Israel vs Hamas

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby SunXia » Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:29 pm

Well that's where we get into Nationalism and the pride people hold in their national identity!! I come from Northern Ireland, a very divided part of the UK so I know all about how nationalism can affect your everyday routine!!

Personally, I'm Irish, I may be part of the UK but I was born and bred on the island of Ireland and I have an Irish passport, I'm Irish through and through, including my ancestors!! I don't need to see an Irish flag anywhere to know what I am and hell, I don't need a United Ireland to feel this way, I just am this way and I agree that the borders aren't something that is needed for that sense of identity!!

A street right beside mine is filled with people who consider themselves British and that identity is very important to them, the very notion of being considered Irish throws them into fits of rage and they hang the Union Jack on every lamppost of their street!! I'm fine with them being British, but when they try to tell me that I am not Irish, it makes me giggle since we still live in Northern IRELAND and so its in the name!! Do people from South Korea try to tell people from North Korea that they are not Korean??

A sense of identity is very important to many people so much so that many are willing to murder for it to be recognised and put up flags to mark out their territory!!

I support the Palestinian right to recognise themselves as Palestinian the same as Israeli people should be allowed to identify themselves as Israeli!! I don't support either of them killing people and trying to force that identity on others or trying to prove their identity as more legit that somebody else's!!

In terms of Scotland, they are doing it democratically, the Party advocating independence has been elected by the people and thus are legitimately allowed to introduce a bill or referendum if they choose!! It may not be perceived a something that is necessarily needed but if the people vote for it then it is something they want, such is the democratic way!!
If becoming enlightened or an intellectual means I must become arrogant and coldly cynical about the world around me then I'd gladly remain a fool for the rest of my life!!

I'm Out4Marriage!!!Are You??

It is a CHOICE!!
User avatar
SunXia
Warrior Princess
Warrior Princess
 
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:48 pm
Location: Keeping Evils from this world at bay...with a smile!!

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby DreamGoddessLindsey » Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:52 pm

Nationalism is one of the worst and most terrifying things there is, and creates so many problems. Personally, I'd be okay with one world nation. Humanity united.
DreamGoddessLindsey
Banned
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:50 pm

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:07 pm

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:Nationalism is one of the worst and most terrifying things there is, and creates so many problems.



Loyalty and pride in one's country/clan/people on its own is not harmful at all, and can be one of the most motivating forces behind people and culture. It is what people choose to do with nationalistic feelings that give such words a pejorative nation.

Personally, I'd be okay with one world nation. Humanity united.


Well, that is pretty terrifying as a concept. It is also fairly idealistic and naive. It strikes me as contradictory you decry the freedom of America, telling us it devolving into a police state, but propose a unified worldwide nation (as if that wouldn't be a police state). Humanity isn't united. The world isn't united.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4323
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby DreamGoddessLindsey » Sun Aug 24, 2014 12:17 am

I didn't say it is. I said it's what I'd like. Is it idealistic? Sure. Naive? Yep. Terrifying? How? What scares you about all humanity united in one nation that helps everyone in the world?
DreamGoddessLindsey
Banned
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:50 pm

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby SunXia » Sun Aug 24, 2014 12:53 am

I would love a united world of good ideals and morals but Shika is also right, a world like that would require leaders and a small group of people deciding the fate of the entire planet?? That is terrifying in itself since there wouldn't be other nations to offer criticism to offer objection should the leaders become corrupt or make bad choices!!
If becoming enlightened or an intellectual means I must become arrogant and coldly cynical about the world around me then I'd gladly remain a fool for the rest of my life!!

I'm Out4Marriage!!!Are You??

It is a CHOICE!!
User avatar
SunXia
Warrior Princess
Warrior Princess
 
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:48 pm
Location: Keeping Evils from this world at bay...with a smile!!

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:53 am

DreamGoddessLindsey wrote:Terrifying? How? What scares you about all humanity united in one nation that helps everyone in the world?


For the reasons SX listed. Any governing body that large will not respresent local interests. We already have tensions between state vs. federal interests here in the country the size of the United States. You're proposing a combined government of the entire world. Good luck with that.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4323
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Sun Aug 24, 2014 5:48 am

Or the EU, as much as I'm pro it, there is tension between interests of the nation state and the EU. Or the devolved countries of the UK vs Westminster. I don't see a world state as a long term thing but it ain't going to happen in the short term. Till then, if the people wish to have their own state and it is reasonably viable, why not?

I share DGL's suspicion of nationalism as, outside friendly sports, more damaging then a good thing. That doesn't mean I think Israel should no longer exist or Palestine should just arbitrarily be ended as a state
“You, are a rebellious son who abandoned his father. You are a cruel brigand who murdered his lord. How can Heaven and Earth put up with you for long? And unless you die soon, how can you face the sight of men?”
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 15927
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Jebusrocks » Sun Aug 24, 2014 7:13 am

I think we have different definitions of 'terror' concerning the IDF tactics.


