Topic: Israel: Operation Protective Edge - page 5. (Read 14723 times)

As far as the NPR link goes, after reading it here I see that the source is Saleh al-Arouri; which would mean that the attack did not stem from Hamas leadership in Gaza, but rather more likely through an exile chain operating independently in the West Bank and directed from Turkey (where he lives).

But even here there isn't evidence of it being directed even from Turkey. All he said in his statement was that Al Qassam Brigade members carried it out, which we already knew, it was merely determined that they were operating alone and not under the direction of Hamas (by the Israeli police chief of the area and by independent analysts). While this douche bag is praising them, he did not actually state that he or Hamas in Gaza ordered the attack. Which of course makes the NPR headline a bit misleading.

I have, but I also base my opinions on more than anecdotal evidence.

The current ceasefire has the same conditionals and elements in it (and then some more on top of them) that Israel never fully implemented in the 2012 ceasefire despite a halt to rocket attacks. With the pressure that Netanyahu is getting from conservatives, I can't see Israel living up to this ceasefire which is likely way over ambitious, especially when it comes to the mandated later talks and dependency on a second round of successful negotiations.

I say it wouldn't work because I honestly don't see how it could. Before we were talking about a business leader in charge of the PA, here you are advocating one in Gaza. That wouldn't change anything in Gaza, how could it? It wouldn't change the farming and fishing crisis, the crisis of medical supplies, fuel, or cash, the salinity and water crisis, it wouldn't end the blockade. I'm not sure how you would see such a leader in Gaza as making a big difference. Israel has been pretty consistent in its treatment of Gaza regardless of how peaceful or violent Hamas acts.

They have in the past, they've also launched military operations against some of these groups (like when the BBC journalist was rescued by Hamas). That hardly seems to matter though.

So a couple of things here:

1.) Hamas has tried peace via a ceasefire in which it did a good job at controlling third party groups. It simply didn't pay off for Hamas which saw its fishing rights cut during this time (in violation of the 2012 ceasefire deal), and Gaza crossings routinely closed (also in violation of the 2012 ceasefire deal). The fighting here was a direct result of the failure of the peace process with Hamas and a failure to live up to ceasefire obligations by Netanyahu's Administration (and due to the Sisi takeover of Egypt). You want them to condemn all violence? Fine I'd honestly like that too, but what would it get them? Where is the evidence that it would in any way improve situations in Gaza or for the Palestinians?

2.) Abbas has tried this exact tract in the West Bank only to be met with a failure by Israel to live up to any of its West Bank specific peace plan promises, a slow death of Palestinian statehood through settlement expansion, and political unrest as Abbas and his allies are labeled puppets of Israel or at the very least complicit in the face of ongoing Israeli abuse, discrimination, and violence. Israel has demonstrated quite visibly in the West Bank that condemning violence doesn't net Palestinians anything other than fewer bombs being dropped on them. They have provided little incentive for peace.

To be perfectly straightforward, it was this violence that has led Israel to a ceasefire that actually addressed some of Gaza's grievances. So as distasteful and immoral as we both find it; the simple fact is that it worked. Israel has created a situation where the only paths that pay dividends are ones of violence.

everybody heard about this 
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28252155
come on guys, the fighting is over. peace is better than anything.

To this I would respond that you should check around for what various people interviewed in Gaza had to say about the public executions. They make my case. Obviously there are many differences within any group. But on this, they are the victims of their upbringing...including schools and culture. They say the wrong things. Israelis do the same things, but media generally makes the Israelis who are into the violence look like the rare loon.

I disagree. What Israel is doing is inexcusable. And here you keep treating them as one group. They aren't. Hamas is self interested. No surprise there. We can either accept that reality and move forward with talks realizing this or we can never have peace. So far Israel has opted for the latter.

The Qassam brigade is new to me actually since I didn't bring it up sana unless you were referring to umair
But it did get me thinking if they are acting like a confederacy then its similar to Libya when Gadaffi was still around with different tribal groups vying for power and Gadaffi being the centerfold keeping the house in check and maintaining the order.
Take away the balancing force and you end up with chaos and a shitfest in the literal sense since what came out of that bag in Iraq was ISIS that then went to Syria as well ^^.
Like removing the spyware and ending up with a Trojan horse instead

Knowing history and how it likes to repeat itself if Israel ever gets rid of Hamas something more sinister might pop up in its place killing any moderate elements with just the extreme end ones.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Name_and_name_changes

As for a business leader
Well first they need to build the economy but that's hard to do under effective boycott unless they try various things like urban gardens cheap internal ways to build the economic capital of the place.

