infuriating story I heard yesterday. A woman who works at McDonald's, who in the past often brought her daughter to work and she kept herself occupied with a laptop. She was burglarized and the daughter's laptop stolen. As she working for a low wage and can't possibly afford daycare, she gives her daughter a cell phone for emergencies and let's her go to a popular nearby park to play. Her daughter is 9 years old.
Long story short, this woman was ARRESTED for child endangerment, now faces investigation by child protective services, and lost the horrible job she was clinging to for survival. In what universe is it unacceptable for a 9 year old child to be unaccompanied at a neighborhood park?? I see 6 or 7 year old kids riding bikes in my neighborhood (gasp) by themselves every single day. I can't remember even having to ask permission to go to the park most summer days when I was that age. Where did the idea that parents can never let their kids get more than 5 feet from their side come from?? Also, need I even mention the fact that the woman who was arrested was, of course, African-American. This arrest would have NEVER taken place if it was a middle-class white mother instead of a poor black one. We are without a doubt one of the stupidest countries on Earth when you consider how we SHOULD act, and how we actually conduct things in our society.
I'm still stunned by this. What in the hell. I was out and about on my own from that age, nothing happened to me. My parents taught me what to do and I had a phone. No body was in any danger, no body was arrested for god sake. What a waste of time, shouldn't they be off fighting actual crime?
Race divide still runs deep I think. It will for a very very long time, possibly forever. . .
That's pretty crazy. I was walking to school and back again (about half a mile) on my own from about 7. This was long before cellphones too. Kids can't be wrapped in cotton wool at all times, and don't need to be.
Its the nature of parenting in the 21st century. If your kid doesn't have an electronic bracelet (soon to be a neck chip implant) so that you know where they are at all hours of the day, a stranger could kidnap them!
Pretty much the only type of crime I can think of where harsher sentencing might effectively deter crime is "white-collar" crime like fraud, embezzlement, tax evasion and insider trading.
Tell me again why insider trading is a crime? There is no victim, just a willing buyer and a willing seller. Trading with asymmetrical information is legal in every other market. If one person hears from Farmer Dan that the value of apples will rise he can buy Farmer Joe's trees without passing on the information he received from Farmer Dan.
People might think its unfair that someone can make money off of information that they don't have, but that happens literally all the time. I'm sure if I was living in the 80s and 90s and knew what Apple or Microsoft would be today I would invest heavily in their stock. Who would be hurt by that? Other people who didn't buy? They weren't hurt in any way, and would they have bought stock in Apple if I didn't anyway? No. So who was the victim?
Someone last year was sentenced to 85 years for receiving information about stock (isn't the US supposed to be all about free speech?). CNBC wrote an interesting piece about it I'd like to share. Here is an excerpt that articulates my point "our ban on insider trading isn't really about protecting investors or making markets function better. It's about expressing a moral view, much like we do with Blue Laws that ban the sale of alcohol on Sundays. There's nothing necessarily wrong with encoding morality into securities laws. But should Steinberg really be facing a possible sentence of 85 years for violating our moral sentiments?" http://www.cnbc.com/id/101289779#.
The worst part is though, that pursuing insider trading cases takes resources away from real crimes that actually hurt real people, such as the fraud you mentioned. How many people do you think got away with embezzlement when the Feds were investigating the ever dangerous super-villain that is Martha Stewart? Like the cost-benefit analysis arguments used against the death penalty, I think we would be better served if law enforcement pursued investigations into more substantial crimes with real, tangible victims.
The Gaza situation continues to be the most frustrating topic here in the States. The US media is notoriously anti-Palestinian.
I don't generally like Jon Stewart (he often uses laughs to distract people from serious issues, and 9 times out of ten resorts to ad hominem attacks) but here he makes a valid point about the conflict.
Unfortunately it was not taken well, and he was attacked by people in the media like Mark Levin. He even tried challenging Hillary Clinton on her stance on the humanitarian crisis and the high level of casualties. Rather than discuss the issue that was presented, she changed the topic to focus on the (obvious) shortcoming of Hamas as an organization, not even acknowledging any wrong doing on the other side. Coming from a former Secretary of State this highlights all the problems with US policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict(s) and the Middle East in general.
For those non-Americans here, I was wondering how the media in other nations has been covering the conflict? What are the "feeling" of the population in other nations regarding the conflict?
I don't generally like Jon Stewart (he often uses laughs to distract people from serious issues, and 9 times out of ten resorts to ad hominem attacks) but here he makes a valid point about the conflict.
