Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Gaza and Israel statistics

rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2014 3:29:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Just saw this. Thought I'd share.

http://www.economist.com...

.............................

1. Population of Israel: 8.16m [Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics]

2. Population of Gaza: 1.76m [Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics]

3. GDP per person of Israel in dollars: $38,000 [Wikipedia]

4. GDP per person of Gaza in dollars: $876 [Washington Institute for Near East Studies, 2010 figure]

5. Population density of Israel, per square kilometre: 392 [CIA]

6. Population density of Gaza, per square kilometre: 4,822 [Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics]

7. Lethal radius of standard 2,000lb bomb in metres: 366 [Wikipedia]

8. Maximum ordnance payload of Israeli F-16 aircraft: 6,800kg [www.F-16.net]

9. Maximum payload of biggest rockets fired from Gaza (M302): 144kg [IDF]

10. Payload of most common Qassam missile: 9kg [IDF]

11. Number of rockets fired from Gaza into Israel from July 8th to August 5th: 3,360 [IDF]

12. Number of Israelis killed by rockets from July 8th to August 5th: 2 + one foreign national [IDF and press reports]

13. Number of Israelis killed by rockets in previous 18 months: Nil [Wikipedia]

14. Kill ratio of Palestinian rocket fire during Operation Protective Edge: 0.000953%

15. Number of rockets intercepted by Iron Dome missile defence system: 584 [IDF]

16. Number of Israeli strikes on Gaza from July 8th to August 5th: 4,762 [IDF]

17. Total Israeli deaths during Operation Protective Edge: 67 [IDF]

18. Total Palestinian deaths from July 8th to August 5th: 1,938 [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

19. Proportion of Gaza population killed per 1,000 people: 1

20. Proportion of Israeli population killed per 1,000 people: 0.008

21. Number of Palestinian children killed by Israeli fire: 460 [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

22. Total Palestinians injured: 9,567 [Ministry of Health, Gaza; UNRWA]

23. Number of Palestinian homes destroyed or seriously damaged: 10,690 [UN]

24. Number of Palestinians displaced by fighting/lost homes: 485,000 [UN]

25. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Israelis: 4.5% [IDF]

26. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Palestinians: 70-85% [Ministry of Health, Gaza; UN; independent NGOs]

27. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Palestinians: 50% [Israeli government]

28. Total number of civilians in Gaza killed by Israeli fire since 2000: 5,000+ [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

29. Number of Americans who would have died given similar death rate: 990,000+

30. Tunnels from Gaza located and destroyed by Israeli forces: 32 [IDF]

31. Total estimated cost of building tunnels: $30m [IDF]

32. Direct cost to Israel of Operation Protective Edge: $1.7 billion [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

33. Estimated cost of restoring services and reconstruction in Gaza: $6 billion [Palestinian government minister, quoted in news reports]

33. Proportion of respondents to online poll, by Israel"s most popular TV channel on August 3rd, who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be peace in the Middle East: 20% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

34. Proportion of respondents to Israeli poll who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be the Ebola virus: 48% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]
mendel
Posts: 73
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2014 9:44:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
You know there's somethings which economists can't measure. For example the statistic didn't include the fact that every Israeli runs into shelters and stairwells when there's sirens and this has saved many many lives. In other words life is not just about surviving it's about quality of life and it's Israels responsibility to stop the rocket fire. Secondly your article didn't include the fact that more than 300,000 residents living in the south left their homes for about a month now because the 15 second rocket warning is not enough and also because you can't live doing it 50 times a day... I'm not an Israeli but I'm in Israel for the summer trust me I've seen all this first hand.
ben2974
Posts: 767
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2014 10:18:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/8/2014 3:29:26 AM, rross wrote:
Just saw this. Thought I'd share.

http://www.economist.com...

.............................

