Fallout Studios Forums

I am going to pretend the above 15 or so posts didn't happen [with the exception of a few well thought out ideas from those that produce them regularly] and concentrate on :

Dauth, on 2 Jan 2009, 15:08, said:

The only reasonable way to stop the conflict is to ensure the Palestinians have the same rights, remedies, equalities and opportunities as the Israelies and in the same geographical location. This conflict is not based on religion (although it is used as a tool of the conflict), but identity attached to the land on which Israel & Palestine is based.

If the Palestinian people were to have access to jobs, hospitals, education and welfare such as the Israelies do now then there would be no need for conflict as we see it. The saddest part of this is that they have been denied these rights since the beginning.

There are identity issues that will linger, but if you look to other countries that have been absorbed in the past, most of Europe has borders only from the '40s, things can be dealt with. There however must be an equality between the differing identities in order for peace to reign. This conflict is about haves and have nots.

Remove the borders around Gaza and the West Bank, allow Palestinians into Israel as naturalised citizens and vice versa and see how much the area prospers. Tough times will occur but in a lesser extent than they do currently.

While I agree this is the most likely way to bring peace to the region, how do you propose to get this through the three Governments in Israel to this conclusion. Remember we have the Israelis, Hamas and Fatah to pacify.

I'm also worried by these lingering identity issues, considering the vehemence of the hatred present currently there, contrast that with the highly prosperous UK and the amount of antipathy between English and Scots.

A reasonable point, however it would be interesting to see what would actually happen if the Israelies just took down the barriers one day and said "what's ours is yours". It's not a realistic option, but I have a feeling that it would see a marked improvement in relations if everyone was on an equal footing.

The identity issue is a genuine concern, but given the current state of play it couldn't hurt the situation. Essentially both sides want their own land and government on the same dimensions. The only solution, save for the complete annihilation of the other side, is for both to be grown up and share what they have.

Israelies may well deserve their own land, but you CANNOT up root an indigenous population for that. You have to be able to empathize.

Very powerful words there Wizard. It is as you said, the conflict is indeed all about identity. The only reason religion was brought into the equation was because the Saudi Arabian kingdom is a Muslim state and made sure the Islam became involved in the conflict.

That looks to me to be the only solution wizard. The problem is the Israelis don't want peace, they might say that - but if you look at what they've done its all been catered towards forcing hamas to attack them. They wanted hamas to attack them so they can use the *Defending ourselves* *Against terrorism* bullshit. Even before the ceasefire started Israel had an economic blockade on Gaza. They never intended to let the palestinian people have their own lands. And if they had to give them something they would make damn sure it failed.

The Israelis also consider hamas a terrorist organisation. So they are not even willing to talk to them, because of this western countries follow suit. Hamas is not all extremists, sure it has some. But hamas also has a large number of non-extremist members. It was voted in democratically after all. In alot of senses hamas really are freedom fighters. I know the saying "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" but really its the Israelis who are in the wrong. If they had allowed gaza to function none of this would have happened in the first place.

I really think its quite a stain on human nature that the very people who were subjected to the holocaust and years of persecution, then do the exact same to another ethnic group. Okay so its not on the same scale, but quite often they have literally used that very persecution to get away with it. Even now the west and the UN just talk, and condemn actions, we never actually do anything.

While it would be nice if people could put aside their differences, think ahead, not dwell on the past. That isn't going to happen. This conflict will end when hamas has been all but eradicated from gaza.

sadly there is true. Israeli tanks and planes bomb innocents, and are basking in immunity by the due to the holocaust.

War between Israel and Palestine has been going on for six decades (needless to say, the US allies itself to Israel) and petty officialdom did nothing to alleviate the problems.

IMO, the US (and any other governments that support either of the sides) should stop the alliance and do what happened in the Israel-Egypt cease-fire )even if not the exact method, at least try to consider).

Or...

Here in our country, we have this unique way of stopping two conflicting siblings over a fried chicken leg.

"Pag-uumpugin ko kayong dalawa!" (translation: "I'll knock both of your heads off!")

Sanction them both. It is not a question of "who peed first". It is now a question of "both of you jackrabbits acted like Neanderthals and you should be punished."

adding further sanctions to gaza will only worsen the situation. it's like 2 siblings fighting over a chicken, one is a poor older brother who was forced to sleep somewhere else due to the younger's using of his room. and the younger is a more secure, and parents would mostly allign with the younger one even if the younger made the mistake. it's like rich kid vs poor kid. imposing sanctions will trouble the rich kid but make life hell for the poor kid

Edit: latest news. wittnesses say that israeli troops asked 110 (around 55 children) civilians to stay in a small 1 room shelter. 24 hours later, israeli's shelled the place, killing 30.
Edited by AZZKIKR, 09 January 2009 - 12:00.