I agree, he does distract people from serious issues, just like in this video. Israel has invested hundreds of millions of dollars for developing a unique system to intercept short-range unguided rockets. but this system is 90% accurate - and since Hamas is firing deliberately at Israel cities, the whole 40km radius around Gaza Strip are in shelters for a month now, serious blow to the economy, to tourism, children are traumatize.
Hamas got Billions of dollars aid from Qatar and other nations, where this all money went?? building tunnels and acquiring and manufacturing thousands of rockets and ATGMS to attack Israel. over 400 tons of cement went to build tunnels, with the same amount it could develop the infrastructure of Gaza ( or shelters for its population ) but chose not to. Over 160 children died in the year 2012 alone by building those tunnels. Indeed the story of Gaza is tragic.
Huh, Australia is a bit more focused on the MH17 incident at the moment. Though the Gaza war is getting air time here and there. We seem to be pro-Isreali but not by a massive margin. There is a humanitarian crisis going on certainly, but, are Palestinian terror groups not constantly bombing and rocketing Israel?
For those non-Americans here, I was wondering how the media in other nations has been covering the conflict? What are the "feeling" of the population in other nations regarding the conflict?
Canada is Israel's biggest supporter on their push to end the terrorist attacks against their country. So a good chunk of the media is supportive of their push here.
For example, in pro Palestinian rallies across the country, media outlets can tend to focus on the one or two individuals carrying around a Hamas flag and then derailing the story on how Hamas is a terrorist organization and anyone associated with them shouldn't be taken seriously.
Or every story just focuses on Hamas and their charter and that is why Israel should do everything they can to stop them, never focusing on the actual population unless it is to decry how they are being used as human shield by the Hamas fighters.
Canada is very multicultural. So every pro Palestinian rally will attract a pro Israeli one. Only one, in Calgary, turned violent with an apology being issued at the next rally.
I think, most Canadians understand both sides of the issue and know that the escalation of violence will not solve anything.
What are the "feeling" of the population in other nations regarding the conflict?
Honestly I doubt most Canadians even care about the conflict. Sure you are going to have people who are very vocal about it attend a few rallies, but I doubt the average Canadian on the street would rate the conflict as being one of the bigger issues they are concerned about.
Children are able to point out the major problem straight away...
They should stop fighting and start talking. Having this eloquently put by an 11 year old is enough to make you realise how evil those who wish to fight and kill are.
Talk is harder. Talk is more virtuous. Talk will plant seeds so that the rewards from it can be reaped. A six year old can pick up a gun and waste more lives. The middle-east needs less six year olds who think killing will give peace and prosperity for their children, but more adults who are willing to take the risk, do the hardest thing and talk to each other...
We then study that guy Ghandi, who freed his nation by not having his breakfast...
They should stop fighting and start talking. Having this eloquently put by an 11 year old is enough to make you realise how evil those who wish to fight and kill are.
Talk is harder. Talk is more virtuous. Talk will plant seeds so that the rewards from it can be reaped. A six year old can pick up a gun and waste more lives. The middle-east needs less six year olds who think killing will give peace and prosperity for their children, but more adults who are willing to take the risk, do the hardest thing and talk to each other...
We then study that guy Ghandi, who freed his nation by not having his breakfast...
Yes talking is harder but when one don't have with who to talk that the problem the Arabic in Gaza DON'T wanna talk all they want is to take the little piece of land that the Israeli have. The Israeli try to make a cease fire and all the Hamas is doing is get more ammo so they can shoot it on Israel. Israel is lucky in one thing they have good defense that if they didn't have that the iron curtain there where a lot more dead Israelis and the ruin of the cities where they live and they would have to live in there protected space because those missiles the Hamas shoot on Israel get to most of the country and it a small country that the Arabic want for themselves. They don't want the Israelis in this country they want them all out even if the Arabic have 37 or how much countries they have.
So italy could be called soft on crime. The US system is not soft on crime.
Which one is more effective?
I've lived in Italy and in the United States. I felt safer and happier in Italy. I can't say I've lived all over the country of italy and heard it can get rough in the south. I had a friend who went to some kind of festival/party thing and took a glass bottle shard to the eye. I'd heard of burglars that would break into houses but if you let them know you were there, they'd leave.
- Terrorists tried to infiltrate Nahal Oz kibutz, 4 dead, Situation still going on.
- A mortar hit in Eshkol, 4 dead and 6 searious and critically injured on Israeli side.
- 2 IDF soldiers dead after Hamas tried to kidnap them.
- A rocket of Hamas hit refugee camp a-shati killing 10, Hamas blames Israel ( 10% of Hamas rockets falling short and hit Gaza itself ).
All of this during a 24 hours CEASEFIRE.
