Israeli Gaza Offensive

[summercrane]

[url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/04/2458651.htm[/url]

So it's the eighth day of Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip, and four hours ago they deployed their ground forces in direct military response to Hamas. So far 400 civilians are dead. Riots and protests are happening all over the world, so what do we here at otakuboards think? Is Israel permitted to break International law as defined by the Geneva Convention in their aim to break the back of Hamas?

[Aaryanna]

[FONT="Tahoma"][COLOR="Sienna"]I don't really know enough about the situation to say much, however, if this part is true:[quote][FONT="Arial"]The Israeli military says its aim is to take control of some of the areas used by Palestinian militants to fire rockets at Israel.

Four Israelis have been killed by rocket fire from Gaza.

"The objective is to destroy the Hamas terror infrastructure in the area of operations," military spokeswoman Major Avital Leibovitch said.

"We are going to take some of the launch areas used by Hamas."[/FONT][/quote]It sounds like the other side was the one to start the ruckus in the first place. So wouldn't that make them the one to break International law? If I'm not understanding this correctly, by all means explain.[/COLOR][/FONT]

[Raiha]

[quote name='summercrane'][url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/04/2458651.htm[/url]

So it's the eighth day of Israel's attack on the Gaza Strip, and four hours ago they deployed their ground forces in direct military response to Hamas. So far 400 civilians are dead. Riots and protests are happening all over the world, so what do we here at otakuboards think? Is Israel permitted to break International law as defined by the Geneva Convention in their aim to break the back of Hamas?[/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]It's hard to say. Were those 400 civilians dumped their by their radical leadership for cannon fodder to make the other side look bad and build unnecessarily stupid sympathy for a cause that's ruined millions of people's lives? Is indirect military response better?

Do you even know the history of the situation or are you just responding viscerally to an issue clearly designed to make people go: "Oh Israel is SO mean!"? Because by all means, if you can please tell me what the best course of action is for Israel, who GAVE up that land to the Palestinians, please do. It didn't make peace, as you can clearly see, it just meant that Hamas [Radical Islamic Totalitarian Jerks] could launch their rockets into Israeli CIVILIANS from a slightly closer distance. Get a better background on the situation please before citing that oh so popular refrain of 'international' law.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[summercrane]

[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]It's hard to say. Were those 400 civilians dumped their by their radical leadership for cannon fodder to make the other side look bad and build unnecessarily stupid sympathy for a cause that's ruined millions of people's lives? Is indirect military response better?

Do you even know the history of the situation or are you just responding viscerally to an issue clearly designed to make people go: "Oh Israel is SO mean!"? Because by all means, if you can please tell me what the best course of action is for Israel, who GAVE up that land to the Palestinians, please do. It didn't make peace, as you can clearly see, it just meant that Hamas [Radical Islamic Totalitarian Jerks] could launch their rockets into Israeli CIVILIANS from a slightly closer distance. Get a better background on the situation please before citing that oh so popular refrain of 'international' law.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]
Wow, your post started off so well! To bad it turned hostile...tbh I havn't formed a full opinion yet...though I don't consider myself completely in the dark, I do after all have a degree in history and was also living in Jerusalem during the Gaza pull out a few years ago haha...the purpose of this thread is not for me to try and argue a certain point, in fact I am the first to admit I am not partial to either side as of yet. I don't believe my post is one sided and it's purpose was to merely cultivate discussion on the issue which in turn could give us all perspective on both viewpoints...

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]To be fair though, Raiha, Israel only "gave up" land that wasn't theirs to give in the first place.

And therein lies the problem - there are people who sit on either side of this debate, but in reality both parties are almost equally at fault. On one side you have Israel, which has attracted a certain reaction by settling on land that is not rightfully her own. And then you have the Palestineans, who do not have their own house in order - they currently have a fanatical leadership which contains people who won't rest until all of Israel is destroyed. In other words, for many, there is no room for any kind of peace or compromise.

To answer your question directly, summercrane, it's worth pointing a couple of things out.

Firstly, under international law, every state has the right to self defense. During the cease-fire period, Palestinean extremists continually fired rockets into Israeli territory. For a long time, Israel simply tolerated this. But now, obviously, they've had enough and they are acting in self-defense. That is totally understandable.

Furthermore, the Israeli military has had a deliberate policy of calling around and warning people of impending military strikes, so as to ensure that minimum casualties are suffered by civilians.