Isreal has a long-term problem. Nobody liked them for trying to be the new America, and everybody may start to detest them. Getting through to the Israeli government is that they need to start caring about the opinion of their neighbour countries. Otherwise they will just be a double plated armoured sheep trapped in a wolfpack.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ast/7835794.stm

Quote

Lets just hope it actually works this time.

Now palestine would be absolutely defenceless against the israelis, as i am extremely sceptical of the ceasefire or of israeli's intentions

Aftershock, on 16 Jan 2009, 15:29, said:

Truth.

However, I wouldn't describe Isreal as a 'double plated armoured sheep', as I'm pretty sure that even now Isreal can go to war with it's neighbors simmultaneously and win.

I think the problem is that Isreal doesn't care about how people view it probably. It thinks it doesn't need to use diplomacy as hard due to it's overwhelmingly advanced military force. Unless Isreal starts worrying about where it's going to get weapons and/or afford to R&D new ones, it doesn't really need to care about it's image.

I mean, in the short term, the easiest way to stop the missiles is to blow up the missles, their launch sites, and the tunnels. It's far easier than trying to negotiate with people whom you've blockaded for years.

Also, I don't think the Isrealis are being enough like the US. If the IDF did some nation building like the US does in Iraq and Afganistan, it'd help a lot with their image. Sure, go bomb them. But at the very least hire some Palestinians and build a school, hospital, or orphanage on your way out. It shouldn't be that hard, Gaza's a small place. Although considering the amount of buildings the IDF destroyed, maybe it's a much more daunting task.
Edited by NergiZed, 19 January 2009 - 06:20.

NergiZed, on 19 Jan 2009, 6:19, said:

Israels butality can be nearly solely attributed to the unwavering and stoic backing it receives from the United States. Over a week ago the UN security council were about to issue a very "stern" edict to Israel, which initially the US supported, however at the last moment Condolezza Rice changed her mind and the States declinned to comment via the UN at all. This is in short a message to the Israelies that they can do what they want as their single largest benefactor won't even voice it's concern about the invasion. That is most worrying. However it will be interesting to see what happens now after tomorrow and what alternative tactics will be used.

Quote

There are no launch sites, these aren't ICBMS, they are lightweight, portable, self propelled rockets that are aimed like a mortar. There sites are behind a tree, inbetween houses, probably even from police station roofs. Not easy to target.

Quote

If the Israelies did things differently a lot of people would be alive today. If it attempted to engage Hamas in direct discussions, rather than refuse, even if Hamas didn't reciprocate, it least they would have the moral high ground, quite useful in international diplomacy.

Bottom line this "ceasefire" will last only as long as the new US administration wants it to.

With Israel now being accused of War Crimes by Amnesty International (among several others but this is quoted in my source). Source.

Do you think the claim of War Crimes is valid? If Israel are guilty of War Crimes are Hamas? Are the countries that created Israel complicit in these War Crimes? Going even further are the civilians who aid Hamas, shelter them etc, War Criminals?

Whether they are or not it's fairly irrelevant in terms of international law. No one would dare, and I do mean no one, attempt to press these charges against Israel. And they wouldn't charge Hamas as this would be seen as interferring and coming down on the Israel side which I think most countries would avoid doing right now.

A very interesting video that shows the point of view of the Israeli settlers in the West Bank

I had just watched a new report on CNN video saying that a Gazan farmer had his chicken coop (containing a couple thousand chickens) bulldozed by the IDF. (the couple thousand chickens are all smooshed btw)

Now I find this case particualrly interesting, since it's obviously not accidental. The question I coninued to ask myself during this report was: "Why?" Why would you go out of your way to destroy someone's livelihood? I just don't see the point. I can understand why you would want to bomb tunnels, hamas buildings, and sites used to fire rockets (and sometimes miss). But why in the world would you flatten a chicken coop with a couple thousand chickens inside creating a haven for disease and destroying one million dollars in a man's property (who's house was already taken over by Israeli snipers).

I don't know how to link the vid, but I found the article on some site (here). Though that site seems rather biased, but you get the point. If you don't want ot read a biased article, here's some pics of the mayhem, and you can extrapolate meaning from it yourself.
Edited by NergiZed, 31 January 2009 - 03:22.

Just to inform you all: before the coast of Gaza there are the 2 largest gas fields of the whole Mediterranean Sea. The are both in Palestinian waters. And guess what: the days that Israel was planning the attacks, the Government also talked to some company to extract the gas for them. Now it makes sense why they attacked Gaza. It's always Oil or Gas or something similar they're after...

My main question, do you have a reliable source for this? Since I haven't heard it before and after Iraq and that political quagmire, most reporters would have seized this and run with it.

Well, I read in the newspaper, and here's a link, which I digged up after 3 seconds of searching on Google...