1. Population of Israel: 8.16m [Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics]

2. Population of Gaza: 1.76m [Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics]

3. GDP per person of Israel in dollars: $38,000 [Wikipedia]

4. GDP per person of Gaza in dollars: $876 [Washington Institute for Near East Studies, 2010 figure]

5. Population density of Israel, per square kilometre: 392 [CIA]

6. Population density of Gaza, per square kilometre: 4,822 [Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics]

7. Lethal radius of standard 2,000lb bomb in metres: 366 [Wikipedia]

8. Maximum ordnance payload of Israeli F-16 aircraft: 6,800kg [www.F-16.net]

9. Maximum payload of biggest rockets fired from Gaza (M302): 144kg [IDF]

10. Payload of most common Qassam missile: 9kg [IDF]

11. Number of rockets fired from Gaza into Israel from July 8th to August 5th: 3,360 [IDF]

12. Number of Israelis killed by rockets from July 8th to August 5th: 2 + one foreign national [IDF and press reports]

13. Number of Israelis killed by rockets in previous 18 months: Nil [Wikipedia]

14. Kill ratio of Palestinian rocket fire during Operation Protective Edge: 0.000953%

15. Number of rockets intercepted by Iron Dome missile defence system: 584 [IDF]

16. Number of Israeli strikes on Gaza from July 8th to August 5th: 4,762 [IDF]

17. Total Israeli deaths during Operation Protective Edge: 67 [IDF]

18. Total Palestinian deaths from July 8th to August 5th: 1,938 [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

19. Proportion of Gaza population killed per 1,000 people: 1

20. Proportion of Israeli population killed per 1,000 people: 0.008

21. Number of Palestinian children killed by Israeli fire: 460 [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

22. Total Palestinians injured: 9,567 [Ministry of Health, Gaza; UNRWA]

23. Number of Palestinian homes destroyed or seriously damaged: 10,690 [UN]

24. Number of Palestinians displaced by fighting/lost homes: 485,000 [UN]

25. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Israelis: 4.5% [IDF]

26. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Palestinians: 70-85% [Ministry of Health, Gaza; UN; independent NGOs]

27. Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Palestinians: 50% [Israeli government]

28. Total number of civilians in Gaza killed by Israeli fire since 2000: 5,000+ [Palestinian Centre for Human Rights]

29. Number of Americans who would have died given similar death rate: 990,000+

30. Tunnels from Gaza located and destroyed by Israeli forces: 32 [IDF]

31. Total estimated cost of building tunnels: $30m [IDF]

32. Direct cost to Israel of Operation Protective Edge: $1.7 billion [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

33. Estimated cost of restoring services and reconstruction in Gaza: $6 billion [Palestinian government minister, quoted in news reports]

33. Proportion of respondents to online poll, by Israel"s most popular TV channel on August 3rd, who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be peace in the Middle East: 20% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

34. Proportion of respondents to Israeli poll who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be the Ebola virus: 48% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

Sucks for Gazans.
brant.merrell
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2014 12:59:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/8/2014 9:44:44 AM, mendel wrote:
You know there's somethings which economists can't measure. For example the statistic didn't include the fact that every Israeli runs into shelters and stairwells when there's sirens and this has saved many many lives.

And economists can't measure this . . . why?

In other words life is not just about surviving it's about quality of life and it's Israels responsibility to stop the rocket fire.

And the Gazan quality of life matters less . . . why?

Secondly your article didn't include the fact that more than 300,000 residents living in the south left their homes for about a month now because the 15 second rocket warning is not enough and also because you can't live doing it 50 times a day...

Israel can't live that way, huh? In Gaza, they can't leave. They don't change the routine of their lives to escape rocket fire, they just live in constant fear of death, with crippled infrastructure and utitlities or THEY JUST DIE.

I'm not an Israeli but I'm in Israel for the summer

Have you lived in Gaza for the summer?

trust me I've seen all this first hand.

No, you've seen half of it first hand. The other half, the Gazan half, wouldn't even have the resources to let you stay there for the summer. Trust you? You mean like, ignore the numbers, the "economists," the statistics?
mendel
Posts: 73
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/8/2014 12:59:22 PM, brant.merrell wrote:
At 8/8/2014 9:44:44 AM, mendel wrote:
You know there's somethings which economists can't measure. For example the statistic didn't include the fact that every Israeli runs into shelters and stairwells when there's sirens and this has saved many many lives.

And economists can't measure this . . . why?

How peoples lives are affected by running into stairwells and how many is it possible to measure?maybe but thats irrelevant anyways the point was that it wasn't included in the statistics.