Now, admittedly, this isn't fool-proof and obviously civilians will die. Civilians die in every single war - that is one of the ugly and unfortunate realities of war.

The Palestineans should really be asking themselves why they elected Hamas in the first place. I think most Palestineans want peace and most are happy to compromise, but they have a government in power that is unwilling to do so.

It's also worth noting that in the past (particularly the 70's I think), it was actually the United States who shot peace opportunities down by encouraging Israel to reject proposals that it found acceptable. Had the US not been involved in those negotiations, we may very well have the "two state solution" by now.

Unfortunately it's an extremely messy situation that has been going on for a very long time. There is no simple answer. And one can not make a blanket generalization about either side, too - both sides definitely have their positives and negatives.

What matters is that, I think, most people on both sides want a peaceful solution that involves compromise. It's just very unfortunate that the hard-liners are often the ones in control.[/font]

[Raiha]

[quote name='summercrane']Wow, your post started off so well! To bad it turned hostile...tbh I havn't formed a full opinion yet...though I don't consider myself completely in the dark, I do after all have a degree in history and was also living in Jerusalem during the Gaza pull out a few years ago haha...the purpose of this thread is not for me to try and argue a certain point, in fact I am the first to admit I am not partial to either side as of yet. I don't believe my post is one sided and it's purpose was to merely cultivate discussion on the issue which in turn could give us all perspective on both viewpoints...[/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]This Just In: Raiha is Hostile.

If you have a degree in history, that's nice. If you can put a logic train together, that's more useful. If you weren't going to argue a point or if you wanted a fair and non opinionated thread, it would've helped if you didn't start off your entire post with a completely biased opinion of how meanie wenie Israel has killed 400 civilians. Call me hostile, call me a crazy conservative, but if you can tell me that your intro post gave any consideration to Israel's side I'll happily give you that.

Unfortunately, unless you radically edit, I'm going to tell you that you are in fact firmly on the side of Hamas. Or at least that's how you've portrayed yourself. Whether that was intentional or not is entirely up to you to fix.

If you wanted to 'cultivate' it's best if you don't leave the gate accusing ISRAEL of all countries of breaking international law, especially when, as James just pointed out. They. Didn't.

Addendum to James: Well the land thing is definitely debatable, the point is that Hamas/Palestine should have probably cut with the rockets thing once their territory was returned, or ceded, whatever you want to call it.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[SaiyanPrincessX]

[SIZE="1"]I agree with you James.

This battle between the two countries has been going on forever, and its going to keep going. I don't see a long lasting peace treaty coming anytime soon, or ever. It is indeed a sticky situation.

It is odd though thinking about it, I was in Israel some months ago and I was so close to all of this.[/SIZE]

[Raiha]

[quote name='SaiyanPrincessX'][SIZE="1"]I agree with you James.

This battle between the two countries has been going on forever, and its going to keep going. I don't see a long lasting peace treaty coming anytime soon, or ever. It is indeed a sticky situation.

It is odd though thinking about it, I was in Israel some months ago and I was so close to all of this.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Glad you made it back in one piece. It's almost sad how desensitized the people in the country have grown to the violence. Not that I don't understand, but everyone is so ready for disaster that it's simultaneously a good thing and at the same time horrifying.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[James]

[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]
Addendum to James: Well the land thing is definitely debatable, the point is that Hamas/Palestine should have probably cut with the rockets thing once their territory was returned, or ceded, whatever you want to call it.[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]It's only really debatable if you're talking about territory inside the 1947 borders. Those borders, as far as I know, are the most universally supported on both sides.

However Israel was occupying areas well outside that territory. Moreover, they continued to establish and grow illegal settlements right up until recent years.

To their credit, Ariel Sharon actually dismantled those settlements focibly - in doing so, he angered many of the hard-liners within his country. But it was the right thing to do. It was a sign of compromise.

I agree that Hamas should have ceased the rocket fire if it wanted to move forward on any kind of deal - but again, I think we all know that Hamas is an extreme organization. It is even less interested in negotiation than Fatah was (and although they had their extremists, their biggest problem was just lack of true leadership I think).

In any case, I don't think that the OP was sitting in Hamas's corner or anything. I don't get that impression from the opening post.

Rather, there's a clear question about the legality of Israel's current action. I personally think that what they are doing is legal based on the U.N. charter, but I'm certainly no expert in international law.

The broader questions about "who is right", however, are far more complex and difficult.[/font]

[Sabrina]

[FONT="Tahoma"][quote name='summercrane'] Is Israel permitted to break International law as defined by the Geneva Convention in their aim to break the back of Hamas?[/quote]I can't really answer this because the question itself is biased. It's asking the question about breaking International Law from the standpoint of: Israel is at fault. And yet the very article you linked to clearly states that it was the other side who was recklessly firing rockets at Israel and thus triggered the attack.

Palestinian militants attacked Israel. And though I wish those people would find a peaceful solution, I don't expect them to just sit there and accept having rockets fired into their land either.[/FONT]

[Malkav]

From what I've read Hamas has been carrying on bombing raids since the Gaza strip was vacated by Israel. This situation is not entirely different from one that happened earlier this year.

If we recall Georgia was oppressing the people of South Ossetia and taunting the Russians under the belief that the Ruskies wouldn't attack. They were wrong and look what it cost them.

The same thing could be said about Israeli conflict going on now. All you have to do is replace South Ossetia with Gaza and history repeats itself less than 4 months later.

To oversimplify this, after the Yom Kippur war Israel made a pledge to itself to become the biggest baddest bully on the block in order to protect its sovereignty and its people. The constant string of wars, conflicts, and attacks have hardened the little country into one of the powerhouses of the middle east and they have to be in that position. If Israel were to ever fall behind its neighbors would make good on Ahmadinejad's promise to wipe them off the map.

I'm not at all an Israel sympathizer nor am I trying to justify their killing of hundreds, but really what did you expect was going to happen? Israel's been fighting wars in its backyard for decades and now a small terrorist group is firing [strike]Chinese[/strike] rockets onto Israeli countrymen and the country is just supposed to sit idle? If Mexico started firing rockets from Tijuana into Spring Valley then the US would march right into Mexico City and demand Calderon's head.

I really hate to see such a terrible thing happen to innocent bystanders, and Hamas is a terrible organization because their actions put these people in danger to begin with. If they survive it can be expected that they'll use this to start a propaganda war against Israel and something like this will probably happen again.

[Esther]

[FONT="Verdana"][SIZE="1"]I find all these protestors in favor of Hamas to be very hypocritical and offensive.

"Stop the Holocaust in Gaza"?
"Save the children!"?

Please, spare me the dramatics. It's Hamas's fault. Perhaps were they to stop shooting rockets into southern Israel and accepted the cease-fire, Israel wouldn't have had been FORCED into taking more aggresive action. Israel has been taking all this like an abused housewife for the longest time. In ONE single day there were 80 rockets fired into southern Israel. 80! So now that Israel decides to take action, they're the bad guy?

Someone, for God's sake, please explain this mind-set to me because I'm really not getting it.

And people need to stop pulling the "save the children" card because it's really ineffective. The Israeli government hasn't been storming orphanages in Gaza and exterminating Palestinian children. There is a conflict in a densely populated area, and when there is military conflict in a densely populated area there WILL be casualties, and unfortunately some will be children.

There is not "Holocaust" going on in Gaza. How can you compare 400 deaths to the deaths of millions who were persecuted PURPOSEFULLY? The Palestinian people are not being targeted because they are Palestinians. Hamas is the enemy here, and they happen to be Palestinians. The Israeli government has stated that they wish to have peace with the Palestinian people but Hamas has decided to ignore this.

Hamas had a chance to avoid this, they took that chance and threw it out the window.

I support Israel's actions in Gaza. It's very clear who is at fault here.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Esther, I don't think anyone here is making the claims you mention in your post. Certainly I haven't seen anyone here compare this to the Holocaust.

I think most people are just trying to understand what is behind the current offensive in Gaza and obviously that's a pretty complex thing. On the surface you can say that Israel is reacting to Hamas. And then someone else will say that Hamas is reacting to Isreal's occupation of their land. And so it goes.

The problem, from my perspective, is that there's no sense of balance to this issue much of the time. Nor is there an appreciation of the complexity involved - the idea that, for instance, all Palestineans are not the same - or indeed that all Israelis are not the same. There are, after all, some within Israel who continue to support a heavy settlement expansion program (although most don't).

