Were the British right to impose an arms ban on Israel over the Gaza conflict?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1099701.html

No. And for the same political reasons, I will no longer buy anything British-made. I have no idea why Israel buys their crappy boats in any case.

Israel should have its own shipyards. It's not like they can't do it.

It should have been a complete arms ban, the partial ban does not go far enough. I wrote to my MP and the UK Foreign Office (I'm a British citizen) during the military assault on Gaza about UK arms sales to Israel. Israeli military operations against Palestinians appear to be principally intended to cause fear and harm among the civilian population, despite whatever rhetoric of 'security' is used.

By the way, I also oppose the UK's military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I would support anyone in another country who proposed an arms embargo on Britain for this reason.

Actually, we should just completely get rid of this whole disgusting, anti-life, arms industry.

In this case I don't believe that Britain is right. For the first time, Israel showed restraint for year while rockets where launched on her cities.
This may be an overstated argument but, No country would stay idle (or mostly idle) while it's cities are being bombed. Irregardless of the damage caused by weapons used.

This "Embargo" will result in additional investment by Israel in it's homegrown weapons industry, therefore hurting Britain's economy.

Some say that Israel's response in Gaza was disproportionate, this argument makes no sense, what did you expect from a country with superior military technology?
Hamas wanted this, they new this type of response would come, in fact they where told by Egypt, Jordan and the PA that Israel would hit them hard if they did not stop. Yet suprise, suprise they chose to go on and keep attacking essentially inviting retaliation.

on a final note, in this case, Britain is absolutely wrong in it's actions.

Israel was attacked, Israel responded to the aggression from Gaza. After tremendous restraint. The whole world could see, that Israel didn't want this war, that this war was imposed on Israel.
Some say, that the reason for this war was Israel's disengagement from Gaza. Had Israel remained as an occupier in Gaza, the war would not have taken place.
Others say, that if Israel were in Gaza, it could not respond in a way it responded.

Those, who deny Israel's right to defend itself, make peace more remote. Because if Israel's self defense leads to international criticism and makes Israel's stature in the world worse, than it's better to remain in the West Bank and recapture Gaza. After all, before Oslo, when there was no Palestinian Authority and no peace process, there were no Qassams either, no suicide bombings, no Palestinian private armies, trained abroad; and also Israel fought against terrorism without planes and helicopters. There was much less violence and much less bloodshed and much less victims on the both sides. So, maybe, peace process was the bad idea? At least, those, who launch all these phony boycotts and embargoes pour the water on this mill.

I think, the peace process is necessary and the Palestinian state is necessary. The Palestinian state will not bring about peace: the Palestinians deny the rights of Jews and this is the root of the problem. But coexistence of two states has its own dynamics and the new generations may reach real peace in the future. The current situation, when millions of people are not citizens of any sovereign state, is intolerable.
But the change can only take place, when the right of Israel for security and for self defense is not disputed and not denied. Those, who launch aggressive war against Israel, should expect massive response.

Therefore, the British parliamentarians and NGOs act against peace in the Middle East.

I, an American, believe total worldwide arms embargo against Israel to prevent it from wreaking death and destruction, as is is so want to do. In my Nation it is illegal to sell arms to Israel, ( Arms Export Control Act ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Export_Control_Act

I am deeply, deeply ashamed of my Nation for Violating, supporting violations of the Geneva Conventions, The Nuremberg principles, The United States Constitution, and any common decency.
Human rights are for ALL HUMANS,

So sad that we must even debate simple Humanity.

We have made "Never Again" an empty slogan in we do not defend the rights of any and everyone.

The UK gov are hypocrites. They haven't slapped any embargo on Sri Lanka, to whom they sold weapons that were used in the decimation of the Tamil Tigers that resulted in as many civilian casualties in several months as Israel has caused in a decade.

Israel needs to be isolated like South Africa> this is nothing, just a small gesture which Israel will ignore like everything else.