Israel talking to Hamas is like USA talking to Al-Qaeda.
No one is going to argue that the members of Hamas aren't first-class scumbags. However, the Palestinian people, who live in the most densely-packed area on Earth, are the ones who are dying, by a almost 10 to 1 margin, because Israel (backed by US weapons and technology) is far and away the more powerful actor here, and should act like it. The Iron Dome defense system that the US financed for them keeps their civilian population (relatively) safe, and for certain infinitely more safe than the Palestinians in the West Bank, who are packed into a sardine can that is getting attacked with rockets about 1000 times more sophisticated than the ones being fired by Hamas.
It also goes to the definition of "terrorism". The West likes to think it has a monopoly and moral high ground on the term, but think about this: If were are a poor Palestinian just trying to scrape by an existence, who has no connection to the radical tactics of Hamas, and a Israeli rocket hits your house and blows you children into a thousand pieces, I think your view of "terrorism" would alter rather dramatically. Just because the US and Israel do the killing with high-tech weapons that desensitize the act doesn't make it any better or less horrific.
No one is going to argue that the members of Hamas aren't first-class scumbags. However, the Palestinian people, who live in the most densely-packed area on Earth, are the ones who are dying, by a almost 10 to 1 margin, because Israel (backed by US weapons and technology) is far and away the more powerful actor here, and should act like it. The Iron Dome defense system that the US financed for them keeps their civilian population (relatively) safe, and for certain infinitely more safe than the Palestinians in the West Bank, who are packed into a sardine can that is getting attacked with rockets about 1000 times more sophisticated than the ones being fired by Hamas.
**bolded part, we are talking about Gaza strip and not the West Bank.
Even with the defense system Iron Dome ( Which the US partly financed ), all southern Israel is shut down from any activity for a month now, What do you suggest if you were being fired upon? sit and watch?
Israel has developed special ammunition specifically to dense area to reduce collateral damage, Israel dropping leaflets and call the residents private phones to evacuate , Israel uses 'roof knocking' before bombing, does any other world military applying the same standards? ( short answer - NO )
Question:
when you are rocketed with hundreds of rockets each day what would be an appropriate response?
It also goes to the definition of "terrorism". The West likes to think it has a monopoly and moral high ground on the term, but think about this: If were are a poor Palestinian just trying to scrape by an existence, who has no connection to the radical tactics of Hamas, and a Israeli rocket hits your house and blows you children into a thousand pieces, I think your view of "terrorism" would alter rather dramatically. Just because the US and Israel do the killing with high-tech weapons that desensitize the act doesn't make it any better or less horrific.
Urban warfare is a harsh and horrible thing, in urban warfare sadly there are more civilian casualties, it even get worse when the militant groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad use its civilians as cannon fodder, human shields, in order to carry out their attacks and actually want their civilians to be killed, so it would be filmed and showed to the western media how horrible Israel is, and sadly they are falling to it.
The key difference here is that Israel fires in order to hit rocket launchers sites , tunnels, booby-trapped houses, rockets and ammunition storages and Hamas militants - and from those attacks there are sadly civilian casualties - Because Hamas conveniently and cynically place them near schools, hospitals, kindergarten and private homes ( And I'm not yet talking about Hamas militants shooting their rifles while surrounding themselves with children ).
While Hamas fires in order to hit civilians. period.
It's, unfortunately, an endless cycle. Hamas certainly does use civilians as shields, and yet Israel fires the rockets anyway. There is no moral high ground in bombing a school or hospital no matter where the (highly ineffective) Hamas rockets are being fired from. By this logic in a hostage situation in a bank it would be acceptable to let the criminal kill the civilians inside to achieve the goal of arresting him at all costs.
The phrase "collateral damage" is a term I despise, as well as the "war is hell" line that make it seem like a natural and expected part of everyday life. We're not talking about damage to cars or buildings, collateral damage=extinguished human lives, in this case nearly ALWAYS innocent civilians. Israel's warnings are made, but useless. There is absolutely no where for these people to go. They live under practical apartheid in the most densely populated region on earth, and live in abject poverty. A warning before a missile strike does not wash your hands of what takes place. I remember during Hurricane Katrina hit when one of the oft-repeated talking points was "these people had plenty of warning, why didn't they just leave??", when that line of thinking was certainly coming from the collective upper middle-class suburban mindset that assumes everyone MUST just simply be able to jump in their SUV and go stay at a Howard Johnson in Baton Rouge. The Palestinian people have nowhere to go and no means to get there if they did, they are sitting ducks, and every one who gets killed further inflames a conflict that I am convinced will never end in my lifetime.
