Hamas Proposes Year-Long Cease-Fire With Israel

Hamas officials have proposed a year-long ceasefire with Israel in the latest round of peace talks brokered by Egypt.

The proposal was made during a meeting in Cairo on Sunday between Palestinian factions and Egyptian mediators and contrasts with an 18-month truce called for by Israel.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[Michale32086]

@moflard

Regarding your 'reservists' question.

What you seem to be proposing is that, because the unactivated reservist is a POTENTIAL legitimate military target, it is tactically sound (from a commander's perspective) to neutralize that potential combatant.

This, in my opinion, takes us into the realm of supposition and prognostication. I don't believe that International Law would want to set the precedent of establishing that POTENTIAL legitimate military targets become legitimate military targets.

Under this guise, a commander could destroy a school house or a hospital because it MIGHT become a legitimate military target in the future..

The same thing applies to unactivated reservists, in my not so humble opinion.

I am still trying to find cites and precedents to back up my opinion..

Until I do, it is just my opinion. But it's an educated one and, I believe, an accurate one..

Michale...­..

[chaos4700]

Is anyone else glad that the military probably didn't put Michale in charge of anything deadlier than an armored Humvee?

[moflard]

I take your point. Obviously from a theoretical point of view, genocide is actually one of the best strategies you can come up with as it removes future as well as present threats. Of course only a raving psycho would actually call for it as a real option.

However, whilst a school has only a theoretical potentiality as a strategic point, an unactivated soldier, or reservist, is still a soldier. Think of it as if they were a gun - now a gun may be in storage, but a magazine is still a valid target. The question is, would they be viewed more as the school, or the gun?

As far as theoretical discussions go, this one's quite unpleasant really isn't it?

But thank you for the response.

[Michale32086]

@Moflard

First off, let me express my appreciation for the manner in which you conduct your discussion­s.. It's very much appreciate­d..

The only reference I could find to the Horse Guards Parade and the IRA was a Feb 1991 attack on 10 Downing St. As I read it, the Horse Guards Parade was where the attack was launched from. It was not the target of the attack...

If this is the incident you are referring to, then it would not be considered a terrorist attack, because 10 Downing St would be considered a legitimate military target, under the Laws of Armed Conflict..

As far as the Brighton Bombing, that's a tough call.. I would say, due to the presence of Government officials (who ARE legitimate military targets) that the attack on the hotel would NOT be a terrorist attack.

It's a tough call because, unlike the King David Hotel, no Headquarters was established at the hotel.. But I think the presence of leadership would render the hotel as a legitimate target....

In both cases, all things being equal, my judgment is that they were legitimate military attacks..

Michale...­.

[chaos4700]

Like I keep saying -- Michale's definition of terrorism seems to be "you have at least this much skin pigmentation to ride the Gitmo Express." I have seen him bend over backwards to justify all many of terrorism by caucausians as "not terrorism.­" And then when it comes to, say, Palestinians, "NOTHING justifies terrorism!!!" and suddenly it's okay to bomb mosques and kill whole families and inflict all manner of other "collateral damage" on them.

[Michale32086]

No matter how you try and spin my words or take my words out of context, you can NEVER show that I am anything but Anti-HAMAS or Anti-Terro­rist..

THAT is a fact..

I challenge you to prove otherwise.­...

{{{{{chirp}}}}} {{{{{chirp}}}}}

That's what I thought...­.

Michale...­..

[Michale32086]

@majormoderate

}}}}
OK since your buddy's at huffpost keep censoring me i'll try to explain this to you again...
{{{{

I can assure you that I have no "buddies" at HuffPo... I probably cause them many headaches and extra work... :D

}}}}
Israel's action is the definition of terrorism because they intend to inflict the maximum amount of pain in gaza by targeting not only the militants but their familes and the civilian population as a means to influence political action. Their overall goal is to make Gazans hurt so bad that they abandon Hamas. How can you say that isn't terrorism?
}}}}

Quite easily..

Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.

Because Israel concentrates their fire on legitimate military targets, their actions cannot be classified as terrorism.­..

}}}}
Israel's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that states policy.
{{{{

That is not Israel's tactics whatsoever­...

That is YOUR perception of Israel's tactics...

}}}}}
Stop treating them like caged animals.
{{{{{

International Law allows for the blockade and/or occupation of belligeren­ts..

The Palestinians are belligeren­ts.. If they, thru their representatives, cease the terrorism and the kidnappings and such, they would find themselves much better treated...

Michale...­..

[chaos4700]

No, they would find themselves run off their land even faster. Case and point, the West Bank -- Fatah has managed to suppress virtually all organized, violent resistance to the occupation, and how are they rewarded? Israel is still building new, Jewish-exclusive settlements!

[Michale32086]

@majormoderate

}}}}
OK since your buddy's at huffpost keep censoring me i'll try to explain this to you again...
{{{{

I can assure you that I have no "buddies" at HuffPo... I probably cause them many headaches and extra work... :D

}}}}
Israel's action is the definition of terrorism because they intend to inflict the maximum amount of pain in gaza by targeting not only the militants but their familes and the civilian population as a means to influence political action. Their overall goal is to make Gazans hurt so bad that they abandon Hamas. How can you say that isn't terrorism?
}}}}

Quite easily..

Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.

Because Israel concentrates their fire on legitimate military targets, their actions cannot be classified as terrorism.­..

}}}}
Israel's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that states policy.
{{{{

That is not Israel's tactics whatsoever­...

That is YOUR perception of Israel's tactics...

}}}}}
Stop treating them like caged animals.
{{{{{

International Law allows for the blockade and/or occupation of belligeren­ts..

The Palestinians are belligeren­ts.. If they, thru their representatives, cease the terrorism and the kidnappings and such, they would find themselves much better treated...

Michale...­..

[Michale32086]

@chaos4700

}}}}
And what? The lives of everyone inside are forfeit? Is this the way Israelis really think? Is this how you justify the slaughter?
{{{{{

As brutal and as cold-hearted as that sounds, yes...

That is how ANY military entity thinks..

Which you would know if you have ever served in the military..­.

Legitimate military targets include armed forces and persons who take part in the fighting and positions or installations occupied by armed forces.

Michale...­..

[moflard]

So all those Israeli reservists would be legitimate targets, even if they were at home with their kids?

[Michale32086]

That's a good question..

I would say that the answer would be no, because they are not considered military assets unless activated.­.

That's just my call, based on my own personal experience, training and expertise. I can definitely see how it might be a gray area..

I am open to any evidence that shows a different viewpoint.­.

Michale...­..

[chaos4700]

Thank you for confirming that you are, indeed, a sociopath.

[thruthseeker]

Hamas is no longer in any position to set the terms of the ceasefire.

All they are trying to do is save face with blustering statements.

They will have to accept whatever The Egyptians, Israelis, and the quartet comes up with.

The loser, and they clearly lost, does set conditions.

[chaos4700]

International diplomacy is not like some cheap bar game. And Israel doesn't "win" by simply racking up the larger body count and causing more damage -- frankly, if anything this whole episode demonstrates who in the region is really composed of out of control militants.

[Michale32086]

Israel may not have won..

But HAMAS surely lost.... :D

Michale...­..

[thruthseeker]

If a combatant use a house to fire from, that house is no longer a civilian target.

[chaos4700]

And what? The lives of everyone inside are forfeit? Is this the way Israelis really think? Is this how you justify the slaughter?

[victoria38]

YES

[Michale32086]

Well, once again it's been real and it's been fun..

Time to tuck the grandkids into bed and spend some time with the wifey.. :D

See ya'all tomorrow..­.

Michale...­.

[MagisterLudi]

Chaoass posted:" Even in the US, we've approached approximately a 50/50 split in opinions over I.sr.ael's actions."

Rasmussen report.Dec­ember 31, 2008
63% of adults overall, say Is.rael is as an ally of the United States.
(55%) of American adults,believe the P-nians are to blame for the current situation in Gaza,
(13%) --believe israel is to blame
(32%) --aren’t sure.

Deal with it, wide stance boy.

[chaos4700]

"Forty-four percent (44%) say Israel should have taken military action against the Palestinians, but 41% say it should have tried to find a diplomatic solution to the problems there, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided.­"

And I can provide the actual link.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/americans_closely_divided_over_israel_s_gaza_attacks

That would be the split over Israel's actions. You can parse and cherry pick the data all you like but the rest of us know where to find the raw data and draw our own conclusions, so your lack of academic integrity is irrelevant.

[Paul]

Time was, Israel could count on a strong majority in the US agreeing with military action.

That time seems to be past.

[Michale32086]

@chaos4700

}}}}}
You mind citing something other than partisan Israeli yellow journalism to back that up?
{{{{{

Actually, I misspoke..­.

It was ARABs that have killed hundreds more Palestinians than Israel ever has...

My bust....

Go ahead.... Ask me for a cite... I DARE you.. :D

Michale...­.

[chaos4700]

That's pretty meaningless, even if it is true (and frankly, I doubt it). It was the Europeans who ran Jews out of Europe, right? So why not blame the entirety of the European subcontinent for the Holocaust instead of just the Nazis?

See that? That would be the flaw in your argument.

[Michale32086]

@Hirnlego

}}}}
Israel still illegally occupies country which is not theirs.

'nuff said.
{{{{{

Actually, this is not true..

International law allows for the blockade and occupation of belligeren­ts..

Regardless of that, Israel left Gaza Sep 2005....

Michale...­...

[chaos4700]

Israel didn't leave Gaza's air space or coastal waters. You can't only leave Gaza by a third and still have it count.

"Blockade and occupation of belligerents," huh. Remind us again how you're not racist for characterizing the Palestinians as categorically belligerent?

[Paul]

From the full report:

"Hamas is also seeking an end to Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip and an opening of all border crossings, to be monitored by European Union and Turkish monitors."

"Israel has said under its plan there would only be a partial opening of the border."


So there it is - Hamas wants the borders to Gaza open in return for a ceasefire agreement.

Why is Israel trying to limit what goes through the border? Seems to me that if the border is fully open, Gazans get enough food and medicine and Hamas enforces the ceasefire - problem solved.

But if the border is constricted so as to continue the suffering in Gaza, you can bet that some rockets will be smuggled through the tunnels and we will be back to where this started.

What is Israel afraid of in opening the borders so Gazans won't have to starve? Why don't they think Hamas can enforce a ceasefire when Hamas was able to send across some mortar rounds during the ceasefire?

Why does Israel have to gain by prolonging the suffering in Gaza?

What does Israel have to lose by ending the suffering in Gaza?

[Michale32086]

HAMAS also wants FATAH to quit negotiating with Israel...

What of Cpl Shalit???

What of tunneling under the border??

Michale...­..

[Paul]

How can Hamas dictate who Israel negotiates with? Hamas, however, would be within its rights to ask that Israel negotiate only with Hamas with respect to Gaza.

If Cpl Shalit was returned, would Israel lift the blockade of Gaza? Or is Israel demanding an unconditional return?

Tunneling would be unnecessary if movement of goods across normal checkpoints was unrestricted.

These things don't seem like dealbreake­rs...

[justice2all]

Who is going to ensure Israel will abide by the terms? As we can see in the past (Nov.4th 2008) Israel can't really be trusted

[Michale32086]

"On November 4 the IDF carried out a military action close to the border security fence on the Gazan side to prevent an abduction planned by Hamas, which had dug a tunnel under the fence to that purpose. Seven Hamas terrorist operatives were killed during the action."

Apparently, it is HAMAS that can't be trusted, your bigotry notwithsta­nding...

No big shocker there...

Michale...­..

[justice2all]

"to prevent an abduction planned by Hamas"- a false statement.
You must have a problem with factual arguments. Tr oll

[Michale32086]

@majormoderate

}}}}}
Right, they invade someone elses basements and destroy the hospitals. So you're saying terrorism is acceptable if performed by a state? How can you say Israel's terrorism is ok but Hamas' isn't? Thats just a poor argument and a double standard.
{{{{{

You have yet to show that ANY of Israel's actions constitutes terrorism.­.

Why is that???

Michale...­..

[chaos4700]

You know, the rest of the world sees this all for what it really is. Even in the US, we've approached approximately a 50/50 split in opinions over Israel's actions. You aren't going to win this one by repeated memes and an overutilized Shift key.

[Michale32086]

WOW

You are speaking for the rest of the world!??

And people say *I* am arrogant..­.

Michale...­..

[Michale32086]

Majormoderate??

You gonna tackle this one???

Michale...­..

[majormoderate]

I'd love to if huffpost would stop censoring me...

[majormoderate]

OK since your buddy's at huffpost keep censoring me i'll try to explain this to you again...

Israel's action is the definition of terrorism because they intend to inflict the maximum amount of pain in gaza by targeting not only the militants but their familes and the civilian population as a means to influence political action. Their overall goal is to make Gazans hurt so bad that they abandon Hamas. How can you say that isn't terrorism?

Al qaeda's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that state's policy. Israel's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that states policy. I don't see a difference in the fundamentals. Yea, they have different philosophies, but fundamentally, a terrorist is a terrorist, no matter if their on your side or not.

To be right by me, and the rest of the Jewish population of the world which somehow deeply feel obligated to defend Israel even when we know what they are doing is wrong, Israel should go back to its 1967 policies. No Illegal settlements, give back golan heights, no more blocking off gaza from the rest of the world, let them build an economy and bring themselves into a more moderate political climate. Stop treating them like caged animals.

[justice2all]

Israel feels justified using F-16 fighters to bomb Hamas targets knowing full well that civilians in that location will be killed-- see Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, or General Assembly Resolution 194

[Hirnlego]

It is state terrorism. You simply cannot do whatever you want in the name of "defense".

[Michale32086]

Prove it..

What definition of terrorism are you using???

Michale...­..

[majormoderate]

OK since your buddy's at huffpost keep censoring me i'll try to explain this to you again...

Israel's action is the definition of terrorism because they intend to inflict the maximum amount of pain in gaza by targeting not only the militants but their familes and the civilian population as a means to influence political action. Their overall goal is to make Gazans hurt so bad that they abandon Hamas. How can you say that isn't terrorism?

Al qaeda's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that state's policy. Israel's tactics are to hurt civilians as a means to influence that states policy. I don't see a difference in the fundamentals. Yea, they have different philosophies, but fundamentally, a terrorist is a terrorist, no matter if their on your side or not.

To be right by me, and the rest of the Jewish population of the world which somehow deeply feel obligated to defend Israel even when we know what they are doing is wrong, Israel should go back to its 1967 policies. No Illegal settlements, give back golan heights, no more blocking off gaza from the rest of the world, let them build an economy and bring themselves into a more moderate political climate. Stop treating them like caged animals.

[Michale32086]

@chaos4700

}}}}}
Wow, so now you have Dr. Martin Luther King posthumously accusing the likes of Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu of being anti-Semitic bigots. That's rich.
{{{{{{

Hay, it's Dr King's words..

If you want to attack him over them, have at it.....

Michale...­...

[chaos4700]

LOL! And so now you have me attacking Martin Luther King, Jr. Do you have a bunch of action figures with you in real life, where you have these pretend arguments with all these people in squeaky falsetto voices?

[Michale32086]

I am just quoting your own words...

Just like I was quoting Dr King's words....

If you have a problem with that, maybe you should quit attacking people...

I'm just sayin'....

Michale...­....