would still be those who are against it or at least against the Jewish citizens of it.  So again, I'm not denying at all what you're saying, but I think it leaves out something.  We're just going to have to disagree on whether you are or are not doing that.

                        •  I don't address why Palestine why chosen (5+ / 0-)

                          my only point has to do with how the Zionists chose to organize their state there.

                          Of course Jews have a connection to the Holy Land.  That's doesn't given them the right to forcibly expel the current occupants and expropriate their property.  And then to pursue a sixty-five year war against the refugees they created until those refugees give up any pretension of returning to the homes and their property from which they were violently dispossessed.

                          Again, the reasons behind the choice of Palestine for the Jewish state are irrelevant to the actions taken in order to create that state.

                          Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
                          ¡Boycott Arizona!

                          by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:57:37 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

            •  there is no point (6+ / 0-)

              this conflict goes back so far there can no longer be any one incident that started it all.

            •  And how many years since the Romans (0+ / 0-)

              "ethnically cleansed" Judea?

              If we're going to play that game, we might as well argue for Israel and Hamas to band together and go kick the shit out of the Italians.

              The whole situation is fucking pointless, and there's not a goddamned thing anyone outside of Israel and Gaza Chan do to change it.

              Fuck 'em all.

              --Shannon

              "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
              "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

              by Leftie Gunner on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:06:58 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  Manure propelled rockets (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, UniC

      All those rockets and so little damage, either to property or people.  I'm sure they are frightening, but then I get nervous on the 4th of July, too.

      I'm just curious, but does anyone know how much damage is being done by Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile rockets?  They have to be landing somewhere; or when they hit one of the Palestinian rockets, debris has to be falling somewhere.

      •  Comparing rockets strikes to fireworks (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Red Sox

        is reprehensible and trivializes the terror and injury being inflicted on innocent civilians.

        You should be ashamed of yourself.

      •  Palestinian rockets causing more damage (0+ / 0-)

        The rockets used to cause no damage which is why they were largely ignored by Israel. Over the past year that has changed. Rockets are now regularly damaging property, causing injury, and more recently 3 deathes in an area rockets have never reached before.

        Sirens go off several times a week and people rush to take cover in bombshells.  The Israeli's mental state is that of being under siege which is why they are generally in favor of launching attacks and aren't disturbed that one Israeli attack generally results in more damage then several months worth of Palestinan attacks.

        This is a list of the 2012 rocket attacks:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        In contrast more then one hundred die in a week's worth of Israeli attacks this month.

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/...

        I don't think many people would be OK with living either under constant Palestian rocket attacks that do random amounts of damage or living under Israel's less frequent but far more devastating attacks that often kill a dozen people at a time.

        There is no clear good guy or bad guy in this fight. There are just two sides, both scared and tired and angry who are easily swayed by calls for greater violence by power hungry leaders who see a path to personal glory over other people's corpses.

  •  Cease fire terms (10+ / 0-)

    are being floated.  Hamas wants end to Naval Blockade and targeted asassinations and cross border incursions.

    Israel wants a 15 year cease fire, the right to enter gaza to pursue terrorists, and a ban on arms entering Gaza.

    Oddly, one outcome of this ill advised operation, is that Hamas may emerge stronger as a more legitimate political entity, capable of negotiating and enforcing treaties.

    Not unlike Lebanon war in 2006 to erode popular support for Hezbollah, how did that turn out?

  •  I suppose one teeny tiny mercy to be grateful for (7+ / 0-)

    is that they didn't do this before the American elections.



    Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

    by Wee Mama on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 06:51:46 AM PST

    •  They do seem to have timed their provocation (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, Wee Mama, lyvwyr101

      to come after the elections.  I assume that was a result of interparty negotiations within Bibi's coalition.

      Bibi, of course, made a strong play to get US Jews to vote for Romney, which drew a public rebuke from Barak.  A military operation to intervene in US politics would have destroyed Bibi's coalition instead of strengthened it.

      Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
      ¡Boycott Arizona!

      by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:47:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Whose (1+ / 0-)

        provocation?

        Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

        by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:06:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  This one (0+ / 0-)

          http://www.maannews.net/...

          According to Emily Hauser's fairly objective accounting, as reported by Robert Wright in The Atlantic, the incident that resulted in Hamid's death set off the current round of fighting.  According to Reuters, that incident involved an incursion of four Israeli tanks and a bulldozer into Gaza.  The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed the incursion took place, and that it resulted in an exchange of gunfire with the Palestinian Popular Resistance Committee.

          Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
          ¡Boycott Arizona!

          by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:38:36 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And the previous one? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JNEREBEL

            And the previous one?

            And the previous one?

            Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

            by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:43:15 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hauser addresses your point (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              protectspice, poco

              like this:

              For instance, some Palestinian sources date the start of this latest round of violence back to November 4, when Reuters reported the death of "an unarmed, mentally unfit man" who strayed too near the border fence, did not respond to reported Israeli warnings, and was then shot. Palestinian medics report that Israeli security personnel prevented them from attending to the man for a couple of hours, and say that he likely died as a result.

              But it's genuinely impossible to date today's hostilities conclusively to one incident or another; even the "two-week lull" that some outlets have said preceded Nov. 8 (when the timeline below begins) was, according to Reuters "a period of increased tensions at the Israel-Gaza frontier, with militants often firing rockets at Israel and Israel launching aerial raids targeting Palestinian gunmen."

              Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
              ¡Boycott Arizona!

              by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:53:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JNEREBEL

                And that's only a one-month period, not 60 years.  Or a couple centuries.

                And having been in the thick of it, there is no time we can all go back in history and agree on the inception of this tragedy.

                Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:13:27 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I disagree with you on two points, delphine (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  stargaze, corvo, callmecassandra, native

                  First, I think the current fighting started with the Israeli incursion on Nov. 8, which resulted in the death of a Palestinian boy and the injury to three IDF soldiers.

                  Second, I think the conflict as a whole can be meaningfully dated back to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1947 and 1948.  The refugees in Gaza, the vast majority of the population there, were all expelled from Israel at that time and their property expropriated by the Jewish Agency.  Their continued grievances against Israel provide the fuel and fire to ongoing Palestinian resistance.

                  Whatever the origin of the conflict in 1947 and 1948, and you and I -- I hope -- would probably agree more than disagree on the causes of that war, there's still no question that at no time, under no circumstances, can ethnic cleansing ever be considered a moral or appropriate response to any kind of provocation.  The decision by the founders of Israel to remove a significant portion of the Palestinian population in order to guarantee a Jewish majority in the Jewish state is the root cause of the current conflict.

                  Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
                  ¡Boycott Arizona!

                  by litho on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:38:42 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, Assaf, for keeping us (29+ / 0-)

    informed -- a much needed antidote to the corporate press.

    Overall, I''m heartened by the reaction at Daily Kos. Another reminder that the vast majority of people here oppose Israeli brutality and support the self-determination of Palestinians. This reality sometimes gets obscured because many tend to stay away from the issue on a day-to-day basis because of the nastiness of I-P threads and the active presence of a small minority of reflexive "pro-Israel" posters.

    •  I-wish-there-were-less-flame-wars,-b/c-dK-is-my (7+ / 0-)

      news-source,-usually-coming-with-links-somewhere-in-the-posts-&-comments.-I-don't-like-it-where-flame-wars-derail-conversation.

      The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

      by stargaze on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:32:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Me too (10+ / 0-)

        I'd like more people engaged on this issue; unfortunately, it tends to get considerable attention here only when there's an outbreak of violence.

        The flame wars work to the advantage of the small minority of "pro-Israel" posters because they poison the poll and push people away.

        •  Enough of that (6+ / 0-)

          bullshit.

          Anyone who says anything that isn't hard-line anti-Israel is considered "pro-Israel" and then you say they "poison the poll and push people away."

          This is the type of blanket comment that starts flame wars.  

          BTW, an escalation after the tit-for-tat may or may not mean the escalation was already planned.  It's likely that Israel has attack plans in place at any given moment.  Whether they are itching for any excuse to use them or simply put them into play rather than continuing small attack-response activities is anyone's guess.

          We know they are knee-jerk in over the top shock and awe response, but Hamas knows this as well - they know that lobbing missiles into Israel will provoke a ridiculously over the top response from Israel.  

          It's horrible, but no one should be surprised at the level of response from Israel.  It's what they always do, unfortunately.  But no one should be naive to think Hamas shouldn't or didn't expect Israel to escalate.  

          Israel is full of neocons and will always escalate.  

          Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

          by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:12:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You know what? (7+ / 0-)

            There's some truth in what you say.

            Anyone who says anything that isn't hard-line anti-Israel is considered "pro-Israel
            Sometimes we in the Adalah camp are too quick to dismiss and criticize people who aren't as strongly pro-Palestinian as we want them to be. The impatience grows out of our feeling that, certain complexities notwithstanding, the issue at the center of this conflict is simple: one side is occupying the other. Still, it would be in our interest to try to politely persuade rather than castigate.

            But let me be clear, when I mentioned the small minority of reflexive "pro-Israel" commenters, I was referring not to people who are agnostic on this topic, or who don't take as strong a pro-Palestinian stance as I want them to, I was referring to Kossacks who, for example. enthusiastically support Israel's brutality and smear Jews who don't as Kapos.

            •  I have (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL, Red Sox, hester

              never seen anyone here "enthusiastically supporting Israel's brutality" that wasn't immediately crushed by donuts and wiped off the thread, if not banned.

              A couple years ago there were maybe two of these folks, and they are no longer here.

              I won't go back over ground I've covered before, citing horrific anti-semitic screeds that were uprated by people who are still here.

              Anyone who goes off wholeheartedly in support of brutality should be hide rated and considered for banning.

              However, to be clear, saying "wow, I can understand [     ]'s reaction here" is NOT supporting brutality.

