Then +1 for actually putting *your* money where your mouth is. :)

Shame there aren't more donors actually keeping up their end.

Shorter Hamas: Give us money or we'll be terrorists!!

@ Dipplayer - So you don't think that Palestinian civilians deserve a roof over their heads, when their homes have been demolished by Israeli forces?

One can condemn Israel's actions without supporting Hamas. Let's not restrict the options.

Obiwan, when did you become a fascist piece of shit? I remember a tolerant person

You know why the Gaza Strip is such a shithole? Hint: it's not because of the Gaza Strip

You'll be calling Israel a Nazi state next, Thucy. :p

I thought the Israeli attack on Gaza was so gentle and surgical there would be no need for any kind of serious reconstruction? Is this an acknowledgement from obi that the Most Moral Army in the World (TM) went a little overboard?

Tolstoy kill em

"One can condemn Israel's actions without supporting Hamas. Let's not restrict the options."

Of course that's true, YHNarrator...

I'm just saying that after the massive outcry last summer, I'd have thought that the masses who were apparently so empathetic towards the Palestinians would've, you know, actually backed that bluster up by chipping in after chirping up (again, excluding Jamiet and those who actually have paid...but as they're reporting massive shortfalls on expected donors, I'm inclined to see Jamiet as the exception rather than the rule.)

"Obiwan, when did you become a fascist piece of shit? I remember a tolerant person"

It's fascistic to condenn Netanyahiu (as I've done repeatedly here) and call for regime change in Israel to a pro-peace party?
It's fascistic to insist that, you know, the internationally-recognized terrorist organization Hamas is to blame as well?
It's fascistic to assert that Israel's done wrong in the West Bank, Hamas has done wrong in Southern Israel, and that Gaza would be better off without Hamas?
It's fascistic to say that after all that bluster from allegedly pro-Palestinian people that they've apparently been abandoned by those same hashtag activists and groups...or is the UN now fascistic for daring to point out that so much of that support was of convenience rather than actual concern, and the so-called advocates of the Palestinian people have largely deserted them when more was called for than Re-Tweeting photos and sharing memes online?

Fascistic kinda sorta has, you know, a specific meaning...so, do you care to back it up with a specific charge which is fascistic in nature, or are you like all those donors, flinging rhetoric about towards a person or group you don't like without actually troubling yourself to back it up with actions?

Me condemning Hamas and being fascistic...yeah...not the same thing?

(And I am tolerant...I don't have a problem with Palestinians, I have a problem with--I'll write it for the thousandth time here--Hamas...and when Hamas incites three wars in eight years, backs attacks like those we've seen thus far this year in Europe, and has it in their charter to kill Jews for religious reasons...well, my tolerance for THAT bull runs out FAST.)

"You know why the Gaza Strip is such a shithole? Hint: it's not because of the Gaza Strip"

And it's not wholly Israel, either...

We've already had confirmed reports of Hamas using materials given to them for improving Gaza to purchase weapons used to fire on Israeli civilians.

Even if you dislike Israel, you can't exactly say that that's a good use of state funds...given that Hamas has instigated three wars in eight years now...would you like to say that's good for Gaza? I bet a Gazan wouldn't say so.

Even if you hate-hate-hate Israel...they're not the only ones to blame here, Thucy...

Fascist does not mean Nazi

They may not be the only one to blame but they bear the bulk of the blame. Any idiot can see that

There is no pro-peace party. Not until the wars stop.

Thucy, do you understand a parliamentary system? There are several pro-peace parties, but they can't do anything because Netanyahu is PM. He's losing in the polls for the election in March to a coalition of two parties that support peace, together conglomerated with the name Zionist Center. They have agreed to rotate the role of PM between the leaders of the two parties, Livni and Herzog. Having looked into their policies, they're very agreeable.

"I thought the Israeli attack on Gaza was so gentle and surgical there would be no need for any kind of serious reconstruction?"

Who said that? O.o

To keep with your analogy, even the best surgeons can leave scars sometimes, if the procedure is serious and the wound deep enough...and that's *without* the surgeon operating under attack?

"Is this an acknowledgement from obi that the Most Moral Army in the World (TM) went a little overboard?"

I'd like to ask, Tolstoy, and those who make similar accusations...

Supposing Israel held back even more than it already does (as even if it doesn't seem like it's holding back, with an army THAT powerful, I think it's fair to say they hold back, or Gaza would be even more of a crater than it already is...this is a state that potentially has nuclear weapons and likewise has one of the best-equipped tank and air force divisions--we can claim they use a lot of force but could use a lot more and thus hold back from using that little bit extra, yes?)

But supposing they limit themselves to a tit for tat sort of response, and we'll go one step further and say they only use the weapons Hamas uses, or the closest possible approximate.

Do you REALLY think that would make a difference?
Is Hamas going to suddenly stop...or play more fairly as a result of Israel giving up its advantages?
Is Hamas going to be less aggressive, or stop tunneling under Israeli soil, or firing on Israeli schoolyards and homes (yeah, funny how no one here gets offended when it's an Israeli civilian target hit, but a Gazan target...*well*...that's different, then!)

Is the conflict, in short, going to be hastened or improved?

If Israel doesn't strike from the air, it'll go in on the ground, with less sophisticated weaponry...you don't think that will rack up high body counts, on the Palestinian *and* Israeli side? You really think fighting urban warfare in the streets will lead to *less* bloodshed than surgical strikes, with admitted collateral damage?

And what are you going to tell the families of dead Israeli soldiers who might not have died had they, you know, been given aerial support, or didn't have to go in at all and let the Israeli Air Force hit instead? Or are those lives not important?

In short, why should Israel give up life-saving advantages when Hamas shows no sign of doing the same, and even if Israel did do such a thing, Tolstoy...if fewer Palestinian deaths mean more Israeli deaths--and it very well could--are you OK with that, with more Israelis dying to satiate your calls for some abstract concept of fairness?

And are you going to be telling the Israelis that...that you'd prefer they fight "more fairly" the next time Hamas rockets them or begins an attack, knowing it will cost Israeli lives to potentially save Palestinian ones? What nation on Earth would EVER sacrifice more of its own sons and daughters to simply appear as if they're fighting a "more fair war?"

Thucydides with the sophisticated arguments. I daresay I'm impressed.

"They may not be the only one to blame but they bear the bulk of the blame. Any idiot can see that"

That's your defense? O.o "Any idiot can see that?"

...Given that all three wars in the last eight years were started by Hamas, and that it's Hamas (NOT Israel) that has deprived Gazans of the money which is rightfully theirs so that a Qatar-based terror group can buy weapons...tell me how "any idiot can see that?"

'Cause you know...Hamas IS Qatar-based...and war in Gaza has been pretty good for business in Qatar, as they've sold weapons to Hamas and the US as well...so...

Wanna tell me again how this is mainly Israel's fault, and that Hamas isn't at least equivalent in that for 1. Having that lovely "Kill all Jews" clause in their charter, 2. Starting three wars in eight years, 3. Doing so for religious reasons and 4. Potentially doing so for PROFIT as well, lining the coffers of Qatar at the expense of Palestinian and Israeli dead?

But...you're right...ANY idiot can see it's all Israel's fault--I'd expect an idiot to have such an overly-simplified view of arguably the most complex geo-political situation on the planet.

This is too long a debate to be had over this medium, but let me fact check some blatant errors atleast:

"Given that all 3 wars in the last 8 years were started by Hamas"

Umm. No.
2014 War: 3 Israeli teens were kidnapped and murdered (There was no evidence to prove it was Hamas responsible and Israeli police officers admitted that it was probably a 'lone cell' though matters became murkier much later with some Hamas people taking responsiblity weeks later) The response by Israel was Brother's Keeper where 350 Palestinians were imprisoned and some 7-8 killed.
Following this Israeli airstrikes killed 7 Hamas members which resulted in rocket fire from Hamas which killed no one and then Israel launched a ground invasion that resulted in 2200 deaths including multiple occasions when children were specifically targeted such as the infamous beach incident.
So, I'm sorry - but 3 kidnappings is not justification for an interstate war. This was certainly not 'a war started by Hamas'

2008 Cast Lead: I'm going to quote from Wikipedia cos I don't remember the details.
"In the month prior to the 4th of November, Israel-Palestinian violence fell to its lowest level since the start of the al-Aqsa intifada in September 2000. Several Israeli violations were reported: In South Gaza on 3 October the IDF fired on two unarmed Palestinians near the border and sent soldiers into the strip to arrest them and detain them in Israel. On the 27 October IDF soldiers fired into Gaza for unknown reasons damaging a school in Khuza and injuring one child. Palestinian fishing boats off the Gaza coast were fired upon on four separate occasions during the month wounding two fisherman. Throughout the month of October 2008 a single Palestinian violation was reported: 1 rocket was fired into Israel causing no damage or injuries. At the end of the month the American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sent a message to Hamas acknowledging their efforts to keep the peace"
Following this, Israel conducted a military operation with tanks and what not in Gaza resulting in many deaths which was responded to by rocket fire - and back and forth and the truce breaks down.
Now tell me that this was also a 'war started by Hamas'

You want to apportion some blame on Hamas too - fine. Israel needs to be condemned for disgusting atrocities but its not like Hamas is blameless -fine. There are 2 warring parties here - both Israel and Hamas - fine. But lets not say that 'Hamas started all wars' please. Thats *bullshit*

And lets also not forget that while there may be two sets of warring parties committing atrocities, the crux of the issue is simplt this: There is only 1 country in the world which is currently an occupying power and colonises a people - Israel.

"There is only 1 country in the world which is currently an occupying power and colonises a people - Israel." Which is why I hope Likud is losing the election, inshallah.

"arguably the most complex geo-political situation on the planet."

This whole Israeli-Palestinian debate is foolish. Neither side can objectively claim ANY moral high ground over the other. Israel drops white phosphorous on schools and hospitals, and Palestine sends suicide bombers to blow up civilians. The only real difference between Israel and Palestine is the sophistication of their weaponry/tactics.

I would suggest a UN resolution to the effect of: "Y'all motherfuckers stay on your side of the line, and y'all motherfuckers fuckers stay on your side of the line, or else!" But they tried that back in the 1940s and it failed miserably.

As a completely unsympathetic and uninterested third party (non-Jewish/non-Muslim American citizen), I advocate that the rest of the civilized world just back the hell out of the situation altogether. If they want to slaughter each other like barbarians, then let them slaughter each other like barbarians. Whoever wins gets to keep the land. No outside interference is necessary or overly practical.

Human rights legislation is a real thing ya know Gunfighter...

"There is only 1 country in the world which is currently an occupying power and colonises a people - Israel."

Israel fought a revolution for its land AFTER Palestinians turned down a UN peace deal which would have created two nations, one for each party...

And I think the Native Americans might disagree about Israel being the only current nation being the only nation which is an occupying power?

Or how about those Normans and Anglo-Saxons before that taking it to the already-established Britons on the island?

Last I checked, both the UK and America own territories which their people didn't own from time immemorial...and the further back you go, the more land swaps there are as nations and empires rise and fall...

So it's almost like that statement of yours is inaccurate and cherry-picked.

In other words, it's perfect for the current level of discourse on this topic.

*the Native Americans might disagree about Israel being the only land occupied by an occupying power, sorry.

"So, I'm sorry - but 3 kidnappings is not justification for an interstate war. This was certainly not 'a war started by Hamas'"

And who appointed you chief of declaring what's justification for an interestate war?

And funny, Sh@dow, I fail to see any mentin of TUNNELS in your analysis...you know...the things foreign powers condemned as a breach of sovereignty and which Israel claimed as a primary cause and objective of the war?

Funny how you've omitted that little fact.

"Let them slaughter each other like barbarians." I mean, I'm a little shocked that you are fine with a bunch of people possessing nukes and state of the art technology slaughtering an entire people who possess some knives, rocks and a couple of functionally useless rockets and are struggling to live like humans on their own fucking land which has been turned into a tiny prison.
Its not slaughtering "each other" - it would be an occupying power committing genocide on the the people of the land.
Not that it would be excusable if it was evenly matched either. Lol.

Here’s the thing: Go back to that UN peace deal and see how much much much more land Israel has already colonized. Furthermore, learn a thing or two about international law and understand that the UNGA (which passed the resolution) has no binding authority in international law – only the UNSC has.
Yeah, the treatment of Native Americans is pretty fucked up – especially in the US and Canada. Agreed. Not sure how it makes Israel any better though. Lol. Hey they aren’t that bad cos there are other people doing bad things too? That’s the argument? And Palestianians are arguably way worse off than some native americans also.
As for the rest of it, there’s no point bringing up what happened a million years ago. Lots of shit happened million years ago. I’m talking about the here and now.


There was no analysis you idiot. I merely fact checked you. That it is purely bullshit to claim that Hamas started a war. Plain and simple bullshit.
As far as tunnels go: live in an area where someone has made your own land into a prison, has blocked all flow of goods into it (including essential services) and treats you like dogs and see if you don’t build tunnels to funnel rockets and food and even essential supplies.
And here’s the thing: Even if there are tunnels, its still not justification for war – its sovereign fucking land. Every country can trade to build weapons and defense systems. Why can’t Palestine? Because Israel occupies them.
Where’s the tunnels in your analysis it seems. Lol.

"Go back to that UN peace deal and see how much much much more land Israel has already colonized."

Palestinians fought a war, and lost--that would seem to be a rejection of that peace deal? Why, then, should the Israelis have honored a peace deal and territory accorded to the Palestinians therein when the Palestinians themselves had already rejected that peace, that deal, and come after the land accorded to Israel?

"Yeah, the treatment of Native Americans is pretty fucked up – especially in the US and Canada. Agreed. Not sure how it makes Israel any better though."

I was simply stating that your claim was false--that Israel ISN'T the only nation currently occupying land once belonging to others, which was your claim that they were the ONLY nation currently doing so?

So...either retract that claim and admit you cherry-picked, or explain to me why the Palestinians' case is different from, oh, the hundreds of still-existent Native American tribes with active governments who, yes, currently have their land colonized by another power.