Just over two weeks ago, on December 27, Israel invaded Gaza in an attempt to get Hamas to stop firing missles into their country.

To date, over 1,000 Palestinians have been killed. Even worse, 315 of those 1000 deaths have been children. Another 4,700 Palestinians have been injured. Anywhere between 40% to 67% of these deaths have been civilians, depending on who you believe.

In comparison, the 389 rockets and 140 mortars fired into Israel by Hamas has caused 13 deaths, 3 of which were civilians.

So, my question is fairly simple. Is Israel right for invading Gaza to defend itself? Or is the death toll simply too much to justify Israel's actions? If Israel shouldn't have invaded Gaza, what should they have done?

My view point on this is biased (In Isreal's favour due to me being raised Jewish) if what I gathered was correct, Hamas refused to negotiate or talk to the Isreali Prime Minister, and to defend themselves they went in to give Hamas a warning.

Therefore I don't think the means justify the results or however that saying goes, but the whole thing is a diluted mess with two very diffrent sides.

Hamas and other extremist groups have been known to drag their dead away and keep their death toll secretive. It's true that the civilian statistics don't change, but the number of dead Hamas fighters is probably grossly underestimated. Not to mention Hamas, in particular, have been known to hide within civilian facilities such as apartment buildings to protect themselves. Israel is fighting that is so bent on Israel's destruction, that they're willing pad themselves with civilians caught in the middle. The facts in these types of cases are often misleading.

My conclusion: Israel might have been quick with the trigger finger, but they also completely demilitarized and withdrew from Gaza. In return, Hamas fighters have dug a tunnel network into Gaza to funnel supplies and weapons. They've re-established Gaza as a post to launch attacks on Israel. Of course Israel isn't going to just wait around while the rockets fall just to get the worlds approval. It's their ass on the line, and it has been their ass on the line for the last 40 years.

Quote from Dudeman

Hamas and other extremist groups have been known to drag their dead away and keep their death toll secretive. It's true that the civilian statistics don't change, but the number of dead Hamas fighters is probably grossly underestimated. Not to mention Hamas, in particular, have been known to hide within civilian facilities such as apartment buildings to protect themselves. Israel is fighting that is so bent on Israel's destruction, that they're willing pad themselves with civilians caught in the middle. The facts in these types of cases are often misleading.

My conclusion: Israel might have been quick with the trigger finger, but they also completely demilitarized and withdrew from Gaza. In return, Hamas fighters have dug a tunnel network into Gaza to funnel supplies and weapons. They've re-established Gaza as a post to launch attacks on Israel. Of course Israel isn't going to just wait around while the rockets fall just to get the worlds approval. It's their ass on the line, and it has been their ass on the line for the last 40 years.

And what of the 300 children? How would Israel mistake them for being terrorists? This whole thing has been mishandled in my opinion. I mean, 500 some odd civilians to 3. That's not exactly fair, or necessary.

the governments, all governments are slime balls, how much more would I possibly need to say?

I think they have the rights to defend themselves.

But I think its completely unnessasary, how much shit they're throwing at Gaza.

Quote from rawgreen

the governments, all governments are slime balls, how much more would I possibly need to say?

...

This isn't a debate on Governments. It's a debate on whether Israel's military actions are justified or not.

Quote from Dragon⁰⁷⁷

And what of the 300 children? How would Israel mistake them for being terrorists? This whole thing has been mishandled in my opinion. I mean, 500 some odd civilians to 3. That's not exactly fair, or necessary.

To put it simply: is there such thing as "fair play" when the opposing side threw out the rule book?

It's not like Israel is targeting children or civilians. It's Hamas firing rpgs and rockets from crowded buildings and hospitals. When a place like Gaza is so densely populated, even the most precise strikes can still be disastrous.

Quote from Dudeman

To put it simply: is there such thing as "fair play" when the opposing side threw out the rule book?

It's not like Israel is targeting children or civilians. It's Hamas firing rpgs and rockets from crowded buildings and hospitals. When a place like Gaza is so densely populated, even the most precise strikes can still be disastrous.

I think Israel should have focused on capturing the terrorists in Hamas. There is absolutely no excuse for 300 children getting killed. I'm not arguing against Israel's right to defend itself, believe me I would never say that. But the way Israel has conducted its attack has been disappointing. Had they gone in with ground troops and been more patient I think this could have been a much more efficient operation. Instead, it seems that Israel went in with the mentality of "Who cares if we blow up a hospital or two? Who cares if we kill a few hundred children? As long as we destroy Hamas, this is a success!" To me, that is unacceptable. I mean, there is really no reason for Israel to destroy hospitals.