Anyone who believes that Israel is wrong in it's actions against Hamas (NOT THE PLAESTINIAN PEOPLE) should consider the following: Since Hamas is no longer a dominating figure in the West Bank and terrorism dropped drastically. Israel reduced it's incursions into Palestinian areas, the West Bank economy grew and is still groing at an incredible rate. The West Bank's first luxury shopping mall is opening soon!!!

Israel did what it had to do in order to retaliate the attacks from Hamas.
For those who say it was disproportionate, what would you have done? How would you have prevented civilian casualties given the tactics used by Hamas?
Given that talking and discussion has no effect on Hamas how would you have convinced them to stop attacking?

As for the U.K, put yourself in Israel's place for a moment. Let's assume you are being attacked by an organization hell bent on your destruction, on a continuous basis. Much like in Irael's case, you have shown incredible (sometimes irrational) restraint. How would you have retaliated? what about civilian casualties, how would you prevent that given that the attackers are operating from within the civilian infrastructure?

You cannot logically dray any parallel between Israel abnd South Africa. Arabs living within Israel enjoy a superior quality of life and rights than they would have in any other Arab country.

Israel is not systematically killing Palestinians, the only Palestinian civilian casualties stem from Israel's need to retaliate to an attack by the terrorist infrastructure.

The only ones that should be isolated like South Africa is Hamas, oh wait that is already the case.

Fact is Palestinians enjoy the right to file law suits against Israel within the Israeli justice system.

Please do us all a favorstop repeating the B.S lines that you are told to use in order to prove a point against Israel. Look at the big picture, draw conclusions based on fact and you will deduce that Palestinians don't have that bad (although there is tremendous room for improving their lives, which will come soon enough).

In reply to Oshri above, your defence of Israel's actions and policy could also sound a bit like "repeating the B.S. lines that you are told to use in order to prove a point" - Lines such as Israel having shown incredible restraint, the West Bank's economy growing incredibly, Hamas being immune to talk or negotiation and 'hell-bent' on Israel's destruction. How much are these statements based on indisputable fact rather than highly subjective interpretation or just plain parrot-fasion repitition of pro-Israel propoganda?

Clearly, both 'sides' of the debate can be guilty of arguments uninformed by fact, but my point is to take a look at the opinions you mistake for fact before you accuse others of talking B.S.

How do you think that most Palestinians would respond to your conclusion 'based on fact' that they don't have it that bad?

Hi Jeff,

You make a good point, although my reply is based on facts.

1) Hamas has been launching missles at Israel for well over a year before the Gaza retaliation. In fact Israel approached the PA, Jordan and Egypt telling them what will happen if Hamas does not stop and to try and convince Hamas to end it's attacks. that is the definition of restraint.

2) The economy in the West Bank is growing rapidly. I must apologize for that one as I cannot find material from both the Palestinian perspective that proves this fact, I only found obne from the Israeli perspective.

3) in facty Hammas is hell bent on Israel's destruction, so is the PA (which is not actively trying at the moment). It is in the Hamas charter (http://www.acpr.org.il/resources/hamascharter.html).

4) as for Hamas bieng immune to talk, I did not mention that but I don't this to be true. They are willing to talk, given the many 3rd party negotiations they have been having with Israel concering the IDF POW.

5) The West Bank situation is not as bad as it is commonly preceived in popular media. I may not have been clear when i mentioned that so let me explain. If you attempt to compare the quality of life and overall situation of "Occupied territories" between Israel and Aparthied South Africa. the Palestinians have it great. As for the Gaza Palestinians, they just went through a war and a being ruled over by Hamas which has brought on this situation in some part.

I truly believe that Israel can do a lot more to improve the day to day life of the West Bank Palestinians. In fact it is and will continuously get better for them until they get their own state. As for the Gaza Palestinians, as long as Hamas is active, nothing good will come to them. In fact, I am pretty sure it will keep getting worse.

Oshri - you need to be honest with yourself about Israel's conduct for 60+ years based on international law. They have been condemned.