I do understand your points about Israel defending themselves, but it is ultimately David vs. Goliath, and I have never tended to side with the giant.
I do understand your points about Israel defending themselves, but it is ultimately David vs. Goliath, and I have never tended to side with the giant.
Oh Irony. How I love thee.
If you're somehow comparing a mythical story about a future king of Israel slaying a frickin' GIANT to a modern day conflict involving two nation states, then let's get real here. For the record I'm also not willing to concede that Perseus actually slew Medusa in her lair and used her head to turn the Kraken to stone. The meaning of David and Goliath takes on the same significance to me as the Tortoise and the Hare or Rapunzel. If the other implication is that Israel should always be viewed as the underdog because of an ancient book of folklore, even though they receive billions of dollars of foreign aid and have one of the most advanced military forces in the world, then I guess I don't have a response to that. David and Goliath is a metaphor for the favorite and the underdog, not the poppycock notions of an ancient right to land that is in the Torah, Koran, Bible or The Song of Ice and Fire. Might as well base our earthly decisions off The Wheel of Time or the Cthulu Mythos for all the validity those other 3 books have.
Edit: On further contemplation the above comes across as needlessly snappy and angry. Suffice to say I was just using the understood general cultural meaning of David vs. Goliath as a powerful force against an underdog. And by underdog I don't mean Hamas, but the Palestinian people, who have no one looking out for them, and are caught between a militant group of religious extremists and a over-zealous right-wing government, and getting slaughtered because of it. Just wanted to come back in and tone it down, since I enjoy these forums and don't want to create animosity.
@jjstraka34 I think you may need to sit back a little. Hamas and Israel don't want to talk. We know. I said that talking was the harder path. I want them too. It would be a great start.
However, my heart to the palestinian situation is hardening.
The pictures from the UN of Hamas delivering rockets to schools... Why did the parents not do something / anything?!?
Sirens are blasted out over the city (from Israel) to warn of impending rocket attacks. Why don't they go to shelter? (They have no shelters, this is not WW2, England, But hang on... THEY HAVE UNDERGROUND TUNNELS... So why not build some... *facepalm*)
As already pointed out a communication blanket warning of attacks is given. The Palestinians decide to send their children to play in that street.
The UN have formed sanitation areas and places of refuge for all the citizens displaced from area under attack. The Palestinians decide to stay in there homes to show they support Hamas and garner more media support.
The dragging around of the bereft by professional Hamas media men. Look for them, they are usually the ones dragging the bereft Mother or the Father by the arms to the cameras, with mobile phones and wearing considerably better clothes. Why would you allow someone to do this to you? Worse, why support them afterwards?
The professional wailers. This angers me the most. Perhaps this may be my supposed British stiff upper lip, but who, in their deepest grief, find comfort wailing into a camera? The palestinians are the only people who do this. Perhaps seeing so many other images of other nations recently comforting each other and sobbing into each others arms has made this stand out strikingly the most to me. But then these people need money, and I think, without proof, this maybe what is really going on.
...
Then again, even my hardening heart does not blindly ignore death and suffering. I wish it would stop. The only way is for the Palestinians to say, enough is enough. With the destruction of the Egyptian tunnels and the severe restrictions placed by Eygpt on travelling to and from Gaza, and a government hostile to Islamic fundamentalism, they need some lifting of restrictions from Israel. It is the Palestinians last hope of creating an economically viable country. But they can only do this if they stop firing rockets or stamping out the evil "six year olds with guns" mentality that seems to pervade the area.
It's, unfortunately, an endless cycle. Hamas certainly does use civilians as shields, and yet Israel fires the rockets anyway. There is no moral high ground in bombing a school or hospital no matter where the (highly ineffective) Hamas rockets are being fired from. By this logic in a hostage situation in a bank it would be acceptable to let the criminal kill the civilians inside to achieve the goal of arresting him at all costs.
Your analogy is false. In a hostage situation, if a gunman is shooting at the police forces surrounding the building from a building and hit the police, the police would return fire to the source, let alone if its Anti Tank missile and RPGs fired from that window.
In the end, Israel has to responsibility to defend its citizens, if a rocket fired from other entity and have a chance to hurt its civilians, it should respond, any other country would do the same.
again, what would be an appropriate response if you are rocketed with hundreds of rockets each day ?
The phrase "collateral damage" is a term I despise, as well as the "war is hell" line that make it seem like a natural and expected part of everyday life. We're not talking about damage to cars or buildings, collateral damage=extinguished human lives, in this case nearly ALWAYS innocent civilians. Israel's warnings are made, but useless. There is absolutely no where for these people to go.
