Lifting the Gaza Blockade: Practical Issues

[bub]

So why you are crying that 5-10K terrorists are in prison? they are POW's. The thing is, that we will free thousands for one single.. if they so care about their brothers in prison so what's the problem to make the exchange?
The asnwer is, th IDF will never do something as long as our soldier is there.. and Hamas knows that, they use it as a strategic tool.. and they know we would not kill any of their prisoners because we have the most appreciation to life.

I'm not crying. I'm just saying, as Apocalypse, that the rights of these prisonners should be respected by both sides.

 

[Tashah]

Don't change the subject, we were talking about the necessity to prevent nails from entering Gaza.

Regardless of your opinion on the Hamas, it is not necessary to ban macaronis, chocolate or even nails in Gaza, because these restrictions do not affect the Hamas capacity to harm Israel and therefore are totally unneeded.

That's why these restrictions are a collective punishment, and that's why they are condemned by the entire world.

You STILL don't get it.

Damn :shock:

 

[Regicollis]

Naturally, but your claim for collective punishment is not based.

If the purpose was not to punish Palestinians they would not care about harmless goods like chocolate.

Well that's not clear at all, and I'm sure that there's an explanation.

From a military point of view it is completely insane to spend time and energy preventing Palestinians from importing ginger.

Why would Israel desire to "harass the Palestinians", according to you?

They did not provide Israel with the kind of government Israel would like and there is possibly a tribal/racial component to the desire to punish Palestinians collectively; "they" captured an Israeli soldier, "they" fired rockets over the wall thus "they" should all be punished.

Bottom line is that there is no humanitarian crisis in the strip. Explain it any way you see fit, it remains the same.

As it has been explained elsewhere in this thread there is chronic malnourishment in Gaza because of the Israeli blockade.

It lowers drastically the security threat to Israel by preventing weapons or materials that can be used in harmful ways from entering the strip.

No blockade will ever be completely efficient and goods will always be smuggled in. Who do you think are first in line to receive the smuggled goods? Ordinary Palestinians or the Hamas? We humans are as a species so stupid that the last resources we cut are the ones we use to kill each other and provide for our leaders. The blockade hits ordinary Palestinians far more severely than the Hamas.

The unemployment is due to the Gazans depending on the humanitarian aid instead of working.
It's way easier to simply make a living without having to work, if someone else is sponsoring you.

And where should they work? Whatever industry existed in Gaza has withered away as the Israeli blockade prevents raw materials from entering and virtually prevents exports. They can't do much farming since Israel bans fertiliser, cuts down olive trees and prevents farmers from harvesting. Fishery is also impossible due to the naval blockade.

One of the only places to find work in Gaza is with the Hamas.

No one is punishing the ordinary Palestinian, the blockade was only placed by Israel and Egypt once Hamas has taken power, not a moment before it.

It was put in place in order to punish civilian Palestinians for not overthrowing Hamas.

 

[bub]

You STILL don't get it.

Damn :shock:

So the blockade is totally pointless because Hamas can get its rockets anyways, and most "dual purpose goods" such as nails have substitutes that are already present in large quantities inside Gaza anyways.

Glad you agree with me.

 

[Tashah]

Moderator's Warning:

Let's keep it civil

 

[Apocalypse]

I'm not crying. I'm just saying, as Apocalypse, that the rights of these prisonners should be respected by both sides.

The conditions of Palestinian prisoners in Israel are fitting the standards of the Western world.
That Israel doesn't recognize Palestinian prisoners as POWs doesn't mean that their keeping conditions are lower than the necessary, it simply means that Palestinian prisoners are to be kept in the same conditions of the rest of the prisoners.

 

[Tashah]

So the blockade is totally pointless because Hamas can get its rockets anyways, and most "dual purpose goods" such as nails have substitutes that are already present in large quantities inside Gaza anyways.

Glad you agree with me.

You need some sleep bub.

I'll never agree with your position that Hamas belligerence is excused but the restrictions due to Hamas belligerence is not.

 

[bub]

The conditions of Palestinian prisoners in Israel are fitting the standards of the Western world.
That Israel doesn't recognize Palestinian prisoners as POWs doesn't mean that their keeping conditions are lower than the necessary, it simply means that Palestinian prisoners are to be kept in the same conditions of the rest of the prisoners.

Of course, that is true. As long as they have a fair trial and that certain conditions (such as those you have mentioned: visits from the red cross...) are respected, I have no problem with it.

 

[Gardener]

You need some sleep bub.

I'll never agree with your position that Hamas belligerence is excused but the restrictions due to Hamas belligerence is not.

