Justifications for Gaza

[zyj3000]

Amnesty International: Mounting evidence of deliberate attacks on Gaza health workers by Israeli army

It's complete utter one sided b.s.

With no connection(or maybe there is) there is plenty of evidence of hamas using ambulances to transport people and weapons.

then where is your "evidence"? can you provide it?

[zyj3000]

Human Rights Watch: Israeli Soldiers Shoot and Kill Fleeing Civilians

[itsAj]

The IDF launched "Operation Protective Edge" on the 8th of July, more than a month ago. The operation involved shelling and a ground offensive.

More than 1800 people have died in Gaza, 3 civilians have died in Israel. 64 members of the IDF have died.

The UN estimate that more than 68% of the Palestinian dead are civilians, including 377 children and 196 women. The UN says that 2744 children have been injured - and they're referring to war wounds, not bruises. But what do these statistics mean?

Sadly, I feel that these numbers do not do justice to those dead and injured children - those children were not terrorists... perhaps their siblings or relatives may become terrorists in response to the grief they are carrying.

Children were playing on Gaza beach and were hit by a shell. They were playing on a beach. That's a disturbing mental image. When you see pictures of tiny corpses wrapped in cloth or children with shrapnel wounds and missing limbs. That is disturbing footage. And when I think of how many families in Gaza must be in anguish - how many mothers have held their baby's corpses? How many father's have lost their sons? How many children have lost their siblings? That is a disturbing reality, one which has compelled me to write this entry.

I have an 8 year old sister. If she died of an illness I would be distraught. However if she was murdered while she was playing in the park, I'm not even sure how I would feel - how can I guess how I would I feel in that situation? And I can only think that my mother would breakdown. Yet the appalling truth is that many people have numbed themselves to the suffering of the Palestinians.

I've stumbled across some deplorable justifications for the actions of the IDF in Gaza on social media and in articles. I'll run through a few and give my blunt opinion on them:

1) "Civilian casualties are a reality of warfare". These people are dressing up the phrase "shit happens". They're forgetting another reality: that Gaza is a strip of land - (hence Gaza strip) densely populated and can simply not be shelled without civilian casualties. The actions of the IDF have proven that the Israeli government are indifferent to the death of civilians in Gaza.

2) "There are far more people dying in conflicts within Arab countries such as Syria". Since when was it a contest? This opinion confuses me. It reminds of me of the debate around drug abuse, for instance heroin overdoses. Someone might say: "Well, far more people are dying from alcohol poisoning". That doesn't mean that heroin overdoses aren't an issue! What is that person suggesting: that it's worse to die from alcohol poisoning? Or maybe that alcohol poisoning is a "bigger" issue based on the number of deaths? To simply dismiss the conflict in Gaza is an insult to the civilians (many of whom were children) who have died there.

3) "The IDF's actions were justified - Hamas were firing rockets into Israel". It is true that Hamas were firing rockets into Israel. 3 Israeli citizens were killed by Hamas rockets and the lives of Israeli citizens were disrupted by rocket alarms. But does that justify the murder of 377 children? Does that justify injuring 2744 children? Can the murder of children ever be justified?? Those children weren't firing the rockets, and those injured (war wounds, not bruises) kids might not even have homes to return to... IDF shells killed those children. Was the IDF response proportionate? Does the IDF have the right to repeatedly violate UN resolutions?

A few interesting facts, people and perspectives:

The US government gave the IDF $8.5 million per day of 2013.

Gerald Kaufman - Jewish Labour MP , very heavy in his criticism of the Israeli government but not without a degree of validity

Gideon Levy - an Israeli journalist

you may choose to want to look at it from your angle, but you don't get it. the "civialians" and "children" over there are basically all allies of the enemy that kills people all the time. they aren't really any better...

israel is on its own besides the financial support they receive. th eonly reason more civialians die on the gaza side is because they purposefully put their weapons in schools an dhotels an dhospitals.

that is  really it, and israel has missile interceptors called th eiron dome and gaza does not. israel drops leaflets and calls buildings to warn civilians to leave the area immediately as there are weapons there they are going to strike. unless you want a full scale invasion of gaza to go house to house and have more casualties thann what else do u expect.

