This is what the UN is trying to rescue
BEIRUT, Jan 17 (Reuters) - "U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said on Saturday that if Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire in the Gaza Strip it should include a timetable for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Hamas-ruled enclave.
Israel is planning to announce on Saturday a halt to its three-week Gaza offensive without any deal with Hamas, an Israeli official said.
Ban said he could not confirm whether Israel would declare a halt to the fighting, though he hoped it would.
"This unilateral declaration should be accompanied by a timetable for Israeli withdrawal," Ban told reporters in the Lebanese capital Beirut.
Ban confirmed that he would be attending a summit meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt on Sunday organized by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to discuss Gaza. (Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Dominic Evans)"
Well, isn't that nice? Once again, the UN calls for a cease fire every time Israel fights back. Where was the UN as Hamas was lobbing rockets into southern Israel. Did they ever call for a halt to that-or take concrete steps to end it? How many times Did Ban-Ki-Moon or any of his woeful predecessors ever go to the Middle East to try and stop the terrorist acts upon Israeli civilians?
But as soon as Israel goes after the Hamas killers (or Hezbollah killers), all the terrorists have to do is take shelter among innocent civilians, show the media the dead and presto! The whole world, the EU and the UN all call for a cease-fire, which only means that the Israelis cease operations, withdraw and hunker down for the next wave of rockets and terrorist attacks. They can't even build a wall to keep out suicide bombers without these same bodies and the ubiquitous Jimmy Carter crawling out of the woodwork.
For all you outraged Americans who are taking to the streets to condemn Israel, ask yourselves this simple question; imagine if Cuba were launching rockets into Miami and other parts of South Florida, resulting in the deaths of innocent civilians. What would you expect the US to do? Would you expect the US to go to the UN and ask them to demand a cease fire from Cuba? Ask the UN to issue a few resolutions, perhaps? Go to the EU and asked them to stop all trade with Cuba or place an embargo upon that country?
Or would you invade Cuba and take out the killers? And suppose the Cuban troops all donned civilian clothes and fought back from civilian centers like schools, hospitals, and crowded residential areas? Would you expect the American military to stop operations and withdraw back to the USA?
Here is my fervent hope: I hope that Israel ignores calls for a cease fire and finishes the job of killing the Hamas terrorists. Then I hope they turn to Hezbollah and finish that job as well.
And the UN, the EU and world opinion? They can all take a giant leap as far as I am concerned. If they insist on siding with terrorists, then their voices should be ignored.
Sooner or later, sensible people must realize that Israel's fight is our fight, their enemies our enemies. Israel is fighting the battle (in self-defense) that the whole civilized world should be fighting. It is not about the rights of Arabs who conveniently identify themselves as "Palestinians", a questionable term that has never represented any national or government entity in recorded history. It is about the fact that the Arab world that abounds Israel cannot accept the idea of a Jewish (or any non-Muslim state) in the region. These so-called Palestinians could have had their "Palestinian State" as far back as 1948. Instead, they rejected the two-state solution and drew their swords-because they wanted it all-and still do, no matter what their spokesmen may tell you from time to time. Read the Hamas charter. It calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. Read the words of Ahmedinejad of Iran who has publicly stated that he wants to wipe Israel off the map.
May God forgive us if we stand aside and let these terrorist barbarians who go by the name of Hamas, Hezbollah (and Iran) destroy Israel and create another Holocaust in the process.
14 comments:
In regards to Hamas using civilians as shields, and it being their fault if the civilians then get killed by Israel...
As an analogy, let's say a police officer is pursuing an armed killer. The criminal takes an innocent bystander hostage and uses them as a human shield. Can the officer just take a shot at the criminal unless he or she is certain that the hostage will not be harmed in the process?
The answer is of course NO, as I suspect you should already know. Even though the criminal brought the bystander into the situation, that doesn't mean that the officer can then risk their life and blame it on the criminal if they get hurt.
The same applies on a larger scale. Although it may be true that Hamas uses civilians as shields, that does not excuse Israel for killing the civilians in the process of attacking Hamas, and it does not mean that their deaths can simply be blamed on Hamas.
Such actions may even be war crimes.
Also, you (and the Israeli government) are delusional if you seriously believe that Israel can just "kill all of the terrorists." That's an impossible and almost laughable goal.
For every 1 terrorist they kill, I'm sure they've probably just created 2 new ones through all of the "collateral damage" they've caused to the civilian population.
I read an interesting study in the American Political Science Review done on terrorism and elections in Israel. The study found that when terrorist attacks increased, more right-wing MPs were elected. I imagine that roughly the same applies in the Palestinian territories, meaning that all of these new attacks will simply push the Palestinian population further towards the right-wing extreme of Hamas. Israel's actions will only solidify Hamas' support.
No, Bryan, I would not call them war crimes since the soldiers are not intentionally killing the civilans. Your example about the cop is correct unless he has no other choice but to return fire or be killed as recently happened in the LA area about 4 years ago (a small child being held hostage by a firing gunman was killed by return police fire.)