Didn't you catch the memo, Tashah? Robbing a bank is now justified because of the bars on the vault.

 

[Apocalypse]

If the purpose was not to punish Palestinians they would not care about harmless goods like chocolate.

But who said they're harmless?
You don't know why Israel bans it, right?

From a military point of view it is completely insane to spend time and energy preventing Palestinians from importing ginger.

Perhaps, perhaps not.
It depends entirely on why they're being blockaded.

They did not provide Israel with the kind of government Israel would like and there is possibly a tribal/racial component to the desire to punish Palestinians collectively; "they" captured an Israeli soldier, "they" fired rockets over the wall thus "they" should all be punished.

That's just ridiculous. Beyond ridiculous actually.
How are you even going to base that claim?
Although it does put some light as to your taken position. Only if you really believe that, of course.

As it has been explained elsewhere in this thread there is chronic malnourishment in Gaza because of the Israeli blockade.

There is no humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

No blockade will ever be completely efficient and goods will always be smuggled in.

Certainly you can agree that it dramatically cuts the amount of weapons that would be transferred to the strip?

Who do you think are first in line to receive the smuggled goods? Ordinary Palestinians or the Hamas? We humans are as a species so stupid that the last resources we cut are the ones we use to kill each other and provide for our leaders. The blockade hits ordinary Palestinians far more severely than the Hamas.

The blockade prevents tons of weapons from reaching the terrorists' hands.
It is one of the main actions that Israel takes to provide security for its people, and so far it is working.

And where should they work? Whatever industry existed in Gaza has withered away as the Israeli blockade prevents raw materials from entering and virtually prevents exports. They can't do much farming since Israel bans fertiliser, cuts down olive trees and prevents farmers from harvesting. Fishery is also impossible due to the naval blockade.

I think a bigger problem is the size of the population that is located in that small strip of land.

One of the only places to find work in Gaza is with the Hamas.

That's a baseless statement.
No doubt that Hamas is a big employer there, but if that was true there would be way more than some tens of thousands of Hamas members.

It was put in place in order to punish civilian Palestinians for not overthrowing Hamas.

A baseless assumption.

 

[bub]

You need some sleep bub.

Why, it's 4.28 PM here

I'll never agree with your position that Hamas belligerence is excused but the restrictions due to Hamas belligerence is not.

That is not my positions, I said nothing about excusing the violence of the Hamas. I said the way you try to harm the Hamas does not work and can not be justified.

Let's take the example of the nails:

Do you agree, or do you not agree, about the argument that it does not make sense to prevent nails from entering Gaza since nails are not necessary (because of the presence in large quantities of substitutes such as any small piece of metal) to make shrapnel bombs, and thus banning them has zero effect on the capacity of the Hamas to make these bombs.

 

[bub]

But who said they're harmless?
You don't know why Israel bans it, right?

Go on, explain us the dangers of chocolate.

 

[Apocalypse]

Go on, explain us the dangers of chocolate.

The Dangers In Chocolate

 

[bub]

The Dangers In Chocolate

Don't forget chocolate poisoning

Theobromine poisoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[CrazyMcCool]

It kills dogs...We must protect our dogs...

Also the blockade is also showing how the government is 100% detached from the poor population that unfortunately traped there..

Hamas Refuses Israel’s Delivery of Flotilla Supplies (Update1) - BusinessWeek

:roll:

 

[Regicollis]

But who said they're harmless?
You don't know why Israel bans it, right?

I'm sorry but I've never heard of the hordes of ginger and chocolate terrorists who kill civilian Israelis by feeding them cakes and pralines until their arteries burst.

Could it be that the reason for banning a lot of these goods are not purely military in nature?

Perhaps, perhaps not.
It depends entirely on why they're being blockaded.

You are right. Since there are no military purposes for banning chocolate the reasons for the illegal blockade must be something else. Like punishing civilians.

That's just ridiculous. Beyond ridiculous actually.
How are you even going to base that claim?
Although it does put some light as to your taken position. Only if you really believe that, of course.

I admire and envy your trust in human kindness and civilisation. I on the other hand believe humans are fully capable of getting the idea that all members of a group should be punished collectively for acts committed by individual members of that group. Unfortunately history is rife with examples of this.

There is no humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

Call it whatever you want; Gaza is not a very nice place to live and conditions there has deteriorated significantly as the direct consequences of the illegal Israeli blockade.

Certainly you can agree that it dramatically cuts the amount of weapons that would be transferred to the strip?

