More mud on the already tarnished reputation of Israels Army

[The Guardian]

Thast cause you are not familiar with Yugoslavian or Slavic history in general and the culture in the Balkan area and I suggest you seriously to drop that topic cause almost anything you say is insulting. I am not a serbian nationalist.

I find it difficult to understand what you're saying, because English is obviously not your first language. If you've construed an insult, I'd like to know how - so that I may apologize as I desire no ill will against you or the Serbian people.

I wept with my Serbian comrades when Kosovo was forcibly taken away from the nation proper. I also felt a great pang of regret for the terror and fear the noble Serbs of Leposavic and Zubin Potok and interior Serbian enclaves must feel on a daily basis.

In regards to you not being a Serbian nationalist - then why are you upset when I espouse the greatness of the German Wehrmacht on this forum? Or is it that you're upset because your practice internationalist communism - in which case I have no regrets.

Its not "superfluous. The name was changed from the Reichswehr to the Wehrmacht.

If you think that the only thing that changed was the name - then you clearly lack the understanding of the German military after 1935. Go read up on the 25 points of the NSDAP to get an idea of the fundamental change here.

People mention the German crimes and others the Soviet behaviour after the occupation with what effect?

The major difference - German "crimes" were legal the Soviet crimes against German civilians were "illegal" - the Geneva Conventions clearly state that civilians not under the protection of the Conventions are liable to reprisals. The USSR during the first days of the war cannibalized captured Germans, killing them without trial and then cooking and eating their remains. This lifted the protection of the Geneva Conventions from the civilian populations automatically.

The Germans did nothing to stop this protection - yet that didn't stop the Soviets from raping over 2,000,000 German women repeatedly.

Nuremberg Laws are bullshit and retroactive - they cannot apply to what happened in World War 2.

 

[Roflcore]

If you think that the only thing that changed was the name - then you clearly lack the understanding of the German military after 1935. Go read up on the 25 points of the NSDAP to get an idea of the fundamental change here.

please, for the love of god, pick up a history book before you make such idiotic claims

 

[Blakut]

If you think that the only thing that changed was the name - then you clearly lack the understanding of the German military after 1935. Go read up on the 25 points of the NSDAP to get an idea of the fundamental change here.

I've been down that road myself. Thing is, the Nationalists in my country won't accept me because i lack religious belief (i.e. i'm an atheist) even if i am on the political right and my social beliefs made most of my friends call me a fascist (even though they all use reductio ad hitlerum logic. Most people don;t know that a lot of the so called "fascist" measures were implemented by a lot of countries before WW2).
That's when i realized they were a group of morons (mostly because they were hardcore orthodox christians and raised some of the nations heroes to the rank of gods and because they were really dumb: they protested electronic passports because they believe the antichrist will control their minds)...

Anyway, i share your belief that an extremely multicultural country is doomed to fail, even if both cultures are on the same level. Not because one is inherently inferior to the other, but because they will ultimately not get along, as they will struggle, unconciously, more for their rights than fort the rights of the other. If all the ethnicities of the world formed their own countries and treated each other with respect, there would be world peace. However, when one culture goes into another country and starts to gain more rights than its majority (europeans know what i'm talking about), that majority is bound to get upset. Disorder follows.

Unfortunately i don't think you are as informed as you like to see yourself. Taking ALL the Nazi point of view as truth without question is just as bad as taking the Allied point of view as truth without question. I for myself consider that Hitler was a mediocre strategist at best. The true power of Germany lay in its great generals (most of the great ones died before the war ended). For example, if instead of Hitler, Rommel commanded Germanie's armies, who knows what language we would've been using now.

My country fought on the Axis' side in the war, but lost a great deal because of Hitler and his strategies. That's why my country was plagued by 50 years of communism.

Bad thing is, even though i am a 'rightist' i am very aware that had the Germans won, i would have not existed: my grandmother was russian, so prolly the Germans would've executed her along with all the slavs.