1) you can call Israel's military assault on Gaza retaliation for Gazan missiles, or you can call Gazan missiles retaliation for Israel's punishing economic blockade and imprisonment of the Gazan population. Maybe it's like debating which came first, the chicken or the egg. Justifying one or the other is also a question of interpretation based more on opinion, political/cultural/tribal allegiance, and commonly repeated propaganda than it is based on fact. What is indisputable fact is that more than a thousand Gazans were killed, thousands more wounded and traumatised, their homes and livelihoods destroyed. A large number of Israelis were also severely affected and threatened by the missiles from Gaza, but the only position from which one can justify the Israeli military response is one which values Jewish Israeli lives vastly (infinitely?) more than Palestinian lives.

2) West Bank economy: "since 2000 the economy has been in decline, with GDP down 14 percent from its peak in 1999. When the rapidly rising population is factored in, the figure is even worse: per capita GDP is down 40 percent" (Ynetnews.com "West Bank economic crisis ever deeper, World Bank says", October 2008). "The World Bank released a report earlier in the year stating that Israel's closure system was a leading cause for the Palestinians' economic woes and that if there was no ease on these restrictions the Palestinian economy would continue to rapidly decline despite the 7.4 billion dollars in aid pledged at the international donors conference in Paris at the beginning of the year" (IPSnews.net, "Roadblocks cripple West Bank economy", July 2008)

3) The Hamas charter is frequently cited as proof that Hamas is 'hell bent' on Israel's destruction and therefore an entirely illegitimate terrorist entity that must be eliminated at all costs. But the charter does not necessarily represent Hamas's actual pragmatic aspirations, with Hamas spokespersons publicly stating their willingness to live alongside an Israeli state (along 1967 borders) and abide by a '100-year' truce, by which time a new generation could forget the hatred of the last.

My point is not to defend Hamas, and particularly not the anti-semitic language of its charter, but to comment on how what you call 'facts' are mainly only a selective interpretation of selectively chosen information.

One could also say that the current Israeli government is 'hell bent' on destroying a future viable Palestinian state. The Likud Party platform states that "The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river" and of "the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel". From a Palestinian point of view, this may not sound much better than the statements in the Hamas charter sound to Israeli Jews. Look back on the statements of many of Israel's past leaders and heroes, and you'll find a fair share of language calling for and celebrating the destruction of the Arab population in 'the Land of Israel'.

5) On what 'facts' do you base your statement that the quality of life and overall situation in the Occupied Territories is 'great' compared to that in Apartheid South Africa? Have you ever been in the West Bank (maybe you have, I don't know. I haven't been but I plan to go in September). You say the situation in the West Bank is not as bad as commonly perceived in popular media, but I'd say the situation in the West Bank is hardly perceived at all in popular media. I don't see much at all in popular media about systematic house demolition and land confiscation, violent repression of peaceful protests, violent attacks on Palestinians by Jewish settlers protected by IDF, routine delay and humiliation at checkpoints, deaths of women in childbirth at checkpoints, virtual imprisonment of whole towns by 'security' wall, uprooting of ancient olive and fruit orchards, kidnapping and detention of prisoners without trial and subject to torture.

Hmm, I didn't mean to write so long but it's something I feel strongly about.

Ahmad - I don't deny that Israel has behaved badly in the past 60 years. The country has made some serious mistakes in the past. The majority of the Israeli population does not approve of the governments' handling of the Palestinian "Issue" (I don't mean to belittle the situation).

Let's face it International law is a joke most countries in the U.N have violated the law in one way or another. Israel has been condemned many times, although the source fo those condemnations is not really credible.
One party cannot condmen another if it is guilty of the same or worse crimes.

My Issue is with the arms embargo and how irrational it is to target Israel within the context of the Gaza retaliation, especially since that particular conflict was very different and Israel tried to prevent it diplomatically for a year.

In this situation Hamas is absolutely too blame, the PA said it, Egypt said it. The only organization who did not is the U.N.

Well said Jeff.

1) There are very few military confrontations that can be justified. The punishing economic blockade of Gaza is the result of the Hamas takeover. Fact is that group with it's ideology cannot be trusted. I realize this is the same point of view for Palestinians about Israel.
We can analyze the statistical data of how many died and wounded on both sides to justify wether a response was proportional or not, but that would belittle the human cost of war and devalue the lost lives, so I would rather not get into that. But the fact is that Israel is militarily superior and will use the tools that are available to them. In fact, Israel could have caused a lot more damage if it did not care about Palestinian lives.

