Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Watching the news coming out of Gaza today, I note the contrasting views of the attack on the Israeli outpost in Gaza in which a couple of soldiers was killed and one taken hostage.

The Palestinian government spokesman says it was an attack in retalliation for the 20 plus civilians that have been killed in recent weeks by Israeli action.

The Palestinians tunneled under the border and launched the attack against the military targets.

The Palestinian side sees this as a fair target in retaliation for the killings of civilians.

The Israelis are calling this an act of Terrorism and have threatened Palestinian politicians if any harm comes to the soldier taken hostage.

It is an interesting spin to call an attack on soldiers 'Terrorism' and to threaten civilians in retaliation.

Interested in hearing what people think of this situation.

Cheers,
Shafique

Attacks on coalition occupying forces in Iraq has been called terrorism also.

Begs the question, what exactly is terrorism these days?

shafique wrote:Watching the news coming out of Gaza today...
Interested in hearing what people think of this situation.

Assalamu Alaykum,

Good post Shafique. And according to your opinion, what is the situarion?.
Israel has been preparing some "war actions" against the Palestinian government. But the odd situation is this: nothing is moving to help the Palestinian government.
Jordan looks like to help the Israeli foreign policy. The same for Egypt. Turkey belongs to the NATO so it is interested in the Israeli foreign policy. The Saudi Arabia is following the US... the same for the UAE.
Who is moving? Only Iran. In fact, the US and Israel are interested in the Iranian situation.
As soon as Hamas has been in power, according to the Palestinian people, the situation is changed... following the US and Israeli wishes.
And according to your opinion: who is the terrorist?. My answer is: surely IT IS NOT Hamas.
Thank you for your attention... shukran...

Dario

Salaam,

My opinion is that all targeted killings of innocent women and children and civilians in general is wrong. I do not believe this can be condoned.

With this general principle, I do not believe that all Hamas' previous tactics of suicide bombings and missiles aiming at settlers was right - and yes, these were acts of terrorism in my opinion.

HOWEVER, I similarly codemn the collective punishment (a crime under international law) carried out daily by Israel against the Palestinians. I similarly condemn as terrorism the killings of Palestinian women, children and civilians by Israel.

Now, in this particular case I watch with fascinating disbelief at the reaction to the attack on military targets and the capture of a soldier.

Looking back at the reactions to suicide bombings against civilians, we must conclude that the Israelies are more concerned and more hurt when their soldiers are attacked and captured rather than when their women and children are killed.

I just think that Israel is concerned that Hamas may listen to world opinion that Terrorism will not be condoned by thinking, moral people - and that Hamas may be getting to the stage where they can now concentrate on an armed resistance against the MILITARY. Israel is at every opportunity trying to brand this military attack as 'terrorism', when in this case it is nothing but a military reaction to military attacks on civilians (remember that Hamas declared the ceasefire over after the family was killed on the Gaza beach).

In summary, the attack and capture of soldier is not terrorism. The reaction of Israel and their actions are disproportionate and against international law and Geneva Conventions, and yes are tantamount to terrorism.

I haven't checked the news this morning, now that the deadline has finished... I dread to... but let us pray that not too many civilians suffer and are killed.

Cheers,

Shafique

While the reaction of Israel has been extreme, I would not say it was unexpected. The system of collective punishment has been used by years by the Israeli army in their 'administration' of the territories.

Of course, there are a lot of 'hidden' reasons for this reaction.
1) Hamas and Israel and not been quite militant towards each other, long before Hamas won the elections. Israel now has its 'justification' for attacking Hamas, not just Gaza.
2) Israel is preparing to dismantle settlements in the West Bank, just like it did in Gaza (not enough of them unfortunately). Olmert cannot appear weak before this campaign begins.

shafique wrote:Looking back at the reactions to suicide bombings against civilians, we must conclude that the Israelies are more concerned and more hurt when their soldiers are attacked and captured rather than when their women and children are killed.

3) This is really an interesting point. I think that if this soldier was was killed with the other two, Israel's reaction would have been different as well. But Rambo syndrome - going in and rescuing the captured soldier - seems to be afflicting people..

I would like to add that the Israeli army bringing back everyone home is sort of a cultural thing in the army. we saw how Israel traded over 450 prisoners for bodies of dead soldiers from hizbollah. However is also interesting to note that they havent been that generious with the Palestinian factions and didnt go for a trade for weizman in 1994, who then got killed when they tried to free him.