Now, you being a Nazi and all, you should know that it is the strongest who is right, and all parties have a right to fight. The winner is the strongest, the fittest. Even though you consider one side to be inferior, if that side fights and kills you, it is its right. And whoever wins deserved to win and is the ruler.

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

edit: Godwin's law should have an extension:
If said discussion involves Israel or the jews, the probability approaches one twice as fast as in the first case.

 

[The Guardian]

Excellent synopsis, Blakut.

I disagree with you on a two points though, firstly: the point that because of Hitler, you nation suffered from 50 years of communism.

In reality because of Hitler, your nation ONLY suffered these 50 years. If not for the invasion in 1941, the USSR would have invaded, and succeeded in conquering the whole of Europe, in 1941. Chances are all of our hearts would be beating left today if not for the NSDAP.

Secondly: the point that Germany would have killed all the Slavs. This is just wrong, as since 1938 Germans were allied with Slavic peoples.

please, for the love of god, pick up a history book before you make such idiotic claims

What in the hell are you chittering about? Can you refute the differences, after having read them?

 

[Ratty Sr.]

since 1938 Germans were allied with Slavic peoples.

Is that what you call slavery now?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Fine, want my thoughts on the conduct of IDF in the Gaza conflict? Here you go....

Good read.

When the operation was still going on I remember people crying foul when the civilian death toll was estimated to only be at 500-600. Putting it into perspective with those other numbers really makes you see how much restraint was actually shown.

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

Fine, want my thoughts on the conduct of IDF in the Gaza conflict? Here you go.

In my opinion, Israeli troops conducted the operation professionally and showed remarkable restraint. The number of dead civilians may seem deceptively high until you consider that the operation in question was a full-scale invasion of one of the most densely populated urban areas in the world, one that also happens to be held by a paramilitary terrorist organization known for its complete disregard of civilian lives. Yes, Hamas does employ human shields and use civilian structures such as schools and hospitals as bases. No, that isn't just IDF propaganda. If it had been *any other military* conducting an operation like the one in Gaza - Syrian, Egyptian, Pakistani, Russian, or hell, Croatian or Serbian - the result would have been a *bloodbath*, with hundreds of thousands of dead civilians and nothing but smoldering ruins remaining afterwards. 1,300 dead civilians is fucking *surgical precision* compared to typical death toll in similar situations. One look into the history books is all the proof you need. 1945, fall of Berlin: half a million dead, tens of thousands of women raped, the city turned to ash. 1971, Dhaka, Operation Searchlight and the ensuing war: tens of thousands dead, including pretty much every educated person living in the city. 1982, Hama: upwards of 40,000 dead, an ancient city turned to dust with artillery and tanks. 2000, Grozny: 20,000 civilians remaining out of a population of half a million, the city itself razed to the ground. That's how these operations normally turn out. That's how urban warfare is conducted. And 1,300 dead suddenly isn't such a scary number.

I think while Israel mantains a veneer of 'caring about civilians', its actions say otherwise. Most of the casualties caused were due to airstrikes, and if Hamas choses civilian sites for its operations, then its fair to say 'collateral damage' is an inevitability for most Israelis. Either way, both show a disregard and contempt for human life. But Hamas does not say it has a moral army.

Also, some of your facts don't really compare with whats going on here. The fall of Berlin was a total war fought by two countries where massacres and brutality were common to either side.

Most of the other conflicts you enumerate, almost none of them include a professional army. By professional I mean like the US, Britain, French, German, Italian, or Israeli.

In face of all that, Israel further claims to have one of the world best special forces, and yet refuses to use them when a 'surgical' strike with smart bombs can be used instead. Why potentially endanger your own troops when you can kill 5-10 Hamas targets and only have a collateral damage of say 50-100 civillians?

Do you call that moral or even caring for civillians? Sound strategic planning it is, but moral, I fear, it is not.

 

[Crni Vuk]

...
I find it difficult to understand what you're saying, because English is obviously not your first language. If you've construed an insult, I'd like to know how - so that I may apologize as I desire no ill will against you or the Serbian people.