I absolutely despise to B.S that Jewish lives are worth more that Palestinian ones. If that where the case, the state of Israel would not have any Palestinians living in it. If that was the case work permits would not be issued. If that where the case Israel would not even bother with road blocks to protect it's citizens and would just not allow any movement at all.

In fact, the Israeli government mandate the educational system to teach about the Palestinian point of view regarding the state of Israel. while you are in the West Bank go see what they teach in there schools, you will be shocked. At ehich point you will revise your point of view about who values what.
http://www.pmw.org.il/

2) You are right about the economy, I apologize.

3) it is a common tactic for Hamas, Hezbollah and the PA to come out publicly state one message and intend on the doing the opposite. Fact is the Palestinians where so much better of before the cancer that is terrorism took hold in their society. Hamas needs to be phased out as it does not respond to the Palestinians or have there best interest in mind. If they did, they would not attack (although that has stopped thanks to the Gaza offensive).

As for the current Israeli government, a Palestinian state will most likely not become a reality given the views of the current government. I was really hoping it would happen and so where the majority of Israelis. At this point, we will all have to wait for a less hardline government to come to power before we will see any movement towards a Palestinian state.

5) Actually I have been, I have also spoken to many Palestinians who live in the West Bank. Some IDF soldiers do not conduct themselves in accordance with IDF rules and regulations and there are many reports of abusive and sometimes violend behavior towards Palestinians (this is being investigated by the Israeli High Court). Fact is, Palestinians are not getting systematically killed, robbed or raped. Abuse that a Palestinian civilian would endure are limited to road blocks and incrusions by the military for security reasons (although the Palestinian armed forces take care of that now at the request if the IDF and incursions are very limited).

The West Bank deserves way more coverage to get the message across, although I watch Israeli media and CNN mostly so the message that I get may be Biased on some level. People commonly percieve the West Bank to me a waist land and war zone. that may have been the case during the intifada but is no longer the case. The situation there has changed since Hamas is no longer a dominant figure and is not a threat to Israel.

you see the relation no terrorism=better lives.

On the Settler issue, I absolutely disapprove, the IDF disapproves and the majority of Israel believes they are delaying the peace process.

The security wall is a life saver, once it was completed suicide bombers could not get through anymore. Terror related activities dropped by 90%, i see it justified. Although, that wall will eventually be torn down, it's construction was stopped in 2005 and only 60% of it is complete. The Israeli government does not consider it to be a priority anymore as terrorism is virtually inexistant since Hamas' influence is limited to Gaza.

Again do you so the relation No Hamas=Better lives.

Israel and the IDF still have long way to go in it's treatment of the Palestinians. We will eventially get to a point in time where Checkpoints and security walls are no longer needed, as was the case before Arafat. This will only happen once the Palestinians remove the terrorist cancer from their society, they are the only ones that can do it and that will only happen when they can see hope in the horizon (Now they are starting too).

Accusations are one thing, It is popular to accuse israel of war crimes. Proving it is quite difficult as credible proof is hard to find.

Oshri, they were proved by Amnesty International, HRW, the U.N. Israeli soldiers etc etc. If you refuse to accept overwhelming evidence and live in denial that's your perogative, just be honest about it with yourself.

I believe sources that are credible. the Amnesty International report is rejected by both Israel and Hamas. what this tells me is that the report was written with unverified facts and hearsay.
HRW issued two reports one about Israeli drone operators attacking civilians and white phosphorous used as a weapon. the two reports rely on hearsay and unverified sources. In fact HRW has been having issues confirming the results because Hamas does not want to help in the investigation. Some speculate Hamas does not want other details of the conflict to be revealed.

Don't get me started about the U.N!!!!!!

as for Israeli soldier testamonies, I consider that a credible source because it comes from the most unlikely source. The IDF has soldiers that are moral enough to complain and testify about the military's decision and actions.