              I've had comments like "Oh, so you support the murder of Palestinian babies".  

              I have a pretty measured view on the mideast and have made it clear I abhor Israel's militarism, so there is no need for crap like that.

              Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

              by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:07:29 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well I'm not a (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, Lefty Coaster

                a troll rater, but if you are, here's a comment from this thread that represents the POV I was talking about.

                It is almost impossible for the majority [of people on this site] to even acknowledge that civilians in Israel are being deliberately targeted for rocket attacks.

                They see nothing wrong with this kind of terrorism.

                •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL, Red Sox

                  this is your "enthusiastic support of brutality"?

                  (A)  The world sees rocket attacks as terrorism, because that is what it is.  Justified or not, lobbing bombs into another country aimed at civilians is terrorism, by definition.

                  (B)  The bombs are being lobbed into residential areas, ergo, they are deliberately targeting civilians

                  How in the world is that post remotely "enthusiastic support of brutality?"

                  It doesn't even say anything about responding.  It just says the facts:  bombs are being lobbed into civilian neighborhoods.  Regardless of any justification (the demand for liberation and an end to occupation), people are being terrorized by it.

                  Sheez, really?  You make my argument for me.

                  I mentioned to a friend the other day the abhorrent practice just revealed of Israel determining the minimum number of calories Palestinians need to survive and using this to limit food going into Gaza.  Just disgusting.

                  He said "Well, that sounds better than you think . . ."

                  See, he assumed that I was saying how wonderful Israel was for making sure the Palestinians got their minimum calories.  

                  And I was saying that limiting food going to Palestinians based on some "minimum" of caloric intake was simply barbaric.  No fucking excuse for it at all.  

                  He heard what he wanted to hear in what I said.  

                  I read that comment and see absolutely NOTHING to suggest this person "enthusiastically" supports any activity by Israel, let alone brutality.  It's a simple statement of fact.

                  The "Jews' souls are twisted and blackened" by the holocaust and therefore they are capable of barbarism comment, though, got uprated.  I'd say between the two comments, this is the vile one.

                  Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                  by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:56:22 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Wow (6+ / 0-)

                    I didn't meant to say that the comment in question was cheering on Israel's brutality. I said it reflected the POV of the "pro-Israel' camp, which, among other views, holds that critics of Israel support Hamas.

                    You call this comment -- which says that most people on this site "see nothing wrong" with Hamas' terrorism -- a simple "statement of fact."

                    I agree that you shouldn't be smeared as a apologist for the killing of Palestinian babies; if you can't admit that people critical of Israel shouldn't be smeared as supporters of terrorism, then you're not arguing in good faith - then indeed, you're part of the problem.

                    •  The comment (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Red Sox

                      doesn't seem to say critics of Israel support Hamas or terrorism.

                      If the commenter had read the diary, s/he would see that it does indeed sort of condemn Hamas (although it says "If you're going to lob bombs, target military targets instead of civilians", which doesn't really condemn the lobbing of bombs into Israel in general).

                      I don't see the comment as smearing all people critical of Israel as supporting terrorism.

                      The writer doesn't see a recognition or condemnation of terrorism in the diary or thread.

                      Not the same thing.

                      Certainly not the same as "You support the killing of Palestinian babies!"

                      Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                      by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:41:27 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        callmecassandra
                        They see nothing wrong with this kind of terrorism.
                        Sorry, I mistook you for a reasonable commenter. Your defense of such a disgusting comment shows me otherwise. See ya later.
                      •  Nor as I stated was the comment meant to refer (0+ / 0-)

                        to the thread or diary but was rather an opinion on the general responses posted in the diaries as a whole since the latest outbreak of violence.

                        For that lack of specificity I erred, but my point is still valid in regards to the interactions and comments I have personally engaged in with others here.

                        •  Plus you didn't (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          JNEREBEL

                          accuse any one person.  It's an observation, not an accusation.

                          In addition, where in this diary does it categorically condemn all forms of terrorism?

                          It really bugs me to read "well, if you're going to bomb, at least target the military".

                          Really?  So there is "legitimate" terrorism?  Isn't bombing someone else's military an act of war?

                          Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

                          by delphine on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:18:48 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

        •  What is "pro-Israel" in this context, please? (7+ / 0-)

          There's a perpetual motion machine of violence which seems fomented between the major political rivals in the region being discussed here.  I see no white knights.

          So, I happen to despise much about Israel's political leadership and have for years, but I'm not otherwise "anti-Israel" in terms of their existence, for example.

          But similarly, I think Hamas is an opportunistic, selfish organization that makes the world a thousand times more difficult and tragic for the citizenry in whose midst they live, but I also support the Palestinians having an independent (i.e., unoccupied) state of their own, some day.

          Am I "pro-" or "anti-" Israel from the above, in your view?  Just wondering if my opinion here would be legitimatized or not before even posting.

          "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

          by wader on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:30:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's not in the most literal sense. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JNEREBEL, wader

            Clearly supporting the Likud government is not practically pro-Israel. Indeed, it harms Israel in the long run. But colloquially, "pro-Israel" means one who generally sides with Israel in the I/P conflict.

            FWIW, I consider myself pro-Israel and think of your stance as pro-Israel as well. The commenter you're replying to has a visceral hatred of the state, and even endorses anti-Semitic memes, so he might see things differently.

            Unapologetic Obama supporter.

            by Red Sox on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 01:01:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  The Guardian just reported that (9+ / 0-)

    the Israeli government admits the real motivation for Pillar of Cloud was to neutralize Gaza in preparation for a possible war with Iran. http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

  •  President Obama got the facts right (5+ / 0-)
    Let’s understand what the precipitating event here was that’s causing the current crisis, and that was an ever-escalating number of missiles; they were landing not just in Israeli territory, but in areas that are populated. And there’s no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders. So we are fully supportive of Israel’s right to defend itself from missiles landing on people’s homes and workplaces and potentially killing civilians. And we will continue to support Israel’s right to defend itself.
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/...
    •  Congress+WH+State Dept. are expectedly 1-sided (13+ / 0-)

      although I do expect a bit more from Obama right now.

      Especially given the love and respect Bibi has showered upon him recently.

      •  Obama was assured of no Ground invasion (8+ / 0-)

        http://www.thedailybeast.com/...

        Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, gave private assurances to Barack Obama on Friday evening that his country was not planning at that moment to launch a ground invasion of Gaza—but those plans would change, he said, if Hamas escalated its rocket war.
        This was reposted to the BBC. Previously not something I'd seen. Right before Obama went to Myanmar.
        •  was it Abba Eban (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive, corvo

          who told LBJ there would be no attack on Egypt?

          •  Not saying he should believe it (6+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            poco, wader, whizdom, bluedust, lgmcp, indie17

            My point here was what Obama's concern was here; I hear his concern about whether or not their will or will not be a ground invasion in Gaza. I wish he was also concerned about rockets, since obviously there have been quite a lot fired toward civilians and many civilian deaths now in Gaza, which is unacceptable. But I do hear, at least, a concern about an out-an-out ground war in Gaza, and also, in Obama's speech on this, he says this is because it would make a two-state solution impossible. Thus I'm hearing subtle warnings in what Obama is saying toward the Israeli Government compared with other previous administrations' unqualified support for the Israeli Government. That's not surprising to me; Obama isn't terribly hawkish.

            Hamas, in their press release today, stated that "He (Netanyahu) wanted to confuse Obama in his second term after backing the wrong horse in the US election. This is a terrified enemy which has miscalculated."

            I find that interesting.

            So I have a little hope between a slight shift in American executive branch attitudes combined with our new relationship with Morsi which is tenuous, and Morsi seems literally to be beside himself to accommodate Obama's requests to help lead Hamas to a ceasefire to make sure to avoid hurting Egyptian cash flow from the U.S. and perhaps to avoid scuffling with Israel too. I think these two factors only serve to change the game a little. We'll see how much. We'll see what Obama is willing to accept if Hamas "escalates" the rockets, as Netanyahu's assurance was couched -- because no where has he said, "Sure, fine, go ahead." His language was extremely careful and cool about how he said that Israel had a right to defend itself. He's not offering full-throated support there in my read. And he definitely asked Netanyahu about it, as you can clearly see in the exchange above: that was a reply to a request, not a random statement.

      •  USA-govt-should-not-pretend-neutrality-:( (11+ / 0-)

        I-don't-want-my-taxmoney-going-for-the-war-machine-in-general-&-IDF-in-particular.

        The boss needs you, you don't need him. -- France general strike, May 1968

        by stargaze on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:34:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  rest of statement (9+ / 0-)
      Now, what is also true is, is that we are actively working with all the parties in the region to see if we can end those missiles being fired without further escalation of violence in the region. And so I’ve had several conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu. I’ve had several conversations with President Morsi of Egypt. I’ve spoken to Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey, who was visiting Egypt right in the midst of what was happening in Gaza. And my message to all of them was that Israel has every right to expect that it does not have missiles fired into its territory. If that can be accomplished without a ramping-up of military activity in Gaza, that’s preferable; that’s not just preferable for the people of Gaza, it’s also preferable for Israelis -- because if Israeli troops are in Gaza, they’re much more at risk of incurring fatalities or being wounded.

      We’re going to have to see what kind of progress we can make in the next 24, 36, 48 hours. But what I’ve said to President Morsi and Prime Minister Erdogan is that those who champion the cause of the Palestinians should recognize that if we see a further escalation of the situation in Gaza, then the likelihood of us getting back on any kind of peace track that leads to a two-state solution is going to be pushed off way into the future.

      And so if we’re serious about wanting to resolve this situation and create a genuine peace process, it starts with no more missiles being fired into Israel’s territory, and that then gives us the space to try to deal with these longstanding conflicts that exist.

      I personally thought it was the most diplomatic thing to say at the time considering the position the U.S. is in with respect to Israel.

