What is the proper response to Hamas rockets?

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Oftencold
Troops are not for arresting criminals. They are for causing vast destruction, death, suffering and most importantly, enormous contrition in one's enemies.

Precise strikes are part of the problem. The general Palestinian population seem to support these savages, (making them savages themselves, of course.) All Palestinians who survive this war need to understand that their model of politics through terror is probably only going to win them land in the form of unmarked, communal graves.

Excuse me!

Their model of politics is this western democracy we keep telling everyone to live by.

 

[cherokee]

Well, unless I missed something, the proper response to Hamas rockets is to fire super laser space beams from out of a Tom Clancy novel to take out the terrorists without harming citizens.

Is that about right?

No the proper response is to carpet bomb they with gummy bears and cracklings.

 

[Red_Dave]

I wouldn't be so sure, despite political differences they still see them as Palestinians. Israel's attacks are only pushing them closer together. The Fatah is having difficult times preventing people of the West Bank from openly supporting Hamas and starting protests on Israeli lines.

I accept that Hamas is being repressed in the West Bank. For example even flying a Hamas flag is illegal there. But my point was that their not fireing rockets into Isreal and this hasnt done them any good. This demonstrates a big hole in the argument that palestinians would be fine if it wasnt for terroism. If this is the case why are those on the West Bank having land taken off them?

This is also relevant to all the demonisation the palestinians get for voting for Hamas. It has been proven that the moderate line taking by Fatah isnt going to get them anywhere so what choice do they have?

At the end of the day abhorrent though Hamas is palestinians are voting for it not because of some defect in their genes but because they are given no alternative other than to sit back and let there land get taken from them. If they where offerd some insentive then maybe they would be more willing to compromise [though it has to be said they have already compromised the vast majority of their country:roll:]

 

[ludahai]

No the proper response is to carpet bomb they with gummy bears and cracklings.

How about carpet bomb them with pork chops and bacon?

 

[Vader]

Israel should calmly ask Hamas to quit bombing them.

They did this.... and it didn't work.

 

[Vader]

Fission and fusion bombs are both nuclear.

WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.

 

[winston53660]

WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.

They are still both nuclear.

 

[Kandahar]

WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.

I didn't argue that they were just as destructive. They ARE nuclear though. This is basic science...fission and fusion are both nuclear processes. I'm not going to debate a basic fact with you.

Besides, you're splitting hairs and ignoring the content of what I wrote. Call them whatever kind of bombs you like, my point still stands.

 

[Rodney]

I've had a few debates with people in (in "real life"), and as I'm an artist and generally keep artists for company, I'm pretty much alone in my position that Israel has the right to eradicate active threats to its people. The discussion always devolves into who threw spitballs at whom first, (e.g. "Hasn't Israel had a tendency to overreact in the past?" as if that has any bearing on what's going on right now) and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets at Israeli population centers during the course of the cease fire is ignored or waved aside.

So, forget who was naughty first. Hamas launches rockets at Israel.

If military retaliation is not the correct response, then what is?

I`m OK with the proposed 30 to 1 ratio of rockets ,Israel over Hamas. When I think about the carnage I do shudder. WE aparently will have to beat many ,in the world of Islam,into submissiion. That sucks ,but as they persist....

 

[walleye]

I think the proper response to Hamas rockets is the total destruction of Hamas and for Israel to take over Gaza and rule it. Then the people will be better off and Israel will never have to fight another terrorist government that rules in Gaza. Simple.

 

[Rodney]

By the way, you are aware that rockets are being launched from civilian structures, are you not?

...civilian structures,hospitals,schools,malls,apartment buildings,other multi-family structures,shelters,more hopitals,more schools,their own homes. Cardinal,they just don`t,(and won`t) ever get it. Interesting point here,"some very fine western government", has provided Israel with state of the art technology for instant targeting of terrorist missile launch locations to increase the rate of kill of the launcher,terrorist ,and additional rockets,in an attempt to reduce collateral damage unless the collateral is on and the same as the launch site.In the event of collateral and terrorist launch site being one and the same ,the Israeli army will have to enter Gaza to get the,"good loveing muslims",without harm to inocents.

 

[Rodney]

I think the proper response to Hamas rockets is the total destruction of Hamas and for Israel to take over Gaza and rule it. Then the people will be better off and Israel will never have to fight another terrorist government that rules in Gaza. Simple.

WALLEYE,it really is that easy...it is,"SIMPLE".

 

[Vader]

Israel should calmly ask Hamas to quit bombing them.

They did that ... it didn't work.

 

[Torin]

I've had a few debates with people in (in "real life"), and as I'm an artist and generally keep artists for company, I'm pretty much alone in my position that Israel has the right to eradicate active threats to its people. The discussion always devolves into who threw spitballs at whom first, (e.g. "Hasn't Israel had a tendency to overreact in the past?" as if that has any bearing on what's going on right now) and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets at Israeli population centers during the course of the cease fire is ignored or waved aside.

So, forget who was naughty first. Hamas launches rockets at Israel.

If military retaliation is not the correct response, then what is?

Accepting one of the various olive-branches offered to Israel, rather than rejecting out of hand any that doesn't include the complete removal of Islam from the Promised Land would work. The problem is that Israel is a power-house in that part of the world, mostly because we (the most powerful country in the world) support them.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

I've had a few debates with people in (in "real life"), and as I'm an artist and generally keep artists for company, I'm pretty much alone in my position that Israel has the right to eradicate active threats to its people. The discussion always devolves into who threw spitballs at whom first, (e.g. "Hasn't Israel had a tendency to overreact in the past?" as if that has any bearing on what's going on right now) and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets at Israeli population centers during the course of the cease fire is ignored or waved aside.

So, forget who was naughty first. Hamas launches rockets at Israel.

If military retaliation is not the correct response, then what is?

Hi Cardinal,

First of all, I would like to apologise for bringing back to life such on old thread. I deliberately was looking for old threads and wondering if any of them would be interesting to revisit. In the light of what's been going on in Israel/Palestine for the past 1.5 year, I think your post is a good first candidate. Let me know if you reject the concept.

Now you're question is of course if a military response is justified, regardless of what has happened previously. To that answer I say, in light of the attack on Israel and the kidnapping of several hundred of their people and the killing of hundreds more, that I do not believe there is an other alternative than a military response. As a matter of fact, When I heard about the attack in the news my first reaction was in the lining of; Why would they wanna do this, because they KNOW that Israel is going to respond in kind and 10 times worse. Unfortunately I was right here. Palestine does not exist anymore. Only on paper.

Personally, I do not agree with the level of destruction. But only because it is a little over the top by now. But the bottom line is that for the last 75 years several countries and people have been calling for the elimination of the country and its people. That makes it an existential thread. And when faced with an existential thread, the rule book goes out of the window. And to highlight that level of destruction. Compared to Palestine, Germany looked like paradise after WWII. The only place in Germany that resembled Palestine was Dresden. Even Berlin looked better than Palestine today.

It is a difficult situation that is unlikely to be resolved without external interference. But I also think that Hamas has to take a lot of blame for what has happened. They have had many opportunities to make peace. Their was a different political climate that was much more favourable for Hamas. Right now there are few Jews who even wanna give them the air to breath. I can only guess what their objective was, but something tells me that this was not the outcome they hoped for.

But may I ask you a question in return? Do you think the pre-emptive strike on Iran is justified?


Joey

 

[Serenity]

Moderator's Warning:

Please don't necro 7 year old threads. Closing this one. Thanks for understanding.