Heam Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 I've compiled a synopsis of the current military conflict/humanitarian disaster in Gaza, along with its historical and regional contexts. I thought FDR listeners would find this of interest, and I sent a copy to Mike who forwarded it to a researcher that is currently working on compiling data for a presentation for FDR. Info included: Military positioning, brief summary of the crisis Gaza geography and demographics Background info on Hamas, its history Background info on Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9 Debunking Israeli propaganda Affects on children Regional context 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 What is missing from your report is the other side. I find it very peculiar that the picture you paint, looks like Israel is attacking for no reason what so ever, do you seriously not know that Palestenians have been shelling Israel with rockets and mortar fire? Do you really not know that Palestinians are aggressing as well? When Israelis declared truth, they got thosands of rockets landing on their territory, which is why they went in, has nothing to do with Arab springs or anything else. I am not sure what this statement means "only x of Jews were killed as compared to" are Jewish lives less valuable? This statement amazes me and I hear it over and over, "well only a few Jews were killed in attacks by palestenians" meaning what? Its a war of numbers? All you did is taken one side, and in doing so, will not help with anything, but will make things worse. By the way I am curious on your thoughts on 1)Beslan school massacre 2)Moscow subway bombings 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heam Posted July 22, 2014 Author Share Posted July 22, 2014 What is missing from your report is the other side. I find it very peculiar that the picture you paint, looks like Israel is attacking for no reason what so ever, do you seriously not know that Palestenians have been shelling Israel with rockets and mortar fire? Do you really not know that Palestinians are aggressing as well? When Israelis declared truth, they got thosands of rockets landing on their territory, which is why they went in, has nothing to do with Arab springs or anything else. I am not sure what this statement means "only x of Jews were killed as compared to" are Jewish lives less valuable? This statement amazes me and I hear it over and over, "well only a few Jews were killed in attacks by palestenians" meaning what? Its a war of numbers? All you did is taken one side, and in doing so, will not help with anything, but will make things worse. By the way I am curious on your thoughts on 1)Beslan school massacre 2)Moscow subway bombings When a nuclear-armed state with tanks, attack helicopters, F-16 bombers, naval warships, and the full backing of the world's sole superpower's political and media apparatuses invades an impoverished ghettoized enclave which it has placed under siege for 8 years, I think that is by any sane, rational person's standards an act of aggression. And when the kill ratio is 600:1, Palestinian to Israelis (literally), it is obvious there is a power disparity there. I post this in order to illustrate who is the aggressor. Zionism is one of the pet projects of the US's oligarchy and the fact of the matter is that Israeli society has the military advantage and can pull its boot off the throat of the Palestinians at any time. It opts not to and instead continue to inflict a horror cinema upon Gaza on the US tax donkey's dime. Israel has no shortage of good press in the West, and it is one of the main reasons why it is afforded the diplomatic cover and military aid to continue slaughtering civilians en masse. That needs to end and this is an illustration of the abject sickness of an Israeli society which should not be supported any more than Hamas should. The difference is that one is considered a terrorist organization, while the other is dressed up in a neoliberal clown costume and paraded before the eyes of Americans as the Middle East's "sole democracy." Calling the Palestinians "aggressors" against Israelis is like calling Jews in the Warsaw ghettos aggressors against Nazis. History inflicts its horrors again and again. The cycle needs to stop. Israel is a country in the OECD with a first world standard of living while Palestinians live in squalor and rely on a system of tunnels dug underground to get basic items for survival. These are a people so devastated that they have had to resort to building with mud bricks because of a shortage of building materials due to Israeli blockade and siege. Meanwhile you have Tel Aviv a couple hundred miles away which is one of the most prosperous cities on the planet. Do you see the problem there? Do you understand why, given these circumstances, I would paint a picture where the focus is placed on Palestinian suffering? There is far more of it to go around. As for my thoughts on violence in Russia, you'll have to wait until I release independent research on it. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 When a nuclear-armed state with tanks, attack helicopters, F-16 bombers, naval warships, and the full backing of the world's sole superpower's political and media apparatuses invades an impoverished ghettoized enclave which it has placed under siege for 8 years, I think that is by any sane, rational person's standards an act of aggression. And when the kill ratio is 600:1, Palestinian to Israelis (literally), it is obvious there is a power disparity there. I post this in order to illustrate who is the aggressor. Zionism is one of the pet projects of the US's oligarchy and the fact of the matter is that Israeli society has the military advantage and can pull its boot off the throat of the Palestinians at any time. It opts not to and instead continue to inflict a horror cinema upon Gaza on the US tax donkey's dime. Israel has no shortage of good press in the West, and it is one of the main reasons why it is afforded the diplomatic cover and military aid to continue slaughtering civilians en masse. That needs to end and this is an illustration of the abject sickness of an Israeli society which should not be supported any more than Hamas should. The difference is that one is considered a terrorist organization, while the other is dressed up in a neoliberal clown costume and paraded before the eyes of Americans as the Middle East's "sole democracy." Calling the Palestinians "aggressors" against Israelis is like calling Jews in the Warsaw ghettos aggressors against Nazis. History inflicts its horrors again and again. The cycle