      Duh, of course they have a right to defend themselves against missiles being fired into their country. Duh. Who wouldn't say that?

      But of course, that's really not the issue. Because EVERYONE over there says they're defending themselves...and at some point it becomes true. If you fire at me, I defend myself by firing back. Then when my fire comes to you, you defend yourself from my attacks as well.

      Saying "self defense" is sort of moot, frankly, at some point. And has nothing to do with anything, eventually. And asking one side (either side) so stop "defending" when the other side hasn't agreed to do the same is also stupid. Who would do that? No sane person. If you and I are in a fist fight, and we're clocking each other, and someone says to you, "Ok look, if you agree to stop hitting mdmslle, then she'll stop hitting you." You gonna believe that or do you  think maybe I might take one last right hook to you by surprise the second you say, "Ok."

      It really doesn't matter who started it at this point. I find that argument juvenile and complete beside the point. The problem is you cannot get one side (either side) to agree to stop fighting (back) without the other side also agreeing to do the same at the same time.

      For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

      by mdmslle on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:39:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and there is no governmet or people... (7+ / 0-)

      ...that wouldn't respond in some way if thier own government or an outside government treated them the way Israel treats the people of Gaza.

      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

      by delver rootnose on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:06:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This seems so obvious! (10+ / 0-)
    what we are witnessing now in and around Gaza is neither an "escalation" that got out of hand, nor a "tit-for-tat". It is a large-scale, pre-planned Israeli operation.

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:19:34 AM PST

    •  Of COURSE it was pre-planned (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      don mikulecky

      you can't call up 70,000 soldiers and prepare a ground invasion into an area without some kind of plan. This was probably drafted months ago as one possibility out of many that might be enacted.
      That still doesn't mean that it was planned to happen right now. Again, the context of the the assassination (which wasn't really pre-planned, just opportunistic. But it was the opening shot, so to speak, of the operation) was the increase in the number of rockets fired over the previous weekend. If that hadn't happened Israel might have held off assassinating him.

      •  Your second paragraph is total speculation. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive, Assaf, corvo

        In any sophisticated and planned operation, timing is carefully considered.  

        •  the US military has hundreds of (4+ / 0-)

          sophisticated plans to wage warfare on any number of countries.  That doesn't mean we have a time frame for invading Moscow.

        •  Yes and no. (0+ / 0-)

          It was reported that they assassinated him because he made some security mistakes, and Israeli intelligence knew exactly where he was and who he was with in the tracked car. Was the context and timing taken into consideration before the shot? Sure. But it very well could not have happened.

          •  Sure, but one can accurately argue that Israel (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Assaf, corvo, FloraLine, lyvwyr101

            intended all along to create a diversion to justify an action to "flatten all of Gaza" or whatever Israel intends to do, so in effect, the particular rockets fired are immaterial.  At some point, more rockets were going to be fired relative to some other point in time.

            The entire operation is orchestrated by Israel to meet Israel's objectives.

            What these are and how justified they are is open to interpretation, but there is no doubt that Israel intended this action all along.

            •  Israel's goal is to neutralize Hamas as a threat (0+ / 0-)

              or, failing that, to create enough deterrence that it won't fire rockets in a long time. Pretty obvious.
              There WAS in increase in rockets over that weekend. 200 in 3 days vs. 800 in 10 months is a rather large increase.
              Yes, Israel wanted to hit all the smuggling tunnels and other military targets. But it wouldn't have done so, risking the 1000 rockets fired over the past week, if the government didn't feel a provocation and a demand from the population.

              •  The increase in rockets is subsequent to the (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mahakali overdrive, corvo

                assassination of Ahmed Jabari, according to the diarist (unless I am gravely misreading his post), so one can logically argue that Israel deliberately provoked the rockets.

                Sure, at least part of the obvious objective is to neutralize Hamas as a threat (leaving out cynical questions like why now?).  Israel can create a desert and call it peace.  

                The conditions in Gaza are untenable in the long term, and given Israel's siege of Gaza and now a second major strike, living conditions in Gaza are unsustainable.  There is no question that Israel is punishing all of Gaza for choosing Hamas.  If they Palestinians can't live in Gaza, they must die or leave.  Is that what Israel wants?  Is the ultimate objective to force the  abandonment of Gaza by Palestinians?  To me, that's what it is beginning to look like.  

                •  See my original post for what the diarist left out (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL

                  But to summarize, there were around 200 rockets fired the weekend before the airstrike on Jabari, a significant increase over recent months.
                  By "neutralize" I didn't mean level Gaza, but to destroy Hamas' arms, missile sites, and infrastructure (which overlaps with civilian infrastructure, which is why we see attacks on media buildings, for example, but that's another discussion).
                  The problem is that I don't think Israeli politicians are thinking in the long term, especially not Bibi. If they were, I would think the peace process would be continuing at the moment, despite everything that is happening. The current leaders are just thinking about the next year, the next election.

              •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                what is shocking to me is how do these missiles get through?? Where is the border security? Is it incompetence in the part of Israeli defense? Imagine if missiles were smuggled through Mexico from Texas...

      •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

        I am certain that a ground invasion of Gaza was planned the minute Gaza became Gaza. All countries have war plans against one another...We have one against Canada.

  •  Israel waited too long to respond (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Trobone

    Would any other country wait WEEKS after being attacked before responding?

    Consider this statement from the Foreign Ministry of France. In particular, note the date: October 17!

    France strongly condemns the spate of rocket attacks on Israel from Gaza in recent days.

    France is concerned by the spread of weapons to Gaza.

    It urges the parties to restore calm.

    http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/...

    Israel tried to be calm for weeks. The rockets just continued to fly.

    Those are the facts.

  •  Excellent presentation of FACTS. Needs one more (6+ / 0-)

    There is some editorial commentary of course, in that you're claiming nothing immediately precede the attack that would have justified it. In fact, there were a series of rocket attacks that were pushing the Israeli gov't in this direction, whether or not you believe the ultimate motivation was the election. THe fact that the Egyptians had gotten involved prior to the hit on Jaabari, is all the evidence you need to know this is true.

    Was it a calculated escalation? Of course. Was it inevitable, regardless of the election? Hard to say. I think the election had a lot to do with it, but this has been building for months or years. The timing may have something to do with the election, but the operation itself? That was bound to come, for better or worse, without a massive change in the Gazans conduct.

    Hpoefully, they can all find a way to step down...fast.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:47:08 AM PST

  •  You also can't have your own facts (5+ / 0-)

    and your decision to start in early November with your timeline, ignoring 800 missiles aimed at Israeli civilians, demonstrates exactly this point.

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

    by dhonig on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:03:06 AM PST

    •  Where is documentation for this claim? n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mkor7, corvo
      •  January through October 2012 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Diamond Mind, JNEREBEL

        Wiki, but you can follow the links as well as I can. I didn't know there was a question but that rocket fire had increased significantly and was ongoing.  

        January

        In January, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians fired 9 rockets and 7 mortar shells at Israel in 14 separate attacks.[3]
         January 1
        Palestinians fired two mortar shells containing phosphorus into Eshkol Regional Council. The shells landed in open fields, causing no injuries or damage.[4] The Eshkol Regional Council filed a formal complaint with the United Nations, noting that the Geneva Conventions prohibit the use of phosphorus against civilians.[5]
         January 19
        After nightfall, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[6]
         January 21
        Overnight, Palestinians fired three mortar shells into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage. In response to the attack, an Israeli Air Force helicopter immediately struck a group of terrorists in the Rafah area.[7][8]
         January 22
        Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[9] In response to this attack and previous ones, Israel carried out air strikes on a weapons factory in the central Gaza Strip, two tunnels in the northern Strip and one tunnel in southern Gaza, causing no injuries.[10][11]
         January 24
        In the afternoon, Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[12]

        [edit] February

        In February, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians launched 36 rockets and 1 mortar shell at Israel in 28 separate attacks.[13]
         February 1
        Between about 6:30 and 9:16 pm, Palestinians fired 8 rockets into the Shaar Hanegev and Ashkelon Coast regional councils, causing no injuries or damage. Local residents were instructed to stay within 15 seconds of bomb shelters in case of additional attacks. Israeli security officials estimated that the attacks were so timed because of the stormy weather, which limits the effectiveness of rocket detection systems.[14][15][16] Next day, Israeli warplanes struck six targets in Gaza in response to previous rocket attacks, hitting two weapons storage facilities, three tunnels used for terror activities and a weapons manufacturing facility.[17]
         February 6
        Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage. The Color Red alarm sounded near in the area prior to the explosion.[18]
         February 10
        After nightfall, Palestinian terrorists fired a rocket into a community in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. The rocket exploded between two homes, sending shrapnel that penetrated one of the homes while civilians were sitting in the living room. The rocket also damaged an electrical pole, cutting off power. No injuries were reported.[19]
         February 11
        Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[20] Israel responded to the attack and to the previous one with air strikes on three tunnels used for terror activity – in the south, center and north of the Gaza Strip – and a weapons manufacturing facility in the north. Officials in the Hamas-ruled territory said that one civilian man was killed and another was wounded.[21]
         February 15
        Palestinians fired five rockets at Israel. Two rockets exploded in the Sdot Negev Regional Council, two more fell in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, and a fifth fell in the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported. In response, the Israeli Air Force struck two targets in the Gaza Strip: a Hamas militant site in Gaza City, and a Palestinian Islamic Jihad militant site in Nuseirat.[22][23] France condemned both the Palestinian attacks and the Israeli response.[24]
         February 17
        Palestinians took advantage of the stormy weather, which hinders Israeli rocket warning systems, and fired two rockets into Israel. One landed in the Eshkol Regional Council, and the other hit the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, south of Ashkelon. Later, Palestinians fired an additional rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported in any of the attacks.[25][26]
         February 18
        With the stormy weather continuing, at about 11:30 am Palestinian terrorists fired a Grad rocket at Beersheba; the projectile landed outside the city. Sirens sounded in Beersheba and the Bnei Shimon Regional Council, and residents entered shelters.[27][28]