I don't know how significant the illegal Israeli blockade is in reducing the influx of weapons but I will grant you that it has some effect. I don't think the current solution with smuggling tunnels to Egypt is the best way of preventing weapons from entering Gaza. If ordinary trade was allowed to take place, inspected by international neutral forces, the smuggling infrastructure would be diminished and thus provide fewer routes of entry for weapons.

Furthermore the illegal blockade is completely overkill. Bub's example with nails is really good; Israel bans nails from entering, because they can be used for shrapnel bombs, thus preventing a lot of construction from going on, while the militant groups just use other small pieces of metal. Also banning goods like ginger or shoes has no military purpose.

I think a bigger problem is the size of the population that is located in that small strip of land.

I'm sorry but I don't live in your fantasy world where blocking of trade routes is not the main reason there is no export going on.

 

[Apocalypse]

I'm sorry but I've never heard of the hordes of ginger and chocolate terrorists who kill civilian Israelis by feeding them cakes and pralines until their arteries burst.

Could it be that the reason for banning a lot of these goods are not purely military in nature?

I'm saying that neither me nor you know the reason, and hence we can only draw baseless assumptions.

You are right. Since there are no military purposes for banning chocolate the reasons for the illegal blockade must be something else. Like punishing civilians.

This is an example for a baseless assumption.

I admire and envy your trust in human kindness and civilisation. I on the other hand believe humans are fully capable of getting the idea that all members of a group should be punished collectively for acts committed by individual members of that group. Unfortunately history is rife with examples of this.

I don't think that it's about trusting in human kindness, it's simply knowing reality and knowing the general environment.

Call it whatever you want; Gaza is not a very nice place to live and conditions there has deteriorated significantly as the direct consequences of the illegal Israeli blockade.

There are many ****holes in this world, like Haiti for example.
Gaza is not a ****hole because of the Israeli blockade. The simple truth is that it was a ****hole before it.
I do agree however that the blockade can only do harm to the Palestinian general population, but that's the consequences of every blockade, and there's nothing that makes it a collective punishment.

I don't know how significant the illegal Israeli blockade is in reducing the influx of weapons but I will grant you that it has some effect.

Good.

I'm sorry but I don't live in your fantasy world where blocking of trade routes is not the main reason there is no export going on.

So you wouldn't agree with the blockade even if it wasn't only neccessities that were being allowed into the Strip?

 

[donsutherland1]

I don't see the point since there are many substitutes to nails when you want to build a nail bomb. As I have already said, any piece of metal can be used. Banning nails therefore makes no sense since it has no effect on the Hamas capacity to build schrapnel bombs.

While there are substitutes, the focus of the maritime blockade is to reduce Hamas' access to such materials. Barring a viable alternative that would prevent Hamas from deriving benefit from allowing materials such as nails into the Gaza Strip, such dual use materials need to be restricted. Even if the blockade cannot completely deprive Hamas of materials/substitutes, a meaningful reduction in Hamas' access to such materials potentially saves lives.

The international community's record on helping address Israel's security needs e.g., through such measures as UNSC Res. 1701, has been very poor. That experience, among other precedents (including a disproportionate tendency to try to deprive Israel of its inherent right of self-defense), makes it impossible for Israel to accept merely written or verbal international commitments. Such commitments need to be robust and credible. It needs to be clear that if Israel were to lift its maritime blockade, a suitable alternative mechanism would be implemented that would be at least as effective in addressing Israel's security needs. Mere calls on Israel to lift the blockade and mere promises, even if in the form of a UN Security Council resolution, are wholly inadequate. Concrete mechanisms with a strong enforcement component need to be laid out. Monitors or lightly-armed forces along the lines of UNIFIL are insufficient.

 

[bub]

While there are substitutes, the focus of the maritime blockade is to reduce Hamas' access to such materials. Barring a viable alternative that would prevent Hamas from deriving benefit from allowing materials such as nails into the Gaza Strip, such dual use materials need to be restricted. Even if the blockade cannot completely deprive Hamas of materials/substitutes, a meaningful reduction in Hamas' access to such materials potentially saves lives.

The international community's record on helping address Israel's security needs e.g., through such measures as UNSC Res. 1701, has been very poor. That experience, among other precedents (including a disproportionate tendency to try to deprive Israel of its inherent right of self-defense), makes it impossible for Israel to accept merely written or verbal international commitments. Such commitments need to be robust and credible. It needs to be clear that if Israel were to lift its maritime blockade, a suitable alternative mechanism would be implemented that would be at least as effective in addressing Israel's security needs. Mere calls on Israel to lift the blockade and mere promises, even if in the form of a UN Security Council resolution, are wholly inadequate. Concrete mechanisms with a strong enforcement component need to be laid out. Monitors or lightly-armed forces along the lines of UNIFIL are insufficient.