I define terror as an act of intimidating a country into submission by breaking its morale and support. One of the biggest methods of "terrorism" was targeting civilians, attempting to break their morale and thus force a country to surrender. A great example would for example, be the American allied bombings of Germany and Japan (and vice versa), or more recently, 9/11. Most of these attacks have proven to be completely counter-productive. In regions like Germany, Japan, and England (during the Blitz) public morale and support for the war actually increased, not decreased.

Extremist-Islamic militant terrorism is exactly the same thing but different, as they do not have the capacity to carry out terror attacks to the scale the Western nations can (9/11 being a very rare example).

I honestly haven't looked too much into IDF operations in the current war, however it seems like an obvious act of terror. They attack civilian targets (including a hospital and I believe a school), and more evidently, they give surrounding areas a day-ahead warning.

Who do you think will leave a hospital or a village if the IDF warned them of an incoming air strike? The militants or people who have their entire lives there and are unable to move (mainly because there aren't many options). Unless the IDF leadership is completely incompetent, this show of force is their attempt to break civilian morale into not supporting Hamas.

I knew deep down that Hamas was responsible. I knew the media was spewing anti-Israel propaganda. They aren't terrorists, they're victims of terrorism. Israel is fighting for their right to exist. Palestine does not need it's own country anymore than Texas or Scotland. It's ridiculous.


lol the frigging hypocrisy of this paragraph is so laughable. Palestine is fighting for their right to exist as much as the Israelis are. Though Hamas enacted acts of terrorism, the IDF retaliated with their own acts of terrorism tenfold, killing hundreds of innocent civilians to send a message.

This idea that the entire Muslim world wants to "kill all Jews" is also laughable. It's funny how people (generally of right-wing) generalize an entire region on the basis of a few opinions they've heard... Right wing opinions of the Middle East are as biased as Left-leaning liberals, they're just too bigoted to see it. I hate politics lol,

Well that's where we get into Nationalism and the pride people hold in their national identity!! I come from Northern Ireland, a very divided part of the UK so I know all about how nationalism can affect your everyday routine!!

Personally, I'm Irish, I may be part of the UK but I was born and bred on the island of Ireland and I have an Irish passport, I'm Irish through and through, including my ancestors!! I don't need to see an Irish flag anywhere to know what I am and hell, I don't need a United Ireland to feel this way, I just am this way and I agree that the borders aren't something that is needed for that sense of identity!!

A street right beside mine is filled with people who consider themselves British and that identity is very important to them, the very notion of being considered Irish throws them into fits of rage and they hang the Union Jack on every lamppost of their street!! I'm fine with them being British, but when they try to tell me that I am not Irish, it makes me giggle since we still live in Northern IRELAND and so its in the name!! Do people from South Korea try to tell people from North Korea that they are not Korean??

A sense of identity is very important to many people so much so that many are willing to murder for it to be recognised and put up flags to mark out their territory!!

I support the Palestinian right to recognise themselves as Palestinian the same as Israeli people should be allowed to identify themselves as Israeli!! I don't support either of them killing people and trying to force that identity on others or trying to prove their identity as more legit that somebody else's!!

In terms of Scotland, they are doing it democratically, the Party advocating independence has been elected by the people and thus are legitimately allowed to introduce a bill or referendum if they choose!! It may not be perceived a something that is necessarily needed but if the people vote for it then it is something they want, such is the democratic way!!


This is one of the biggest questions of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and for the most part, it is not about nationalism. Its a completely different situation from North/South Korea or the British Isles, and unfortunately so. The region was never unified under a single nation-state, and is more about regional autonomy amongst similar mindsets than nationalism (much like the Kurds). It's just sort of called nationalism because we westerners have progressed into nation-states, while most of these Arabic regions were under colonial rule until pretty much end of WWII.

There have been many attempts to "solve" the problem in Israel. The three biggest is: The One-state solution, the Two-State solution, and "Arab reintegration".

1) One-State Solution: The idea that Israel will absolve the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. There have been a lot of scholarly work on this solution, and for the most part, the consensus is that it is no longer possible. Palestinian interest in this plumetted over the past few decades (not that they were that high), and more importantly, Israel has no real outlook if it became a one state solution. Someone said this in one of the journal articles I've read, and I'll reiterate it here, in order for a one state solution to work, Israel must "either give up its democracy, or its Zionism". Palestinians are again becoming, or have become the majority population in the area. Either they have to lose its democracy (in order to keep Israelis in power, they must reduce the voting rights of Palestinians in some way) or its Zionism (the idea of a Jewish state will not exist if the majority of the country's population are Muslim Arabs). This is why the situation is completely different from say, Scotland or Quebec

2) Two-State Solution: The idea that that Israel and Palestine will co-exist. It is safe to say that the Oslo Accord is no longer relevant. The brilliant idea of choosing the PLO (a group that have not been in the area for decades and declining in power) have not worked out(if they had chose Hamas, than a less extremist group, things might have worked out for the better, and more importantly, the Israelis would have had a much stronger justification and overseas support for actionas against them)
Israeli attempts to divy up lands have also come up completely insane and illogical (Palestinians will own pocket settlements with no connectivity in the West Bank, and no access to fresh water).

