If the article is laying out the facts, it should not matter where the inclination of the site lies. It is simply reporting details which would not be published elsewhere (sorry, this has nothing to do with Refresh’s links, rather a general point).

You can’t name one major news agency which is a beacon of neutrality today, especially when the proportion of media output is taken into account according to the nation-state orientation that the parent media group belongs to.

‘Seems like I’ve read something very similar on the GlobalResearch web site, which is hardly a beacon of neutrality is it?’

Actually the figures were from the original source, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The interpretation is mine. If you have an alternative to offer which fits the dates and the details then please let us know.

My apologies I picked up the wrong link – try this one:

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/2626

Yes, I see now. No, I don’t agree with your interpretation of the dates or the breaking of the ceasefire.

Seems like I’ve read something very similar on the GlobalResearch web site, which is hardly a beacon of neutrality is it?

Victory wasn’t necessarily guaranteed in some of the older forms of combat, and armies openly facing each other was definitely an incredibly dangerous way to fight, but there is a lot to be said for such chivalrous (dare I say “more honourable”) modes of warfare. Short of challenging enemy armies to come out from wherever they may be hiding or located and face you in direct, open combat in a pre-arranged location, so-called “modern” ways of fighting mean that civilian casualties are a depressingly predictable eventuality.

Not that attacking civilian populations to force the opposing military/political forces to capitulate or to kill the latter if they are in the midst of civilians is a new tactic, of course; it’s been used by numerous aggressive groups throughout history, and many of them were unapologetic and entirely unashamed about using this approach if it enabled them to achieve victory.

Unless both Hamas and the IDF radically altered their approach to warfare and their associated “codes of conduct”, I don’t see how either side could avoid injuring civilians if they were intent on using violence to achieve their goals.

‘whatever does not kill you makes you stronger’ is meaningless propaganda guff, and if you ever find yourself repeating something like that as if were not obvious nonsense, then you know someone did a good job on bullshitting you. Might be worth asking yourself who and why.

The real problem is that, while a stronger hamas would not be good, a weaker but meaner Hamas doesn’t particularly solve any problems for Israel, and those in the region who would like to live in peace with it.

The military strength required to bomb a restaurant and issue a press release is minimal: some individuals have done it. Casualties in one such incident could easily be above several years of untargeted attacks.

Come over here, bring their pungent food (which we delight in eating but lets not mention that), take our jobs & women etc…

“Erm, Jeff is from Mosquewatch,.. is anyone expecting a serious discussion with this racist, paranoid nutbag??”

Well, no. But I wanted to know whether he was talking about Hamas or hummus. With such a keen eye for all things Arabic, both must be equally suspicious.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11606

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAS20050813&articleId=829

I don’t believe in the two state solution is viable for anybody. The way the Jewish state of Israel came about was wrong while Palestinians couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery. These two people need each other in a secular, democratic state of unity. I know this to be true more than ever.

I am glad you asked instead of getting upset, so thank you …
I am all for a free Palestine, with all my heart I hope for it, for them!
I love these people!
http://tinyurl.com/44p92l

I just can’t see how the slogan is appropriate for this?
1.If Hamas is now the official spokesman for Palestine and its people … maybe it can’t be “free”.
2. It’s not “Palestine” is it? It’s the gaza strip …
it is Hamas which has seized and occupied it, and if anything the people of gaza are victims of them!
When have they ever! ever! asked for peace? If you can find it please show me. No Country is at war with Israel. They are all at peace already!
Hamas wants them to start a war …
http://tinyurl.com/yvk7t7

but I can see how this attack will increase support……
however you can minimise stupid actions that create more of them.

…. I do understand what you are saying and under normal circumstance would agree …. but in this case I am listing the protests against Israel, with its free free Palestine slogan … in with the stupid actions which only increase support.
I will agree with you too a call for peace actually undermines Hamas rather than defends it. But who is encouraging them to fight? No one!
I wish there was another way … but what would it be?
I always wondered why no one has tried to invent happy weapons? Like laughing gas bombs, or something to just make people chill out for a while … I don’t know why killing is always the only answer we can come up with.

Israel has problems too …

http://www.economist.com/world/mideast-africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12436112

is it governments? or people that cause them?

My apologies I picked up the wrong link – try this one:

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/2626

MaidMarian: Lazy thinking in the way that associates any questioning of the Hamas line with revelling in 500+ deaths. Lazy in the way that abrogates Hamas of any responsibility to find a solution in good faith.

Not sure how anyone is doing that. I don;t agree with Hamas at all. but I can see how this attack will increase support.

Its a bit like… if you attack Iraq and kill 100 or 1000s of people, its obvious you will create more suicide bombers, regardless of the fact they’re stupid morons. You can’t wish away suicide bombers by condemning them… however you can minimise stupid actions that create more of them.

Lazy thinking that puts words like, ‘worked,’ into the mouths of people who clearly do not think anything worked, for that matter. You are normally above that sort of thing Sunny.

It was a question, rather than putting words in your mouth.

Yeah, the article got a nice response.. though I don’t worry too much about the response from CIF commenters… I get interesting email and facebook messages after, which are better.

Israel presumes its future is based on removing all hope from the surviving Palestinians. Its their established ethos, as outlined by Ben Gurion et al.

I simply disagree with this. Most Israelis believe that the Palestinians could have a future of their own making, as hopeful or despairing as they make it, if they’d only accept that Israel is there to stay.

Incidentally, your use of the term ‘surviving Palestinians’ is interesting. You are of course aware that the Palestinian population has increased year on year since 1948.

Do you think killing innocent Palestinians is a justified electioneering tactic by the Israeli government?

In the UK we go canvassing and show PEBs to get votes.

In Israel they kill Palestinians.

Could you have a look at my contribution on ‘Propaganda war from Gaza’ thread?

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/2624

I believe you only told half a story.

There has been a fairly long running conversation going on here – over quite a number of threads now – and as far as I remember very few, if any, commentators have come out and said they agree exclusively with Hamas. What a lot of people have said, myself included, is that this is no way to resolve a situation, and that the victims are the people of Gaza, and that, quite possibly, the Israelis will end up regretting it.

That seems to me to be a fair enough analysis.

So, why the aggression?

It’s an easy question. Try answering it.

On the other hand I don’t see why anybody should be forced to answer your question, which is simply designed to split folk into ‘us’ and ‘them’ camps for reasons that are opaque to me. Most folk on here can actually do complicated without their heads exploding.