I would like to see your opinion on the example of the nails:

do you think, yes or not, that preventing nails from entering Gaza will have any influence on the capacity of the Hamas to build schrapnel bombs, knowing that there are billions of tiny metal pieces in Gaza that can be used as schrapnels?

 

[donsutherland1]

I would like to see your opinion on the example of the nails:

do you think, yes or not, that preventing nails from entering Gaza will have any influence on the capacity of the Hamas to build schrapnel bombs, knowing that there are billions of tiny metal pieces in Gaza that can be used as schrapnels?

As I don't have information on quantities of alternatives vs. quantities of nails that would otherwise be imported, I am in no position to determine whether the restriction has only a modest impact or a far more significant impact in curbing some of Hamas' capabilities.

 

[Djoop]

I agree with Bub that the action didn't help Israel one way or another, those idiots got exactly what they set out for. I hear Egypt lifted the blokkade, nails a plenty.

 

[Apocalypse]

I agree with Bub that the action didn't help Israel one way or another, those idiots got exactly what they set out for. I hear Egypt lifted the blokkade, nails a plenty.

It's not the first time they do that.
It's in their interests to keep it closed however, so it would probably be closed by the end of the week.

 

[bub]

As I don't have information on quantities of alternatives vs. quantities of nails that would otherwise be imported, I am in no position to determine whether the restriction has only a modest impact or a far more significant impact in curbing some of Hamas' capabilities.

You have plenty of informations about the alternatives: any small piece of metal can be used as a substitute to make shrapnels in this kind of bombs.

Such weapons use bits of shrapnel (ball bearings, nail heads, broken razors, darts and bits of metal) to produce a large radius of destruction.

Nail bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Antipersonnel IEDs typically also contain shrapnel-generating objects such as nails or ball bearings (known as shipyard confetti after the metal waste found in the shipyards of Belfast).

Improvised explosive device - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now do the people in Gaza possess pieces of metal?



Let's conduct a short inquiry.

Fig.1: picture of Ismail Haniyeh, who, apparently rules over Gaza.

Fig.2: picture of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. ​

When we compare Fig.2 with Fig.1, we can see a difference in the beard: one is trimmed, the other is not.

We can conclude from this comparison that razors, cisors or other bladed tools are present in Gaza, and we can assume that these tools are made of metal, even if some people in the past used to shave with shells (the molusk exoskeleton, not the artillery projectiles that frequently fly over the borders of Gaza)*

Thus, unless the prime minister of Gaza shaves with seashells, we can reasonably assume that metal pieces are present in Gaza.

Thus, the Hamas does not rely on nails importations to makes its nail bombs.

Thus, a blockade preventing nails from entering Gaza has no effect on the Hamas capacity to build nails bombs.

Thus, such measure does not fullfil any military objective.

This measure is thus exclusively aimed at civilians.​

*On Shaving - Lost Leaders by Andrew Lang

 

[donsutherland1]

Thus, the Hamas does not rely on nails importations to makes its nail bombs.

Thus, a blockade preventing nails from entering Gaza has no effect on the Hamas capacity to build nails bombs.

Thus, such measure does not fullfil any military objective.

Even if Hamas does not currently rely on nails, because they are not available, that does not mean that Hamas would not do so if they suddenly were available. Hence, one cannot argue that the prohibition on importing nails into the Gaza Strip does not serve a military objective. As noted previously, I believe robust enforcement mechanisms should be in place were nails and other dual use products to be permitted to flow into the Gaza Strip so that such materials would only be used for civilian purposes and would not, in any fashion, be used by Hamas and its personnel. In the absence of heavily armed forces who would accompany construction crews and a mechanism for assuring that Hamas and its people would not seize newly-constructed buildings, I am not sure that is possible.

 

[Degreez]

Even if Hamas does not currently rely on nails, because they are not available, that does not mean that Hamas would not do so if they suddenly were available. Hence, one cannot argue that the prohibition on importing nails into the Gaza Strip does not serve a military objective. As noted previously, I believe robust enforcement mechanisms should be in place were nails and other dual use products to be permitted to flow into the Gaza Strip so that such materials would only be used for civilian purposes and would not, in any fashion, be used by Hamas and its personnel. In the absence of heavily armed forces who would accompany construction crews and a mechanism for assuring that Hamas and its people would not seize newly-constructed buildings, I am not sure that is possible.

Now explain how banning shoes is not a collective measure againt the inhabitants of Gaza. Hamas are not the only ones with feet in Gaza. Yet shoes are banned even though they do not distinguish between civilian and military.