In other words life is not just about surviving it's about quality of life and it's Israels responsibility to stop the rocket fire.

And the Gazan quality of life matters less . . . why?

Contrary to the nonsense you hear on the news israel would want nothing better than the gazans to have happy successful lives.

Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first, but the vast majority of things get in there, namely there is no shortage of food whatsoever there's free drinking water supplied by israel which they have such an abundance of that they made a water park (i believe it was burned down by hamas in 2010 for mixed swimming and some people were executed...) there's electricity supplied by israel (not a cent is payed for by gazans) together with their own power plant and some lines from egypt. There is no shortage of medical supplies no epidemic or anything of the sort has ever broken out there... But the seige of course limits them physocolgically they can't travel at will...

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid. now even if they wouldn't have the support of the gazans (and i'm sure at this point they realize what a mess they got themselves into) it doesn't change the reality that israel is morally obligated to keep the seige.

Secondly your article didn't include the fact that more than 300,000 residents living in the south left their homes for about a month now because the 15 second rocket warning is not enough and also because you can't live doing it 50 times a day...

Israel can't live that way, huh? In Gaza, they can't leave. They don't change the routine of their lives to escape rocket fire, they just live in constant fear of death, with crippled infrastructure and utitlities or THEY JUST DIE.

Point being what? So israel shouldn't respond? If gazans really can't live that way them them stop shooting at israel duuuuu

I'm not an Israeli but I'm in Israel for the summer

Have you lived in Gaza for the summer?

I've actually visted the jewish settlments in gaza before they were destroyed and expelled, the most beatiful surburban communites i've ever seen... Now in those same places theres nothing but barbarians screaming blood curling allah hu akbars

trust me I've seen all this first hand.

No, you've seen half of it first hand. The other half, the Gazan half, wouldn't even have the resources to let you stay there for the summer. Trust you? You mean like, ignore the numbers, the "economists," the statistics?

Actually if i stayed in gaza i would be summarily executed because i'm recognizably a jew, where as not a single arab is afraid to walk around in the most densely populated jewish cities in israel this is the unfortunate reality. Just do yourself a favor and don't dig your head in the sand.
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2014 2:11:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM, mendel wrote:
Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

People don't vote the way you want them to? Blockade them! Long live democracy! It was a fair election. No one disputes this.

Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first...

It's actually a lot more severe than that.

" In September 2011, the Chair and Vice-Chair of a UN Panel of Inquiry concluded in the Palmer Report that the naval blockade is legal and had to be judged isolated from the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings. Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[24][25][26] However a Fact-Finding Mission for the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a former judge of the International Criminal Court concluded that the blockade constituted collective punishment of the population of Gaza and was therefore unlawful.[27] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and some experts on international law[28] consider the blockade illegal."

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid

People don't vote the way you want them to? Bomb them! Long live democracy! Israel has no choice but to bomb, blockade and illegally occupy the land of the Palestinians, after all.

Point being what? So israel shouldn't respond? If gazans really can't live that way them them stop shooting at israel duuuuu

Maybe they should respond, but as far as I'm aware it's not a legitimate response to a couple of civilian casualties to kill hundreds of children and destroy the lives of countless more. Perhaps Israel should stop with its illegal aggression?

I've actually visted the jewish settlments in gaza

Illegal settlements?

Actually if i stayed in gaza i would be summarily executed because i'm recognizably a jew, where as not a single arab is afraid to walk around in the most densely populated jewish cities in israel

That's false, as far as I'm aware.

"While meeting with leaders from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' rival Fatah movement, Gaza-based Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar rejected a reconciliation deal that called on Hams to adopt non-violent resistance to Israel, as opposed to armed confrontation. Zahar pointed out that since there are no Jews living in Gaza, Hamas has no one against whom to conduct peaceful protests.

"Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip?" Zahar asked. "When Gaza was occupied [sic] that model was applicable."

So, even Hamas acknowledges that a strong Jewish presence in Gaza was a recipe for less, not more violence. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders keep their heads buried in the sand on this point."
http://www.israeltoday.co.il...

Unless it's a cunning plot to behead them all? lol.