Fact is it was a war, Israel retaliated with the tools available at the time, it used precision weaponry and tried to warn civilians through the use of air dropped pamphletes and phone calls, this is the reason way the Hamas leadership did not sustain many losses.
Civilian casualties are unavoidable and given the density of the Gaza strip (being the most densly populated area on the planet) I am happy that civilian casualties where limited to 1400 dead (many many more injured). Although that is 1400 too many.

Out of 1.5 million people residing in the Gaza strip and as many reported being unable to leave their homes. Israel really tried to prevent minimize (you can't prevent in a war) civilian casualties.

I am honest about it, haven't you been reading my posts? I know that every army makes mistakes in a war. everything happens so quickly. But it is unheard of for an army to warn it's targets before attacking. I consider the Gaza palestinians lucky to have Israel as an adversary and not Egypt or Jordan or any other Arab state that does not care about the Palestinians as much as "the zionist enemy".

Even if it is a partial embargo which the U.K is saying its not, then its too little too late!

No country should take part in Israel's war crimes. Even if Israeli people are disillusioned and the IDF has no morals left, other countries, such as Britain and the U.S. should not provide it with the weapons to commit war crimes against civilians. Armed or un-armed, I have never heard of a Palestinian army!

Le Lets not forget Israel's war on Lebanon. (Iran is better behaved!)

So tired of Europeans and Americans double standards
Free Palestine!

Hi Oshri,

You make some good and important points in your posts, but much of your argument continues to fall back on the same old propaganda and ignorance/denial of the reality of the situation.

I agree absolutely with your starting point that very few military confrontations can be justified, and I respect your point that playing the numbers-dead-on-each-side game devalues the lives lost - a human life is a human life regardless of which 'side' they were on, regardless of nationality, race, religion, political beliefs and so on.

I was tempted to argue that the military attack on Gaza was precisely one of those 'military confrontations' that cannot be justified, but then I realised I myself would be falling into the same propaganda trap that defenders of Israeli military actions and most mainstream media reporting unwittingly fall into (or knowingly collude with).

Rather, I'd question the very use of the term 'military confrontation' for the Gaza attacks. A confrontation requires two sides utilising somehow comparable force, a military confrontation requires two military forces of somewhat comparable means. Hamas may have some armed militants/terrorists (call them what you like), but they have no tanks, no air force, no navy - all of which were used by the IDF against Gaza.

The IDF may have succeeded in killing a few Hamas militants/terrorists, but civilians have borne the overwhelming and horrific cost of the IDF's action. Even using the word 'war' to describe the IDF's attack on Gaza seems absurd to me. I would describe it more as a prolonged and brutal attack on an imprisoned, impoverished and beseiged refugee camp by one of the most powerful military forces in the world.

You were right to say that this 'conflict' was very different, but wrong to think that it was any more justifiable.

The Palestinian Media Watch website link you posted is interesting and I am shocked by much of what it reports is taught to Palestinian school children about Israel. Nevertheless, some of what PMW decry as 'hate propaganda against Israel' actually has reasonable factual basis from the Palestinian perspective. For example, Palestinian Authority claims that Israel plans the Judaization of Jerusalem, which PMW calls 'hate-libel', is not unreasonable if one looks at what is happening in East Jerusalem with house demolitions, Jewish settlement construction, and Netanyahu reminding the world that it has been the policy of all Israeli governments that the city is the capital of the Jewish people, that its sovereignty is not up for debate, and that Jews are permitted to build anywhere in the city (while non-Jews are not).

I agree entirely with you that Palestinians would be better off without the 'cancer' of terrorism that has taken hold of aspects of their society. I would also say that Israelis (and the rest of us) would be better off without a culture that so routinely justifies military force and aggression to deal with political problems.

As you point out, the Israeli High Court has ruled against some of the excesses of IDF procedures and government policies, but the rulings are often blatantly ignored. For example, the IDF routinely fail to protect Palestinians against settler violence, and instead protect the illegal settlers by declaring 'closed military zones' which allow the settlers to continue their appropriation of Palestinian land. Just google 'IDF protects settlers' for informative links. I would seriously question your belief that the IDF shares your disapproval of the settlement program.