        Palestinian terrorists later fired a rocket toward Israel, but it exploded instead on a Palestinian home in the Gaza Strip, causing no injuries.[29]

        Israel responded to recent attacks with an air strike on a weapons manufacturing site in the Gaza Strip.[30]
         February 19
        After nightfall, Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Sdot Negev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[31]
         February 21
        After nightfall, Palestinians fired a mortar shell into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[32]
         February 23
        Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Sha'ar Hanegev and Eshkol regional councils, causing no injuries or damage. Residents of the former said that the Color Red alarm sounded only seconds before the rocket exploded, and some did not manage to reach rocket shelters in time.[33][34][35]
         February 24
        At about 1 am, a Palestinian terrorist cell attempting to fire rockets at Israel was thwarted when an IAF jet fired at it. Palestinian sources said that two people were injured.[36] At about 2:30 am, Palestinians terrorists fired two rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage. Israel responded with air strikes on two terror targets in the northern Gaza Strip.[34][35][36][36][37]
         February 25
        In the evening, Palestinian terrorists fired two Qassam rockets at Ashkelon. One landed in an open area within the city, and the other landed in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. After nightfall, a third Qassam rocket landed in the southern Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported in any of the attacks. In response, IAF aircraft targeted a weapons-manufacturing site and a smuggling tunnel in southern Gaza Strip, causing no injuries.[38][39][40][41][42][43]
         February 26
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[44]
         February 28
        Palestinians fired a rocket into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, near Ashkelon, causing no injuries or damage. The Color Red alarm sounded in the region.[45][46]

        Israel sent a demonstratively terse letter of protest to the United Nations, saying: "Ten days, ten rockets and not one condemnation".[47]

        [edit] March

        In mid-March there was a significant escalation of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel. Throughout the month, according to the Israel Security Agency's routine monthly summary, Palestinians fired 173 rockets and 19 mortar shells at Israel in 156 separate attacks.[48] However, according to a different report by the agency, during the escalation alone Palestinians fired 281 rockets at Israel, of which 86 were long-range.[49]

        [edit] March 1–8
         March 1
        Palestinians fired three rockets toward Ashkelon. The projectiles landed in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[50]
         March 2
        Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[51]
         March 3
        After nightfall, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[52]
         March 8
        On the morning of the Jewish holiday of Purim, Palestinians fired a mortar shell into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[53]

        [edit] March 9–15

        Main article: March 2012 Gaza-Israel clashes

        a rocket fired from Gaza hit the city of Netivot
        Palestinians fired over 300 Grad missiles[unreliable source], rockets and mortars deep into Israel. Three civilians were wounded directly by the fire, one of them seriously. Additionally, 21 people suffered from shock and 11 were injured while fleeing for cover. A total of 23 Israeli civilians were injured. Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system intercepted many of the Palestinian-launched projectiles aimed at large cities, shooting down 56 rockets in 71 attempts.[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]

        Most of the attacks followed an Israeli air strike on Zuhair al-Qaissi, commander of the armed wing of the Popular Resistance Committees, a terrorist group with close ties to Hamas, and Mahmoud Hanini, a top field commander in the group. Al-Qaissi had overseen the 2011 southern Israel cross-border attacks, which killed eight Israelis including six civilians.[62] Israeli officials said that he was preparing the final stages of a new mega-attack that could have claimed multiple lives.[63]

        To protect students from the rockets, Israeli officials cancelled classes in all schools in the cities of Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheba, Netivot, Kiryat Malakhi, Kiryat Gat, Gedera, Yavne, Lakya and other southern communities, as well as in Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Ashkelon Academic College and Sami Shamoon College of Engineering.[64][65][66][67] The Home Front Command barred all mass gatherings in southern Israeli communities.[68] The Israel Police raised the level of alert around the country.[69]

        Israel responded with air strikes on weapons storage facilities, rocket launching sites, weapon manufacturing facilities, training bases, posts, tunnels and terror operatives, killing 22 militants, mostly from Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the others from the Popular Resistance Committees. Four civilians were killed as well.[57][70][71][72][73]

        The United States, France, and an official from the United Nations condemned the Palestinian attacks, and the US stressed that Israel has the right to defend itself.[74][75] The Organization of the Islamic Conference, the Arab League, Syria, Egypt and Iran condemned Israel's responsive air strikes on militants.[76][77][78][79][80][81]

        Details of individual attacks follow:
         March 9 Palestinians fired two mortar shells into the Eshkol Regional Council.[82]
         In the early evening, at least four Grad missiles fired at Ashdod, Gan Yavne and Kiryat Malachi were intercepted by Iron Dome.[83]
         Late in the evening, several rockets were fired at Beersheba. Some landed on the outskirts of the city, and at least one was intercepted by Iron Dome.[83]
         Six Qassam rockets were fired on the Shaar Hanegev, Sdot Negev and Eshkol regional councils.[84]
         March 10 During the night, a rocket fired at Beersheba damaged a building and activated air raid sirens. Residents fled to shelters. A second rocket fired at the city was intercepted by Iron Dome.[85]
         Two rockets fired at Ashdod were intercepted by Iron Dome.[86]
         A rocket fired at Beersheba from the northern Gaza Strip landed in an open area.[87]
         Two rockets exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[88][89]
         A rocket exploded near Sderot. The Color Red alarm sounded in the area.[90]
         A Qassam rocket exploded in the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[91]
         Two rockets fired at Ashkelon were intercepted by Iron Dome.[92]
         Two rockets exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[93]
         A rocket exploded near Netivot, while another landed near Sderot.[94]
         Shortly before 2 pm, a Qassam rocket exploded in a farm in the Eshkol Regional Council.[95]
         Two rockets hit the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council within the space of an hour.[96]
         Two rockets hit the Eshkol Regional Council.[97]
         Two rockets fired at Ashdod were intercepted by Iron Dome. The Color Red alarm sounded in the city.[98]
         After nightfall, shrapnel from a rocket intercepted over Ashkelon by Iron Dome fell on a home in the city.[99]
         A rocket landed near a farming facility in the Be'er Tuvia Regional Council.[100]
         A Qassam rocket hit a stable near Kiryat Malachi, killing a horse.[101]
         Two Grad rockets were fired at Ashkelon.[100]
         Five rockets exploded in open areas in the Eshkol Regional Council.[102]
         March 11
        Palestinians fired at least 39 rockets into Israel.[103]
         In the morning, two rockets were fired into Israel, one into the Eshkol Regional Council and one at Ashkelon.[104]
         Later in the morning, several rockets were fired at Ashdod, at least one of which was intercepted by Iron Dome.[105]
         Shrapnel from a rocket fired at Beersheba and intercepted by Iron Dome fell on the city. A vehicle and a sewer pipe were damaged and several residents suffered from shock.[106]
         A rocket hit a school in Beersheba,[107] exploding in its courtyard and damaging its outer walls and disconnecting parts of the neighborhood from landlines.[108] A second rocket landed in the middle of a residential neighborhood in the city; fifteen homes were damaged and several residents suffered from shock.[109]
         Two rockets were launched at Ofakim.[110]
         Three Qassam rockets exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[111]
         Two rockets fired at Ashkelon were intercepted by Iron Dome.[112]
         Two Qassam rockets landed in the Eshkol Regional Council.[113]
         Late at night, four Grad rockets were fired at Ashkelon. Some were intercepted by Iron Dome.[114][115]
         March 12
        Palestinians fired 42 rockets into Israel.[116]
         During the night, seven Qassam rockets were fired into the Eshkol Regional Council. One landed in a village and damaged several homes and vehicles.[117][118][119]
         In the morning, three rockets were fired at Beersheba. One was intercepted by Iron Dome and the two others landed outside the city. A warning siren sounded in the city.[120]
         In the morning, five rockets fired at Ashdod were intercepted by Iron Dome. At least one additional rocket landed near the city. The Color Red alarm sounded in the city and surrounding areas.[121][122]
         Two trucks that were transporting goods from Israel into the Gaza Strip were damaged by mortar shells on the Gazan side of the Kerem Shalom border crossing.[123]
         A Qassam rocket landed in the Eshkol Regional Council.[124]
         Two Qassam rockets landed in the Shaar Hanegev Regional Council.[125]
         Around 1 pm, two Grad rockets exploded near Beersheba. Air raid sirens sounded in the city.[126]
         Around 1:30 pm, a Qassam rocket fired from the northern Gaza Strip exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[127]
         Around 1:30 pm, one or two rockets landed near Gedera. Two vehicles were damaged, and several people suffered from shock.[128][129]
         Around 2:30 pm, three rockets exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[130]
         Around 2:30 pm, a rocket exploded in Ashdod. Two people were injured by shrapnel, and several other people suffered from shock. Damage was to caused to stores and a vehicle.[131][132] Two other rockets fired at the city were intercepted by Iron Dome.[133]
         Around 4:30 pm, a rocket exploded near Ofakim.[134]
         Around 5 pm, a rocket fired at Ashdod was intercepted by Iron Dome.[135]
         Around 6:30 pm, two rockets exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[136]
         Around 8 pm, two rockets fired at Ashkelon were intercepted by Iron Dome. A third rocket landed in an open area.[137] Air raid sirens sounded in the city.[138]
         Around 9 pm, two mortar shells were fired into Israel.[139]
         Around 10 pm, a Qassam rocket exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[140]
         March 13
        Despite an informal ceasefire, Palestinians fired at least 7 rockets and 10 mortars at Israel.[54]
         Before morning, a rocket exploded in the Shaar Hanegev Regional Council.[141]
         In the morning, a mortar shell landed in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[142]
         In the morning, a Qassam rocket exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council.[143]
         Around 10:30 am, a mortar shell fired at the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council set off the Color Red alarm in the area, but it apparently landed within the Gaza Strip.[144]
         Around noon, six mortar shells were fired into the Eshkol Regional Council.[145][146]
         Around 7 pm, a Qassam rocket was fired into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[147]
         Around 8 pm, a mortar shell was fired into the Eshkol Regional Council.[148]
         Around 11 pm, a rocket exploded in a parking lot in Netivot. A 40-year-old man was injured by shrapnel, and 20[149] people were treated for shock. Several vehicles were damaged.[150]
         March 14
        Around 7 pm, a Grad rocket fired at Beersheba was intercepted by Iron Dome. A second rocket landed in an empty field. Neither projectile caused injuries or damage.[151] Following the attack, local authorities announced that schools in Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheba, Kiryat Gat, Kiryat Malachi, Gan Yavne and the Bnei Shimon Regional Council would be closed for March 15. Some schools had been open on March 14 after the recent escalation was perceived as having ended.[152] Israel responded to the attack with air strikes on an infiltration tunnel and a rocket launching site.[153]
         March 15
        Palestinians fired a barrage of rockets into Israel. The attacks were praised by Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, who, in a Hezbollah graduation ceremony, lauded that fact that "the resistance was able to force a million and half a million of Israelis to stay in shelters".[154] Details of individual attacks:
         In the morning, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sdot Negev Regional Council near Netivot.[155]
         Several hours later, a Grad rocket fired at Beersheba was intercepted by Iron Dome. Air raid sirens sounded in the area.[156]
         After nightfall, a Grad rocket fired at Ashdod was intercepted by Iron Dome, and air raid sirens sounded in the area.[157]
         Around 9 pm, a rocket was fired into the Eshkol Regional Council.[158]
         Around 9:30 pm, a rocket exploded in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[159]

        [edit] March 16–31
         March 16
        Before morning, Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council.[160]
         March 19
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[161]
         March 20
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[162]
         March 21
        In the evening, Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council. Later, a mortar shell was fired into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council. This was followed moments later by a second mortar shell fired at Israel Defense Forces soldiers near the border fence. No injuries or damage were reported in any of the attacks.[163][164][165]
         March 29
        In the evening, Palestinians fired three mortar shells into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[166]

        [edit] April

        In April, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians launched 10 rockets at Israel in 9 separate attacks. Two of these rockets were launched from the Sinai in Egypt.[167]
         April 4
        Main article: Rocket attacks on Eilat and Aqaba#April 4, 2012

        After nightfall, unidentified terrorists in the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula fired 3 Grad missiles at the resort town of Eilat on Israel's Red Sea coast. No physical injuries or damage were reported, but some residents suffered from shock.[168][169][170][171]
         April 7
        Israel aircraft attacked Gaza militants just as they were about to launch rockets into Israel, injuring two.[172]
         April 8
        In the morning, Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Sdot Negev Regional Council, near Netivot, causing no injuries or damage.[173][174]

        In the evening, a Palestinians rocket fired at Sderot landed in an open area, causing no injuries or damage. The Color Red alarm sounded in the city.[175]
         April 14
        The Ayman Judah Brigades, a division of Fatah, the party that controls the Palestinian Authority, said they fired a rocket into Israel after nightfall. However, the Israel Defense Forces said that no rocket landed in Israel at that time.[176] The Gaza NGO Safety Office, a project of CARE International, reported that a rocket fired at that time from east of Jabalia exploded prematurely.[177]
         April 15
        Palestinians fired Qassam rockets into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council and the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported in either attack.[178][179]
         April 22
        Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[180]
         April 23
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council. For unknown reasons, the Color Red alarm failed to sound. A second rocket was fired into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. Neither attack caused injuries or damage.[181][182]
         April 30
        After nightfall, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage. The Color Red alarm sounded in nearby towns.[183]

        [edit] May
         May 1
        Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[184] Israel retaliated by attacking a tunnel in northern Gaza.[185]
         May 9
        Palestinians launched a Qassam rocket into the Sdot Negev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[186]
         May 15
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[187]

        [edit] June

        In June, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians launched 83 rockets and 11 mortar shells, 3 shooting at Israel in 99 separate attacks. Also had been reported that Two were killed and seven were injured,[188]
         June 1
        Palestinians fired two rockets into Israel, causing no injuries or damage. The attack followed a separate incident in which Palestinian fighter Ahmed Nassir infiltrated Israel and opened fire on soldiers, leading to his own death and that of Golani Brigade St.-Sgt. Netanel Moshiashvili (21). Israel responded with air strikes on terror facilities associated with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, killing one militant and wounding two others.[189][190][191][192]
         June 3
        Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[193]
         June 5
        Palestinians fired a mortar shell into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[194]
         June 16
        Main article: Rocket attacks on Eilat and Aqaba#June 16, 2012

        A 122 mm Grad missile launched from Egypt's Sinai Peninsula or Jordan exploded near Uvda in the southern Arava region.[195][196]
         June 17
        Palestinians fired rockets into Israel. Israel responded the following day with air strikes on a weapons manufacturing facility in the southern Gaza Strip and a terror activity site in the central Gaza Strip.[197] Also Israeli aircraft attacked a motorbike in the northern Gaza Strip, killing two Islamic Jihad operatives who were behind a series of recent sniper attacks along the Gaza border.[198] An Israeli civilian, Said Fashapshe, 35, of Haifa, had been killed in by terrorists in the clashes.[199] Additional Israeli airstrikes killed other two Palestinians.[200]
         June 19
        Ten Grad rockets and over 30 Qassam rockets were fired into Israel, some by Hamas. Four people were injured by shrapnel during one of the attacks.[201][202]
         June 20
        An estimated 65 rockets were fired into southern Israel. One of the rockets directly hit a home in the Sdot Negev Regional Council.[203][204]
         June 21
        Seven rockets were launched into the Eshkol Regional Council And Ashkelon.[205]
         June 22
        Two Qassam rockets fired from the northern Gaza Strip exploded in the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported.[206]
         June 23
        More than 20 rockets were fired into Israel. A 50-year-old resident of Netivot was wounded when a Qassam rocket directly hit a factory in the Sderot industrial zone. He received shrapnel wounds in his neck and was transported to Barzilai Hospital in Ashkelon.[207][208][209]
         June 25
        Despite a truce, two mortar shells were launched from Gaza into Israel.[210] landing in the Eshkol Regional Council.
         June 26
        Palestinians fired four rockets into Israel, of which two were intercepted by the Iron Dome system.[211] A chicken coop was damaged.[212]

        [edit] July

        In July, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians launched 18 rockets and 9 mortar shells at Israel in 28 separate attacks.[213]
         July 5
        In the morning, Palestinian militants in Gaza fired a Qassam rocket toward Israel’s Eshkol Regional Council.[214]
         July 6
        In the morning, Palestinian terrorists fired a Qassam rocket into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[215]
         July 9
        In the afternoon, a Qassam rocket launched from Gaza landed in the Eshkol Regional Council.[216]
         July 16
        In the morning, a Qassam rocket fired from Gaza landed in an open field in the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[217]
         July 24
        In the evening, Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip fired two rockets at Israel. One was intercepted over Ashkelon by the Iron Dome missile defense system. The second rocket hit open territory in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. There were no reports of injuries or damage.[218]
         July 25
        A rocket was fired into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, with no reported damage or casualties.[219]
         July 27
        Palestinians fired two projectiles into agricultural fields in the Eshkol Regional Council.[220]
         July 28
        Two rockets fired from the Gaza Strip exploded in an open area in the Eshkol Regional Council. A woman was lightly injured while running to a shelter. No other injuries or damage were reported.[220]

        [edit] August

        In August, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians fired 21 rockets and 3 mortar shells at Israel in 16 separate attacks.[221]
         August 5
        A Qassam rocket hit Sderot, with no injuries reported.[222]
         August 6
        A Qassam rocket hit the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, with no injuries reported [222]
         August 7
        At 7 am, a rocket launched from Gaza hit the Sha'ar HaNegev Regional Council.[223]
         August 8
        A Qassam rocket hit the Eshkol Regional Council, with no injuries reported.[224]
         August 12
        A Qassam rocket hit the Eshkol Regional Council, with no injuries reported [225]
         August 16
        A rocket was launched from Gaza into the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council, with no injuries reported.[226]
         August 23
        A rocket launched from Gaza fell in the outskirts of a kibbutz in the Eshkol Regional Council[227]
         August 26
        Two rockets hit Sderot, and one hit the Sha'ar HaNegev Regional Council.[228] Two people suffered from shock,[229] and two factories sustained structural damage. Another rocket fell in open areas.[229] An al-Qaeda-affiliated Salafi group, Jamiat ul-Mujahedin Bayt al-Maqdis, claimed responsibility for the attack.[230]
         August 27
        As the school year was beginning,[230] a Qassam rocket exploded outside Sderot in an open area. No harm was caused.[231] An additional rocket landed in Sderot, and a third rocket hit the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[231]
         August 28
        Two rockets and one mortar shell were fired from Gaza into the Eshkol Regional Council, landing in open areas. The attack marked the third continuous day of rocket fire from Gaza.[230] Israel responded by carrying out airstrikes on two weapons production sites and a weapons warehouse in northern Gaza.[232] The "Mujahideen Shura Council of Jerusalem" group claimed responsibility for an attack on Ashkelon with five Grad missiles.[233] Two other mortars were launched during the evening,[234] with no casualties or damage reported.
         August 31
        A rocket exploded in Sderot and directly hit a home. A woman developed acute stress reaction symptoms and received treatment.[235] The house sustained damage. Another rocket exploded in an open area in the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[236]

        [edit] September

        In September, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians fired 17 rockets and 8 mortar shells at Israel in 25 separate attacks.[237]
         September 1 In the evening, Palestinians fired several rockets into Israel, hitting open fields in Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[238]
         September 2 Two Grad missiles were launched from northern Gaza.[238] One missile exploded in a closed field in the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council after passing over Netivot.[238]
         September 4 Two Grad missiles were launched from northern Gaza.[238] One missile exploded in a closed field in the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council after passing Netivot.[238]
         21:35 a rocket fell near Eshkol [239]
         September 6 At 5:40 A.M. two rockets fell near Netivot and the Sdot Negev Regional Council.[240]
         At 17:47 a rocket fell near Eshkol.[241]
         September 7 At 6:20 A.M. two rockets fell near Netivot.[242]
         September 9 A Grad rocket was fired at Beersheba a little past 2 A.M., exploding in an open area.[243]
         A Grad rocket was fired soon after the previous attack and hit two homes in Netivot, causing serious damage to both buildings. The rocket directly hit one of the homes, although the building was empty, and the second home was damaged by shrapnel. Its inhabitant managed to survive by finding shelter in the bathroom.[244] Seven civilians were injured, and four people were treated for shock. Authorities in Beersheba and Ashdod announced that school would be cancelled the following day.[245][244]
         September 11 17:07 A Qassam rocket hit the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[246]
         18:56 A Qassam rocket hit the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[247]
         21:48 Two Qassam rockets hit the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[248]
         September 14
        Two Qassam rockets hit the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council.[249]
         September 28
        21:50 A mortar hit the Eshkol Regional Council.[250]

        [edit] October

        In October, according to the Israel Security Agency's monthly summary, Palestinians fired 116 rockets and 55 mortar shells at Israel in 92 separate attacks.[251]

        In late October, Sderot Mayor David Buskila began a hunger strike outside of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, protesting what he perceived as the lack of attention by the government to Israeli towns that suffer from rocket attacks and demanding that the government intervene in the issue.[252] Five days into Buskila's hunger strike, the Israeli government approved a NIS 270 million plan to increase fortifications for all Israeli towns between 4.5-7 km of the Gaza Strip. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained that "this will bring security to the southern residents. This is something which southern residents have been requesting for a long time."[252]
         October 1
        According to the Israel Police, Palestinians fired a rocket into Israel. No injuries or damage were reported.[253]
         October 4
        In the evening, according to an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson, Palestinians fired a Qassam rocket into the Ashkelon area.[254]
         October 8
        On the morning of the Jewish holiday of Shemini Atzeret, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups fired more than 50 rockets and mortars into Israel. One of the rockets landed in a petting zoo in the Eshkol Regional Council, killing two goats and wounding nine other goats. A worker stated that the zoo was usually "packed with children" but was empty at the time because of the holiday. A residential building was also damaged, but no human injuries were reported. Israelis in the Eshkol Regional Council were instructed to remain in shelters for several hours. This marked the first time since June that Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, claimed responsibility for rocket attacks on Israel. The group's stated aim was vengeance against "Zionist crimes"; this was an allusion to an Israeli air strike the previous day against Muhammad Jerbi, a jihadist militant from Rafah, and Abdullah Mohamed Hassan Maqawi, a member of the The Mujahideen Shura Council of Jerusalem, a Gazan militant group, killing Maqawi and injuring 11.[255][256][257]
         October 9
        Palestinians fired 6 rockets into Israel. No injuries or damage were reported in any of the attacks.
         Around 6 am, a rocket was launched into the Eshkol Regional Council.[258]
         In the afternoon, a Qassam rocket was fired into the Sha'ar Hanegev Regional Council.[259]
         After nightfall, two Qassam rockets landed outside Sderot, and three Grad missiles landed outside Netivot.[258][260]

        Israel responded with an air strike on an infiltration tunnel in the northern Gaza Strip.[261]
         October 10
        In the morning, Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council.[262] Another rocket exploded in an open area in the city of Netivot.[263] In the evening, a Grad missile was fired toward Netivot.[264] No injuries or damage were reported in any of the attacks. Israel responded with an air strike on a Hamas training camp, causing no injuries.[265]
         October 12
        Around 19:30, Palestinians from the Mujahideen Shura Council in the Environs of Jerusalem fired a Grad missile into Netivot, which exploded in the backyard of a family home. Shrapnel pierced the walls of the home and penetrated a child's bedroom. Though there were no physical injuries, two people were hospitalized for acute stress reaction. Israel responded with an air strike on two Mujahideen Shura Council terrorists riding a motorcycle in the northern Gaza Strip. One was killed and the other was injured.[266][267][268]
         October 14
        Palestinians fired two rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage. In a separate incident, Israeli forces targeted Palestinians as they were preparing to fire rockets into Israel, killing one and injuring another.[269]
         October 16
        Palestinians fired a rocket that landed near a home in the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. The building was damaged and two people were treated for acute stress reaction. A second rocket landed in an open area in the Lachish Regional Council. Local residents were urged to stay close to bomb shelters. The attacks followed a threat against Israel by Sinai-based Salafist group Ansar Bayt al-Maqdes. Israel responded with an air strike on a base of Hamas' armed wing in the northern Gaza Strip, causing no injuries.[270][271][272]
         October 17
        Palestinian terrorists fired at least seven rockets into southern Israel, one of which struck a kindergarten. The building was damaged, but no one was in it at the time and no injuries were caused. The other rockets landed in open areas. Israel returned fire at the source of the rockets and hit some of the terrorists, according to Palestinian media.[273]
         October 18
        Palestinians fired a rocket into the Eshkol Regional Council, causing no injuries or damage.[274]
         October 22
        Palestinians fired 7 rockets into the Shaar Hanegev and Ashkelon Coast regional councils. No injuries or damage were reported. In two separate incidents, Israel launched air strikes on Palestinians preparing to fire projectiles into Israel, killing two members of the Popular Resistance Committees.[275][276]
         October 23
        Palestinians fired 3 rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported.[277]
         October 24
        Palestinian military personnel fired at least 80 rockets and mortars into Israel; most landed in the Eshkol, Lachish and Ashkelon Coast regional councils. Five people were injured; two of the victims were critically wounded and were evacuated by helicopter to Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba. A house was also reportedly damaged. At least 8 rockets were intercepted by the Iron Dome defense system. Municipalities in southern Israel cancelled school. Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, claimed responsibility for the attacks. Israeli air strikes on rocket launching squads killed four Hamas militants throughout the day.[278][279][280][281]
         October 25
        Despite an informal ceasefire, Palestinians launched a mortar shell into the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damage were reported.[282]
         October 28
        Overnight, Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council. In the morning, a third Qassam rocket[283] and two Grad missiles exploded near Beersheba.[284] The Popular Resistance Committees claimed responsibility for one of the Grad missiles.[285][286] The Beersheba municipality cancelled school; Mayor Rubik Danilovich explained that the decision resulted from experience, saying, "We've had four direct hits on schools, and each of those times was when we were told to resume normalcy."[286] In the afternoon, another rocket landed near Ashkelon.[287]
         October 29
        Throughout the night and morning, Palestinians fired 20 rockets and mortars at Sderot and the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council. Residents of these towns were cautioned to stay within 15 seconds of reinforced "secure rooms" for protection in case a rocket fell.[288][289]
         October 30
        in 7:44 in the morning a rocket hit the outskirts of Dimona,[290] no injuries or damage reported. That was the first time 45km rocket had been used.
         October 31
        In the morning, Palestinians fired two Qassam rockets into the Eshkol Regional Council. One rocket exploded in an open area within a town, but caused no injuries or damage.[291]

        Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

        by dhonig on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:34:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Again, I'm not sure why Israel would expect (12+ / 0-)

        a population under occupation for 45 years, under blockade, whose land is still being stolen and colonized, to acquiesce to that fate.

        Sticks and stones may break your bones. So those are good choices for bone-breaking.

        by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:21:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  RE: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      poco, corvo

      Let all the Bush tax cuts expire

      by Paleo on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:50:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well th IAF had been hitting Gaza with the same (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo

      regularity in October as in SEPTEMBER.

      So where would YOU have the timeline start?

      •  November 11, (0+ / 0-)

        1918

        Not November 2012.

        Not June 1967.

        Not even 1948.

        Nope, 1918. The breakup up of Ottoman Empire, the British Protectorate, and everything that followed really forms the basis for all the issues in the area.

        Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

        by dhonig on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 10:12:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  1948 huh? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lyvwyr101, protectspice

          Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were evicted, fled or murdered by Jewish terrorists.
          As a result of that ethnic cleansing the Gaza strip was filled with refugees.
          80% of Gazans are refugees or descendants of refugees.
          Israel has spent 45 years as a colonial and occupying force of the West Bank and Gaza.
          Israel has blockaded Gaza for 6 years from air land and sea.
          50% of the population of Gaza are under 18 and most of their lives have been destroyed by Israeli violence. Think for one minute what terrorism is, what it does to children and what it means psychologically for the rest of the lives of those children as they grow to adulthood.

          You don't need 1948, not even 1982, only a dickhead pretends Palestinians need anything more than living memory to throw rockets into your desert.