Also, Arabs are clearly very afraid to walk around their own damn cities, perhaps you should consider that. If you went for a walk in Gaza you'd probably have more to fear from an Israeli bomb being dropped on your head than angry Muslims...
mendel
Posts: 73
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2014 5:37:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 2:11:15 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM, mendel wrote:
Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

People don't vote the way you want them to? Blockade them! Long live democracy! It was a fair election. No one disputes this.

That makes it even more understood why a blockade is legal. I was trying to give them the benefit of the doubt that they didn't vote in this terrorist organization.

Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first...

It's actually a lot more severe than that.

" In September 2011, the Chair and Vice-Chair of a UN Panel of Inquiry concluded in the Palmer Report that the naval blockade is legal and had to be judged isolated from the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings. Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[24][25][26] However a Fact-Finding Mission for the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a former judge of the International Criminal Court concluded that the blockade constituted collective punishment of the population of Gaza and was therefore unlawful.[27] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and some experts on international law[28] consider the blockade illegal."

These UN organizations are not to be trusted and they have no validity or connection to anything. The reason being that many of the countries sitting on these most "prestigious" committees of the UN are countries like saudi arabia, kuwait, UAE, cuba etc. I would rather if you could argue with a particular point that i made for example is there any shortage of food, shortage of clean water, shortage of medical supplies etc.

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid

People don't vote the way you want them to? Bomb them! Long live democracy! Israel has no choice but to bomb, blockade and illegally occupy the land of the Palestinians, after all.

Yes israel has no choice but to bomb hamas after all...

Point being what? So israel shouldn't respond? If gazans really can't live that way them them stop shooting at israel duuuuu

Maybe they should respond, but as far as I'm aware it's not a legitimate response to a couple of civilian casualties to kill hundreds of children and destroy the lives of countless more. Perhaps Israel should stop with its illegal aggression?

You obviously didn't read the whole thread. I began explaining why israel has the right to do whatever it has to, to stop the rockets.

I've actually visted the jewish settlments in gaza

Illegal settlements?

Nothing illegal about them, even if they were to come part of this arab state, why is Jewish settlements a problem there are a million and a half arabs living in israel why can't thousands of jews live under the arabs. The answer is the arabs don't want a single jew allowed in to their country which of course is the core of the conflict. A jew could live in berlin and moscow but he cant live in the holy land it's absurd, The only reason why settlments are a "problem" to peace is because the arabs want a yudenrein state which they should never be allowed to make.

Actually if i stayed in gaza i would be summarily executed because i'm recognizably a jew, where as not a single arab is afraid to walk around in the most densely populated jewish cities in israel

That's false, as far as I'm aware.

You're obviously not very aware...

"While meeting with leaders from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' rival Fatah movement, Gaza-based Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar rejected a reconciliation deal that called on Hams to adopt non-violent resistance to Israel, as opposed to armed confrontation. Zahar pointed out that since there are no Jews living in Gaza, Hamas has no one against whom to conduct peaceful protests.

"Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip?" Zahar asked. "When Gaza was occupied [sic] that model was applicable."

So, even Hamas acknowledges that a strong Jewish presence in Gaza was a recipe for less, not more violence. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders keep their heads buried in the sand on this point."
http://www.israeltoday.co.il...

Unless it's a cunning plot to behead them all? lol.

The jokes on you, you literally sound to anyone who knows anything like a raving lunatic. You know in the future you should check up a little bit on hamas before you start telling me what they do or don't do or believe or do.

Also, Arabs are clearly very afraid to walk around their own damn cities, perhaps you should consider that. If you went for a walk in Gaza you'd probably have more to fear from an Israeli bomb being dropped on your head than angry Muslims...

If your a terrorist or within 20 feet of one, you sure as hell have what to be afraid of, thank g-d for the idf may g-d protect all the soldiers and destroy the enemies of the jewish people amen.
slo1
Posts: 4,341
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2014 10:06:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
When looking at the civiliabs to military deaths it certainly looks like hamas is the more responsible party.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 9:36:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/8/2014 9:44:44 AM, mendel wrote:
You know there's somethings which economists can't measure. For example the statistic didn't include the fact that every Israeli runs into shelters and stairwells when there's sirens and this has saved many many lives. In other words life is not just about surviving it's about quality of life and it's Israels responsibility to stop the rocket fire. Secondly your article didn't include the fact that more than 300,000 residents living in the south left their homes for about a month now because the 15 second rocket warning is not enough and also because you can't live doing it 50 times a day... I'm not an Israeli but I'm in Israel for the summer trust me I've seen all this first hand.