I wept with my Serbian comrades when Kosovo was forcibly taken away from the nation proper. I also felt a great pang of regret for the terror and fear the noble Serbs of Leposavic and Zubin Potok and interior Serbian enclaves must feel on a daily basis.
...

I am saying, that if you are not a Yugoslavian, you should stop to talk about "serbian nationalism" in any form. More then 60 years of hate, war, and destruction are enough in the Balkan caused by exagerated "patriotism" and nationalism, on all ends. There is no need for a "foreign" person to monkey the same phrases that run trough the Balkan for centuries. There is no positive effect of a situation when neighbours that live 20 years next to each other become "enemies" and slice their throats.

You lack the understanding of the issue, the understanding of the Balkans history. You have no knowledge about the roots which lead to many issues regarding the area. Many of my relatives had to suffer the effects of the conflicts, on all sides. It was a Broderwar. And a very dirty one.

It is already very difficult for Serbians today to reduce the anthipaty and preconceptons on the Balkan that many have toward us caused by incidents like Omarska, Keraterm Manjača. Statements like you throw around do here much damage. Even if you dont realise it ! And many of them are also very insulting to those people that had to suffer the effects of the conflict. I would expect such kind of insensitivity from a serbian "nationalist", but not from a foreigner.

...
The major difference - German "crimes" were legal the Soviet crimes against German civilians were "illegal" - the Geneva Conventions clearly state that civilians not under the protection of the Conventions are liable to reprisals. The USSR during the first days of the war cannibalized captured Germans, killing them without trial and then cooking and eating their remains. This lifted the protection of the Geneva Conventions from the civilian populations automatically.

So much to "legal" actions.

Commissar Order

Nazi crimes against Soviet POWs

Einsatzgruppen Trial

The Einsatzgruppen and Gas Vans in the Eastern Territories

alone from 5 Million soviet POWs more then 3 Millions died in German POW camps. Well dokumented by the German Military, for everyone today visible in the Bundesarchieven (German Federal Archives), all of the Documents that have survived the war regarding concentration camps, documents of the "Reichskanzlei", orders from Hitler or his staff are today visible for everyone. Same for orders by Military leaders, the Oberkommando of the Wehrmacht (OKW) and Oberste Heeresleitung (OKH), Orders about crimes with the signature of invidiuals, as Mahnstein, Walter Model general of the Panzerarmy, Albert Kesselring airforce general. All this people and many more higher or lower officers and generals have approved certain crimes in russia against the civilians and military personal or had at least knowledge about orders many which had their signature which means they have at least seen it. Many orders have not been executed, but many as well have. Most of them at least had knowledge about the Orders and could have easly done something to avoid them. But they have not.

And there was no legal ground for any of the crimes commited by either the Wehrmacht, SS or any other troops during WW2. There was no legal reason for ANY Soldier, officer and general to excuse their actions and crimes in the war with the persoal swear of the Wehrmacht to Hitler. And saying it have been only orders.

After the death of President Paul von Hindenburg on 2 August 1934, Hitler assumed the office of Reichspräsident, and thus became commander in chief. All officers and soldiers of the German armed forces had to swear a personal oath of loyalty to the Führer, as Adolf Hitler now was called.


Both the assumed office of the Reichspresident and the Reichswehreid (oath of allegiance) based on the person Hitler have been done without any agreement with the elected Reichstag and have been unseated. The oath was completely illegal performed by the Minister of Defence Walter von Blomberg.

It would be similar to a situation if Robert Gates would now swear the US troops on the person Obama and not the US state, thus not the insitituation they usualy represent and that without the agreement of the congress! It would have no value. On the front, no soldier or even general had any reason from a political and militaristc point to feel tied to any of Hitlers orders as nothing was in conjunction with the parliament.

The Wehrmacht was already before the war a "illegal" organisation by itself not representing the people, state and in no relation with the parliament which was voted by the nation. Even if many members of the parliament have been members of the Nazi party, everything after 33/34 particuilarly the oath happend without any agreement, and thus had no value. Hitler was still a representative in that time. Though just a formality. But still illegal.