From the article, spoken by Dr. Barry Howard, Archbishop of Wales:

"To hear the news that the only health facilities in this part of Gaza have been destroyed, leaving the population of that area without any medical facilities at all, is horrendous."
“It is hard to understand why Israel would allow, let alone commission, an attack on a facility which provides support mostly to young babies and their mothers,”
“We have no reason to believe that this building was producing or distributing arms or being used as a base or launch pad for rockets sent into Israel. If there is evidence to the contrary we would like to see it.”

Let's get something straight. Just because Hamas has thrown out the rulebook and has killed Israeli civilians, including women and children, does not make it OK for Israel to do the same thing in response. Ever. It's never OK to kill civilians, even in war. And even though Israel is not targeting civilians like Hamas does, it doesn't matter. A dead child is still dead whether he was targeted or not. Israel has been just as bad as Hamas has been in this conflict, if not worse. If Israel wants to be a civilized nation, they need to learn how to properly conduct war.

Well, I'm not exactly disagreeing. The only thing I think is kind of a problem here, is that it's almost impossible to justify war. Nonetheless, justify the conduct of modern war.

A ground battle poses completely new problems. The only way to capture militants in an urban environment, is to capture the street and search them out door to door. For this, the offense needs to break up into smaller squads and engage the enemy in very urban environments.

A classic mistake of the Vietnam war was the idea, "hey, the enemy won't come out and attack our big army. Instead, they just hide and ambush us. Let's have smaller squads search them out, because they'll at least be engaging the enemy". This did allow us to engage them on a smaller front, but our casualty rates went up greatly. So here's the ultimatum: sacrifice your troops just to engage the enemy directly or try to take them out from a far. If you try to save civilians, you're going to have a lot more dead soldiers. Not to mention that this method won't guarantee civilians won't die, especially considering the population density.

The last time Israel tried the sweep method, it wasn't too successful because they didn't have the troops to outnumber them. Can you blame them for trying something different?

Can I justify the hospital incident and all the dead civilians? No, actually I can't.

Quote from Dudeman

Well, I'm not exactly disagreeing. The only thing I think is kind of a problem here, is that it's almost impossible to justify war. Nonetheless, justify the conduct of modern war.

A ground battle poses completely new problems. The only way to capture militants in an urban environment, is to capture the street and search them out door to door. For this, the offense needs to break up into smaller squads and engage the enemy in very urban environments.

A classic mistake of the Vietnam war was the idea, "hey, the enemy won't come out and attack our big army. Instead, they just hide and ambush us. Let's have smaller squads search them out, because they'll at least be engaging the enemy". This did allow us to engage them on a smaller front, but our casualty rates went up greatly. So here's the ultimatum: sacrifice your troops just to engage the enemy directly or try to take them out from a far. If you try to save civilians, you're going to have a lot more dead soldiers. Not to mention that this method won't guarantee civilians won't die, especially considering the population density.

The last time Israel tried the sweep method, it wasn't too successful because they didn't have the troops to outnumber them. Can you blame them for trying something different?

Can I justify the hospital incident and all the dead civilians? No, actually I can't.

hmmmmm

You make a great point. I understand that no matter how you cut this it is going to be ugly, but I guess I just feel that Israel rushed itself into this. There had to be a better way.

http://switch434-01.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=434&ar=CH2News_2

Link to a cam set up in gaza, might be messed up a bit though. I think like a bomb or something hit nearby, so all there is is audio. Once in a while you see something though.

Theres just audio now, but you can hear gunfire and occasionally bombs. Pretty crazy shit.

Video back on, lots of smoke coming out of one building.

I don't think anything good will come of this fighting, no matter who wins. Like Betrand Russel said, "War doesn't determine who is right, only who is left." Even if one of them wins this little bout, they'll continue to fight untill the other is completely gone from the face of the planet, and then go pick another country to fight immidiately afterwards. I don't think either country is going to have peace.

I'm rooting for Israel, **** yeah!

Not until a nuke from the Iran comes flying over and the jews all make a O_o face.


I don't see what's there so much to question. Israel isn't left much of a choice in defending themselves, regarding dudeman's statement. I also doubt that they're going "hah, take that, ****ing civilians". It's just that the Hamas is sitting everywhere in densely populated areas, in the midst of thousands of civilians, shooting at targets in Israel. Israel is barely left a choice but to shoot back at where they are, in the midst of thousands of civilians.