Economists can and do measure a lot of that when they can. Regardless, the picture does paint how extremely different life is for Israelis vis a vis Palestinians. All that you state about Israeli discomforts pale in comparison to what Palestinians face.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 10:10:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/8/2014 3:29:26 AM, rross wrote:
Just saw this. Thought I'd share.

33. Proportion of respondents to online poll, by Israel"s most popular TV channel on August 3rd, who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be peace in the Middle East: 20% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

34. Proportion of respondents to Israeli poll who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be the Ebola virus: 48% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

It's things like these last two points that are slowly formulating the idea in my head that Israel would not stop with the West Bank and Gaza and may make more incursions into other Arab territories if given the chance.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 2:11:15 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM, mendel wrote:
Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

People don't vote the way you want them to? Blockade them! Long live democracy! It was a fair election. No one disputes this.

Doesn't matter. If you win a fair election on the grounds of "I'm gonna kill all black people," the blacks have every right to pro-actively defend themselves.


Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first...

It's actually a lot more severe than that.

" In September 2011, the Chair and Vice-Chair of a UN Panel of Inquiry concluded in the Palmer Report that the naval blockade is legal and had to be judged isolated from the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings. Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[24][25][26] However a Fact-Finding Mission for the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a former judge of the International Criminal Court concluded that the blockade constituted collective punishment of the population of Gaza and was therefore unlawful.[27] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and some experts on international law[28] consider the blockade illegal."

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid

People don't vote the way you want them to? Bomb them! Long live democracy! Israel has no choice but to bomb, blockade and illegally occupy the land of the Palestinians, after all.

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.


Point being what? So israel shouldn't respond? If gazans really can't live that way them them stop shooting at israel duuuuu

Maybe they should respond, but as far as I'm aware it's not a legitimate response to a couple of civilian casualties to kill hundreds of children and destroy the lives of countless more. Perhaps Israel should stop with its illegal aggression?

I've actually visted the jewish settlments in gaza

Illegal settlements?

Actually if i stayed in gaza i would be summarily executed because i'm recognizably a jew, where as not a single arab is afraid to walk around in the most densely populated jewish cities in israel

That's false, as far as I'm aware.

"While meeting with leaders from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' rival Fatah movement, Gaza-based Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar rejected a reconciliation deal that called on Hams to adopt non-violent resistance to Israel, as opposed to armed confrontation. Zahar pointed out that since there are no Jews living in Gaza, Hamas has no one against whom to conduct peaceful protests.

"Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip?" Zahar asked. "When Gaza was occupied [sic] that model was applicable."

So, even Hamas acknowledges that a strong Jewish presence in Gaza was a recipe for less, not more violence. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders keep their heads buried in the sand on this point."
http://www.israeltoday.co.il...

Unless it's a cunning plot to behead them all? lol.

Also, Arabs are clearly very afraid to walk around their own damn cities, perhaps you should consider that. If you went for a walk in Gaza you'd probably have more to fear from an Israeli bomb being dropped on your head than angry Muslims...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/9/2014 2:11:15 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM, mendel wrote:
Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

People don't vote the way you want them to? Blockade them! Long live democracy! It was a fair election. No one disputes this.

Doesn't matter. If you win a fair election on the grounds of "I'm gonna kill all black people," the blacks have every right to pro-actively defend themselves.

Here's the Hamas charter.

http://fas.org...

Where is there anything about genocide or even killing people? Yes, it's very aggressive about obtaining Islamic rule over Palestine, and I can understand how people could object to that.

Article 31 states:

"Hamas is a humane movement, which cares for human rights and is committed to the tolerance inherent in Islam as regards attitudes towards other religions. It is only hostile to those who are hostile towards it, or stand in its way in order to disturb its moves or to frustrate its efforts.
Under the shadow of Islam it is possible for the members of the three religions: Islam, Christianity and Judaism to coexist in safety and security. Safety and security can only prevail under the shadow of Islam, and recent and ancient history is the best witness to that effect. The members of other religions must desist from struggling against Islam over sovereignty in this region. For if they were to gain the upper hand, fighting, torture and uprooting would follow; they would be fed up with each other, to say nothing of members of other religions. The past and the present are full of evidence to that effect."

Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first...

It's actually a lot more severe than that.

" In September 2011, the Chair and Vice-Chair of a UN Panel of Inquiry concluded in the Palmer Report that the naval blockade is legal and had to be judged isolated from the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings. Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[24][25][26] However a Fact-Finding Mission for the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a former judge of the International Criminal Court concluded that the blockade constituted collective punishment of the population of Gaza and was therefore unlawful.[27] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and some experts on international law[28] consider the blockade illegal."

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid

People don't vote the way you want them to? Bomb them! Long live democracy! Israel has no choice but to bomb, blockade and illegally occupy the land of the Palestinians, after all.

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

In any case, can you really be suggesting that killing hundreds of children and thousands of civilians is an appropriate response to political hatred?
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 7:16:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 10:10:16 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/8/2014 3:29:26 AM, rross wrote:
Just saw this. Thought I'd share.

33. Proportion of respondents to online poll, by Israel"s most popular TV channel on August 3rd, who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be peace in the Middle East: 20% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

34. Proportion of respondents to Israeli poll who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be the Ebola virus: 48% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

It's things like these last two points that are slowly formulating the idea in my head that Israel would not stop with the West Bank and Gaza and may make more incursions into other Arab territories if given the chance.

I actually really believe the Israeli rhetoric that they think they're fighting a defensive war. The thing is, there's always going to be extremists who attack Israel, and Israel can use that as an excuse to attack whole populations or invade other countries.

So...if that's true, then the only thing that would stop them would be if they believed in surrounding countries' support for Israel's existence. Then, if there were attacks, the governments of those countries could be relied to prosecute the perpetrators as criminals. But they don't have that support right now.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:40:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 7:16:18 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 10:10:16 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/8/2014 3:29:26 AM, rross wrote:
Just saw this. Thought I'd share.

33. Proportion of respondents to online poll, by Israel"s most popular TV channel on August 3rd, who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be peace in the Middle East: 20% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

34. Proportion of respondents to Israeli poll who say the best birthday gift for Barack Obama would be the Ebola virus: 48% [Israeli Channel 2 TV]

It's things like these last two points that are slowly formulating the idea in my head that Israel would not stop with the West Bank and Gaza and may make more incursions into other Arab territories if given the chance.

I actually really believe the Israeli rhetoric that they think they're fighting a defensive war. The thing is, there's always going to be extremists who attack Israel, and Israel can use that as an excuse to attack whole populations or invade other countries.

If Israel is fighting a defensive war, why are they looking to annex territory? Doesn't make sense.

I agree with you about the excuses part, but IMHO when it comes to war, it's mainly about net benefit and self-interest, and it's in the interests of any political entity to annex more land if it can.

So...if that's true, then the only thing that would stop them would be if they believed in surrounding countries' support for Israel's existence. Then, if there were attacks, the governments of those countries could be relied to prosecute the perpetrators as criminals. But they don't have that support right now.

I really don't think they will ever get that support unless you expect those countries to renounce Islam...but they can't become Jewish if they did that can't they? That's IMHO the intractable problem with Israel.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:51:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

This sounds like the general calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, I'm sure you're familiar with those.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:52:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:51:44 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

This sounds like the general calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, I'm sure you're familiar with those.

An example, if you're not:

http://dailycaller.com...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 8:59:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:52:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:51:44 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

This sounds like the general calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, I'm sure you're familiar with those.

An example, if you're not:

http://dailycaller.com...

I hate to be picky, but there's a difference between the destruction of PEOPLE and the destruction of a REGIME. Wanting the nation of Israel to cease to exist is not the same as wanting to kill Jews.

Although, I have to say I've been reading through the Hamas charter a bit more carefully, and, yeah, it's pretty bad. However, I think even people in Hamas are beginning to separate themselves from the charter, and they've been talking about a two-state solution so Idk.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 9:00:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:51:44 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

This sounds like the general calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, I'm sure you're familiar with those.