Israel warnings are not useless, you saw videos of 'Roof Knocking'? you know why there are those videos? because Israel warned before hand and they had time to evacuate and set a camera.
further more, "there is absolutely no where for there people to go" is wrong, there are entire neighborhoods in Gaza strip that the IAF haven't touch, IAF direct the people via leaflets where to go with accordance with UNRWA.
Here is a testimony of soldiers on ground in Gaza strip:
"In the last five years, Gaza has reinforced and armed itself," the commander said. "We went to the hospital in Beit Hanoun and found 12 empty beds and underneath an ammunitions warehouse. The yard of an agricultural school for girls in Beit Hanoun was being used for rocket launches. There was a pneumatic system that could raise 24 Grad launchers to the surface. Imagine – a girls' school."
"(Hamas) encounters with citizens are far more radical than people think," he said. "The civilians want to leave, and Hamas pins them in their homes at gunpoint. From Hamas' perspective, anyone who moves from his home is dead. From my perspective, only those who shoot at me are dead. We use judgment. We abandoned the demolition of a house belonging to an Islamic Jihad commander as the house was full of women and children.
"The area around a school in Beit Hanoun had ****y-trapped houses. Every house was suspicious. One soldier returned fire at a sniper in a window - and the whole house exploded in on its inhabitants. This has happened with several buildings. Beit Hanoun is easier than Saja'iyya. Saja'iyya was completely dug up."
They live under practical apartheid in the most densely populated region on earth, and live in abject poverty. A warning before a missile strike does not wash your hands of what takes place. I remember during Hurricane Katrina hit when one of the oft-repeated talking points was "these people had plenty of warning, why didn't they just leave??", when that line of thinking was certainly coming from the collective upper middle-class suburban mindset that assumes everyone MUST just simply be able to jump in their SUV and go stay at a Howard Johnson in Baton Rouge. The Palestinian people have nowhere to go and no means to get there if they did, they are sitting ducks, and every one who gets killed further inflames a conflict that I am convinced will never end in my lifetime.
Gaza Strip is not under 'apartheid', Israel has pulled out in 2005, and there is no single Israeli in Gaza strip let alone a Jew ( obviously, they would kill any Jew on sight ), they are on their own to rule, yet chose Hamas.
Poverty and being dense area is not an excuse to launch thousands of rockets on other country.
The Gaza strip received BILLIONS of dollars foreign aid, for this little piece of land it was supposed to be the Singapore of the Middle East. Where did all this money go?!
Each tunnel Hamas dug, with concrete that was supposed to go to develop Gaza strip, is estimated around 3 million dollars, and there are a lot of them.
Thousand of rockets most certainly doesn't come cheap either. If they will start to invest the international aid in things other than requiring means in order to cause damage to Israel, maybe their reality would have been better.
Again, Hurricane Katrina analogy is wrong. Hurricane Katrina hit entire new Orleans and would require the evacuation of the entire city. IDF is operating only in the outskirts of Gaza strip and asked the evacuation of only several neighborhoods in those front lines ( which consist the tunnel opening towards Israel, AT fire positions, IEDs, etc).
I do understand your points about Israel defending themselves, but it is ultimately David vs. Goliath, and I have never tended to side with the giant.
Last thing, you are never with the side of the 'giant', which is a natural feeling. Yet the USA or NATO are obviously way stronger than Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, you suggest that you would support Al-Qaeda and the Taliban because they are the underdog??
Unfortunately its not a football match. Its not Palestinians vs Israel here, the Gaza strip crisis is much bigger than that. It is used as a playground for other muslim nations in order to advance their agenda.
Gaza strip is getting constant military aid from Iran in order to fight proxy war against Israel. Hamas is getting money from Qatar in order to continue fighting Israel and advance their radical Islamic view ( The Imam in Qatar mosque constantly saying they should fight until the last Jew ). Unfortunately there are civilians who caught in the middle, like in any other armed conflict.
As long as Hamas and Islamic Jihad exist in the Gaza strip, the local population will continue to suffer, Its a ruthless and cruel regime which abuse its own population in gruesome and cynical way. I yet to hear any realistic or practical solution for the situation from the EU or USA other then a ceasefire, which will only lead to a fiercer conflict in a year or two.
Edit: Report from the last minutes: Hamas executed in the street 20 Palestinians out of a group who protested against it, accuse them for collaboration with Israel.
There was once an old Jew wise woman who said "We are able to forgive Arabs on the killing of our children. We aren't able to forgive them on forcing us to kill their children. We will have peace with the Arabs only when they will love their children more then they hate us. " Golda Meir
The Israel-Palestine conflict is a pointless and destructive one. Both Hamas and the Israeli government are responsible for targeting civilians, escalating the conflict and repeated failures of negotiation. The huge majority of casualties on both sides are either civilians or young conscripts. The current state there is a waste of lives on both sides and just perpetuates a cycle of violence, as @Anduin's video nicely demonstrates.