A strong business leader would do nothing to help the situation in Gaza. He or she would face the exact same problems. There is nothing that can change Gaza until either Israeli policy changes, or progress is made in the West Bank (or Hamas is destroyed, but that is highly unlikely). I suppose an occupation of Gaza would work too.

They don't actually need control, they just need to condemn it. It may be a bit late for Hamas, though. I don't think he could do worse. And if done properly, it could work quite well. Surviving the change would be pretty difficult, of course.
Unfortunately, saying this doesn't really accomplish much. And it's a horrible way to start negotiating any reduction in violence.

We also have to keep in mind that Hamas only has so much control over third party militant groups. It isn't a federal government, it is more of a confederacy here with Hamas just being the strongest and primary service provider of the strip. So when things get bad due to the blockade and other issues, Hamas ability to reign in these groups weakens. You mentioned the Qassam Brigade, but that is just the group that Hamas has the MOST control over because it is actually headed by Hamas, whereas the others are not.

http://www.npr.org/2014/08/22/342318...-israeli-teens
A third option is to condemn all violence. Israel cannot really go all offensive if they have no cover of rocket fire or kidnappings or whatever to make it look good.

Right, but they goad them by blatantly violating the terms of the ceasefire and threatening to destroy them anyway by doing so. Hamas as two options in that case: 1.) Disappear 2.) Launch rockets and fight in the hopes of forcing a reprieve through new ceasefire terms and international attention.

Think of it like the relationship that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt used to have with its armed wing back in the day. Very similar set-up.

As far as the statement, I'd have to see the source / question it. It was determined by both Israeli police and independent experts that it was more of a lone wolf act, not operating under orders from Hamas.

Well for Hamas they need time to find funding for more rockets and to re-arm themselves.
For Israel well they got the bloodbath they wanted and left Hamas from their perspective in a much weaker position politically and militarily as they still hold all the cards, destroyed their tunnel system and bombed the crap out of their buildings while portraying them as terrorists to the mass media.

After the already damaged infrastructure got destroyed, Hamas and the Palestinians will also need to rebuild and restore the buildings that were obliterated in their latest spat, so they could both use the ceasefire.

That said between those two countries they are always at a boiling point so while this one may be silent for now its only a matter of time before it'll get hot again since its ongoing like it did a few years ago and will again a few years from now.

_
Hamas, though badly battered, remains in control of Gaza with part of its military arsenal intact. Israel and Egypt will continue to control access to blockaded Gaza, despite Hamas’ long-running demand that the border closures imposed in 2007 be lifted.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-hamas-says-longterm-truce-agreed-with-israel-9691910.html

The Al Qassam Brigade actually IS Hamas' actual armed wing. There is lag between the Hamas political head's calls and Al Qassam's adherence to it at times, but they are the same group in a way that Hamas and say the Palestinian Jihad are not. Technically, Hamas doesn't launch any rockets ever. That is the Al Qassam Brigade's duty under Hamas. It's also why they are known as Qassam rockets.

Which is why I circle back to saying a strong business leader is probably the best solution at this point. They need to categorically separate themselves from any military action in a very public way, then make the easy case for the financial oppression Israel is carrying out. Of course, that person would probably be executed by some group with links to Hamas. Probably call him a traitor like those people they executed a few days ago.

Palestinians are their own worst enemy, and they just don't get it.

It all gets blamed on Hamas because Hamas seems to accept liability. For example, according to NPR,
It goes on to attribute it further to the al-Qassam brigades, but basically indicating they are essentially the same group. I haven't heard any denials, although perhaps you have? Israel is trolling the Palestinians by goading them into a violent, albeit pointless response, then sitting back and saying "see, they're all terrorists". The violent response is unbelievably stupid and can't win. They are simply massively outgunned.

The deal depends on good faith negotiations concerning the release of prisoners and coastal access which there is little precedence of Israel ever honestly engaging in (not without very heavy US pressure and even then only in limited terms). That may or may not be a deal breaker to the point of initiating rocket attacks (it usually isn't right away). Hamas will likely NOT be the first to fire rockets, that would likely be third party Palestinian militant factions (as per usual) which I suppose is the same thing since it all gets blamed on Hamas anyway. In fact, Israel rarely keeps ceasefire agreements very long outside of military action clauses. It knows that in terms of PR people only care about physical attack conditionals as they relate to ceasefires, not to the actual letter of the actual ceasefires as they relate to say, the fishing restrictions, or the opening of crossings.