Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

... but still you like to quote them.

not i ..... you and i just happen to disagree on how we interpret the bits we read and see on tv ..... the stuff sivad quotes above i discard out of hand, though on the other hand, i am far from convinced that israel did not use white phosphorus bombs - jury's out on that

Cynic - as I understand it there is already an investigation underway on the phosphorous allegation. The Israeli public will be outraged if it's true.

i think so too ..... watch and wait ...... will that be disproportionate if so proven? .... don't answer that - lol!

It would be criminal. If you mean to equate the words disproportionate and criminal then you'll have to accuse Hamas of using 'disproportionate force' in their rocket attacks. And a mealy mouthed western apologist pro-jihadi wouldnt want to do that now, would he?

me pro-jihad? ..... where on earth did you get that disproportionate adjective from?

It was used as a noun. The 'mealy mouthed western apologist' bit that you didn't object to were used as adjectives.

glad i rarely take offense - lol!
in my own mind at least, i try to form a balanced view ..... i would certainly fight very hard for israel's right to exist .... i would also like to see that nation living peaceably with its neighbours, but all parties involved don't seem to consider that a "fun" idea and would rather punch 7 bells out of each other.
and yes, i still hold the view that israel's general treatment of the palestinians is pretty despicable and their present military action disproportionate

..... i would certainly fight very hard for israel's right to exist ....

... but not, it seems, for its right to defend itself.

i never said that, and well you know it
as a reasonable parallel, had british army waded in with tanks and bombs against IRA, that too would have been disproportionate

I didn't say you did.

But virtually all of your posts strike out at Israel with your allegations of disproportionate force, and yet you haven't once suggested how Israel might defend itself military and effectively whilst staying within whatever parameters you secretly use to define proportionality. And you continue to refuse to be drawn on what those parameters are.

If, as you imply in your post 559, that you would in fact fight very hard for Israel's right to defend itself then please excuse me for pointing out that your very hard fight for that right has so far seemed worse than a bit wimpy on this thread.

G

i would certainly fight very hard for israel's right to exist .... tanks and bombs against pinpricks (hamas ineffective rockets) is scarcely the same as using same against an invasion by say an iranian army

i had the fortune of growing up and going to school in india from 5 until 16, i also travelled extensivly throughout se asia untill my late 20,s (im 30 by the way) i met on my travels people from all over the world, however i met a lot of isralis who i can safely say 99.9% of were the most biggoted, insuler, racist people i have ever had the misfortune to meet, i also have journelist friends who cover the middle east and they are of the same opinion, a lot of people are talkin on this thread about extremists, but the isralis are some of the most extreme fucked up people i have ever met

cheers

Xenophobia rules OK

Gausie,

I would like to think that you are capable of stepping back, and re-reading the previous postings by others and myself.

Your will see there that I have a more balanced judgement on the Middle East problems than you seem to suggest.

I have never condoned the use of rockets aimed at Israel by Hamas.

I have never called for the abolition of the State of Israel.

But, I can understand the frustration of the Palestinians and the motivation behind them resorting to violence, in order to keep their predicament on the political map and in the hope of international intervention, which may give them the justice they, and many others, think they are entitled to. It may in your opinion be wrong, but it was the method used by their adversaries before and after the setting up of the State of Israel.

It is also the method used by many subjugated or abused minorities to have their grievances addressed. Whether the use of force speeds up or slows down the change or moderation, which later occurs, is open to research and debate.

When you condemn the Islamic Zealots for the extreme decrees, balance them against the decrees and the actions of the Jewish Zealots within the area controlled by the Israeli government. (E.g. Greater expansion of the State of Israel and destruction of Palestinians' own properties and areas. Properties, which had previously been in their families' names for centuries.)

There are major abuses and faults on both sides.

I have drawn attention to Israeli use of force for different reasons. Amongst those reasons is to highlight the indiscriminate use of weaponry being used knowingly and sanctioned by the Israeli government.

Also, to draw attention to abhorrent weaponry which is still permissible in international law.

To draw attention to the fruitlessness of using what others, and I, consider disproportionate force.

Also, to help push public opinion into demanding Political intervention, by America and United Nations, to start meaningful, fair and legally binding negotiations and solutions to this problem.

I think that Obamas appointment of Senator George Mitchell to be his Middle East envoy, may lead to a peaceful resolution of what appears to be an insurmountable problem.

Fred - that's a long post and given the nonsense you usually post I simply can't be arsed to read it.

So let's cut to the chase.

Do you mention in your post what, in your opinion, would constitute either a reasonable or a proportionate response to incoming shelling from a neighbouring state?

Gausie,

Congratulations as usual.

Once again, you are your usual informative self!

I am glad that you will not be negotiating at the table when it comes to a settlement!

But, perhaps, you advocating that your attitude should be used by the Israeli government at the time of such negotiation.

I'll take that as a no, then.

a reasonable response would certainly have been for the two (notional) protagonists to sit round the negotiating table with open minds, though no chance of that.

failing that, destroying the communication tunnels between Egypt and Gaza would have been a sensible starting point and perhaps israel putting its mind on how to win "hearts and minds" of the palestinians ..... no point asking their ami champions for advice in that respect, but patently blowing the population to smithereens is never going to work, even if one accepts that hamas are holed up in residential areas.

Gausie,

My guess is Riccardo has just been a little unlucky in the Israelis he has met.