3) Arab reintegration - this is an idea that hasn't really been taken seriously, but the idea that Palestinians will join other Arab countries like Egypt and Jordan. I haven't seen too much on this, but the mass relocation (unless Israel is willing to make concession to their Arab neighbors, which they won't) is pretty hazardous, and these nations will not have a proper way to dealing with such massive waves of immigration

My personal opinion? No fucking clue. Seriously...
It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat.
User avatar
Jebusrocks
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 2407
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:22 am

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Dong Zhou » Sun Aug 24, 2014 10:07 am

I should point out DGL is left-wing rather then right-wing.
“You, are a rebellious son who abandoned his father. You are a cruel brigand who murdered his lord. How can Heaven and Earth put up with you for long? And unless you die soon, how can you face the sight of men?”
User avatar
Dong Zhou
A-Dou
A-Dou
 
Posts: 15927
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: "Now we must die. May Your Majesty maintain yourself"

Re: Israel vs Hamas

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:05 pm

Jebusrocks wrote:
I define terror as an act of intimidating a country into submission by breaking its morale and support.


You need to define that further. Governments take action all the time to undermine the popular support of other country's citizens, be it economic/diplomatic/etc, in order to accomplish a goal. That alone is far from state terrorism.

One of the biggest methods of "terrorism" was targeting civilians, attempting to break their morale and thus force a country to surrender.


You seem to repeat the term 'force into surrender'. Surrender isn't a necessary component of terrorism, be it regular terrorism or state terrorism. All that is necessary is to use violence to achieve influence political decisions. That alone is a vague definition so we'd need to pin it down.

A great example would for example, be the American allied bombings of Germany and Japan (and vice versa), or more recently, 9/11.


I'm sorry, you're intermixing too many things here. Your first example is the actions of one government body, who is actively at a state of declared war, using military force against the territory of another established government. You'd need to show that the intended targets were purely civilian, and even then it'd likely amount to a war crime and not what we typically consider terrorism.

Your latter example, while completely unlike the former, is an actual and fairly standard example of terrorism. The use of violence by a non-government body aimed only at civilians of another country in an attempt to achieve a goal (not surrender).

Most of these attacks have proven to be completely counter-productive. In regions like Germany, Japan, and England (during the Blitz) public morale and support for the war actually increased, not decreased.


You're assuming the goals were only to achieve this, and not to hinder production of military supplies.

Extremist-Islamic militant terrorism is exactly the same thing but different, as they do not have the capacity to carry out terror attacks to the scale the Western nations can (9/11 being a very rare example).


No they don't. And Western Nations rarely have, if ever have, carried out acts of terrorism.

I honestly haven't looked too much into IDF operations in the current war, however it seems like an obvious act of terror.


If you're not willing to look into, become knowledgeable about, and speak on IDF combat tactics in a government sanctioned military campaign then I think we should avoid throwing out grave insults like 'terrorists'. In fact, if you disagree with specific IDF tactics (which is fine) then call those acts out. As it is, nothing is 'obviously an act of terror' about the IDF's current or past campaign. At best I can agree that I think there's been an unnecessarily high civilian toll in their campaign against Hamas (intended targets).

They attack civilian targets (including a hospital and I believe a school), and more evidently, they give surrounding areas a day-ahead warning.


Yea. You need to be more objective about the facts in my opinion. They attacked and infiltrated a hospital/school in the current campaign (one which was held by the RedCross if I believe) because there were rockets and militants in the stronghold. From your assertion it seems you think that so long as a building holds a 'civilian' purpose, it can't be used by militants as a staging ground. That is fairly obvioulsly a false assumption.

America experienced the same thing with the Iraqis in both Desert Storm and the most recent conflict. Churches/Hospitals/etc were off-limits often, even those sniper/mortar fire came directly from those things. So don't act like militants don't hide in a civilian rich environment intentionally, they do.

Lastly, your last assertion would imply the opposite of an act of terror. A state giving ample warning to civilians that their military will be conducting operations at their location and against militants is the opposite of what terrorists typically do. What that is, is basic decency and military protocol.

Who do you think will leave a hospital or a village if the IDF warned them of an incoming air strike?


Regardless of my thoughts on the feasibility of it for certain individuals, my answer to your question is...reasonable people. If the military told me they'd be shelling my location due to suspected military targets I would leave my area.

The militants or people who have their entire lives there and are unable to move (mainly because there aren't many options). Unless the IDF leadership is completely incompetent, this show of force is their attempt to break civilian morale into not supporting Hamas.


Its far from incompetent, but it also has an insanely difficult task that you seem (from your armchair general fortress) to think is insanely easier and the line between acceptable risks and results is self-evidently black and white. Gaza is a relatively small place, it is packed with civilians and civilians structures and you're fighting militants who hide amongst them. The IDF has a job to do, the fact that they give civilians forewarning (thus betraying any element of surprise to their intended targets) is commendable even if they know some residents will not move. (The IDF can't make civilians move, but they can't stop doing their job either).
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4323
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved