Skip to main content

View Diary: No One Cares About Gaza (157 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Let me put it this way.... (6+ / 0-)

    Under international law, Israel has certain obligations as to the delivery of aid to Gaza.  The moment they place restrictions on how that aid is to be used, under the threat of not delivering it, they are once again violating the law.  How can one blame Hamas for rejecting this "deal," which is clearly a violation of the law?  Who is "rejecting aid" exactly?  

    •  You seem to be laboring under the misconception (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jersey Jon

      that I somehow excuse Israel for this. Hamas had a choice--accept the aid or play politics. Irrespective of Jerusalem's intransigence, there still could have been aid going to Gaza's needy but for Hamas's refusal. That doesn't exonerate Israel in any way--you can have multiple parties acting badly, even when they are opposed to one another.

      •  Disagree (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, Oh Mary Oh, Deep Texan

        "Hamas had a choice--accept the aid or play politics."

        Accept aid, under the illegal terms put forth by their occupier, or call for Israel to adhere to their legal obligations and allow the Red Cross to oversee delivery.

        To put blame on Hamas here is simply another attempt to deflect yet another in a long list of Israeli violations.  

        But, let's look at your "playing politics" charge for a moment.  If Hamas gives in to Israel's illegal demands and allows aid to enter based on Israel's restrictions, does it not work against their ultimate goal, which is to have the blockade itself lifted?  It may have short-term advantages, but in the long run, it plays right into Israel's hands.  "What do you mean they are not getting aid?  We deliver it all the time!"  Meanwhile, it's not enough aid and heavily restricted, which are all illegal and continue to punish the 1.5 million Gazans.

        I don't understand your point of view, in all honesty.  What you call "playing politics" is simply not rewarding Israel for violating the law.

        •  You can still call for Israel to lift the (0+ / 0-)

          blockade while allowing in foodstuffs and medicine.

          Or you can call for Israel to lift the blockade and make a political point. We can pretend that the latter has an ultimate effect on the overall blockade if you like, but we'd only be fooling ourselves. Meanwhile, food and medicine that could have gone to needy Gazans was rejected by Hamas.

          That doesn't make Israel any less guilty of collective punishment, it just underscores the malfeasance of Hamas.

          •  Of course... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo, Oh Mary Oh, Deep Texan

            ... but it weakens the position.  Israel has no right to place these conditions on Hamas.  So blaming Hamas for rejecting an illegal offer, or more accurately Israel's extortion demand, is bizarre, in my opinion.

            I just don't understand your position, as hard as I am trying.  The blame falls squarely on the occupier who is failing in their legal obligations, not the occupied, who reject an illegal demand.  Standing on the side of law shouldn't be a condemned position.  People throughout history had the same choice.  Take what you are offered, which is bad, but better than the status quo, or choose to suffer until you get your rights.

            I mean, how many of these offers was made to Ghandi?  And King?  They rejected all of them.  And many suffered.  But it was all done in service to a greater goal, which was justice and human rights, unfettered by corrupt, illegal and immoral restrictions.

            (and no, I'm not saying Hamas is like Ghandi or King, but instead they are examples which speak against your point)

            •  I'm not so much blaming Hamas (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Jersey Jon

              as I am faulting them for their indifference to the civilians suffering in Gaza. The idea that Hamas would operate unfettered by corruption, illegality, or immorality just isn't grounded in reality. They had an opportunity to accept aid for their impoverished citizens. They rejected that opportunity.

              Take what you are offered, which is bad, but better than the status quo, or choose to suffer until you get your rights.

              The Hamas leadership isn't suffering. The Gaza civilians are. Hamas demonstrated that they don't really care. That doesn't mean Israel does (they don't), but to pretend that Hamas is making some righteous stance to their own detriment is silly.

              •  Indifference? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, Deep Texan

                Was Ghandi indifferent to the suffering of his people when he rejected the British "concessions" which failed to reach his goal of independence?

                "The Hamas leadership isn't suffering."

                Says who?  Living in an occupied hellhole... is suffering.

                •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

                  "The Hamas leadership isn't suffering."

                  Says who?  Living in an occupied hellhole... is suffering.

                  The Hamas leadership is well-fed, well-dressed, with little in the way of wants. It's the civilians of Gaza who are suffering mightily, mostly at the hands of Israel, but also at the hands of Hamas. You may wish to believe in the benevolence of Hamas, but I can't fathom why.

                  •  I give up. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    corvo, Oh Mary Oh, Deep Texan

                    "The Hamas leadership is well-fed, well-dressed, with little in the way of wants."

                    More baseless assertions.  Can you link to the photos of the luxurious oasis in Gaza which houses Hamas leadership?  And link to the sources which show the enormous banquets they have every night?  And I'd love to see the photos of their Armani collections.  

                    How do you know what you are saying has any validity at all?  What is your evidence?  You see, your prejudice is obvious to me, if not to yourself.  Your rejection of Hamas's position, which echoes the civil disobedience positions of numerous human rights advocates in the past, is based on rumor and innuendo.  

                    Is Hamas a bunch of great guys?  No.  But your claims that they aren't suffering and enjoy enormous comforts has no basis in reality and that fact cripples your overall opinion that they are rejecting Israel's corrupt propositions because "they don't care."

                    •  Would Haniyeh's (0+ / 0-)

                      $4 million home be evidence enough of his lack of wants?

                      •  *yawn* (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo

                        "The source for the report is an unnamed person who is close to Haniyeh"

                        I need real evidence.

                      •  Check out the sourcing (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo

                        on that story.

                        First defeat, then deceit, then you're totally in denial (old Egyptian proverb)

                        by Ptah the Great on Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 08:22:23 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  How could I miss this?! (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo

                        "Palestinian Authority media.... "

                        You understand this is like posting a FOX News piece on Obama as a legitimate story, right?

                        •  Oh dear (0+ / 0-)

                          Now even Palestinian sources cannot be used. OK. How about Avi Trengo's column in Yediot?:

                          Which projects are we talking about? Perhaps the four million dollar villa being built by Haniyeh, or the one being constructed by the police minister’s aide for "only" one million dollars? No chance. The European commissioner will engage in the obligatory tour of razed sites, and horrified by the situation she will quickly return through the Erez Crossing, just like any self-respecting European diplomat, straight to the luxury hotel in Jerusalem.

                          •  lol (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            corvo

                            How does this prove anything?  Some guy makes baseless claims about alleged million-dollar homes and you take his word for it?

                          •  Funny... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            corvo

                            ... Israel has had NO PROBLEM bombing any sites in Gaza at their whim, yet they are impotent to destroy this alleged 4 million dollar compound which holds a Hamas leader, who Israel has given itself permission to assassinate?  That sounds realistic to you?  

                            Use your head.  You're falling for propaganda.

                          •  Ha (0+ / 0-)

                            You're falling for propaganda.

                            Says the guy who has fallen for the myth of Hamas' benevolence. You'll hopefully forgive my inability to take this line seriously.

                          •  lol (0+ / 0-)

                            Let's review.

                            I am basing my opinion on the actions taken by Hamas, the statements explaining those actions by a Hamas spokesman, which echo the civil disobedient positions of numerous activists throughout history and you base your opinions on baseless innuendo.

                            Facts, vs. Innuendo.

                            By the way, the annoying "benevolence" nonsense is misrepresenting my position.  It's about making a difficult choice in furtherance of a greater good, not benevolence.

                          •  You didn't answer... (0+ / 0-)

                            ... so I'll ask again.

                            ... Israel has had NO PROBLEM bombing any sites in Gaza at their whim, yet they are impotent to destroy this alleged 4 million dollar compound which holds a Hamas leader, who Israel has given itself permission to assassinate?  That sounds realistic to you?  

                            Answer the question.  

                          •  Sorry, you usually take three or four comments (0+ / 0-)

                            to make one reply, and it's too tedious to track them all.

                            For someone who has appointed himself the guardian of strictly fact-based answers, your hypothetical whereby Israel would have destroyed this house because it has destroyed others is as logical as the laughable myth that the Hamas leadership is suffering.

                          •  Wow... (0+ / 0-)

                            Nice dodge.

                            So, Israel has (this is a fact, by the way) given itself permission to bomb in Gaza at will, yet my hypothetical which says they could target the compound of a Hamas official is "laughable"?  Even though they have an official policy where they can target Hamas leaders for assassination (another fact)?  At what point does your lack of rationality become self-evident?

                          •  Of course they COULD (0+ / 0-)

                            That they may not have doesn't really demonstrate much, other than your own biases (which you swear you don't have).

                            Weak sauce, son.

                          •  Conversely... (0+ / 0-)

                            Your "evidence" suggests that a Hamas official, who is considered a terrorist by Israel and is on a list people targeted for assassination, decides to build a huge mansion out in the open, thus putting a huge bullseye on his back for the entire Israeli military to see plain as day.  Yeah, makes perfect sense.

                            More weak sauce?  Or common sense?  Son?  

                            I've always wondered if people like you simply turn off your common sense abilities whenever you discuss this topic, or do you lack the ability in all areas of your life?

                      •  people arguing the pro-I side (0+ / 0-)

                        shouldn't be eager to accuse the Ps of corruption.

                        Glass houses, stones, and all that.

              •  You base this on what, exactly? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, Deep Texan

                "but to pretend that Hamas is making some righteous stance to their own detriment is silly."

                The words of the Hamas spokesman I posted speaks against this assertion.  It's simply a baseless opinion, which has you claiming to know their motivations, without any proof to back your claim.

      •  One more thing... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        valadon, corvo, Deep Texan

        ... were Hamas to accept this corrupt deal, it would then be setting a precedent, no?  The new standard of aid reaching Gaza is based on illegal rules put forth by the illegally occupying power.

        Hamas is holding to the rule of law in this particular matter, which has well-established parameters, all of which are being ignored by Israel.

        •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

          We're not talking about an appeals court setting a standard for lower courts, we're talking about getting food and medicine to needy people. Israel would be in no better position today WRT the blockade than they would have been had Hamas allowed in the aid. More aid has been flowing since the flotilla incident, but Israel has still steadily eased the blockade and I suspect will eventually have no choice but to give it up entirely. The idea that accepting some food and medicine in the wake of the Mavi Marmara incident would have had any effect on that is simple fantasy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site