IDF jets strike Gaza

“In retaliation” is really code for “someone let off a sparkler and we can now use that as an excuse for the annual shoot ‘em up. This is probably a precursor to something that will last about two months now.

The end result will be mostly dead civilians. Again.

http://www.rt.com/news/317634-israel-gaza-idf-airstrikes/


Israeli warplanes have reportedly launched airstrikes on targets in Gaza overnight in retaliation to rocket fire which struck Israeli territory earlier in the day.
At least three explosions in the Gaza strip were reported on social media by witnesses, who allegedly saw Israeli F-16 jets and drones circling the airspace.


The strikes apparently targeted sites of the Palestinian Hamas organization’s military wing, the al-Qassam Brigades. Reports suggested that the Abu Jarad training site and Bader camp in the central Gaza Strip were hit.

On Sunday evening two rockets were fired from Gaza towards Israel, with one exploding on the Gazan side of the border. The second rocket exploded in an open area

 

Hm... Israelis must restrain themselves and retaliate proportionately and in kind. They should have sent a couple of Jews armed with knives and several teens armed with slingshots running around Ramallah trying to stub Palestinians, and have two or three Merkavas fire several rounds into the sea. That'd be just

 

let's say you lived in a gated community, to keep the american riff raff out of your neighborhoods...

what kind of response would you want, when they start launching rockets into your neighborhood?

would you call them sparklers, because they didn't hit anything this time, or would you demand something be done to prevent them from shooting rockets?

let me guess... "its different"

 

I wouldn't regard them as riff raff(sic).

 

Sure, how can Israelis dare to defend themselves using their military power? To be totally fair, Tel Aviv should order to IDF soldiers to walk around carrying only stones, little stones ... let's not exaggerate!, [allowing them to bring one sling ... you know the tradition of King David ...].

 

well if you chose to live in a gated community, clearly you didn't want them in your neighborhoods... I'm using that comparison because I think its fair to call israel a gated community... they need to be, to keep all the trouble makers out... so now the trouble maker shoot rockets over the "gates"...

anyhow, way to not answer the question and try to deflect...

so would you demand people shooting rockets into your neighborhoods, despite missing targets this time, should be dealt with severely?

or would you just say, well nothing got hit this time, so no big deal?

 

I guess if I stole their homes I'd deserve the blowback.

 

This is the Middle Eastern Groundhog Day:

1) Palestinians shoot rockets at an Israeli town from a hospital or elementary school in Gaza.
2) The rockets land in the desert (hurting no one), or they land in a house, killing Israelis.
3) Israel retaliates by knocking out the site where the rockets were launched.
4) The world condemns Israel for "aggression".

Then all is quiet for six months and it happens again.

 

but are they shooting at the stolen homes... or the home you bought and paid for...

so you think its okay to shoot rockets at your home if someone feels you stole the home or the land???

does this mean native americans, can shoot rockets into your neighborhood, until they kill you, or you leave their lands?

yes?

 

Anyone is entitled in law to resist an aggressive occupier. Israel is an aggressive occupier and dozens of UN Resolutions condemning Israel's routine law-breaking and human rights abuses have been passed. Typically only the US and Britain (plus a few obscure island states reliant on US handouts and fearing ostracism), either abstain or veto these resolutions.

 

There was no country of Palestine before the Jews started moving back there almost 200 years ago. It was a deserted wasteland.

 

how far back should we consider the right for those who want to "resist an aggressive occupier"... because none of our lands, truly belong to the people who have them now... so every single one of our nations is an aggressive occupier... so these terrorists are justified shooting rockets, beheading people, and all the other wacky actions nutjobs around the world do claiming they were wronged? should the mass shooters simply be called resisters to aggressive occupiers who were stealing land and rights from them?

I don't want to put words into your logic... but seems thats kinda what you're saying...

how do you feel about russia pushing into ukraine? is russia just taking back lands from the aggressive occupiers who stole it from them?

what about china building land and pushing across territory lines of other nations, are they just resisters against the aggressive occupiers who took that land from them in the past?

let me guess... "its different" when something you support does it right? just like in other threads where you apply this logic? its different when you support it? wrong when you don't?

 

The Israelis periodically punish the Palestinians in Gaza as a reminder to them that they are under the jackboot of the IDF. This is a good week to "mow the lawn" as the Israelis put it because the American media are busy with one of their mass shootings and are using the rest of the time to bang on about the Russians in Syria. Israelis killing Palestinians is not news to Americans and they are the only people who really matter to the Israelis.

 

There are no good guys in this one.

 

There is a concept called 'international law'. It was enacted by the Western powers, including the USA, following the end of the Second World War precisely in order to curb the expansionist ambitions of countries such as Israel. Of course, as Israel is an 'ally' of the USA it can do no wrong and leaves America tacitly complicit and condoning of her serial law-breaking. These laws are enshrined within the Geneva Conventions which, I might remind you, both the USA and Israel are signatory to and thus obligated to observe.

 

I notice you didn't mention russia, china, or other nations violating this... just israel...

so I guess I was right... "its different" when its something you support right...

 

I'll mention America as well as the others you suggested. I mentioned Israel because it is the subject of this thread. There's no hypocrisy finer than that of a great power...

 

so to confirm, you support rocket attacks on israeli citizens... check...

 

I guess if went about murdering babies I'd deserve all that was coming. End of.

 

The misconceptions and often ignorance surrounding Israel and Palestinian Arabs living in the area are mind boggling. Read:

"It should be remembered that in 1918, with the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France were handed more than 5,000,000 square miles to divvy up and 99% was given to the Arabs to create countries that did not exist previously. Less than 1% was given as a Mandate for the re-establishment of a state for the Jews on both banks of the Jordan River. In 1921, to appease the Arabs once again, another three quarters of that less than 1% was given to a fictitious state called Trans-Jordan." (Jack Berger, May 31, 2004.)"

How much of that (*)(*)(*)(*)ing 0.25% you wanna take away from Jews and give to Arabs?

 

Israel is a crappy little welfare and parasite state. Without the money they shill from the US and Germany, they'd be selling shoe laces.

- - - Updated - - -

I take it Berger is a Jew, yeah?

 

Can't find anything on this Jack Berger fella.

 

Here are the couple of novel concepts for yea:

Keep babies out of harm's way.
Don't stand babies on rooftops of buildings about to be bombed.
Don't stand babies near the rocket lunch sites which will soon be bombed in retaliation
Don't shot them rockets from near hospitals, skruls, playgrounds where babies may be present
Use munitions to protect babies, not babies to protect munitions.

Simple, is it not?

 

Jack Berger
The writer I is a retired architect /real estate developer who writes on Israel/ Jewish world issues. He and has been writing and giving talks to both Jewish and Christian audiences on the subject for over twenty years.

Who he is is irrelevant, really. The land and its distribution, as he describes it a a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing historical fact

 

So, to confirm, you like making things up. Check.

- - - Updated - - -

So what? People, Arabs, were living there and the European Jews who were coming 'home' threw them out. You wouldn't mind someone claiming your home as theirs because of a Biblical imperative?