Taking one side or the other tends to ignore the failings of both leaderships over decades. Arguing over who is worse is a just talk - both of them need to sit down to bargain and compromise.
Comments
Race divide still runs deep I think. It will for a very very long time, possibly forever. . .
People might think its unfair that someone can make money off of information that they don't have, but that happens literally all the time. I'm sure if I was living in the 80s and 90s and knew what Apple or Microsoft would be today I would invest heavily in their stock. Who would be hurt by that? Other people who didn't buy? They weren't hurt in any way, and would they have bought stock in Apple if I didn't anyway? No. So who was the victim?
Someone last year was sentenced to 85 years for receiving information about stock (isn't the US supposed to be all about free speech?). CNBC wrote an interesting piece about it I'd like to share.
Here is an excerpt that articulates my point "our ban on insider trading isn't really about protecting investors or making markets function better. It's about expressing a moral view, much like we do with Blue Laws that ban the sale of alcohol on Sundays.
There's nothing necessarily wrong with encoding morality into securities laws. But should Steinberg really be facing a possible sentence of 85 years for violating our moral sentiments?"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101289779#.
The worst part is though, that pursuing insider trading cases takes resources away from real crimes that actually hurt real people, such as the fraud you mentioned. How many people do you think got away with embezzlement when the Feds were investigating the ever dangerous super-villain that is Martha Stewart? Like the cost-benefit analysis arguments used against the death penalty, I think we would be better served if law enforcement pursued investigations into more substantial crimes with real, tangible victims.
I don't generally like Jon Stewart (he often uses laughs to distract people from serious issues, and 9 times out of ten resorts to ad hominem attacks) but here he makes a valid point about the conflict.
Unfortunately it was not taken well, and he was attacked by people in the media like Mark Levin. He even tried challenging Hillary Clinton on her stance on the humanitarian crisis and the high level of casualties. Rather than discuss the issue that was presented, she changed the topic to focus on the (obvious) shortcoming of Hamas as an organization, not even acknowledging any wrong doing on the other side. Coming from a former Secretary of State this highlights all the problems with US policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict(s) and the Middle East in general.
For those non-Americans here, I was wondering how the media in other nations has been covering the conflict? What are the "feeling" of the population in other nations regarding the conflict?
ISIS in Iraq have ordered that all women between the ages of 11 and 46 must undergo female ******* mutilation.
Africa is suffering daily terror attacks by Jihadi groups such as Boko-Haram and Al-Shibab.
Saddening as the Gaza situation is, those problems are not less worse and aren't/barely getting the world media spotlight.
There is the whole EU media to balance it out. I agree, he does distract people from serious issues, just like in this video. Israel has invested hundreds of millions of dollars for developing a unique system to intercept short-range unguided rockets. but this system is 90% accurate - and since Hamas is firing deliberately at Israel cities, the whole 40km radius around Gaza Strip are in shelters for a month now, serious blow to the economy, to tourism, children are traumatize.
Hamas got Billions of dollars aid from Qatar and other nations, where this all money went?? building tunnels and acquiring and manufacturing thousands of rockets and ATGMS to attack Israel. over 400 tons of cement went to build tunnels, with the same amount it could develop the infrastructure of Gaza ( or shelters for its population ) but chose not to. Over 160 children died in the year 2012 alone by building those tunnels. Indeed the story of Gaza is tragic.
For example, in pro Palestinian rallies across the country, media outlets can tend to focus on the one or two individuals carrying around a Hamas flag and then derailing the story on how Hamas is a terrorist organization and anyone associated with them shouldn't be taken seriously.
Or every story just focuses on Hamas and their charter and that is why Israel should do everything they can to stop them, never focusing on the actual population unless it is to decry how they are being used as human shield by the Hamas fighters.
Canada is very multicultural. So every pro Palestinian rally will attract a pro Israeli one. Only one, in Calgary, turned violent with an apology being issued at the next rally.
I think, most Canadians understand both sides of the issue and know that the escalation of violence will not solve anything.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/harper-s-support-for-israel-political-philosophical-or-both-1.1206070
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/pro-gaza-protesters-condemn-canadian-leadership-for-support-of-israel
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1974411018001
Each character is historically factual, and armed as they would be. It is shown to 10 to 11 year olds.
Children are able to point out the major problem straight away...
Talk is harder. Talk is more virtuous. Talk will plant seeds so that the rewards from it can be reaped. A six year old can pick up a gun and waste more lives. The middle-east needs less six year olds who think killing will give peace and prosperity for their children, but more adults who are willing to take the risk, do the hardest thing and talk to each other...
We then study that guy Ghandi, who freed his nation by not having his breakfast...
They don't want the Israelis in this country they want them all out even if the Arabic have 37 or how much countries they have.
Which one is more effective?
I've lived in Italy and in the United States. I felt safer and happier in Italy. I can't say I've lived all over the country of italy and heard it can get rough in the south. I had a friend who went to some kind of festival/party thing and took a glass bottle shard to the eye. I'd heard of burglars that would break into houses but if you let them know you were there, they'd leave.
- Terrorists tried to infiltrate Nahal Oz kibutz, 4 dead, Situation still going on.
- A mortar hit in Eshkol, 4 dead and 6 searious and critically injured on Israeli side.
- 2 IDF soldiers dead after Hamas tried to kidnap them.
- A rocket of Hamas hit refugee camp a-shati killing 10, Hamas blames Israel ( 10% of Hamas rockets falling short and hit Gaza itself ).
All of this during a 24 hours CEASEFIRE.
Israel talking to Hamas is like USA talking to Al-Qaeda.
It also goes to the definition of "terrorism". The West likes to think it has a monopoly and moral high ground on the term, but think about this: If were are a poor Palestinian just trying to scrape by an existence, who has no connection to the radical tactics of Hamas, and a Israeli rocket hits your house and blows you children into a thousand pieces, I think your view of "terrorism" would alter rather dramatically. Just because the US and Israel do the killing with high-tech weapons that desensitize the act doesn't make it any better or less horrific.
Even with the defense system Iron Dome ( Which the US partly financed ), all southern Israel is shut down from any activity for a month now, What do you suggest if you were being fired upon? sit and watch?
Israel has developed special ammunition specifically to dense area to reduce collateral damage, Israel dropping leaflets and call the residents private phones to evacuate , Israel uses 'roof knocking' before bombing, does any other world military applying the same standards? ( short answer - NO )
Question:
when you are rocketed with hundreds of rockets each day what would be an appropriate response? Urban warfare is a harsh and horrible thing, in urban warfare sadly there are more civilian casualties, it even get worse when the militant groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad use its civilians as cannon fodder, human shields, in order to carry out their attacks and actually want their civilians to be killed, so it would be filmed and showed to the western media how horrible Israel is, and sadly they are falling to it.
The key difference here is that Israel fires in order to hit rocket launchers sites , tunnels, booby-trapped houses, rockets and ammunition storages and Hamas militants - and from those attacks there are sadly civilian casualties - Because Hamas conveniently and cynically place them near schools, hospitals, kindergarten and private homes ( And I'm not yet talking about Hamas militants shooting their rifles while surrounding themselves with children ).
While Hamas fires in order to hit civilians. period.
The phrase "collateral damage" is a term I despise, as well as the "war is hell" line that make it seem like a natural and expected part of everyday life. We're not talking about damage to cars or buildings, collateral damage=extinguished human lives, in this case nearly ALWAYS innocent civilians. Israel's warnings are made, but useless. There is absolutely no where for these people to go. They live under practical apartheid in the most densely populated region on earth, and live in abject poverty. A warning before a missile strike does not wash your hands of what takes place. I remember during Hurricane Katrina hit when one of the oft-repeated talking points was "these people had plenty of warning, why didn't they just leave??", when that line of thinking was certainly coming from the collective upper middle-class suburban mindset that assumes everyone MUST just simply be able to jump in their SUV and go stay at a Howard Johnson in Baton Rouge. The Palestinian people have nowhere to go and no means to get there if they did, they are sitting ducks, and every one who gets killed further inflames a conflict that I am convinced will never end in my lifetime.
I do understand your points about Israel defending themselves, but it is ultimately David vs. Goliath, and I have never tended to side with the giant.
Edit: On further contemplation the above comes across as needlessly snappy and angry. Suffice to say I was just using the understood general cultural meaning of David vs. Goliath as a powerful force against an underdog. And by underdog I don't mean Hamas, but the Palestinian people, who have no one looking out for them, and are caught between a militant group of religious extremists and a over-zealous right-wing government, and getting slaughtered because of it. Just wanted to come back in and tone it down, since I enjoy these forums and don't want to create animosity.
However, my heart to the palestinian situation is hardening.
The pictures from the UN of Hamas delivering rockets to schools... Why did the parents not do something / anything?!?
Sirens are blasted out over the city (from Israel) to warn of impending rocket attacks. Why don't they go to shelter? (They have no shelters, this is not WW2, England, But hang on... THEY HAVE UNDERGROUND TUNNELS... So why not build some... *facepalm*)
As already pointed out a communication blanket warning of attacks is given. The Palestinians decide to send their children to play in that street.
The UN have formed sanitation areas and places of refuge for all the citizens displaced from area under attack. The Palestinians decide to stay in there homes to show they support Hamas and garner more media support.
The dragging around of the bereft by professional Hamas media men. Look for them, they are usually the ones dragging the bereft Mother or the Father by the arms to the cameras, with mobile phones and wearing considerably better clothes. Why would you allow someone to do this to you? Worse, why support them afterwards?
The professional wailers. This angers me the most. Perhaps this may be my supposed British stiff upper lip, but who, in their deepest grief, find comfort wailing into a camera? The palestinians are the only people who do this. Perhaps seeing so many other images of other nations recently comforting each other and sobbing into each others arms has made this stand out strikingly the most to me. But then these people need money, and I think, without proof, this maybe what is really going on.
...
Then again, even my hardening heart does not blindly ignore death and suffering. I wish it would stop. The only way is for the Palestinians to say, enough is enough. With the destruction of the Egyptian tunnels and the severe restrictions placed by Eygpt on travelling to and from Gaza, and a government hostile to Islamic fundamentalism, they need some lifting of restrictions from Israel. It is the Palestinians last hope of creating an economically viable country. But they can only do this if they stop firing rockets or stamping out the evil "six year olds with guns" mentality that seems to pervade the area.
In the end, Israel has to responsibility to defend its citizens, if a rocket fired from other entity and have a chance to hurt its civilians, it should respond, any other country would do the same.
again, what would be an appropriate response if you are rocketed with hundreds of rockets each day ?
Israel warnings are not useless, you saw videos of 'Roof Knocking'? you know why there are those videos? because Israel warned before hand and they had time to evacuate and set a camera.
further more, "there is absolutely no where for there people to go" is wrong, there are entire neighborhoods in Gaza strip that the IAF haven't touch, IAF direct the people via leaflets where
to go with accordance with UNRWA.
Here is a testimony of soldiers on ground in Gaza strip:
Gaza Strip is not under 'apartheid', Israel has pulled out in 2005, and there is no single Israeli in Gaza strip let alone a Jew ( obviously, they would kill any Jew on sight ), they are on their own to rule, yet chose Hamas.
Poverty and being dense area is not an excuse to launch thousands of rockets on other country.
The Gaza strip received BILLIONS of dollars foreign aid, for this little piece of land it was supposed to be the Singapore of the Middle East. Where did all this money go?!
Each tunnel Hamas dug, with concrete that was supposed to go to develop Gaza strip, is estimated around 3 million dollars, and there are a lot of them.
Thousand of rockets most certainly doesn't come cheap either. If they will start to invest the international aid in things other than requiring means in order to cause damage to Israel, maybe their reality would have been better.
Again, Hurricane Katrina analogy is wrong. Hurricane Katrina hit entire new Orleans and would require the evacuation of the entire city. IDF is operating only in the outskirts of Gaza strip and asked the evacuation of only several neighborhoods in those front lines ( which consist the tunnel opening towards Israel, AT fire positions, IEDs, etc). Last thing, you are never with the side of the 'giant', which is a natural feeling. Yet the USA or NATO are obviously way stronger than Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, you suggest that you would support Al-Qaeda and the Taliban because they are the underdog??
Unfortunately its not a football match. Its not Palestinians vs Israel here, the Gaza strip crisis is much bigger than that. It is used as a playground for other muslim nations in order to advance their agenda.
Gaza strip is getting constant military aid from Iran in order to fight proxy war against Israel. Hamas is getting money from Qatar in order to continue fighting Israel and advance their radical Islamic view ( The Imam in Qatar mosque constantly saying they should fight until the last Jew ). Unfortunately there are civilians who caught in the middle, like in any other armed conflict.
As long as Hamas and Islamic Jihad exist in the Gaza strip, the local population will continue to suffer, Its a ruthless and cruel regime which abuse its own population in gruesome and cynical way. I yet to hear any realistic or practical solution for the situation from the EU or USA other then a ceasefire, which will only lead to a fiercer conflict in a year or two.
Edit:
Report from the last minutes: Hamas executed in the street 20 Palestinians out of a group who protested against it, accuse them for collaboration with Israel.
Taking one side or the other tends to ignore the failings of both leaderships over decades. Arguing over who is worse is a just talk - both of them need to sit down to bargain and compromise.