The Germans did nothing to stop this protection - yet that didn't stop the Soviets from raping over 2,000,000 German women repeatedly.

Nuremberg Laws are bullshit and retroactive - they cannot apply to what happened in World War 2.

The Germans sow the wind and reap the whirlwind

Old Biblical phrase, that fitts very well to the stituation that Germany had to suffer after the war was loost.

 

[The Guardian]

I am saying, that if you are not a Yugoslavian, you should stop to talk about "serbian nationalism" in any form. More then 60 years of hate, war, and destruction are enough in the Balkan caused by exagerated "patriotism" and nationalism, on all ends. There is no need for a "foreign" person to monkey the same phrases that run trough the Balkan for centuries. There is no positive effect of a situation when neighbours that live 20 years next to each other become "enemies" and slice their throats.

Your posts have gone from oddities, into stupidity.

I said fascist Croatia was good. They killed Serbs, oh well. Communists killed innumerable people based on various nationalities throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. Yet here you are rattling your sword and calling yourself a Yugoslavian.

Communism and multiculturalism has led your people down the path that has led to the massacres. Artificial multiethnic states are doomed.

I would expect such kind of insensitivity from a serbian "nationalist", but not from a foreigner.

I wept with my Serbian brothers when Kosovo broke off. Where were you? Dancing with the Albanians? You're not a nationalist, so why not?

The Germans sow the wind and reap the whirlwind

There were 2000 cases of rape reported in the German army in World War 2.

And Germany invaded 10 sovereign nations.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

I think while Israel mantains a veneer of 'caring about civilians', its actions say otherwise. Most of the casualties caused were due to airstrikes, and if Hamas choses civilian sites for its operations, then its fair to say 'collateral damage' is an inevitability for most Israelis. Either way, both show a disregard and contempt for human life. But Hamas does not say it has a moral army.

"Moral army" is PR speak. There is nothing moral about war. It's the conduct of individual soldiers and officers that's moral or immoral. And judging by the actions of Israeli soldiers in this war and the countless previous ones, they are at the very least highly disciplined.

Also, some of your facts don't really compare with whats going on here. The fall of Berlin was a total war fought by two countries where massacres and brutality were common to either side.

Most of the other conflicts you enumerate, almost none of them include a professional army. By professional I mean like the US, Britain, French, German, Italian, or Israeli.

Professional by what standards? Because from where I'm standing, Russia, Pakistan and Syria have professional armies. They may show less regard for civilian life than your average western European force, but they are professional. There is nothing uncommon or extraordinary in the way they conduct urban warfare. Looting, pillaging and mass murder of civilians have been the norm when conquering cities all the way until the end of WWII, and only post-1945 did the world (and by "world" I mean the West) start to get squeamish about it. Not surprising, really, as western powers haven't had to fight a real war since 1945, unless you count slapping around third-world thugs as warfare. It's easy to hold IDF to an impossible standard when you're sitting in an ivory tower and haven't had a taste of your own blood in 60 years. Let's send a "professional" force like the French or Germans into Gaza and see how well they fare against a fanatical enemy that hates your guts, doesn't adhere to any kind of international law and doesn't hesitate to put mortars in an orphanage.

In face of all that, Israel further claims to have one of the world best special forces, and yet refuses to use them when a 'surgical' strike with smart bombs can be used instead. Why potentially endanger your own troops when you can kill 5-10 Hamas targets and only have a collateral damage of say 50-100 civillians?

50-100 is an overinflated figure. If the average Israeli surgical strike claimed that many lives, total Palestinian death toll would likely be an order of magnitude higher, if not more. With that in mind, I see nothing wrong with using an aerial strike where appropriate. Sure, the collateral damage is likely to be higher, but jeopardizing your best, most valuable troops because it *might* save a couple of civilian lives would be an utterly irresponsible tactical decision and certainly not more "moral". There is nothing immoral about conducting your war responsibly. Now if IDF carpet-bombed Gaza and rolled its tanks over the smoldering remains, *that* would be immoral. Incidentally, it would probably also be a more effective solution to Israel's problems than a thousand surgical strikes.