Keep in mind also that Israel has gone to great lengths to avoid these deaths, even telephoning to the target in advance.
As for killing one terrorist creates two terrorists, that may be true since we are dealing with fanatical minds, but what is your solution to Israel's dilemma?
Gary, they might not be intentionally killing the civilians, but they are still disregarding their lives.
Let's take the analogy further by including your point about warning the civilians in advance. That would be like the cop saying to the hostage, "Okay, I'm going to start shooting. Now get yourself away from the criminal!" and then begins shooting.
In any case, it still does not excuse the actions. No matter how much Israel warns the civilians, if they are still attacking targets where they KNOW civilians are currently present at the time of the attacks, they are committing a war crime.
Furthermore, Israel's blockade of Gaza has essentially turned it into a giant prison, so where are the civilians supposed to flee to anyways?
Also, the UN have condemned Hamas attacks. Once again, you just haven't been listening or paying attention, and only hear/see what you want to.
Here's an article from just days before the start of the Israeli offensive.
Bryan,
The UN also passed 17 resolutions directing Saddam Hussein to cooperate in regards to wmd and failed to enforce any of them. So Ban Ki-moon issues a statement at the end of December about the rockets. Fine. What action did the UN take to end those rocket attacks? Did BKM travel to Egypt (as he does now) to end the rocket attacks? No.
Do you regard all attacks in war targeted toward enemy combatants that kill civilians in the process to be war crimes? How about the cities of Germany in ww2? Why did we and the Brits bomb German cities? For two reasons; one to hit military targets like factories as in Schweinfurt, also to weaken the will of the population. There were no military targets in Dresden, for example. How about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How about Hanoi during the Viet Nam war? I realize some of these examples can be fiercely debated, like Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but at what point do you draw the line-especially with an enemy that deliberately fights from behind innocent civilians?
Are the Israeli soldiers now war criminals for street to street fighting against Hamas in Gaza City, in which innocent people are caught in the cross-fire?
I hate to point this out but war is not the same as police work. Cops cannot simply open fire when they see the bad guys- as soldiers do. In police work, collateral damage is never acceptable. The loss of one cop is never acceptable in planning an operation-as it is in war.
As for the people of Gaza fleeing, you raise a good question. Certainly, they are not going to flee to Israel. Flee to Egypt? The Egyptians don't want them. I doubt that Hamas would even let them flee out of Gaza City preferring to keep them as hostages and PR tools.
But you still have not answered the basic question: What do you suggest that Israel do to solve their dilemma?
There is no truce. Israel will stop firing and Hamas will continue rocket attacks. I know that this "cease-fire" isn't going well with the IDF, nor the Israeli population.
So what if a few civilians got hurt. Let's get this point clear:
IN WAR CIVILIANS GET HURT!!!
That is a fact of war! Live with it. The more enemy civilians die, the better off your side is. That is also another military fact. Something Bryan and his cohorts would understand if they ever had the balls to actually serve this or any nation.
Findalis,
There are moments when you come off as a reasonable person, and then you go and make statements like that. I don't even know what to say in response, as I'd feel like I'm debating with a cartoon.
Lance:
War is a nasty, dirty business. And those of us who have seen it know that very well.
We also know that democracies go to war at the last resort, to correct a wrong that cannot be corrected any other way.
So what if a few of their civilians die? That is war. That is the nature of the beast. Believe me, very, very few Americans shed tears for German or Japanese civilians in WW 2. Very, very few.
Wow, really, Findalis? I never knew that! To think that I was under the impression that this problem could be solved with flowers, hugs, and good feelings. Thanks for setting me straight.
Gary,
Bryan is like a kid whose parent is trying to teach him right from wrong, but no matter what you say to him, he will be deliberately obstinate. Surely he cannot be that thick!
Thank you Findalis and Ted for responding to my arguments with well thought-out replies. Oh wait, you resorted to personal attacks on my intelligence and condescending remarks. I guess you sure showed me!
Gary, I'll try to reply with my thoughts on what needs to be done in the Israel/Palestine conflict at some point, but I've just been really busy lately. Work has really picked up for me here at the office and I've been working 12 hour days 7 days a week. I can make these short replies while I'm working, but I need more time to think about such a complicated issue.
Bryan,
Your comments are always welcome. I'll await your reply, and don't forget the question I posed to you: what is your suggestion for Israel to solve their dilemma.
Gary,
Is it always necessary for a person to know what the solution should be if he or she is pointing out what the wrong response is?
For instance, I don't know how build an airplane, but if I saw somebody using toothpicks and Elmer's glue to make a 747, I would be correct in telling him that's the wrong way to go about it.
I won't speak for Bryan, but I know that I don't agree with Israel's "solution" to this situation, as I feel that it will only lead to further bloodshed in the future. As to what should be done? Shoot, I don't know - but you don't do the wrong thing just because you don't know the right thing.
I'm also hoping that Ted doesn't zing me with that razor-sharp wit that he has. Mind like a steel trap, that guy.
Post a Comment