It's really NOT the same, and I think it's really important not to exaggerate because of the reactivity.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 9:01:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 8:59:21 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:52:25 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 8:51:44 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

This sounds like the general calls for the destruction of the state of Israel, I'm sure you're familiar with those.

An example, if you're not:

http://dailycaller.com...

I hate to be picky, but there's a difference between the destruction of PEOPLE and the destruction of a REGIME. Wanting the nation of Israel to cease to exist is not the same as wanting to kill Jews.

I fully agree, and IMHO it's not being at all picky. Still, Israel is militant, no question, so the destruction (or attempt to) of the state of Israel will involve a very large body count.

Although, I have to say I've been reading through the Hamas charter a bit more carefully, and, yeah, it's pretty bad. However, I think even people in Hamas are beginning to separate themselves from the charter, and they've been talking about a two-state solution so Idk.

I think given Israel's own foundations, a two-state solution is probably the most plausible solution.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2014 11:37:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 6:07:33 PM, rross wrote:
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/9/2014 2:11:15 PM, Wocambs wrote:
At 8/9/2014 1:50:31 PM, mendel wrote:
Here's the problem, after israel left in 2005 THERE WAS NO BLOCKADE it was after the gaza strip was taken over by the terrorist organization called hamas in 2007 that the blockade began. Now it's even worse (unless the elections were rigged) the hamas came into power because they won by a landslide under the banner no recognition, no peace talks and violence as the answer.

People don't vote the way you want them to? Blockade them! Long live democracy! It was a fair election. No one disputes this.

Doesn't matter. If you win a fair election on the grounds of "I'm gonna kill all black people," the blacks have every right to pro-actively defend themselves.

Here's the Hamas charter.

http://fas.org...

Where is there anything about genocide or even killing people? Yes, it's very aggressive about obtaining Islamic rule over Palestine, and I can understand how people could object to that.

Article 31 states:

"Hamas is a humane movement, which cares for human rights and is committed to the tolerance inherent in Islam as regards attitudes towards other religions. It is only hostile to those who are hostile towards it, or stand in its way in order to disturb its moves or to frustrate its efforts.
Under the shadow of Islam it is possible for the members of the three religions: Islam, Christianity and Judaism to coexist in safety and security. Safety and security can only prevail under the shadow of Islam, and recent and ancient history is the best witness to that effect. The members of other religions must desist from struggling against Islam over sovereignty in this region. For if they were to gain the upper hand, fighting, torture and uprooting would follow; they would be fed up with each other, to say nothing of members of other religions. The past and the present are full of evidence to that effect."

In 1996 Hamas completely boycotted its own elections because the Palestine government had the audacity to engage in peace talks with Israel. They weren't boycotting any particular aspects, just the fact that there were talks of peace.


Now of course israel made a blockade which essentially means that everything that enters gaza has to be inspected by israel first...

It's actually a lot more severe than that.

" In September 2011, the Chair and Vice-Chair of a UN Panel of Inquiry concluded in the Palmer Report that the naval blockade is legal and had to be judged isolated from the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings. Concerning the restrictions on goods reaching Gaza via the land crossings the Palmer report stated that they were the main reason for an unsustainable and unacceptable humanitarian situation in Gaza.[24][25][26] However a Fact-Finding Mission for the UN Human Rights Council chaired by a former judge of the International Criminal Court concluded that the blockade constituted collective punishment of the population of Gaza and was therefore unlawful.[27] UN envoy Desmond Tutu, United Nations Human Rights Council head Navi Pillay, the International Committee of the Red Cross and some experts on international law[28] consider the blockade illegal."

But honestly does israel have a choice absolutely not and the gazans brought it on themselves did they really thing that israel would just let hamas run gaza like any goverment in the world how stupid

People don't vote the way you want them to? Bomb them! Long live democracy! Israel has no choice but to bomb, blockade and illegally occupy the land of the Palestinians, after all.

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

Not quoting their words, only their actions.


In any case, can you really be suggesting that killing hundreds of children and thousands of civilians is an appropriate response to political hatred?