As far as comparing this to South Ossetia, I don't really view them as being too comparable. The South Ossetian dispute came about primarily as a result of the break up of the former Soviet Union.

South Ossetia was claimed by Georgia quite a while ago - in fact I believe it has always been recognized as part of Georgia. Georgia then made the mistake of invading South Ossetia in an attempt to drive out Russian forces - the end result, of course, was a massive and pretty foolish miscalculation.

But the outcome there says more about a Russian desire to re-assert its former dominance than any perceived oppression by Georgia.[/font]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR="Indigo"][FONT="Arial"][quote name='James][font=franklin gothic medium']Esther, I don't think anyone here is making the claims you mention in your post. Certainly I haven't seen anyone here compare this to the Holocaust.[/font][/quote]I believe Esther is referring to the links within the article that go to [I]other[/I] articles that talk about the protests being held. Articles like this one: [URL="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/04/2458664.htm"][U]Protests[/U][/URL] where people are making overly dramatic claims like that. I doubt she was referring to a post here.

Anyway, most of the people here have already stated what I think. If you're stupid enough to fire missiles at another country and kill their citizens, then you should be prepared to face the consequences for your behavior. The idea that they can just fire on Israel and not be held accountable doesn't fly with me. [/FONT][/COLOR]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='Raiha][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]This Just In: Raiha is Hostile.[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]Not just in and you know it. So if you could ease off on the hostile bit I'd appreciate it.

However summercrane, Raiha makes a very valid point about the so called neutrality of your original post. Sabrina pointed it out as well. Your opening post had the biased slant of saying Israel was at fault. Though if that's your opinion you're certainly entitled to it.

However I read the article and in this instance Israel is responding to acts of aggression that were, in this case, started by the other side first. So saying they're breaking International law ignores the fact that they were provoked. They didn't just up and decide to attack Hamas for no reason at all.

Also, I seriously doubt International law allows one country to wantonly attack another and not be held accountable for their actions. So based on what I've read, I'm seeing that it was Hamas that broke International law in this case, not Israel.

[James]

[quote name='Indi'][COLOR="Indigo"][FONT="Arial"]I believe Esther is referring to the links within the article that go to [I]other[/I] articles that talk about the protests being held. Articles like this one: [URL="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/04/2458664.htm"][U]Protests[/U][/URL] where people are making overly dramatic claims like that. I doubt she was referring to a post here.
[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, that's cool and all, but it wasn't terribly clear from her post. Given that a thread involves responses to the OP, it's usually a good idea to be specific when referencing stuff outside the thread.

I say this partly for the sake of clarity, but also because I don't think anyone in this thread has yet had a really alarmist response to this.

Anyway, summercrane, it looks like you've got a pretty good series of responses here. And for the most part everyone has been civil about it, which is always helpful. :catgirl:[/font]

[Esther]

[quote name='James'][font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, that's cool and all, but it wasn't terribly clear from her post. Given that a thread involves responses to the OP, it's usually a good idea to be specific when referencing stuff outside the thread.
[/font][/QUOTE]

Sorry you mis-read my post, James. I thought I was pretty specific when I stated in the very beginning sentence of my post that I was talking about protests and went on to speak about the protests... Also, if I was responding to a specific post I'm always sure to quote that post like I did above. :]

[quote name='Rachmanioff']Also, I seriously doubt International law allows one country to wantonly attack another and not be held accountable for their actions. So based on what I've read, I'm seeing that it was Hamas that broke International law in this case, not Israel.[/quote]

[FONT="Verdana"][SIZE="1"]Exactly my point. The people who cite International Law against Israel obviously don't have any background knowledge on the crisis in the Middle East. Like I've already said, rockets have been fired into Israeli territory since the last Gaza fiasco in 2006. Hamas and their supporters like to state that the rockets haven't killed as many people as the airstrikes carried out by Israel into Gaza (City). So I guess it's now okay to fire mortars into your enemy's territory and kill a few people and cause survivors to suffer from post-psychological stress.

In my opinion, Hamas wanted this to happen.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[James]

[quote name='Esther']Sorry you mis-read my post, James. I thought I was pretty specific when I stated in the very beginning sentence of my post that I was talking about protests and went on to speak about the protests... Also, if I was responding to a specific post I'm always sure to quote that post like I did above. :][/quote]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Yeah, that's totally cool. I just wanted to emphasize the point that while the OP's original post indicated a particular bias/opinion, it doesn't necessarily advocate everything that ties in with the link provided.