needs to stop. Israel is a country in the OECD with a first world standard of living while Palestinians live in squalor and rely on a system of tunnels dug underground to get basic items for survival. These are a people so devastated that they have had to resort to building with mud bricks because of a shortage of building materials due to Israeli blockade and siege. Meanwhile you have Tel Aviv a couple hundred miles away which is one of the most prosperous cities on the planet. Do you see the problem there? Do you understand why, given these circumstances, I would paint a picture where the focus is placed on Palestinian suffering? There is far more of it to go around. As for my thoughts on violence in Russia, you'll have to wait until I release independent research on it. Again I see so called kill ratios, to follow your logic, when a person is shooting at your feet, in no way shape or form you have the right to shoot back? As far as being impoverished, how is this Israels problem? The whole of Africa, the most of middle east is impoverished. Israelis are not holding anyone in concentration camp, to compare the two either stems from lack of your knowledge, or intellectual dishonesty. You want the cycle to stop? When Israel retreated from west bank as Palestenians demanded, do you know what happened after? Thousands of rockets were launched from that territory into Israel. You keep on talking about shortages, they dont seem to have shortages when it comes to buying expensive rockets and weapons. Blown up night clubs blown up buses, blown up farmers markets, blown up wedding ceremonies, rockets blowing up preschools. And here you are talking about death ratio? What is your solution to stop the cycle? Blaming Israel, and not caring for Israelis life is nothing new, you are inventing a bicycle here. What is the real solution? Yes I understand that when you take the subject in absolute vacuum as you have done, then you will come to such conclusions. Advancement of a country has zero to do with anything at all. It doesnt mean that the country that is less advance somehow has the right to attack it. You named many qualifiers which are facts, but have no connections. If you want to be honest, then you simply can not look at one side only 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heam Posted July 22, 2014 Author Share Posted July 22, 2014 Again I see so called kill ratios, to follow your logic, when a person is shooting at your feet, in no way shape or form you have the right to shoot back? As far as being impoverished, how is this Israels problem? The whole of Africa, the most of middle east is impoverished. Israelis are not holding anyone in concentration camp, to compare the two either stems from lack of your knowledge, or intellectual dishonesty. You want the cycle to stop? When Israel retreated from west bank as Palestenians demanded, do you know what happened after? Thousands of rockets were launched from that territory into Israel. You keep on talking about shortages, they dont seem to have shortages when it comes to buying expensive rockets and weapons. Blown up night clubs blown up buses, blown up farmers markets, blown up wedding ceremonies, rockets blowing up preschools. And here you are talking about death ratio? What is your solution to stop the cycle? Blaming Israel, and not caring for Israelis life is nothing new, you are inventing a bicycle here. What is the real solution? Yes I understand that when you take the subject in absolute vacuum as you have done, then you will come to such conclusions. Advancement of a country has zero to do with anything at all. It doesnt mean that the country that is less advance somehow has the right to attack it. You named many qualifiers which are facts, but have no connections. If you want to be honest, then you simply can not look at one side only I have already stated my rationale for including a "kill ratio," which is that it provides an illustration as to who is an aggressor in this situation amid the propaganda fog which is belched out of the dank furnaces of American mainstream media. I take it that you did not fully read my post because this fact floats well over your head and you have continued to repeat essentially the exact same fundamental arguments that you made in your first post and even misconstrued my points to suit your narrative. For example, from my statement: Israel is a country in the OECD with a first world standard of living while Palestinians live in squalor and rely on a system of tunnels dug underground to get basic items for survival. These are a people so devastated that they have had to resort to building with mud bricks because of a shortage of building materials due to Israeli blockade and siege. Meanwhile you have Tel Aviv a couple hundred miles away which is one of the most prosperous cities on the planet. You replied: Advancement of a country has zero to do with anything at all. It doesnt mean that the country that is less advance somehow has the right to attack it. My original statement ties in with the fact that there is a power disparity here. How you misconstrued this to mean that Palestinians are justified in attacking Israel because Israel has more money is beyond me and I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are confused. Unfortunately, you aren't even arguing with me, but a projection you've canvassed over your screen. I would appreciate that you give me the respect of acknowledging my points. I'm not going to sit here and patiently try to reason with somebody flittering through propaganda cue cards and pretending I don't exist. Furthermore, you seem to demonstrate serious ignorance of the conflict. Israel never pulled out of the West Bank, it maintains 300,000 settlers there and an enormous occupation force policing the area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#Israeli_occupation Also the fact that you can sit here with a straight face and ask me how Palestinian poverty is Israel's problem while it maintains a full-blown occupation and economic/military siege over the West Bank and Gaza, respectively, demonstrates that you are completely disconnected from the reality of this conflict and that you did not even read the research posted in the OP. I'm not here to cater to your insecurities about an apartheid state that you seem vehement about defending despite overwhelming evidence highlighting its evil nature. Show some respect, please. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devon Gibbons Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 to follow your logic, when a person is shooting at your feet, in no way shape or form you have the right to shoot back? To follow your logic, 1 Israeli = 600 Palestinians. That's a bit fascist... 