It's not just political hatred, it is a group that wants you dead and has the means to attempt it.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 3:28:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 11:37:09 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

In 1996 Hamas completely boycotted its own elections because the Palestine government had the audacity to engage in peace talks with Israel. They weren't boycotting any particular aspects, just the fact that there were talks of peace.

Yeah,and that's bad, but it was also 18 years ago.

Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Are you quoting someone? Because I can't find reference to that anywhere.

Not quoting their words, only their actions.

Which actions are you quoting?

In any case, can you really be suggesting that killing hundreds of children and thousands of civilians is an appropriate response to political hatred?

It's not just political hatred, it is a group that wants you dead and has the means to attempt it.

There's no question that Israelis feel that way. And there's no question that Hamas is anti-Israel (the regime and the occupation), but I honestly don't see the evidence that Hamas is the problem and that Israel is justified in its actions against Gaza. Because, even without Hamas, Israelis would think that the Arab world wants them dead, and they'd name some other group, some other evidence, and react in the same way.

So Hamas boycotted an election 18 years ago, and has some aggressive language in its charter. So does the Likud party. These are definitely issues to be concerned about. I don't see them as justification for a 7-year blockade and the murder of thousands of civilians, though. Do you? How does the justification work, exactly?
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 7:58:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/10/2014 4:40:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Doesn't matter. If you win a fair election on the grounds of "I'm gonna kill all black people," the blacks have every right to pro-actively defend themselves.
Nope, when someone says "there will be no peace until you are dead," you don't have a choice but to fight back.

Please consider changing your mind. The narrative that the Palestinians are all savage martyrs baying for the blood of every Israeli to spilt on the sands of the Holy Land is simply not true, as demonstrated by the behaviour of the negotiating parties, Hamas, Fateh, Israel and the US, this year.

"The Israeli decision to break off negotiations with the Palestinians last week after the Palestinian groups Fateh and Hamas announced their reconciliation agreement reveals the darkest and most destructive sides of Israel and its Western backers vis-a-vis their declared desire for a negotiated peace agreement: their inconsistency, insincerity and hypocrisy. You might say these are normal attributes of any political actor, which is true to some extent. But here this kind of behaviour also advances the accusation that Israel and the United States in particular only wish to negotiate peace on their terms, and not on terms that treat the Palestinians and Israelis equally.

I say this because in their reconciliation announcement Fateh and Hamas made it clear that the unity government and the desired subsequent negotiations with Israel would be based on three important principles that have long been an Israeli and American demand, and that the Quartet in 2006 specifically demanded from Hamas: that Hamas adhere to three conditions of non-violence, adherence to previous agreements, and acceptance of Israel"s right to exist. On this basis, it was assumed, Palestinian negotiators would speak for all Palestinians, and Israel, the United States and other countries could deal with Hamas.

Well, the national unity agreement between Fatah and Hamas last week precisely mentioned that Hamas had agreed to these three demands; the UN Secretary General"s special representative to the Arab-Israeli peace process, Robert Serry, made it clear after meeting Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas that the national unity government would respect the existing PLO commitments that include recognition of Israel, non-violence, and adherence to previous agreements. In other words, the UN sees the Palestinian unity agreement terms as having met the conditions that the Quartet set on 30 Jan 2006.

So what did Israel do in return for Hamas meetings its conditions, with the United States in tow? It immediately ended the negotiations and told President Abbas that he had to choose between peace with Israel or a "pact" with Hamas. The American government, predictably, described Palestinian unity as "unhelpful." So when the Israelis and Americans suddenly came face-to-face with a united Palestinian leadership that openly and explicitly accepted the Israeli-American terms for diplomatic engagement, the Israelis-Americans ignored their own terms for talks and totally shattered the most recent attempt to negotiate peace.

This kind of reckless hypocrisy or straightforward lying is bad enough in itself, but it is made even worse by the fact that on the Israeli side there are ministers in the Netanyahu government who reject the Quartet"s three conditions..."

http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu...

You can damn Rami Khouri for being an Arab and regard his piece as completely biased if you wish, but the fact remains that Hamas agreed to the conditions of the Quartet.
Wocambs
Posts: 1,505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 7:59:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/9/2014 5:37:00 PM, mendel wrote:

You may want to read my reply to Ore_Ele above where I demonstrate that Hamas want peace more than the Israelis do.