 

[DexterMorgan]

:epic:

Ratty, what kind of collateral damage do you call a woman getting shot through the head by a sharpshooter while carrying a white flag and a baby?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

:epic:

Ratty, what kind of collateral damage do you call a woman getting shot through the head by a sharpshooter while carrying a white flag and a baby?

Do you have a link for that? All I could find is this one.

In one instance, an Israeli sharpshooter killed a Palestinian woman and her two children when they inadvertently took a wrong turn after being released from detention in their own home, Haaretz and Maariv reported, quoting a soldier who'd fought in Gaza.

"The platoon commander let the family go, and told them to go to the right. The mother and the two children didn't understand and went to the left, but they forgot to tell the sharpshooter on the roof that they had let them go . . . " said an infantry squad leader, whom the papers didn't identify by name or unit in their Thursday editions.

Sounds like there was some break down in communication there. The sharpshooter I am assuming was under strict orders to open fire on anyone who crossed a certain point.


Here is a nice article I found while I was looking up that story.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3689388,00.html

IDF soldiers rebut claims of immoral conduct in Gaza

'It is true that in war morality can be interpreted in many different ways, and there are always a few idiots who act inappropriately, but most of the troops represented Israel honorably,' soldier says in response to claims of immoral behavior during Operation Cast Lead. Reservist: Claims 'fictitious'. 'Free Gaza' movement demands international investigation

I am going to go ahead and take a wild swing that articles such as this are written by the army of Mossad bloggers that Alex Jones link spoke of earlier?

 

[DexterMorgan]

Here's the link:

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/crisisingaza/2009/02/200922011365319680.html

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

"Moral army" is PR speak. There is nothing moral about war. It's the conduct of individual soldiers and officers that's moral or immoral. And judging by the actions of Israeli soldiers in this war and the countless previous ones, they are at the very least highly disciplined.

Off course its PR speak. But its PR speak best avoided when you are in a fight, as you have so succintly put it, in a population dense area with a high chance of civilian casualties.

Professional by what standards? Because from where I'm standing, Russia, Pakistan and Syria have professional armies. They may show less regard for civilian life than your average western European force, but they are professional. There is nothing uncommon or extraordinary in the way they conduct urban warfare. Looting, pillaging and mass murder of civilians have been the norm when conquering cities all the way until the end of WWII, and only post-1945 did the world (and by "world" I mean the West) start to get squeamish about it. Not surprising, really, as western powers haven't had to fight a real war since 1945, unless you count slapping around third-world thugs as warfare. It's easy to hold IDF to an impossible standard when you're sitting in an ivory tower and haven't had a taste of your own blood in 60 years. Let's send a "professional" force like the French or Germans into Gaza and see how well they fare against a fanatical enemy that hates your guts, doesn't adhere to any kind of international law and doesn't hesitate to put mortars in an orphanage.

Those armies are not professional. They rely heavily on conscription, have poor training and discipline, mostly low morale, low pay, a lack of trained officers/NCO's and so on.

Interestingly, you mention sending the British or French out there, and yet, the British were there long before the Israelis, facing the same kind of problem and hatred, and you did not see them sniping on innocent women with babies, or ordering people en masse out of a house only to shell them, or recklessly empty a house of its contents for no reason, and so on.

50-100 is an overinflated figure. If the average Israeli surgical strike claimed that many lives, total Palestinian death toll would likely be an order of magnitude higher, if not more. With that in mind, I see nothing wrong with using an aerial strike where appropriate. Sure, the collateral damage is likely to be higher, but jeopardizing your best, most valuable troops because it *might* save a couple of civilian lives would be an utterly irresponsible tactical decision and certainly not more "moral". There is nothing immoral about conducting your war responsibly. Now if IDF carpet-bombed Gaza and rolled its tanks over the smoldering remains, *that* would be immoral. Incidentally, it would probably also be a more effective solution to Israel's problems than a thousand surgical strikes.