About the 'security' wall, you say that its construction was stopped in 2005, but this is simply not true.The B'Tselem human rights group report that as of May 2008, 409 kms of the barrier had been built, 66km were under construction and a further 248 kms of construction planned, while house demolitions continue near the route of the barrier: www.btselem.org

I'm glad that you believe the wall will eventually be torn down (I hope so too), but it will not be dismantled by any Israeli government which plans to use the Wall as a future border (resulting in confiscation of Palestinian land and creation of a discontinuous Palestinian state).

Your final point, that Palestinians can only remove the terrorist cancer from their society when they can see hope on the horizon, has a lot of truth in it. As you say, they are largely responsible for cutting out the 'terrorist cancer' themselves, yet Israel is tragically failing in its responsibility to empower them with the desperately needed hope and opportunity to do this.

Well said. I see we agree on many of the same issues.

As an Israeli, I have to say that the majority of Israeli society does not approve of the the military campaigns that are orderd by the government, except for a few cases.

For example, the lebanon war in 2006 should not have been so fierce although it was entirely justified as it is an act of war to attack and kidnap soldiers of another nation.

In Gaza, a military campaign is more appropriate than a war. It is actually very hard to distinguish Hamas militants from civilians. the IDF did it's best to minimize civilian casualties, as i mentioned in a previous post, the IDF called the homes that where to be hit and dropped flyers on the targetted areas almost 24 hours in advance.

As for what you said about the definition of war, being two militaries of euql strength and capabilities. Hamas had the capability of terrorizing the nearby communities. Ok the Hamas rockets do not cause that much damage, I have seen the damage it is like a pot hole. Bu the sheer number of rockets launched on a daily basis terrorized the communities, especially when they have less than a minute to find shelter whena roket is detected.
For a little more than a year hamas has been waging a military campaign against Israel with no end in sight.

What is a nation to do?
Should the IDF retaliate for every rocket launched by Hamas with a comparible weapon in the IDF arsenal, Is that proportional? If that where to happen, Israel we get criticized.

But the Israel government decided to hold of on a mjor campaign in fact, debates where being held on the news for 4 months before the "Military campaign in Gaza". Everyone was questioning the impact on the peace process if a military campaign was ordered. That is why they seeked the APPROVAL of the PA, Jordan and Egypt.

I sent you the Palestinian Media Watch link to give you perspective. Israeli students are not taught to hate or kill palestinians. Although, as you saw Palestinian children are not given the chance to decide for themselves as they are being broguht up to hate (that a human rights abuse if i ever saw one!!!!). There are many Palestinians and Israelis working together to deal with this issue (see http://www.onevoicemovement.org/) I am a member of that organization.

Any form of hate or racism is despicable, so what you said about the teh 'hate libel' on PMW being resonable from the Palestinian perspective is, I believe wrong. Keep watching the videos there and you will understand how a Palestinian child can strap a bomb to his/her chest and blow up a coffee shop.

The Settle issue in Israel is a big pain for the Israeli society. They are causing many peoblems that the government does not want, In fact they are rioting and punishing the palestinians for some reason, because they now Israel will remove them from these areas and dismantle the illegal settlements.
The IDF protects settlers but cannot intervene in there actions because the Military of a democratic nation cannot intervene in local issues. The Israeli police have to do that and by the time they are called in, the damage is done.
The only protection offered to the settlers is to make sure they are not hurt.

Eventually, the settler issue will be dealt with, we just need a government with some guts.

I may have gotten my facts wrong about the security wall having been stopped, it was in the Israeli news. Regardless that wall is horrible but for the time being absolutely necessary. As much criticism as the security wall has been getting it has caused more good than bad. Good, it nearly eliminated the ability of Palestinian militants to attack and reduced crimes originating from the territories by 90%, as it was intended to do. Bad, it is causing even more hardships on the Palestinian society, cutting through there land and hurting farmers.

Israel in it's entirety belongs to the government of Israel so there is no such thing as Palestinian land. The West bank and Gaza will eventually become part of the new Palestinian nation, hopefully soon. the whole concept of land grab does not make sense, how can you grab or steal land that is yours. The longer the PA takes to negotiate on what they would like the smaller the land they will eventually get will be.