          Republicans make America feel like the scariest place on Earth from the inside, and look bat-shit crazy from the outside.

          by UniC on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 02:33:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  US attitudes - today's CNN poll (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    whizdom, johnny wurster

    link pdf
    Sympathize with Israelies - 59%, Palestinians 13%
    Was Israel justified in taking military actions against Hamas - 57% unjustified 25%

  •  Glenn Greenwald on the conflict (12+ / 0-)

    heading up to 2,00 comments on the guardian site

    another 100 on commondreams.org

    Stop pretending the US is an uninvolved, helpless party in the Israeli assault on Gaza
    The Obama administration's unstinting financial, military and diplomatic support for Israel is a key enabling force in the conflict

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

    •  From the link (5+ / 0-)
      it's just been staggering to see how tilted US media discourse is: Israeli officials and pro-Israel "experts" are endlessly paraded across the screen while Palestinian voices are exceedingly rare; the fact of the 45-year-old brutal occupation and ongoing Israeli dominion over Gaza is barely mentioned; meanwhile, every primitive rocket that falls harmlessly near Israeli soil is trumpeted with screaming headlines while the carnage and terror in Gaza is mentioned, if at all, as an afterthought. Two cartoons perfectly summarize this coverage: here and here.
  •  Elites Will Make Gazans of Us All (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Diane Gee, corvo, Assaf, lyvwyr101

    title of today's Chris Hedges article

    http://www.commondreams.org/...

  •  Look, I agree with you... (4+ / 0-)

    that both sides in this conflict are bad actors, but your attitude is clearly biased for the Palestinian side. Just some points you make:

    Over 4.5 days, Palestinians have fired more rockets into Israel than in the previous full year.
    So you admit that Hamas has in fact been attacking Israel continually for the last year.
    So, to sum it up: what we are witnessing now in and around Gaza is neither an "escalation" that got out of hand, nor a "tit-for-tat". It is a large-scale, pre-planned Israeli operation.
    So you are suggesting that tit-for-tat is bad, but actually planning something to respond to random attacks on civilian targets is even more wrong? Really, really bad? Should Israel have just randomly lobbed some rockets into Gaza? Would that have been the “nice” response?

    So basically, Israel is continually attacked, randomly, by well-financed terrorists on its borders and when it responds with a concerted, planned action, they have committed an atrocity. Right.

    How would the United States respond if terrorists in Mexico started lobbing 3-5 rockets a day into El Paso over the course of YEARS? Calmly and diplomatically, without rancor and without violence? Right.

    And this is always the story from the anti-Israel media. Israel must respond differently from every other nation in the history of the world. It must meekly consent to be attacked. It must never, ever act “angry,” or rashly because that “proves” they are wrong. The only thing worse than an angry black man is an angry Jew.

    Only Israel must give up things in “negotiations.” When Hamas is offered 95% of what they ask for it’s perfectly OK to walk away and it’s Israel’s fault for not giving them everything they want and more? Right.

    Israel is a tiny nation surrounded by murderous enemies sworn to not only wipe out the country, but to kill every Jew on the planet. But it’s Israel who is always at fault. Right.

    How about we start with the Middle-Eastern Muslim world collectively admitting Israel’s right to exist? How about we start with the Middle-Eastern Muslim world admitting that Jews have a right to live at all. How about we begin with the Middle-Eastern Muslim world doing something, anything for the “Palestinian” people other than simply giving them rockets to shoot into Israel and egging them on to do the dirty work in the war they so clearly want? How about the Middle-Eastern Muslim world provide the Palestinians with a “right of return” to anywhere in the Middle-Eastern Muslim world with a job waiting and housing and financial support until they can get on their feet? But of course the Middle-Eastern Muslim world needs the Palestinians to be poor and starving so they can whip up hatred against Israel and Jews around the world. It’s simply too profitable and politically advantageous for the Middle-Eastern Muslim world to keep the Palestinians downtrodden and the Israelis under fire. The Middle-Eastern Muslim world is the instigator and the perpetrator of everything bad in the middle east.

    But it’s all Israel’s fault, isn’t it?

    Right.

    •  Very well written (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo

      paragraph about the Muslim world.

      I question what good Israel is doing by this aggression, especially considering your points here.

      I believe Israel (and especially Netanyahu) could have worked much harder on a peace solution that they have for years.  Their continuing to build in the West Bank, etc. -- the list goes on.

      If we look at our drone attacks in Pakistan and the rockets entering Israel, how do we support Israel's aggression in this conflict?  "No country on earth would tolerate missiles raining down," Obama said.

      •  Well I agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        indie17

        The settlements are a problem. Netanyahu's belligerence is a problem.

        But while Hamas is firing rockets every day, and the rest of the Muslims in surrounding nations and across the middle east continually call for the annihilation of Israel, deny the Holocaust, call for killing all Jews everywhere, I kind of wonder how Israel can act differently.

        I sort of hope Obama and Clinton can do something before this gets worse. I hope Israel will call for a cease fire before it all goes to hell.

        But much of the problem is Hamas, Iran and the rest.

        No nation would put up with what Israel puts up with.

    •  what a stupid comment... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, bluedust, DarkLadyNyara, lyvwyr101

      ...I don’t know where to start.

      Well I start with this nugget.

      How would the United States respond if terrorists in Mexico started lobbing 3-5 rockets a day into El Paso over the course of YEARS? Calmly and diplomatically, without rancor and without violence? Right.
      I'll counter it with just as stupid an argument.

      How do you think Mexico would respond if we walled off Tijuana limited access and embargoed the area and occasionally killed hundreds of people with our most advanced military equipment.

      The reason there will never be peace there is both sides are assholes.  Israel’s idea of peace is Palestinians need to be peaceful and acquiesce to all of Israel's demands and Hamas won't even admit Israel should exist.

      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

      by delver rootnose on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:31:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What I don't think most people get (5+ / 0-)

    including apparently the diarist, is that people are so tired of this dispute and the endless rhetoric.  This includes the new no, it's "not he hit me first, mom."  This resolves nothing.

    Peace must be imposed on this region, once and for all.  Time to stop the endless blame game and ancient rights rhetoric and get a deal done.  

    Recognition of Palestinian state not just in Israel, but in other middle east countries as well, and recognition of Israel's right to exit.

    "To recognize error, to cut losses, to alter course, is the most repugnant option in government." Historian Barbara Tuchman

    by Publius2008 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 08:48:56 AM PST

  •  Noam (13+ / 0-)
  •  I'm not sure why Israel persists in its (14+ / 0-)

    occupation, colonization and blockading of Palestinian territories since Israel appears to be so frightened by the resistance the natives put up.

    Sticks and stones may break your bones. So those are good choices for bone-breaking.

    by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:05:34 AM PST

    •  It reminds me of this quote all too much (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      beltane, Assaf, lyvwyr101

      "But, as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other."

      - Thomas Jefferson to John Holmes, (discussing slavery and the Missouri question), Monticello, 22 April 1820.

      There was a terror of ending slavery in the U.S. due to the violent slave uprisings on plantations from near this period to the Civil War, in the hundreds IIRC, and so we maintained slavery in no small part simply because we weren't sure what would happen if we let the slaves go; people were afraid they would mass murder the plantation owners (they were 10:1 in the South at that time).

    •  It doesnt know (0+ / 0-)

      how to stop.  Maybe we can help

  •  I'm having trouble believing (8+ / 0-)

    that the air strikes against Gaza have anyting to do with "eliminating" a "threat."

    For one thing, it isn't the rocket installations that are being targeted, but mostly homes.

    So is Israel out to eliminate the Hamas leadership?  Strangely, it seems reasonable to assume that when Israel is out to blast you to bits, you tend to avoid your home.  So I'd have to say that blowing up Hamas Guy's home doesn't have much to do with eliminating Hamas Guy himself.

    So what does this accomplish?  Material damage and, of course, "collateral damage."  Nothing more.

  •  the update is no more a "fact" than the rest (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JNEREBEL

    it's not about "increased missile-launching capability." It's about increase missile launches. As for what "everybody" knows, again, opinion. More important, opinion refuted by outcry in southern Israel about the country's failure to respond to the increased launches.

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

    by dhonig on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:28:59 AM PST

    •  Oh, Israel's leader are *very* good at ignoring (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brecht

      outcries from the south, the north, the center and any other parts of the country, when it suits their own agenda.

      In case you haven't noticed, half a million people went out into the streets a year ago with an outcry.

      Since then, the policies have gone to the diametric opposite of that 2011 outcry.

      They could have easily defused any political pressure from the south (and there wasn't that much to begin with), had they not had this operation already planned and dying to be unleashed.

  •  I am praying that your peaceful voices are heard. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dexter, Assaf, lyvwyr101

    This is a sad day for Israel.  
    This is a sad day for Palestine.

    Howard Dean will always be my president.

    by 4democracy on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:46:07 AM PST

  •  This is what Obama voters voted for. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, protectspice

    n/t

    To label any subject unsuitable for comedy is to admit defeat. -- Peter Sellers

    by krikkit4 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:46:17 AM PST

  •  Thanks for this diary. (7+ / 0-)

    The moral cowardice of the A-list "progressive" bloggers across the blogosphere and the front-pagers here is never in danger of ceasing to be an issue.

    Obama's full-throated support for the massacre currently taking place all but insures that feckless immoral posturing and steaming piles of hypocrisy will remain the order of the day.

    To label any subject unsuitable for comedy is to admit defeat. -- Peter Sellers

    by krikkit4 on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:53:34 AM PST

  •  Why Americans Won't Embrace Palestine (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, lyvwyr101

    Quote:

    "Zionism, like democracy, is a failing experiment that has only succeeded in turning Israel and the United States, respectively, into that which we'd sought to distinguish ourselves."

    Mike Flannigan, "Why Americans Won't Embrace Palestine"

    JP
    http://welcomebacktopottersville.blogspot.com

    Defending bad taste and liberalism since 2005.

    by jurassicpork on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 09:54:53 AM PST

  •  You want facts - see link below (0+ / 0-)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    And for the record ISRAEL IS NOT OCCUPYING GAZA

  •  Assaf- I would like your opinion on something (4+ / 0-)

    in the diary (I will attempt to keep things civil!)