Well, for each airstrike we hear in the news, usually the civillian death toll is between 50-75 people, including injured, so I would not say its inflated.

Furthermore, Israel has carpet bombed Gaza in all but name. I agree with you, they are conducting war in the right fashion, but there is nothing moral about it, and they are definitely not right in doing so.

Hamas, with all its hatred of Israel, has proposed a long term truce if Israel returns to its 1967 borders. Israel has yet to reply. Clearly, the ball is in Israel's court.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Here's the link:

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/crisisingaza/2009/02/200922011365319680.html

Thanks for the link.

As I said before most of this I am waiting on until after more investigating is done to form some sort of concrete opinion. All of this still seems fairly fresh and facts are easily twisted.

Hamas, with all its hatred of Israel, has proposed a long term truce if Israel returns to its 1967 borders. Israel has yet to reply. Clearly, the ball is in Israel's court.

I do not blame them for being hesitant in even considering such demands.
Hamas should be damn grateful that Israel does not wipe them off the map and show the world what a war crime and massacre truly is.

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

I do not blame them for being hesitant in even considering such demands.

Hamas should be damn grateful that Israel does not wipe them off the map and show the world what a war crime and massacre truly is.

In its current form, this is a self-perpetuating conflict neither side can win. Clearly the violence that has been used for the past decades has lead to nothing, why no try something new?

Ironically, Hamas' demand is paralel to most Western plans for a legitimate, long lasting peace to endure.

Again, its all down to Israel.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

:epic:

Ratty, what kind of collateral damage do you call a woman getting shot through the head by a sharpshooter while carrying a white flag and a baby?

An unfortunate and isolated incident.

Also, lulz @ citing Al Jazeera as a source.

Those armies are not professional. They rely heavily on conscription, have poor training and discipline, mostly low morale, low pay, a lack of trained officers/NCO's and so on.

They also happen to have experience fighting (and, in many cases, winning) actual wars, unlike many of the so-called "professional" armies that piss their undies when they find themselves in a real warzone. I'm looking at you, Koninklijke Landmacht.

Interestingly, you mention sending the British or French out there, and yet, the British were there long before the Israelis, facing the same kind of problem and hatred, and you did not see them sniping on innocent women with babies, or ordering people en masse out of a house only to shell them, or recklessly empty a house of its contents for no reason, and so on.

Are you kidding? The circumstances are hardly comparable. British authority in Palestine lasted for only like 30 years and didn't have to deal with nearly as much shit as Israel does. The Arabs hadn't yet adopted terror tactics and their discontent was mainly directed at the Jewish immigrants rather than the British authorities. The first serious instance of Arab insurrection, the revolt of 1936-1939, was crushed violently and at the cost of many lives. In 1948 the Brits hightailed it out of Palestine, leaving the Jews in charge of the brewing mess. Situation in Palestine has changed greatly since, as has the nature of warfare. With all that in mind, I simply don't see how parallels can be drawn.

Furthermore, Israel has carpet bombed Gaza in all but name. I agree with you, they are conducting war in the right fashion, but there is nothing moral about it, and they are definitely not right in doing so.

I don't think you know what carpet bombing means. Hint: if your "carpet bombing" kills only 1,300 people, then you're doing something wrong.

Hamas, with all its hatred of Israel, has proposed a long term truce if Israel returns to its 1967 borders. Israel has yet to reply. Clearly, the ball is in Israel's court.

I was wrong - Palestinian terrorists *do* have a sense of humor.

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

Also, lulz @ citing Al Jazeera as a source.

I was waiting for somebody to make that comment.

Surely if we were in the middle east and somebody cited BBC we would get the same kind of response? I don't think its wise to disregard the source as unreliable simply because it tends to present its news from a non-western perspective.

Im sure if we look deepder we will find the incident in more 'reputable' news outlets.

They also happen to have experience fighting (and, in many cases, winning) actual wars, unlike many of the so-called "professional" armies that piss their undies when they find themselves in a real warzone. I'm looking at you, Koninklijke Landmacht.