On a final point, The Palestinian society has a lot of healing to go through. It is clear that they are growing tired of this conflict as much as Israel is. But I ask myself, how can peace be achieved if your children are brought up to hate. Israeli children are taught the palestinian perspective in school.
Palestinian children are taught to hate not only Israel but Jews as well. If that is what the next Palestinian generation will look like, I have very little hope for them, sad but very true.

Oshri, the concept of land grab makes complete sense regarding the route of the Separation Wall :

"As with the previous route, most of the newly proposed route runs through the West Bank , and not along the Green Line.... A major aim in setting the route was de facto annexation of land: when the Barrier is completed, some nine percent of the West Bank, containing 60 settlements, will be situated on the western – the “Israeli” – side... It is reasonable to assume that, as in the case of the settlements, the Separation Barrier will become a permanent fact to support Israel 's future claim to annex additional land" http://www.btselem.org/English/Separation_Barrier/

An example of this land grab in action, from the B'Tselem website again:
"Army demolishes village housing over 200 Palestinians, west of the Barrier":
http://www.btselem.org/english/Separation_Barrier/20071125_Forced_Eviction_of_Khirbet_al_Qassa_Residents.asp

I don't understand what you mean by "there is no such thing as Palestinian land", do you mean the whole of the West Bank belongs to Israel too? You say yourself that the Wall causes hardships as it cuts through their (Palestinian) land, so you are contradicting yourself there.

I've heard of One Voice, they're in the UK too. As far as I understand they're pushing for a 2-State solution urgently, but I have to say I have serious doubts that there can be a viable and acceptable Palestinian state given the 'facts on the ground' (settlement cities) and the many points which Israel says are non negotiable (e.g. control of borders). That's not for me to decide though, and its a whole other discussion topic.

Some people just said, that Hamas attacked Israel and that Israel defended itself.

But this is not correct.
The atacks which were done were from Fatah-Al-Islam, which is a US/Saudi supported Al Kaida Group.
They were created to fight the Hizbullah.

And so Mark Regev said. Hamas has not broken the truce.
Mark Regev is the Israel Prime Ministers Spokesperson.

About the Fatah-Al-Islam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ARl_nJEK3A (Al Jazeera)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ga22XxUjSU (CNN)

Is it possible the US/Sauds have ordered this attack ?
That is what I believe.

And what is with the Israelis ? Afraid to conquer the real enemy ?
But this is nothing new. We already see this in Libanon.
Not able to fight the Hisbollah so attack civilian targets.
Thats just was Olmert hast said. I'am not interpreting anything into it.

Even if Iran is shut down.
The Saudi Families: Al Ibn Al Bin Laden who were the administrators of the Jersusalem Tempelberg. (Har haBait).
They will not stop to send their people.
They will even use a vacuum to get their feet in Gaza. (They already tried last month.)
And they have Billions to spend. (Just look to Aghanistan.)
They will do such things just for their fun.

After all the US is paying them money for the Oil.
Does anybody think the US will beat the Saudis for doing so ?
Not as long as they give all Oil to the US.

After all it is completely false that such a Blockade which is on Gaza is a allowed thing to do.
Just for a Moment:
It that would be - why are people critizizing the Britains ?
Just have a lookm to the israseli Foreign Minister.

But Nürnberg Trails said is is strictly forbidden by International Law to bombard an prisoned city.
I must say.
As a German I understand it. White phosporus was also used against the City Warschau.
You can see here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvDQzC-Dor4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVoUopuzsZc&NR=1
(Just go to Part 2 - 5:25 to the White Phospurus)
So this is not a War Crime at all ?
So this report would be right ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRbn__lBg_g
Lets just say. If this is not a Crime referring here to Israel definitions.
There would be some Germans who like the Idea.
http://www.npd.de/

There are not many examples in history were Prison Camps were attacked which I now to compare to the Gazan situation.