I know you weren't directly implying that, but the source was not immediately clear either. So, you know, it's a way to keep things on track. :catgirl:[/font]

[quote][FONT="Verdana"][SIZE="1"]In my opinion, Hamas wanted this to happen.[/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]

[font=franklin gothic medium]I kind of agree with this. I mean, what other response could Hamas expect?

And then when Israel finally responds, this provides Hamas with the justification to a) continue attacks and b) recruit more people. It also invariably adds to the sense of desperation and anger among Palestineans, hard-liners and moderates alike.

So unfortunately this cycle just continues. And Hamas is really the linch pin for a great deal of what is happening now (and what has happened for years, really). The difficult part is that the moderates within Palestine can't dislodge a group with such power and zeal.

Most of all I feel sorry for those caught in the crossfire who have absolutely no power to change things, at least individually.[/font]

[Mr. Blonde]

I was watching msnbc earlier today and they were discussing as to whether the US was going to force a cease fire. *Sigh* Really?

I think we've learned after getting involved in middle eastern affairs since 1983(ish) that this 2,000 year old war is never going to end (sad to say) until the Israeli's blow the Palestinians up or vice versa. Neither side is going to give up Gaza, and both will die for it.

War is always obsurd, but a religious war is altogether pointless.

[Raunsgaard]

While I wouldn't vouch for any part in this conflict, as far as I know it all began back when the Isrealian (are they called so? - not native english speaking) people were given a country to call their own, they simply forgot to ask the people already living in this region if they could "borrow" some of their land, and simply claimed it without taking into consideration the people already living there.
Am I right? If not please fill me in on what really happened back then, so that I can decide upon my own point of view:>

Anyway I more or less agree with James. It is definately wrong of Hamas to repeatedly launch missiles into Isrealian territory, and I understand Isreal's reactions.
But.. They are going to far, the current civilian losses are to great, so I do not think that their current way of taking action should be accepted by the world community.
Another problem is that Hamas ain't really negotiating with Isreal, and that Isreal should not be acknowledged as a country is not going to happen, nor is it fair.
Other times Isreal has blocked relief supplies and aid workers from gaining acces to Gaza to help the civilian victims in there, which is simply outrageous.
They should simply live in mutual tolerance and both try to agree on some treaty than would benefit civilians in both countries as much as possible.

On a site note; hostile posting for not obvious reasons is not cool:>

In short: Give in to Amnesty Internationals demands, and follow their recommendations!

Link to most recent news article, regarding Human Rights and safety in the Gaza area, from Amnesty International:

[url]http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/israelopt-immediate-access-humanitarian-workers-and-observers-essential-20081231[/url]

[Raiha]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Actually there are disputes that the Palestinians even owned their land. But on the other hand, citing international law, as so many people are fond of doing would mean that when Israel defeated Hamas last time and obtained the Gaza strip by right of conquest, it's theirs. Which means they were under no obligation to give it back.

In the same vein, you could ask the US to give back California [like some skulls-full-of-oatmeal are asking right this very minute. Also New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, and some parts of Nevada. I'm not going to even dignify that claim though. As I recall, the US kicked Mexican *** for the land, so they get to keep it. Same goes for Israel. The only difference is that now Israel is so obsessed with getting it right, they are actually e-mailing and texting their next targets before the bombs fall. When their targets stay put and get blown up to build national sympathy, one can only wonder. Why even bother?[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Tophel]

Israel cannot win here. There is no military solution to the Palestinian issue. The only way Israel will get any peace is if it makes peace. But peace is hard. War is easy. So war is being waged.

As for the OP question about breaking international laws, etc. Well few people actually care about that. The US breaks those laws all the time. In this particular case, Israel is breaking the law, both the letter and the spirit.

Every country is allowed to defend itself but its actions must be PROPORTIONAL to the threat. In 7 or 8 years of pestering Israel with its pathetic rockets, Hamas has killed about 7 people in those attacks. In over a week of operations, Israel has slaughtered over 500 so far, and counting. The numbers don't add up.

Hamas is really not a threat to Israel or its citizens. The rockets are more a nuisance than anything else. More people die on the roads in Israel each month alone than have died in 7 years of rocket fire.