    You say this:

    This type of ebb and flow of violence has been going on at the Gaza front, both before and after Cast Lead. In short, "tit-for-tat", "uptick, downtick", or "response" and "counter-response" are appropriate terms to describe what happened until last Wednesday.
    I would tend to agree.  There seem to be many scale of response.  Israel tends to undergo this sort of thing for awhile, then engage in massive retaliation (i.e. Lebanon 2006, Gaza 2009, situation here).  An extreme argument in the opposite direction would be to accept some minimal level of continued violence en route to a (hoped-for) larger peace.  So--maintain talks even if a rocket is launched/IDF launches a targeted attack on a military installation.

    In the middle is scaled response--rockets get launched, targets get hit.  This seems to accomplish nothing but eventual escalation.

    As a citizen of Israel, what do you think the proper military handling of this 'noise' should be?

  •  Viewed "objectively" (0+ / 0-)

    (which is to say, without reference to history or causes) what's happening is clear: Gaza is getting the shit kicked out of it by Israel.

    Gaza is getting very badly beaten up, and Israel is doing the beating. Israel never got beaten up by Gaza. It got provoked by Gaza and threatened by Gaza, not beaten up.

    The whys and wherefores of this situation might be debatable, but the facts of it are not. Three Israelis have been killed. Over a hundred Gazans have been killed, and it appears that many of them are about to be be killed.

    As police detective Joe Friday used to say, "Just the facts Maam, just the facts".

    "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

    by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:26:30 AM PST

    •  Many MORE of them, I mean. (0+ / 0-)

      "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

      by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:28:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's nonsense. Hamas is a genocidal group (0+ / 1-)
      Recommended by:
      Hidden by:
      merrywidow

      commited solely to the destruction of Israel and the death of as many Jews as possible.  Objectively, then, the residents of Gaza have accepted a coup that ousted a more moderate Fatah government and are suffering consequences as a result.  Hamas is being accepted by the Palestinians as a voice for Gaza, it is a voice of hate and violence which begets hate and violence.
      Use all the facts, ma'am, don't ignore the inconvenient ones.  

      The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

      by Memory Corrupted on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 09:56:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are offering reasons for, and (0+ / 0-)

        justifications of what Israel is doing to Gaza. I was merely presenting the facts of what it is doing. The actuality of a situation - the present tense of it - speaks more forcefully to me than any amount of explanation as to why it is occurring.

        If an outside observer, without knowing anything about the long standing hostilities involved, were to simply look at what is occurring, he would undoubtedly be very sympathetic to the people of Gaza.

        "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

        by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:55:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was trying to point out that people (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          native

          can not live in a present moment alone.  We remember the past and can project a future and that's probably the key difference in mankind from the rest of the animal kingdom.  Ignoring that makes any assessment such an observer would have as irrelevent to the issue.

          The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

          by Memory Corrupted on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 11:53:58 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ah, I see - it's irrelevant you say. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Memory Corrupted

            So what our theoretically objective observer sees now with his own eyeballs - namely Israel kicking the shit out of Gaza for all to see - is irrelevant to the issue? The issue being, I suppose, what happened in the past according to a certain perspective?

            We have a clash of histories here, a clash of two mythologies, two ideologies, neither one of which is absolutely true, though both are partially true.

            But the assessment of a disinterested observer would not be irrelevant in this case. On the contrary, such an observer would be best able to judge the situation objectively, for what it is. Because the present is a sure key to the past. If you see someone beating the crap out of someone else now, it's a good bet he has done so in the past. Not vice versa.

            "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

            by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 04:02:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not really. What I think irrelevent is to (0+ / 0-)

              make a judgement based only on the information one wants to include.  If I go back one day that same observer would likely say "Geez, look at all those missles those guys are shooting into Israel."   Following your logic, they shot missles now so they did so in the past and will do so again.  It completely supports Israels response, is not an invalid assumption, but it also ignores the roots of the whole war to being with.  It's just not possible to determine the direction of a line from a single point (weak analogy but I'm confident you get the idea).

              Basically, I was calling BS on the argument that the uninformed are objective.  I fully believe that not only the more uninformed a judgement is the more irrelevent it is but also that objectivity is unrelated to the amount of information.  Just look at the teaparty. No data and no objectivity.

              As an aside.  I agree that how people respond to a stimulus is important in determining an assessment of those people.  But people are far too complex and eventually everyone reaches the point of having to respond in a way that might be contrary to their core beliefs. That applies to both sides.

              The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

              by Memory Corrupted on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 06:26:08 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I read this comment as a very detailed, extensive (0+ / 0-)

                pile of BS. Obfuscation par excellence.

                with no attempt to shovel the glimpse
                into the ditch of what each one means.

                To quote Bob Dylan.

                "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

                by native on Fri Nov 23, 2012 at 08:53:53 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  HD'ed for "genocide" (0+ / 0-)

        if I can't accuse the Israelis of wanting all Palestinians dead (or gone from "Their" land somehow) then you can't accuse the Palestinians of that either!

        no two state solution = palestinians gone somehow

        •  Please do not "HD" or HR anyone (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Memory Corrupted

          for expressing an opinion you don't agree with. I am more offended by this pathetic attempt at censorship than by anything that might be said by someone involved in an argument. Thank you.

          "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

          by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 04:41:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

          There's validity in arguing the use of the word 'genocide' but an HD is very poorly used in this context.  Should I HD you for misuse of the HD?  I wouldn't and you should remove that rating and begin defending the evil Hamas now.

          The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

          by Memory Corrupted on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 06:30:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I got 8 hide ratings for using that word (0+ / 0-)

            so I did think that word was an issue, when people really mean Ethnic Cleansing, not necessarily dead, but gone.

            •  I don't know how you used the word or why (0+ / 0-)

              people HD'd the post.  But to me, what other people did doesn't rationaize this event and I've only HD'd once, and that was to an obvious troll's diary (which was rapidly hidden).  
              On reconsideration of the initial post, the word was used to imply the elimination of an entire religious element within a particular nation.  In that context, since the Hamas charter calls for the death or expulsion of all Jews from "Palestine" I feel the word still applies, despite its emotional content.  Choice bits of their charter:
              -  Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims.
              - Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!
              - "Surat Al-Imran (III), verses 109-111 Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors."

              Sounds like "kill them all" to me.

              The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

              by Memory Corrupted on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 10:37:11 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Israelis feel the same way, but again (0+ / 0-)

                most people everywhere want the same things, to be happy and avoid suffering, warm place to sleep, food for the family.....Palestinians do not want all jews dead and most Israelis are less genocidal that American Zionists I know.

                Leaders suck, THEY want power and violence gets them power... people are encouraged to hate others by leaders

                •  So? I said Hamas, I didn't say Palestinians. (0+ / 0-)

                  I also said that the Gaza residents were suffering as a result of the Hamas extremism.  
                  Of course no group of more than one person agrees 100 percent on everything, that wasn't the point.  The point is you HD'd me for what I believe is no good reason. I.e. that I applied an emotional term to a people (which I didn't)and you said unless I appplied it to a citizenry i was being out-of-bounds.

                  if I can't accuse the Israelis of wanting all Palestinians dead (or gone from "Their" land somehow) then you can't accuse the Palestinians of that either!

                  The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking. A. A. Milne

                  by Memory Corrupted on Wed Nov 21, 2012 at 05:24:36 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  And further, such an outside observer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    merrywidow

    would undoubtedly see Israel as being the aggressor, as the cruel belligerent.

    Now, you might regard this as a superficial understanding of the situation, and you might be right. The pros and cons from both sides of this dispute have already been skilfully debated. It's very complicated for sure, and neither side comes across as being at all virtuous.

    But if we want an objective viewpoint, the closest we'll get to it is from someone who is outside the conflict, who has no horse in the race, and who simply observes what is happening, at this particular moment.

    From that perspective, Israel's behavior looks very bad indeed.

    "The pessimists may be right in the end but an optimist has a better time getting there" -- Samuel Clemons

    by native on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 11:23:34 AM PST

Meteor Blades, Paleo, grollen, Timaeus, 4democracy, native, PeterHug, just another vet, TX Unmuzzled, hnichols, litho, Wee Mama, ask, Time Waits for no Woman, MillieNeon, boadicea, bewert, SneakySnu, annan, Deward Hastings, vacantlook, Brecht, krikkit4, corvo, orson, sofia, skyounkin, babatunde, ScottAC, turdraker, jj24, mightymouse, Land of Enchantment, skywriter, martini, poco, esquimaux, Keone Michaels, BlueInARedState, AoT, Lefty Coaster, triv33, el cid, bumbi, callmecassandra, Timothy J, Elasg, sea note, ZenTrainer, jobird, cpresley, One Pissed Off Liberal, dotdot, fabucat, Castine, devis1, jayb, david mizner, heathlander, artisan, Aunt Martha, martyinsfo, letsgetreal, jnhobbs, Fireshadow, OIL GUY, CT Hank, Don midwest, ImpeccableLiberalCredentials, KingGeorgetheTurd, Aureas2, Buckeye Nut Schell, canoe dragger, beltane, tofumagoo, MrJayTee, No Exit, elpacifico66, Notreadytobenice, Karl Rover, protectspice, LaFeminista, Celtic Merlin, FudgeFighter, don mikulecky, Carol in San Antonio, mkor7, UnaSpenser, Eyz, sfarkash, Flyswatterbanjo, futureliveshere, Larsstephens, Christy1947, David Harris Gershon, mookins, Dexter, ramara, Johnny Q, USHomeopath, allenjo, Lost Left Coaster, Montreal Progressive, Teenom, Haf2Read, soysauce, muddy boots, docmidwest, Fire bad tree pretty, stargaze, bluedust, cailloux, Hayate Yagami, ratcityreprobate, GrannyGeek, Mentatmark, quill, anodnhajo, angry marmot, Mindful Nature, IndieGuy, Lonely Texan, 420 forever, InAntalya, whizdom, Victim of Circumstance, Diane Gee, BradyB, greblos, merrywidow, goodpractice, Smoh, boriskamite, listencloser, Jilly W

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site