Just want to post the Marg Regev Clip also.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SILJxPTqjAM

hahaha who are you? hizballah's spokesperson on facebook? Since when does fatah al islam operate in gaza?
White phosphurus can be used for light, and it was used legally by Israel - see the low civilian casualty rate for evidence. If there was any illegal use, it is those specific soldiers and commanders who should be unished by the Israeli army.
Good luck with all your bullshit and conspiracy theories. Why you're on here i don't know...

Since last year as they attacked Israel from there.

But whats with Mark Regev then ?
Is he also working for Hisbollah as Spokesperson ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Regev

Even if someone proof that is was not Fatah-Al-Islam,
there are so many Organisations...

But it wasn't the Hamas like some people said here.

Just see the Videoclip where Mark explain it to you.

Dear Jeff -
Thank you for entertaining us with such amusing phrases as "the military assault on Gaza"... always interesting to see unrelated and detached people develop passionate erroneous views... I guess you would refer to Hamas' firing 8,000 rockets into Israel as "peaceful self defence"?

If Edinburgh, or any other city in the UK was hit by any rockets at all fro another country - then the british army would be expected to embark on a "military assault". If you look at what every other sovereign nation have done over much much smaller threats (vietnam? chechneya? the turks in kurdistan? UK in Afghnistan and Iraq, or the Falklands? WWI? Gulf War I? the list goes on...) - and compare the civilian casualty rates, and level of threat (no iraqi had ever bombed a british school) - yes, israel acted in great restraint - that is undeniable to anyone who doesn't have an interest -emotional or material - in caricaturing Israel as the bad guy.
The West bank, since the number of checkpoints has been reduced greatly in the last year is experiencing an economic boom. Look it up. Of course that isn't 'the solution' - but it's a fair start, hope it isn't squandered - though with the current Israeli government and no change on the Palestinian side, it probably will be...
as for hamas - why do you feel the need to speak on the behalf? they are happy to declare that they seek israel's destruction and are willing to offer only a 10 year truce at best. Why would you spoil their fun?

The Uk embargo on israel is absurd and is another symptom of the anti-israel lobby successful campign to re-write history and reality.

this is yet a another plain example of the media twisting realties in order to frame their attractive story...
What it says in that BS report is that "Israel killed 6 hamas militants." That is true. 6 hamas *terrorists* were killed by the Israeli army.
What the report deliberately doesn't tell you is the circumstances of that event. This information is from memory- if you really want i might look for the news report. A group of armed hamas fighters advanced towards the fence that separates Gaza from Israel. If you don't know - there is a certain distance that is a no go "no man's land" which the men advanced past - they attempted to plant roadside bombs by the fence.The Israeli security services had intelligence about this, and knew of a tunnel that was dug from that location to a house, that was supposed to serve a part in a soldier abduction operation. The Israeli army attacked the men on the fence, and bombed the tunnel, as last resort in order to prevent a soldier being kidnapped.
So who broke the cease fire? I dunno... perhaps hamas smuggling loads and loads of weapons into gaza during the cease-fire (against what was agreed) would entail a violation? Perhaps Khalid Mashaal declaring on the last day of the cease fire that it was over and there was no chance of it being renewed, which was followed by dozens of rockets, played a part?

And no - nothing Mark Regev says enforces what you say - Hamas broke the cease fire not by shooting rockets - but by trafficking arms, and attempting to carry out an attack, which was prevented in what Hamas attempts to claim is an israeli violation.

The bottom line is this: If Hamas didn't want to be attacked by Israel - it should not have declared the cease fire over and shot dozens of rockets into israel. It did that - it should have exected a response.
This was a calculation by hamas - they thought that the Israelis, having been "defeated" in Lebanon - would not respond harshly to rocket attacks, and that pressure would be put on the government for more concessions, like the pullout from Gaza. That retarded calculation is symptomatic of the Arab total lack of understanding of Zionism, of Israeli values and thinking, and them willing to believe their own lies. Just watch Khalid Maashal's speeches from around then. "Gaza is the bedrock of our victory, we make the rules of the game now" he said. and so long as israel was not willing to initiate an overall assault on hamas - he was right.
Hoped that helped you sort things out.