Yeah, the Romans also had a shit load of experience, and they were still Brutal as could be. Experience alone does not make an army ''professional'', even though it may be one of the pre-requisites.

Are you kidding? The circumstances are hardly comparable. British authority in Palestine lasted for only like 30 years and didn't have to deal with nearly as much shit as Israel does. The Arabs hadn't yet adopted terror tactics and their discontent was mainly directed at the Jewish immigrants rather than the British authorities. The first serious instance of Arab insurrection, the revolt of 1936-1939, was crushed violently and at the cost of many lives. In 1948 the Brits hightailed it out of Palestine, leaving the Jews in charge of the brewing mess. Situation in Palestine has changed greatly since, as has the nature of warfare. With all that in mind, I simply don't see how parallels can be drawn.

And yet you are the one drawing paralles between what has been going on now and what happened in Berlin in 1945.

The truth of the matter is, the British had tact and knew better than to alienate their 'subjects' with indiscriminate brutality (A lesson the French didn't learn till Algeria - and I still have my doubts)

It did not leave the Jews in Charge, but rather the U.N, and from then on we all know what happened.

I'm not going to sit here and say the Palestinians have always been innocent, but Israel has definitely gone from being the victim, having being invaded almost three times, to being the bully. For countless decades they have been playing the same tit for tat game that is getting nobody anywhere. In the meanwhile it is not making anybody any favours with these constant 'invasions'.

Ironic how the rocket attacks still haven't stopped. The only things that work are the truces, and after then efforts to turn these truces into long lasting peace accords. If both sides spent less time rearming, scheming and attacking, and more time on peace efforts perhaps we would have something concrete in that region now rather than the senseless violence we see now.

I don't think you know what carpet bombing means. Hint: if your "carpet bombing" kills only 1,300 people, then you're doing something wrong.

I know what it means. Israel doesn't really have the means to carpet bomb an area. But I hardly call their 'strikes' surgical. Surgical strikes are perhaps those the U.S is conducting in Pakistan, and even then I still have my doubts.

I was wrong - Palestinian terrorists *do* have a sense of humor.

Thats funny, because what they are asking for is exactly what the International Community is also demanding of Israel for a long term peace solution. Is that also funny?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

I know what it means. Israel doesn't really have the means to carpet bomb an area. But I hardly call their 'strikes' surgical. Surgical strikes are perhaps those the U.S is conducting in Pakistan, and even then I still have my doubts.

Israel has the military capability of creating a blood bath worthy of title "war crime".

They did not go into this operation with zero planning and just shell every building they saw. Prior to the actual military conflict there had been a very lengthy intelligence gathering process.

A year's intel gathering yields 'alpha hits'

A year of information-gathering by Military Intelligence and the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) paved the way Saturday for Operation Cast Lead.

At 11:30 a.m., more than 50 fighter jets and attack helicopters swept into Gazan airspace and dropped more than 100 bombs on 50 targets. The planes reported "alpha hits," IAF lingo for direct hits on the targets, which included Hamas bases, training camps, headquarters and offices.

Thirty minutes later, a second wave of 60 jets and helicopters struck at 60 targets, including underground Kassam launchers - placed inside bunkers and missile silos - that had been fitted with timers.

Their locations were discovered in an intensive intelligence operation. The goal: to strike at Hamas's ability to fire rockets into Israel.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230111714969&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

Most Hamas bases destroyed in 4 minutes


Preparations nearly two years in the making were put into action yesterday as a two-wave offensive of 88 Israel Air Force fighter jets and helicopters delivered over 100 tons of explosives to approximately 100 Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050432.html

Thats funny, because what they are asking for is exactly what the International Community is also demanding of Israel for a long term peace solution. Is that also funny?

Thankfully the International Community does not make decisions for Israel.

 

[Chancellor Kremlin]

Oh yes, its pretty obvious the invasion was being planned long in advance, no doubt predicting that the ceasefire would not be renewed, and to coincide with the elections to make the current party look 'strong'.

I think I already know the answer to this, but Bal-Sagoth, do you support Israel's continued occupation of the 1967 territories?