Anyhow, the OP was interesting. I read a post on the bbc blog how people are objecting to the use of words in reporting on the situation. for example kidnapped vs captured and the palestinian officials being detained vs arrested and so on ...

just shows how this whole conflict can be looked at from many different angles which adds so much to the complexity of trying to resolve it in peacful means.

Agree with your observations Maad.

How is going into Palestinian territory and detaining Hamas parliamentarians called an 'arrest' or 'detention' and not termed 'hostage taking' or 'capture'????

Its a Media Game... the nations are being fooled and mislead.

Who owns the media.. wins the nations.

Real terrorists are the once who are using the media to terrorise their own nations and use that as a support for their devilish attacks on other innocent people.



Its a game of Words... you will be surrprised how the human do react to certin words.. most of those who chooses such technices of words are psychologists... ( there are those who displace words from their (right) places, and say: "We hear and we disobey"; and "Hear, may you not hear;" and "Ra'ina"; with a twist of their tongues and a slander to Faith) 4, 46.


and as my grand mother use to say: To who a one seed of wheat could complain if the judge was a chicken


when the devil start ruling:

The invader became a liberator
The lier became a good political man
The defener a terrorist
The one who sticks to his rules is a communist or a dictator
The one who says yes for everything is a democratic.

The terminology being used by the Israeli government and the media is ridiculous, and most people should see right through it. My definition of terrorism is suprise attacks by non-military personnel on civilian targets. If Israel is going to use their military to attack civilian and organised terror groups in Palestinian territories, then fine. However, kidnapping of soldiers and attacking military personnel are not what I would call terrorism. According to my definition, you cannot "terrorise" military targets - afterall, aren't militaries around the world organised and sanctioned terrorising machines?

Well said K.

BTW, hows my A$$?

Your ass is doing just fine It is up on a shelf so that my kitties don't bite it.

My a$$ on a shelf, for all to admire....

Is terrorism limited to killing people? If you blow up a building, is it terrorism? If its a military building like the Pentagon? How about a person who blows up an abortion clinic?

Lets say a country is training suicide bombers, does that make them terrorists?

In any military attack there are always the unfortunate bystanders that are killed. At what point does this number become unacceptable? (assuming that you support a military action)

shafique wrote:My opinion is that all targeted killings of innocent women and children and civilians in general is wrong. I do not believe this can be condoned. With this general principle, I do not believe that all Hamas' previous tactics of suicide bombings and missiles aiming at settlers was right - and yes, these were acts of terrorism in my opinion.

))Well... in general terms and peaceful situations, i might be agree with you but... there are two elements to consider:
1) there is a war situation;
2) Israel kill, during its attacks or strikes, Palestinian civilians ( women and kids included ).
The other point, to consider, is this: who is interested in the Palestinian cause?.
Jordan is not interested;
Egypt is not interested;
the Saudia Arabia and the UAE are watching;
Kuwait is not interested;
Lybia wishes to stay out of it.
So... a lot of nations speak about the Palestinian situation but... only one is helping the Palestinian government. And this is the situation that the US and Israel like...
Shukran... thank you...

Dario

Dario,

I maintain that under any circumstances the concious decision to kill civilians in general and women and children in particular cannot be condoned. Revenge is a natural human instinct and atrocities do occur in war, but my view is that as humans we have choices and I cannot think of a situation where terrorism (as I've defined it) is justified.

Kanelli - I sincerely hope that many people see things as clearly as you do. From what I see in the media, there are many in Israel that do not - I hope that the ones that do are in the silent majority, but I doubt it.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I maintain that under any circumstances the concious decision to kill civilians in general and women and children in particular cannot be condoned. Revenge is a natural human instinct and atrocities do occur in war, but my view is that as humans we have choices and I cannot think of a situation where terrorism (as I've defined it) is justified.

Salam Safique,

I wrote that, in general terms and in peaceful situations, i agree with you.
But the situation in Palestine is different. There is a war to gain ( or to defend ) the own land. Killing civilians is not a new situation in war conditions. Unfortunately, in war situations, it may happen that civilians are killed.
Secondly... Palestinians are fighting to defend their land... i may realize that you may be near to the Israeli or the US approach but... at least you must give the possibility to Palestinians to defend their land.
Usually... the wars are started to defend or to take freedom, justice and equality to all the citizens. I may realize that it may not be a good point for the persons who are in power but the power belongs to all the citizens of a nation. Without discrimination based on sex, money, status or others... this means freedom, justice and equality.
Shukran... thank you for your attention...