This really is exactly it. The civilians are intentionally putting themselves in harms way in order to help make Israel look bad to the rest of the world. IMO this makes them as much of the enemy as the people with guns and rockets. Everyone has the right to hold their own opinion, but they do not have the right to harbor militants who intend to attack other countries.

[zyj3000]

For thousands of years, Gaza has been an important seaport and trade community, exporting agricultural produce to other areas of historic Palestine and serving as a way station for traders traveling along the Egypt-Syria trade route. Located in the southwest most corner of historic Palestine, Gaza is home to a wealth of natural resources including fertile agricultural land, rich fishing grounds, and large offshore natural gas reserves. Gaza also has beautiful beaches, a rich history, and a moderate climate, all of which make it a potentially attractive tourist destination. Add to this a highly educated and youthful population (60 percent under the age of 18, and over 40 percent age 14 or younger), and you might expect  that Gaza’s development prospects were positive.

Unfortunately this is not the case. Gaza’s wealth is largely unreachable as a direct result of Israel’s occupation and blockade. Most agricultural land is located in places declared closed military areas (“no go” zones) or has been destroyed during military attacks. Access to traditional fishing grounds is restricted by the Israeli navy. Development of the natural gas reserves is forbidden by the Israeli government. All of this while the movement of people into and out of Gaza is severely restricted and both the import of goods and the export of products from Gaza is strictly limited. Military attacks over the last 13 years have also resulted in the near complete destruction of Gaza’s business and manufacturing base. As a result, the unemployment rate among Gaza’s 1.7 million residents is over 35 percent  and poverty rates are even higher. More than 80 percent of the population is now dependent on international assistance for survival. Yet the people of Gaza have not lost hope, continuing to dream about and work for a better future.

[zyj3000]

Did the 2005 Israeli redeployment from Gaza end Israeli military operations in Gaza?

No, while Israeli did withdraw its military bases from Gaza and redeployed its forces to bases outside of Gaza in 2005, it continues to carry out daily military operations in and attacks on Gaza.  According to Defense for Children International – Palestine, during the first year after the disengagement the Israeli military fired over 15,000 shells into Gaza, conducted over 550 airstrikes on Gaza, and carried out regular military incursions into Gaza.  A total of 525 Palestinians were killed and 1,527 injured during these attacks.  This period included two major military operations.  Operation Summer Rains during June 2006 left at least 256 Palestinians dead and 848 injured.  At least 85 more Palestinians were killed in Gaza during a November 2006 military offensive which was codenamed Operation Autumn Clouds.

The next major Israeli military operation in Gaza was Operation Warm Winter in February and March 2008.  During this attack Israel killed 120 (34 children) and injured 269 (at least 63 children) Palestinians.  A ceasefire negotiated between Hamas and Israel in June 2008 dramatically lowered violence until Israel killed six Palestinians during an incursion into Gaza in November 2008.  Tit for tat attacks between Gaza and Israel escalated over the next month until Israel launched Operation Cast Lead in December 2008.  More than 1,400 Palestinians, the majority of them civilians, were killed by Israel during Operation Cast Lead and over 16,000 Gazans were permanently displaced from their homes which were destroyed during the attack.  Finally, Israel carried out Operation Pillar of Cloud in Gaza during November 2012 killing 168 Palestinians and destroying hundreds of homes.  Between all of these operations Israel conducted military incursions into Gaza or fired into Gaza using ground artillery, naval forces, and airstrikes on a daily basis.

Gazans suffered nearly 7 decades of oppresssion, murder and maiming by israeli brutal forces, if you are one of them would you just sit there do nothing and watch israeli soldiers kill your neighbours one by one until they kill you too?

[DodoB]

4-Year-Old Israeli Boy Killed by Hamas Mortar Fired From Near UNRWA School in Gaza

[zyj3000]

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/

[Mars not Moon]

Don't know much on the theories on the Gaza thing but The middle east conflict should stop Asap 

[DhaniBoy]

it is different betwen how to defend ourselves and to attack the innocent people like israel do
defending palestina land from the terrorist like israel, must be done by the palestine people
how do you think if your freedom is taken by other, are you just do not anything
hopefully palestine will get their freedom ...

[TrailingComet]

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.612085

Find this article to be very apt and on-the-money

[u9y42]

Learn what Genocide means. Gaza's population is steadily growing,assuming it wasnt it would take 90 years for Israel to kill every Gazan in the current rate.

I guess you didn't take the advice I gave you on the other thread of looking up the definition (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=718407.msg8171882#msg8171882). Again, you don't classify it as genocide only if the whole population is killed off. Also, see my answer to starscream's post on that thread for a little more detail on it.

you may choose to want to look at it from your angle, but you don't get it. the "civialians" and "children" over there are basically all allies of the enemy that kills people all the time. they aren't really any better...

israel is on its own besides the financial support they receive. th eonly reason more civialians die on the gaza side is because they purposefully put their weapons in schools an dhotels an dhospitals.

that is  really it, and israel has missile interceptors called th eiron dome and gaza does not. israel drops leaflets and calls buildings to warn civilians to leave the area immediately as there are weapons there they are going to strike. unless you want a full scale invasion of gaza to go house to house and have more casualties thann what else do u expect.

At one point Israel declared about 45% of Gaza as a no-go zone; in a small, densely populated area such as Gaza, and with both Israel and Egypt mostly denying passage to civilians, where exactly is the population supposed to go, even when warnings are actually given? Often times these people have nowhere else to go, and even taking refuge in the few shelters there are doesn't guarantee their safety, as Israel has, intentionally or not, repeatedly hit them.

Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again.

[DodoB]

Learn what Genocide means. Gaza's population is steadily growing,assuming it wasnt it would take 90 years for Israel to kill every Gazan in the current rate.

I guess you didn't take the advice I gave you on the other thread of looking up the definition (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=718407.msg8171882#msg8171882). Again, you don't classify it as genocide only if the whole population is killed off. Also, see my answer to starscream's post on that thread for a little more detail on it.

Fine,Lets look at Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

Genocide is the systematic destruction of all or part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group via the (a) Killing of members of the group; (b)  Causing of serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

If you follow these two,you get a double genocide because both Hamas and Israel pass those criterias.
No proof the current operation is intended to to systematically exterminate the Palestinians whatsoever.

 (c)Deliberate inflicting on the group's conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

 Palestininan population is steadily growing,at the current rate Genocide in this cirteria is impossible.

 (d) Imposing of measures intended to prevent births within the group; or (e) Forcible transferring of children of the group to another group.

Not happening.

[u9y42]

Fine,Lets look at Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

Genocide is the systematic destruction of all or part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group via the (a) Killing of members of the group; (b)  Causing of serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

If you follow these two,you get a double genocide because both Hamas and Israel pass those criterias.
No proof the current operation is intended to to systematically exterminate the Palestinians whatsoever.

 (c)Deliberate inflicting on the group's conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

 Palestininan population is steadily growing,at the current rate Genocide in this cirteria is impossible.

 (d) Imposing of measures intended to prevent births within the group; or (e) Forcible transferring of children of the group to another group.

Not happening.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Hamas' actions here - but you're equating two sides that aren't on equal footing. As I said before, Israel's actions are completely disproportionate. For more detail, and to address a), b) and c), see my reply to Starscream from the other thread (sorry for the copy/paste, but it gets tiring always reading and replying to the same things, especially when all this is public knowledge already):

About 80% of the Palestinian casualties are civilians - either the IDF is worryingly incompetent (so much so that it would probably be better not to allow them anywhere near a weapon, for fear they would hurt themselves), or they target/don't care about civilians and civilian infrastructure. Am I missing another possibility there? I've lost count at the amount of shelters they've hit after being repeatedly warned of the coordinates, and that there were refugees inside - at what point should people stop calling these attacks accidents and instead start calling them intentional? Because they just keep on happening, time and time again. And no, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to kill civilians because Hamas might or might not be nearby.

Are we supposed to believe this isn't just a continuation of the Dahiya doctrine? Quoting IDF Northern Command Chief Gadi Eisenkot, “What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. [...] This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved”. And quoting a Wikileaks release, "Eisenkot stated that Damascus fully understands what the Israelis did in Dahiya, and that the Israelis have the capability of doing the same to Syria. He suggested the possibility of harm to the population has been Hizballah leader Nasrallah's main constraint, and the reason for the quiet over the past two years".

Then we have the blockade imposed on Gaza, which according to official Israeli policy, is meant to keep the Palestinian population on a state just slightly above that consistent with a humanitarian crisis, and the economy there at the brink of collapse - again, we know this thanks to Wikileaks. Of course, with the recent escalation of the conflict, and the usual Israeli targeting of vital infrastructure, they are now in a humanitarian crisis.

I honestly don't think it's such a stretch to call this genocide anymore.

EDIT: Oh, and take a look also at the following part, in relation to Apartheid, which touches on b) and c) as well.

[DodoB]

About 80% of the Palestinian casualties are civilians

According to Hamas-the numbers are most likely very diffrent.

at what point should people stop calling these attacks accidents and instead start calling them intentional? Because they just keep on happening, time and time again. And no, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to kill civilians because Hamas might or might not be nearby.

Unavoidable Incidents like this are numerous and rare when looking at the fact that Israel made thousands of strikes in Gaza that were not targetet against civilians. its pretty much impossible to fight a war without civilian casualties,especially in densely populated areas.

Then we have the blockade imposed on Gaza, which according to official Israeli policy, is meant to keep the Palestinian population on a state just slightly above that consistent with a humanitarian crisis

Source? the official reason for the blockade is Hamas.

Are we supposed to believe this isn't just a continuation of the Dahiya doctrine? Quoting IDF Northern Command Chief Gadi Eisenkot, “What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. [...] This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved”. And quoting a Wikileaks release, "Eisenkot stated that Damascus fully understands what the Israelis did in Dahiya, and that the Israelis have the capability of doing the same to Syria. He suggested the possibility of harm to the population has been Hizballah leader Nasrallah's main constraint, and the reason for the quiet over the past two years".

This quote whether actually said this way or not proves nothing about the situation on the ground.

[bryant.coleman]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Hamas' actions here - but you're equating two sides that aren't on equal footing. As I said before, Israel's actions are completely disproportionate.

Well.... I have only one thing today. Don't poke the sleeping bear. If you do that, then don't complain when it bite back. Unlike the previous Gaza vs Israel conflicts, this conflict has seen a more balanced international reaction. People living outside the Middle-East are condemning the Israeli bombings as well as the Hamas rocket strikes.  

[u9y42]

About 80% of the Palestinian casualties are civilians

According to Hamas-the numbers are most likely very diffrent.

The estimates of civilian casualties caused by Israeli attacks I've seen so far mostly range from about 70% to 80%. And even if you only want to take the IDF estimates, they put it at some 55% - quite indefensible no matter how you look at it, if you ask me.

at what point should people stop calling these attacks accidents and instead start calling them intentional? Because they just keep on happening, time and time again. And no, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to kill civilians because Hamas might or might not be nearby.

Unavoidable Incidents like this are numerous and rare when looking at the fact that Israel made thousands of strikes in Gaza that were not targetet against civilians. its pretty much impossible to fight a war without civilian casualties,especially in densely populated areas.

Again, Israel doesn't have the right to further endanger and kill civilians just because Hamas might be nearby, and then keeping it up until it causes over 2000 casualties, over 10000 wounded, hundreds of thousands of refugees, and destruction of vital infrastructure that the population depends on to live. And you can only say this is unavoidable if you don't want to move to a peaceful solution - and unfortunately, Israel has no interest in a two state solution, or even a one state solution, for that matter, as evidenced by its actions over the years.

Then we have the blockade imposed on Gaza, which according to official Israeli policy, is meant to keep the Palestinian population on a state just slightly above that consistent with a humanitarian crisis

Source? the official reason for the blockade is Hamas.

The sources are Israeli officials, as revealed by Wikileaks (http://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08TELAVIV2447_a.html).

[...]
Israeli officials have confirmed to Embassy officials on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy functioning at the lowest level possible consistent with avoiding a humanitarian crisis. [...] As part of their overall embargo plan against Gaza, Israeli officials have confirmed to econoffs on multiple occasions that they intend to keep the Gazan economy on the brink of collapse without quite pushing it over the edge (see reftel &D8).
[...]

Now, you can try and excuse this any way you want, Hamas or not, but you can't then ignore the consequences on the population that is forced to live under this regime, or how it serves to further radicalize it.

Are we supposed to believe this isn't just a continuation of the Dahiya doctrine? Quoting IDF Northern Command Chief Gadi Eisenkot, “What happened in the Dahiya quarter of Beirut in 2006 will happen in every village from which Israel is fired on. We will apply disproportionate force on it and cause great damage and destruction there. From our standpoint, these are not civilian villages, they are military bases. [...] This is not a recommendation. This is a plan. And it has been approved”. And quoting a Wikileaks release, "Eisenkot stated that Damascus fully understands what the Israelis did in Dahiya, and that the Israelis have the capability of doing the same to Syria. He suggested the possibility of harm to the population has been Hizballah leader Nasrallah's main constraint, and the reason for the quiet over the past two years".

This quote whether actually said this way or not proves nothing about the situation on the ground.

Again, this is an official quote from the current deputy chief of General Staff Gadi Eisenkot, made during an interview, and shown in another leaked cable: http://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08TELAVIV2329_a.html. Whether or not this reflects the reality on Gaza, you can see from the outcome on the ground.

Well.... I have only one thing today. Don't poke the sleeping bear. If you do that, then don't complain when it bite back. Unlike the previous Gaza vs Israel conflicts, this conflict has seen a more balanced international reaction. People living outside the Middle-East are condemning the Israeli bombings as well as the Hamas rocket strikes.

That seems like the right reaction to me - but don't forget the circumstances which serve to perpetuate the conflict, namely, the blockade and the occupation.

[DodoB]

Again, Israel doesn't have the right to further endanger and kill civilians just because Hamas might be nearby, and then keeping it up until it causes over 2000 casualties, over 10000 wounded, hundreds of thousands of refugees, and destruction of vital infrastructure that the population depends on to live. And you can only say this is unavoidable if you don't want to move to a peaceful solution - and unfortunately, Israel has no interest in a two state solution, or even a one state solution, for that matter, as evidenced by its actions over the years.

Israel does give warnings and phone calls before it bombs a target with civilians nearby,Hamas being the governing body of Gaza supported by the population and their human shields makes it impossible for Israel not to harm civilians.
a peaceful solution requires both sides to aim for peace,and that is currently impossible.

Now, you can try and excuse this any way you want, Hamas or not, but you can't then ignore the consequences on the population that is forced to live under this regime, or how it serves to further radicalize it.

The Palestininans elected Hamas,even if some Palestininans dont like Hamas anymore they realy do nothing to show it.  besides Hamas,that are dozens of other factions that co operate with Hamas. the more radical Islamic Jihad for example.

That seems like the right reaction to me - but don't forget the circumstances which serve to perpetuate the conflict, namely, the blockade and the occupation.

That,and the Palestinians not wanting to have any Jews near them.

[u9y42]

Again, Israel doesn't have the right to further endanger and kill civilians just because Hamas might be nearby, and then keeping it up until it causes over 2000 casualties, over 10000 wounded, hundreds of thousands of refugees, and destruction of vital infrastructure that the population depends on to live. And you can only say this is unavoidable if you don't want to move to a peaceful solution - and unfortunately, Israel has no interest in a two state solution, or even a one state solution, for that matter, as evidenced by its actions over the years.

Israel does give warnings and phone calls before it bombs a target with civilians nearby,Hamas being the governing body of Gaza supported by the population and their human shields makes it impossible for Israel not to harm civilians.

I've just answered someone on this exact point, a few posts back:

"At one point Israel declared about 45% of Gaza as a no-go zone; in a small, densely populated area such as Gaza, and with both Israel and Egypt mostly denying passage to civilians, where exactly is the population supposed to go, even when warnings are actually given? Often times these people have nowhere else to go, and even taking refuge in the few shelters there are doesn't guarantee their safety, as Israel has, intentionally or not, repeatedly hit them."

And again - this doesn't seem to have registered with you yet:

"Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again."

That is to say, you can't just attack an area when you know civilians will most likely be harmed - even if you warned them to get out (and as I said above, they can't always really do so). Doing this is a violation of the rules of war, and violates not only discrimination between civilian and military targets, but also proportionality in response to the threat.

a peaceful solution requires both sides to aim for peace,and that is currently impossible.

Yes, because Israel refuses to accept a peace deal, either in the form of the one or two state solution.

Now, you can try and excuse this any way you want, Hamas or not, but you can't then ignore the consequences on the population that is forced to live under this regime, or how it serves to further radicalize it.

The Palestininans elected Hamas,even if some Palestininans dont like Hamas anymore they realy do nothing to show it.  besides Hamas,that are dozens of other factions that co operate with Hamas. the more radical Islamic Jihad for example.

Know that what you're advocating there is collective punishment - another violation of the Geneva Conventions. Further, it's so bad an argument, that it even serves to legitimate Hamas' attacks on civilians: "some 80% or 90% of Israelis support the attack on Gaza, so they are valid targets", or some nonsense like that - it's wrong when Hamas does it, and it's wrong when Israel does it. But treating the Palestinians like caged animals isn't going to solve anything; only worsen the situation.

That seems like the right reaction to me - but don't forget the circumstances which serve to perpetuate the conflict, namely, the blockade and the occupation.

That,and the Palestinians not wanting to have any Jews near them.

Really? Because I seem to recall them wanting to move to a peaceful solution, even quite recently, and Israel boycotting the negotiations.

[DodoB]

"At one point Israel declared about 45% of Gaza as a no-go zone; in a small, densely populated area such as Gaza, and with both Israel and Egypt mostly denying passage to civilians, where exactly is the population supposed to go, even when warnings are actually given? Often times these people have nowhere else to go, and even taking refuge in the few shelters there are doesn't guarantee their safety, as Israel has, intentionally or not, repeatedly hit them."

They can go to whatever place that is not bombed,while they're at it they should also not bring their rockets with them.

"Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again."

Israel actions are disproportionate,i agree,but they could be much,much worser. they can turn the operation into to an actual and effective genocide which will end the rocket threat,as there will be no one left to fire. though that will create even bigger problems.

"Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again."

Rules of war.. does anybody actualy follow these?
if they were indeed following the so called Dahiya doctrine again the results would be much more catastrophic.

Yes, because Israel refuses to accept a peace deal, either in the form of the one or two state solution.

Which peace deal are you talking about? specify the conditions.

Know that what you're advocating there is collective punishment - another violation of the Geneva Conventions. Further, it's so bad an argument, that it even serves to legitimate Hamas' attacks on civilians: "some 80% or 90% of Israelis support the attack on Gaza, so they are valid targets", or some nonsense like that - it's wrong when Hamas does it, and it's wrong when Israel does it. But treating the Palestinians like caged animals isn't going to solve anything; only worsen the situation.

Caged animals is a one hell of a wild exaggeration. Hamas and its allies seeing the Jews as subhuman does not solve the situation either.

Really? Because I seem to recall them wanting to move to a peaceful solution, even quite recently, and Israel boycotting the negotiations.

Source?

[u9y42]

"At one point Israel declared about 45% of Gaza as a no-go zone; in a small, densely populated area such as Gaza, and with both Israel and Egypt mostly denying passage to civilians, where exactly is the population supposed to go, even when warnings are actually given? Often times these people have nowhere else to go, and even taking refuge in the few shelters there are doesn't guarantee their safety, as Israel has, intentionally or not, repeatedly hit them."

They can go to whatever place that is not bombed,while they're at it they should also not bring their rockets with them.

I get the feeling you really have no idea of the situation in Gaza, and the level of devastation there. Why do you think there are currently, literally, hundreds of thousands of refugees there at the moment? Do you have any idea of what that is? And again, rockets or no rockets, civilians aren't automatically valid targets - that's a violation of the rules of war, if anyone cares.

"Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again."

Israel actions are disproportionate,i agree,but they could be much,much worser. they can turn the operation into to an actual and effective genocide which will end the rocket threat,as there will be no one left to fire. though that will create even bigger problems.

Yes, and other countries could also nuke that whole region to oblivion and end the stupid conflict once and for all - would you like that solution, or should we perhaps move to kill less people, and not more?

"Also, even if there are enemies nearby firing rockets or whatnot, Israel doesn't automatically have the right to attack them if it puts civilians at risk - Israel's actions have been completely disproportionate, and lead me to question if they aren't just following the Dahiya doctrine again."

Rules of war.. does anybody actualy follow these?
if they were indeed following the so called Dahiya doctrine again the results would be much more catastrophic.

You're right, when you have US diplomatic support, you can get away with a lot of crimes - but make no mistake, that support won't last forever, as more and more opposition to Israel's actions is felt at all levels of society; I honestly don't give it 10 years before Israel is completely isolated at this rate.

Yes, because Israel refuses to accept a peace deal, either in the form of the one or two state solution.

Which peace deal are you talking about? specify the conditions.

I'm referring to the one or two states solutions; that is, Israel either taking over the whole territory and population, or Israel and Palestine coexisting side by side, with negotiations having as a starting point the 1967 borders - both of which Israel refuses, either in word or in action.

Know that what you're advocating there is collective punishment - another violation of the Geneva Conventions. Further, it's so bad an argument, that it even serves to legitimate Hamas' attacks on civilians: "some 80% or 90% of Israelis support the attack on Gaza, so they are valid targets", or some nonsense like that - it's wrong when Hamas does it, and it's wrong when Israel does it. But treating the Palestinians like caged animals isn't going to solve anything; only worsen the situation.

Caged animals is a one hell of a wild exaggeration. Hamas and its allies seeing the Jews as subhuman does not solve the situation either.

Is it? Again, you have little to no idea of the situation in Gaza - do us both a favor, and please, look into it: Israeli officials weren't kidding when they said it was meant to keep the Palestinian population at a level just slightly over that of a humanitarian crisis. And you know what would help solve the situation? Ending the illegal blockade and the occupation.

Really? Because I seem to recall them wanting to move to a peaceful solution, even quite recently, and Israel boycotting the negotiations.

Source?

Here I'm referring to the recent unity government that Hamas and Fatah created; Hamas accepted all the preconditions of the Quartet, and despite the Quartet's willingness to work with them (even with US agreement), Israel immediately threatened sanctions against the Palestinian Authority, holding back tax revenues, and suspended peace negotiations - source, the Israeli Prime Minister.