This is the right approach to dealing with the terror that comes from Gaza.... "When the (Palestinian) rockets now hit Sderot after Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, Olmert and his people respond mainly with a new round of RRH. The laughter from Ramallah was deafening. Let's note that, back before 1993, when Israel held Gaza tightly with on-the-ground military rule, there were no Kassam rockets in Gaza. The Palestinian savages threw stones at Jews because real weapons were hard to procure. The PLO knows what we all know; namely, that Olmert is afraid to take the only action that, in the end, can end the shooting of Kassam rockets into Jewish homes - R&D, or Re-Occupation and DeNazification. Let's hope his successor will be less pusillanimous. From Professor Stephen Plaut.
Israel are wrong in punishing all of the people living in Gaza. It is mass punishment which is totally wrong.
Under the geneva convetion by blowing up the power station and other roads they are possibly commiting war crimes.
The situation keeps escaliting becuase each time one side does something bad, the other one does something twice as bad. This will continue until one side realises this.
At the end of the day it is the innocnet people on both sides who will suffer the consequences of these actions from both sides.
Israel do not help themselves in situations like these.
Posted by: Tom | June 30, 2006 at 12:26 PM
Bullshit... shooting rockets at jewish elementry schools in your eyes I guess is justified for the Pallies.
The elected terrorist government of hamass said that their electorial victory sanctioned them by the people to wipe out Israel... Except they have one little problem its called the IDF.
So they pissed the jews off enough for them to react with just a fraction of their military strength and now its boo hoo for the pallies Bullshit its like a dog attacking a bear the dog can get some bites in but sooner or later the bear is going to rip the dogs head off...
Posted by: The Troll | June 30, 2006 at 02:57 PM
Somone on Question time last night said that "blaming the entire British population for something their government did is as unfair as blaming the entire palestinian population for something their government did." However, Hamas is on a mandate from the vast majority of the Palestinian people, so that argument holds no water. It is Hamas' stated objective to wipe Israel off the map. Palestine unanimously voted for Hamas (76/132 seats), so it is fair to say that many Palestinians want Israel dead.
Someone on the panel said, embaressingly for him, that it was not the solution to Northern Ireland to kill all catholics, so it shouldn't be the case of killing all Palestinians. Although they have their grievances, northern-irish catholics do no want Britain erased from the map, unlike the Pallies. So the comparison does not work. Besides, the IRA is a bit (but not enough to prevent it) sorry for civilian deaths, but Hamas glories in it.
Posted by: Daniel Bright | June 30, 2006 at 04:06 PM
Daniel,
You spotted the hypocrisy of the QT Speaker. The Palestinians VOTED en MASSE for Hamas but the enemies of Israel shut their eyes to that inconvenient fact.
Posted by: David Vance | June 30, 2006 at 05:46 PM
Daniel Bright claims that 'Palestine unanimously voted for Hamas', and then goes on to say that they received 76/132 seats. Only one of these statements can be true.
The voting choices of Palestinians give simply no justification for how they are being treated at the moment, with 'targeted assassinations' that kill innocents, and a the bombing of a power station in Gaza.
Even if we were to accept that Palestinians who voted Hamas somehow deserved to be punished, this would still not provide moral justification for the treatment of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. How does the bombing of a power station make a distinction between those who voted for Hamas and those who did not? Furthermore, how do children deserve punishment for the choices of their parents?
Posted by: Hugh Green | June 30, 2006 at 06:09 PM
Hugh,
Daniel Bright claims that 'Palestine unanimously voted for Hamas', and then goes on to say that they received 76/132 seats. Only one of these statements can be true.
Too many big words.
Posted by: Frank O'Dwyer | June 30, 2006 at 06:52 PM
"Although they have their grievances, northern-irish catholics do no want Britain erased from the map,"
Some of the unionist RCs have major grievances with our government appeasing terrorists
Posted by: aileen | June 30, 2006 at 08:38 PM
The Israelis pulled out of Gaza precisely because they were attempting to create a stable framework for a workable Palestinian government that would participate in a real peace process.
Since that has not happened, and since the Palestinian monsters seem intent on continuing to attack Israel, it would behoove the international community that called on Israel to withdraw to now acknowledge their right defend themselves.
I'm waiting....
Posted by: Mike's America | July 01, 2006 at 06:33 AM
The Israelis pulled out of Gaza precisely because they were attempting to create a stable framework for a workable Palestinian government that would participate in a real peace process.
So why did they do it unilaterally, Mike?
Posted by: Hugh Green | July 01, 2006 at 10:55 AM
A few corrections: Hamas never said it wished to 'wipe Israel off the face of the earth'. In actual fact they have recently signed up to the state solution in which they agree to recognise Israel's existence alongside a Palestinian state.
You people are confused. The 'wipe Israel off the earth / face of the map' was wrongly attributed, by the media, to the Iranian president.
See: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13641.htm
The phrase has been seized on by western and Israeli hawks to re-double suspicions of the Iranian government's intentions, so it is important to get the truth of what he really said.
He actually said: "the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time". Which is something completely different. see:http://www.juancole.com/
Farsi speakers the original is here: http://www.president.ir/farsi/ahmadinejad/speeches/1384/aban-84/840804sahyonizm.htm
Posted by: Frank Smithers | July 01, 2006 at 11:33 AM
OK Frank,
SO, Let me get this straight. When Hamas declares in its charter that;
"he Last Hour would not come until the Muslims fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them, and until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim or Servant of Allah there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree of Gharqad would not say it, for it is the tree of the Jews."..that means they want to be partners in peace, right?
Posted by: David Vance | July 01, 2006 at 12:31 PM