Dario

I wrote: Without discrimination based on sex, money, status or others... this means freedom, justice and equality.

Dario

Dario,

I can understand the sense of desperation that leads people to justify the killing of Israeli women and children - the arguement is that so many more Palestinian women and children have been killed by Israel. I just make the point that I do not condone this - this is my view and it is actually also what the Quran requires of all Muslims who want to follow what God says in the Quran.

Leaving to one side the moral and religious reasons to object to the killing of women and children (and other non-combatants), there is also the practical issue of whether this advances the Palestinian cause one step closer to where they want to be.

In my view, the killings of innocents only leads to resentment and retaliation and does not help the cause of the Palestinians one bit. At best, in my opinion, it may help with the feeling of revenge and outrage at the atrocities they are being subjected to - but I still stand by my views expressed in previous posts.

Attacking soldiers is an act of self defence in this war... and not terrorism...which is where this thread started.

Wasalaam,
Shafique

There are no Israeli "civilians" over the age of 18 till the age of 55 or 60 (I forget).

All ISraelis in that age bracket are subject to unannounced mobilization and are thus militarily ready.

Liban wrote:There are no Israeli "civilians" over the age of 18 till the age of 55 or 60 (I forget).

All ISraelis in that age bracket are subject to unannounced mobilization and are thus militarily ready.

You make it sound as if all Israelis have an M-16 in their closet just waiting for the army orders to put on their uniform. Actaully so many Israelis a so fed up with/disillusioned with the army that more than 70% of the population doesn't do reserve duty at all.
And even a person who is an 'active' reserve soldier - when he is not in the army, he is a civilian - that's why the call it RESERVE duty

Most of Israeli society is armed to the teeth and have a uniform in their closet.

Are you Israeli? No.

Do know any Israelis? Probably not.

I have known Israelis in Canada and I heard it from many. So do not attempt to educate me on a matter I know more of FIRST HAND.

You're WAY OFF on this one. If you would read any sort of demographic information about Israel you would see how few do reserve duty. This is in fact one of the biggest conflicts in Israeli society, is what is seen as the lack of fairness reguarding who does reserve duty.

Don't try and group all of Israeli society with really what are a few thousand fanatic settlers that live in the West Bank between Arab villages.

I don't need to read what I know first hand my friend

You are incorrect. Get it from the source and not from stories.

Peace

As I told you before.....I was there....you weren't - so please don't tell me about '1st hand knowledge.'
When you get tear-gassed, water-cannoned and yes, even have live ammunition fired above your head for protesting "The Wall" as it is so affectionately called - then start talking to me about 1st hand knowledge.

But just to help you get your facts straight - here are a couple of articles I found for you.

http://www.shtull-trauring.org/aron/Com ... serve.html
http://www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/tex ... /061120031

Liban wrote:My a$$ on a shelf, for all to admire....

Well it was a really cute little ass after all

Liban wrote:My a$$ on a shelf, for all to admire....

Well it was a really cute little ass after all

mraph33 wrote:As I told you before.....I was there....you weren't - so please don't tell me about '1st hand knowledge.'
When you get tear-gassed, water-cannoned and yes, even have live ammunition fired above your head for protesting "The Wall" as it is so affectionately called - then start talking to me about 1st hand knowledge.

But just to help you get your facts straight - here are a couple of articles I found for you.

http://www.shtull-trauring.org/aron/Com ... serve.html
http://www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/tex ... /061120031

Don't speak to me of war my friend

You don't know the half of it!!

Peace

arniegang wrote:

Liban wrote:My a$$ on a shelf, for all to admire....

Well it was a really cute little a#s after all

Albite slightly hairy...

Liban wrote:

mraph33 wrote:As I told you before.....I was there....you weren't - so please don't tell me about '1st hand knowledge.'
When you get tear-gassed, water-cannoned and yes, even have live ammunition fired above your head for protesting "The Wall" as it is so affectionately called - then start talking to me about 1st hand knowledge.

But just to help you get your facts straight - here are a couple of articles I found for you.

http://www.shtull-trauring.org/aron/Com ... serve.html
http://www.infoisrael.net/cgi-local/tex ... /061120031

Don't speak to me of war my friend

You don't know the half of it!!

Peace

I'm not speaking of war...I'm speaking of 1st hand knowledge of Israeli society that you claim to have so much of.

I definatly do know more than you and have been affected by it much more than you dude. So, once again, I don't want to turn this into a pissing competition on who saw and suffered the most in this conflict.