No the 'reason' for the war lies elsewhere. Israel wants to change the ground situation before Obama takes office (because Israel knows that Bush will gladly follow Israel to the gates of Hell). There is also an election in Israel coming up next month and no Israeli politician has suffered by being 'too hard' on Hamas.

What is ironic is that Bush talks about democracy in the Middle East (or he used to). They had democracy, the people elected Hamas. But the US and Israel cannot accept the Palestinian peoples' choice so they tried to stage a coup (the US and Israel supported Fatah in its attemppts to overthrow Hamas in the Gaza). The coup failed, Hamas' control strengthened. So they tried to starve Hamas by punishing the entire 1.5 million people in Gaza, i.e. closing the borders, basically like a medieval siege. That has been going on for months, actually over a year now. And now they take it a step further and wage a war. The irony? The US wants democracy but only when the people elect the government the US likes. :rolleyes:

Why was Hamas peppering Israel with these silly rockets? Precisely to draw this kind of reaction. Hamas can then get an excellent PR deal, and afterwards they can always claim victory. There is no downside for them because this is a political and not a military problem. Hamas WANTS Israel to overreact.

So why does Israel fall for this ruse? Because there is no downside for the Israeli politicians by being 'hard' on Hamas. Everybody gets what they want. Except the thousands of civilians getting caught in the crossfire.

[Raiha]

[quote name='Tophel']As for the OP question about breaking international laws, etc. Well few people actually care about that. The US breaks those laws all the time. In this particular case, Israel is breaking the law, both the letter and the spirit.

Every country is allowed to defend itself but its actions must be PROPORTIONAL to the threat. In 7 or 8 years of pestering Israel with its pathetic rockets, Hamas has killed about 7 people in those attacks. In over a week of operations, Israel has slaughtered over 500 so far, and counting. The numbers don't add up.
[/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Retaliation to threat, in this case rockets, is perfectly legitimate under any law. Furthermore, there is no provision ANYWHERE in the HISTORY of war for "proportional" response. I heard that nonsense on ABC and MSNBC, and ever other mainstream news outlet that's never had to fight a real war before.

A proportional response to any threat just means nobody will win. You lob a rocket, I lob a rocket, and the score is 1 to 1. You lob a rocket, and I murder your family, children, relatives, uncles with beards, and all the next door neighbors means that I win. Score is 1 to -10,000. The point of war is for it to be so one sided that the opposition can't rise up to threaten you anymore. See: Dresden and Hiroshima for examples of how disproportionate responses work.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Drizzt Do'urden]

[quote name='Mr. Blonde']
War is always obsurd, but a religious war is altogether pointless.[/QUOTE]

Not trying to dispute this fact in the least from a standpoint from somebody who has seen what religion and war can do to a country, but what needs to be remembered here is that Israel has been the site of religious war for 2,000 years.

Muslims, Jews, and Christians have coveted every inch of this Country since the begining, Crusades anyone? The only reason we don't fight over it now is because we've learned that backing Israel is easier then trying to fight them. I know I should look things up before I quote them, but I don't have time for that right at the moment. Anyone who does please look up the...I think it was called the 7 year war in which Israel marched over multiple countries basically just to prove a point.

I think U.S. involvement (as long as it is unbaised, though we all know it won't be) could be unavoidable at this point. Sure Hamas started it, but when 400 non-combatants are killed then it's time to back off. I don't care if they have radical belifs or not. That would be like us invaded Iraq and just destorying a whole villiage becasue it was in the wrong place. I know this is not always avoidable, and maybe they were housing rocket sites, but there are other ways and Israel knows it. They just prefer the pure unadultrated agression approach.....sort've like Raiha

[B]Edit:[/B] Summercrane, you've learned a good lesson in this thread. Unless you have a bullet proof retaliation to the hostilities of Raiha, it's best to let it go because I think anybodies yet to best her.

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR="Sienna"][FONT="Tahoma"][quote name='Tophel']Every country is allowed to defend itself but its actions must be PROPORTIONAL to the threat. In 7 or 8 years of pestering Israel with its pathetic rockets, Hamas has killed about 7 people in those attacks. In over a week of operations, Israel has slaughtered over 500 so far, and counting. The numbers don't add up.[/quote][B]lolwut?[/B]

Since when was war or any form of conflict ever proportional? [/FONT][/COLOR]