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 To follow your logic, 1 Israeli = 600 Palestinians. That's a bit fascist... I never made such logic, point to where I said that its ok that Palestinians are dying? And lets keep calling each other fascist shall we, that is if you want to have an intelligent conversation. Lets see if I can draw this out more clearly. When people say "Yes, but Israelis are also dying, so you simply can not simply state that only one side is the aggressor" people like Waleed bring up ratios, for what purpose? What does him bringing up ratios has to do with anything? Does the fact that Israelis are dying no longer matters? And this is why I say that ratios have nothing to do with anything. A better analogy would be, England was at fault in WW2 since more Germans died I have already stated my rationale for including a "kill ratio," which is that it provides an illustration as to who is an aggressor in this situation amid the propaganda fog which is belched out of the dank furnaces of American mainstream media. I take it that you did not fully read my post because this fact floats well over your head and you have continued to repeat essentially the exact same fundamental arguments that you made in your first post and even misconstrued my points to suit your narrative. For example, from my statement: Israel is a country in the OECD with a first world standard of living while Palestinians live in squalor and rely on a system of tunnels dug underground to get basic items for survival. These are a people so devastated that they have had to resort to building with mud bricks because of a shortage of building materials due to Israeli blockade and siege. Meanwhile you have Tel Aviv a couple hundred miles away which is one of the most prosperous cities on the planet. You replied: Advancement of a country has zero to do with anything at all. It doesnt mean that the country that is less advance somehow has the right to attack it. My original statement ties in with the fact that there is a power disparity here. How you misconstrued this to mean that Palestinians are justified in attacking Israel because Israel has more money is beyond me and I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are confused. Unfortunately, you aren't even arguing with me, but a projection you've canvassed over your screen. I would appreciate that you give me the respect of acknowledging my points. I'm not going to sit here and patiently try to reason with somebody flittering through propaganda cue cards and pretending I don't exist. Furthermore, you seem to demonstrate serious ignorance of the conflict. Israel never pulled out of the West Bank, it maintains 300,000 settlers there and an enormous occupation force policing the area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#Israeli_occupation Also the fact that you can sit here with a straight face and ask me how Palestinian poverty is Israel's problem while it maintains a full-blown occupation and economic/military siege over the West Bank and Gaza, respectively, demonstrates that you are completely disconnected from the reality of this conflict and that you did not even read the research posted in the OP. I'm not here to cater to your insecurities about an apartheid state that you seem vehement about defending despite overwhelming evidence highlighting its evil nature. Show some respect, please. A ratio doesnt constitute an aggressor. There is no logic behind your ratio at all, since rockets are flying into Israel in thousands. And I will repeat the same argument as it seems to be flying right over your head. Lobbing rockets into another territory is an act of aggression, the fact that this rocket has not killed anyone is irrelevant, this is equal to saying that if a person is shooting at the ground in front of you you have no right to shoot back at him. Your example of tunnels to get basic needs is false, look up what the tunnels are actually used for. Power desperaty? So if you have a gun and I have a bat, I can bludgeon you to death because you have more firepower, and you have no right to respond to me because I have less power? This is your logic? I can say the same right back at you. Unfortunately, you aren't even arguing with me, but a projection you've canvassed over your screen. I would appreciate that you give me the respect of acknowledging my points. I'm not going to sit here and patiently try to reason with somebody flittering through propaganda cue cards and pretending I don't exist. Yes, Israel retreated from some territory of the west bank to get attacks in return. So when Israelis remove some settlements and get rocket fire in return, that means what ? To me this means that its useless to even try, if instead of negotiation table you get rockets. Ok, looking up on the economy Ill concede the point to you. As far as economy being in bad shape, not without Israels "help "(not in good way ) Last point, my insecurities? Seriously ad hominem attacks? you do know that this is the cheapest and the m,ost immature thing you can do, right? And evil state? Whats a state? Are you an anarchists or a statists? If you are an anarchist then stop talking states and talk people. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devon Gibbons Posted July 22, 2014 Share Posted July 22, 2014 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynicist Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 A ratio doesnt constitute an aggressor. There is no logic behind your ratio at all, since rockets are flying into Israel in thousands. And I will repeat the same argument as it seems to be flying right over your head. Lobbing rockets into another territory is an act of aggression, the fact that this rocket has not killed anyone is irrelevant, this is equal to saying that if a person is shooting at the ground in front of you you have no right to shoot back at him. I didn't realize this whole conflict started with the rockets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I didn't realize this whole conflict started with the rockets... I have actually changed my approach to the conflict, after looking into more evidence and facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynicist Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I have actually changed my approach to the conflict, after looking into more evidence and facts. This thread is a bit stale isn't it? I'm normally pretty good about noticing dates... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts