another one bites the dust..

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...0418191331&e=2

GAZA CITY (AFP) - Hamas threatened a "volcano of revenge" against Israel as some 200,000 Palestinians packed the streets of Gaza for the funeral of the Islamic movement's assassinated leader Abdelaziz Rantissi.

His killing late Saturday prompted a chorus of international condemnation, except in the United States...

<yahoo bye the way also tryed to set an "Ave.A" tracking cookie>

myself i think they did what they had to do. hammas has taken "credit" for all the suicide bombings, including this past friday's and the saturday attack on a west bank settlement. not to mention various civilian targets like public transportation,(mind you im not saying the palistinians shouldn't be fighting for their homes back) so doesn't that make the leader of that group fair game?...and why isn't the EU condemming the bombings like they are the killing of a militant leader who can hardly be called a civilian or an innocent.

call me crazy, but when you go around blowing people up and then brag about it i think that pretty much makes you a fair target no matter which side is right or wrong. You got some nut job yelling "hey jew i killed your mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers!" then the world expects nothing should be done by the families. i dont get it. does blowing up a bus load of civilians do more to "facilitate a positive outcome of this process" than the killing a hate monger?

id like to know how other Americans feel.

The way I see it, the world has one less terrorist to deal with, which is definitely a good thing. If you take charge of a terrorist organisation and organise the murder of hundreds of innocent people then you should expect to become a target. I know our government has condemned the action, but then we are supposedly supporting Palestine whereas the US policy favours Israel.

I say send in the SAS and take out all the major leaders. Without someone to guide them, organisations like Hamas will quickly flounder.

I will try to take an impartial position.

Hamas is an organisation that is most certainly involved in a war, it is not a charity, it is not a welfare organisation? It is a group who are trying to bring about their political ends by violent means?

Given that, all members and officials are combatants and, therefore, legitimate targets for the "enemy". To be realistic, you cannot shoot at someone and not expect them to shoot back?....................well I would, but only because I used to teach sniping!

We have had bombings over here in the UK, I have seen IRA "mortuary cards" (a sort of In Memoriam) they all said "Killed on active service"...... no whingeing there....

I do not think that it really matters if you support Israel or the Palestinians?

The bottom line is that if Hamas cannot stand the heat they should get the hell out of the kitchen?

After all, they are hardly a bunch of schoolkids in a bus are they?

Just my thoughts

Tedob1

Quote:

---

id like to know how other Americans feel.

---

Does this mean that all non americans should abstain from answering in this thread ? :confused: :D

I feel you have to look beyond the act before you can condem or condon it. On the most basic level I feel that anyone who puts themselves in that position is fair game. Hamas accepts responsiablity for the bomb attacks it should also accept responsiability for the retaliation.
The only thing that would bother me is the reason why he was got rid of now. IF the reason is revenge for the bomb attacks that would be one thing. It would be much better if it was to have some positive effect on the peace procces in the middle east.
If the only reason he was assasinated was to keep things boiling then I would condem it.

To delight in war is a merit in the soldier, a dangerous quality in the captain, and a positive crime in the statesman. ------George santayana

cheers

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by MURACU
Tedob1
Does this mean that all non americans should abstain from answering in this thread ?

---

If that's the case then it's a bit late since the first two replies have been from Brits. :)

BTW, how come your location is set to paris but your flag is that of Ireland? :confused:

Pwaring,

Quote:

---

BTW, how come your location is set to paris but your flag is that of Ireland?

---

That's easy I am Irish but living in Paris hence the Irish flag but the location Paris. :D

I would like to point out that this conflict at this moment has no ending.

I think everyone can see that. It's not about gouverment anymore it's about civilians
if that is a correct way to put it.

Isreal or palastinia have little or nothing to say in the matter, they suicide bomb each other
to death untill there are no suicide idiots left.

The world should stop looking for a peacefull soluction and take action. The U.S. didn't mind waging war on an entire country because someone was stupid enough to fly plains into building.

Yet they think that this should be solved peasfully, wich i think is bullshit. On the other hand my own homecountry should stop being pussy all the time as well. In here there seems to be a
we need to help the poor jews kind of air.

The world or UN or NATO or EU should put an end to this. Nomore roadmaps nomore stup bullshit but hard action. Take out hamas and other it's likes.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by MURACU
Tedob1



Does this mean that all non americans should abstain from answering in this thread ? :confused: :D


cheers

---

no not at all but if you notice the flags of the posters every one but americans seem to have an opinion. not to far off from my own but yahoo seems to state that that everyone besides the americans are outraged at this killing.... and im not outraged. he danced to the music...

its my understanding that israel wants to weaken hammas before they withdraw from the west bank (like thats ever going to happen) and im far from an expert on this subject but i dont think the reason here is important. a member of a military organization was killed by the enemy...period. he ordered killing and he himself was killed. what in hell is all this hub-bub about? you shoot you kill you get shot you die. its a freggin war. it looks to me like the palistinians have been watching far too many john wayne WWII movies, he kills 732 of the enemy while carring a water cooled machine gun, then goes balistic when the guy along side him gets shot.

Ted,

I think that there is probably a considerable difference between what politicians say and what the ordinary population feels.

I think that the ordinary people tend to take the view that there is a war going on, and combatants get killed in wars. In WWII the British sent the RAF to take out Rommel, so the concept is neither new nor Israeli.

As for taking sides, most of the people I talk to are pretty apathetic about the whole conflict, as they don't see how it could be any of their business. There is obviously a revulsion against bombing because it is indiscriminate, and they remember the IRA bombings in the UK. It is far easier to condone a surgical strike against a legitimate target than blowing up a supermarket or school bus?

On the other hand the politicians are really venting their frustration at their impotence. They are unable to influence either side or bring about a peaceful settlement, and that annoys them? As the vast majority of voters are either apathetic, or at best disinterested, the politicos know that they can posture as much as they like without it having any effect on their chances of re-election.......it is an opportunity to get publicity?

There is also a twinge of guilt perhaps, as the whole problem basically came about because the British promised the same land to two different groups? This was encouraged by the rest of Europe and supported by the USA, who felt guilty about the Holocaust?.............in 1947/8 the images of concentration camps liberated by the Allies were still very vivid in people's minds?

What saddens me is that I cannot see a solution being achieved in my lifetime. Both sides are far too entrenched, and neither has the moral high ground?

Cheers

How does murdering Abdelaziz Rantissi solve anything? It simply creates even more hostile Palestinians. Palestinians that may not have been so strongly militant previous to this assasination might be more than willing to strap a bomb to their body and cross the border.....It just creates more violence...

To those that are easily upset.....please don't read any farther.

If someone were to bomb civilians in my home town and then brag about it.....they would find I take the view that war is HELL. I would bomb them back, and to hell with being surgical about it.
Personally, I would drop a 500# bomb on a consentration of their people for every bomb they set off amoung mine. Eye for an eye bull....when I want to get even, I really mean vastly ahead. 100/1 sounds very good to me, and I would not just limit it to military targets. There are no civilians in war.
The US pussyfooted around in Viet Nam, and look what it got them. South Korean soldiers(ROK) on the other hand responded quickly and completely when they were attacted, and per capita had far less soldiers killed, especially by sniper or ambush style attacks.
Yes its bloody. Yes alot of people get hurt/killed and maimed. But, its over fairly quick, because one side or both runs out of people.

Tedob1

Quote:

---

no not at all ..

---

I understood what you were saying. the only thing was that as I had to go convince a server that it really didnt need the blue screen to prove it was an original microsoft product both Pwaring and Nihil posted before me. So anyway back to the topic.

I would have no problem with the israeli army killing off all the heads of Hamas. That would be justifiable. IF you behead the organisation it would make it easier for the palastinian authorities to dismantle it. What does disturbe me in the timing between the killings. A couple of weeks ago there was another head of hamas taken out. The timing between the killis is just about right to keep the emotions running as high as possiable in palastien and as such makes all discussion impossiable. This allows Israel to act unilaterially as there is no-one on the other side to talk to.
I agree with what Ms Mittens said in another thread -- It is frightening how hard line israel has become in the last couple of years.

Here is an interesting link I found that goes into the situtation since 1947. the details are good even if it is a bit light. They do give all their referance material so it is well worth a read.

the middle east problem

the conflict

here is the worlds reaction.

bbc world reaction

Where is the reaction and outcry when Hamas suicide bombers kill Isreali school children? Their crime, going to school. Isreal shows great restraint, especially when an army of masked soldiers carrying AK 47s and Shoulder Rocket launchers are congregated in a parade for the funeral of a Humas leader. Knowing that one of those in attendence will kill civilians in a bus stop or a hotel, or a coffee shop or a super market. Even knowing that and looking the enemy in the face, they hold restraint in favor of a world against them.

Roadclosed: you present a valid viewpoint but you forget, Israel invaded and continues to invade Palestine and the remnants of Palestine. Both nationalities are at fault here, and sadly there is a lot of emotions behind this small war which means that it is far from over. The simple fact is that no one is innocent here, each are as condemnable as the other. May God and Allah have mercy on our souls as well as thier own. And may a peaceful end to this conflict be reached someday.

Redhawk, I don't forget anything, well I try not too. :)

Perhaps I can shed some light on Israel in my own words. For instance, why are they in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and why do they occupy territory considered by the Palestine’s to be their home land? First off, you may remember the Ottoman Empire chose sides with Germany during WWI. They lost, their empire folded and land was up for grabs. You don't initiate hostile takeover of other societies and expect them to just give everything back. Sure that happens but if one country attacks another with intention to destroy the society they are after, then a think recourse and taking of the attackers land is justified. But as you note that after World War 2 most areas were given back autonomy, even Germany was divided among the winners. But the Germans victors accepted the division which over decades lead to the re-unification of Germany.

On to the Middle East, after the Axis Powers were defeated the newly formed UNITED NATIONS, I caps that for effect, gave Jews land covered by what is now pretty much Israel. Remember the Empire was defeated, their hostile action brought about the defeat. The Arab world was pissed so HALF of Israel was to be given to the Palestine’s, because they were there for a centuries, but heck Jews were there before that. Don't recall Palestine’s at the Crucifixion. But in recent history the area was occupied by Palestine, they lost a war so the result was again, the UN set the land to be used by BOTH, divided.

But the Arab world would have none of that and they did not accept the offer and started hostility (again). It was much more than Palestine that attacked the new state of Israel. They were fighting for survival on all sides and they won; only now they controlled 80 percent of the territory that was supposed to be used by Palestine. Are they victims or aggressors? Palestine and the rest of the Arab world did not accept the UN directive, after losing a war with the west. What about the other Israel held territories?

After Israel won the fighting and held control of Palestine areas, Egypt and Jordan held onto The infamous Gaza Strip and West bank held by each country respectively. In the 60 and 70 escalations rose once again and Egypt once again ATTACKED Israel. The war was devastating and the Israeli Air Force cut through Egypt defenses and drove them back past the borders of The Gaza Strip, guess what, Israel said you attacked us, we won, we are ****ing keeping Gaza, and have a nice day. My guess is it was a buffer zone at the time and Israeli settlers began making home there. Israeli invaders in a war initiated by Egypt? Over simplified, perhaps but that is what happened. I’ll leave Jordan to another discussion.

In each case the invaders were Arab. Now you can argue that the UN resolution was wrong and go from there, but remember the three Arab/Israeli wars since World War 2 and the destruction of the Ottoman Empire were not Israel invading other counties. Current borders in Israel are the result of military successes and demographics. In fact since peace talks in the late 70s and 80s Israel has given control of much of the disputed areas in Gaza and Golan Heights to the Palestine’s. Mr. Sedate (Egypt) was a childhood fascination with me. But they (Palestine) continued killing Israelis and children so some of that process has been hurt, outcomes including the wall being constructed to separate those areas.

Does anyone remember the assassination of a recent Israeli Prime minister? I know everyone is worried about AK 47 mask wearing Hams leaders, but a very respected Yitzhak Rabin was gunned down in the name of “Peace”. And no one cared. He didn’t even wear a mask or carry rocket propelled shoulder launchers in public and was a Prime Minister of an internationally recognized country, Israel. To my knowledge non of the conspiracy theories around his death have panned out, but it was he who signed a peace accord with Yasser Arafat, once labeled a terrorist and leader of the PLO. So many people were pissed that he even spoke to him. Perhaps a great man of peace? Or a fool, who knows, I like the first.

I suppose the Israeli people are just supposed to shut up and let the Arab world destroy them for the name of World Peace. Hamas operates INDEPENDENT of Palestine authority in public notion. There might be some secret ties, very likely, but in the public eye, Hamas does not answer to Palestine authority, that’s why the hide behind masks. Perhaps they are the true leaders of the Palestine people, if so they are doomed to death for many years to come.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

"Hamas operates INDEPENDENT of Palestine authority in public notion. There might be some secret ties, very likely, but in the public eye, Hamas does not answer to Palestine authority, that’s why the hide behind masks. Perhaps they are the true leaders of the Palestine people"

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

seems to me another group, before Hamas fit this discription (aside from the masks). a group of terrorists calling themselves "Irgun" blewup building and killed the occupation force in palistine in an attempt to drive them from their land, apparently without the knowledge or consent of the "official" leaders. they also threatened world wide terrorism if their demands were not met. Members of that group included David Ben-Gurion, Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon who turned out to be the true leaders of israel

as an example:
http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Pa.../Kingdavid.htm


"Sharon was a killer obsessed with hatred of Palestinians. I
had promised Arafat that his people would not get any harm.
Sharon, however, ignored this commitment entirely. Sharon's
word is worth nil."
Ambassador Philip Habib
President Ronald Reagan's Special Middle East Envoy in 1982

now this isn't to say that the palistinians are right but rather to say both sides are wrong. they both seem to think that the end justifies the means even when there's no end in sight.

Ted that was a good link, did you have a good look around that site?

There is no easy answere to the problems in the middle east because of hatred and bigotry. The poisoning of young minds from an early age.

I believe the onlyway is to fight fire with fire as unpalatable as that may seem. Hamas has it comeing to them.

This is from a page i found through Teddobs link it shows that fighting a terrorist war is a thankless and nasty business.

The Americans were strongly pro Jewish and very anti British. One Hollywood motion picture Mogul declared in the British press that he had a holiday in his heart every time a British soldier was killed in Palestine. and large sections of the American media echoed this sentiment. At one point early in 1945 Winston Churchill became so irritated with continual American shouting about Palestine that he suggested that since the Americans were so unhappy about the way Britain was handling Palestine, "the best solution would be for them to take the job over themselves, I'm not aware that Britain has to vaunt about this painful and thankless task, he said, and someone else should have their turn and the sooner the better".

Read it all here:

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Palestine/kidnap.htm


Jinxy

no i didn't look around i was searching for some info on the king david hotel bombing that didn't look too biased. isn't irony ironic?

Quote:

---

isn't irony ironic?

---

It sure is which reminds me of Alanis Morriset. Isn't it ironic.

Edit: Don't you think.