Hacker News Reader

Comment by berntb | Hacker News Reader

You don't contradict that you were aware of my points..?

If e.g. Finland or Estonia started to shoot rocket artilleri towards St Petersburg, the reaction would certainly be much worse than Israel's at Gaza...

(And because of Karelia etc for Finland and generations of slavery for Estonians, they have as good reasons as the Gazans.)

The situation is:

Side A attack side B's civilians. You only complain about side B's quite moderate defense against A's attacks. (Again, installed to stop the attacks.) Then you motivate that further attacks from A are understandable, because of B's defense.

It is such a sad case of hypocritical and hateful circular logic I get vertigo. :-(

View on HN

I did not respond because you are oversimplifying the issue. The history of the Israel-Palestine conflict is long and bloody. Claiming in such a confident and final manner that the building of the wall was because Gaza started is very narrow-sighted.

Your analogy is incorrect.

When a sovereign nation attacks another, war ensues. That is very clear. But when resistance elements arise within a city that is supposedly part of a sovereign nation, you don't build a wall around the city. That's how you would handle it in the Middle Ages.

But the issue is even more complex than that, since the resistance aims to gain independence from the state. So I would say that the Gaza situation is somewhat similar to that of the IRA and the UK.

I don't recall the UK building a wall around Ireland and carpet bombing it every few years?

Woah woah woah man... quite moderate? The destruction of a third of Gaza and the death of thousands of people is quite moderate?

I give up. This discussion is going nowhere :(

Do you truly believe that Israel carpet bombs Gaza, or is it just a figure of speech (to make an impression on a reader who doesn't know better)?

This is carpet bombing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phzRY0DdRXk

This is a typical Israeli strike: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAT1uBNcOHU

And while we're at it, this is indiscriminate bombing of an Israeli town of Sderot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRz3nHwgjHY

My bad. Let's call it "indiscriminate bombing" instead then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqAmIcIpq_4

The "knock on the door" technique employed by the IDF seems very considerate by the way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjxsrqCdl-4

What makes you think bombing in that video was indiscriminate? On the opposite, I see single buildings being destroyed, while the neighbouring buildings stay intact. That's a very precise strike by any standard. Furthermore, there is nothing to convince me these buildings were not occupied by Hamas terrorists (which are known to hide behind civilian population).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70Oqo_wmuGo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0wJXf2nt4Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcrWy3PT6zc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPU4UN03t7E

And yes, I agree with you that knocking on the roof is a very considerate "last warning". Which other country goes to such lengths to minimize civilian loss of life? There are early warnings, too, though: by phone, text and leaflets. That's why you don't see any people running out of that house: it is already empty.

If Hamas recognizes the right of Israel to exist, the walls will be broken and the major part of the settlements moved. Israel has shown several times that they can exchange land for peace, even within right wing governments.

No one can believe that. That's one of the big lies of the Israeli government. Settlements will never be given back and the mission is to get all the land. That was the idea from the beginning and they think they have their god on their side.

So the basic problem is that the Jews and/or the democratic country are evil? Sigh... :-(

Arafat got at least two offers for a Palestinian state (at Camp David and once later), with about 91% of the West Bank iirc.

The later offer was when Barak needed Arafat's support of a peace agreement before an election (so the Palestinian side had a good negotiating position).

Arafat didn't accept either -- which was one thing. But there was no counter offer like "Give us XX and YY and customs advantages ZZ and ...". Instead Arafat started a terror campaign.

But there is no blame for all that refusal to even give a counter proposal; it is all a big Israeli conspiracy.

(Seriously, I feel a bit sick when I chat with hateful people.)

I was only saying that Israel government lies , i have not said that jews are evil. So stop lying and putting words i have not said. I have not even said that Palestinian government is good. I feel sorry for people like you , so brainwashed that can not even see reality.

Saying that the Israel government lies when every government lies doesn't add anything to the discussion. The difference is that Israel in his very short history has shown that they can exchange land for peace in an extent no other country recently did after winning wars from the weaker side.

The lies you are talking about are just part of a long term negotiation until Hamas recognizes the right of Israel to exist and live in peace. Once this milestone is achieved, Israel will not have any excuse to move forward with the peace process because the Israelis, and the jewish people will not tolerate more excuses.

See, this is a reasonable presentation of ideas, not accusing me of being hateful, thanks for being polite and stating your points. Maybe i don't agree with you, i still don't believe that Israel wants to give back anything when they are building more every year. So the exchanges of land they are so proud is returning land they have stolen before so nothing to be proud of. Apart from that i still think that Hamas is stupid not trying to reach a real peace, it would be good for all, cause having a neighbor like Israel could help to accelerate the development of a Palestinian state. IMHO the problem is that both sides think they can win and the other side lose and that makes real efforts for peace look they are in vain.

What I've read, is that the border to Gaza was open enough for commuting and shopping trips -- until the systematic attacks on civilians.

You had no problem with that description in your previous comment.

But good references to non partisan sources would be interesting?

(AGAIN: If the ones controlling an area -- including doing elections, defense, police and taxes -- put all their economy into rocket artillery against another country's civilians, the reaction will not be mild... And Gaza is not part of a city, it was a free area.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com