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?

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.

Oh how gracious of you.......

if one is not careful, this could easily turn into quite a racist thread!

Yep, didn't someone say (I wonder who........) "some of his best friends" were Jewish?

No comments about Channel 4 news tonight?
How Hamas shot people who asked them not to shoot at Israelis from their houses?
One man was punished for asking them that by his son being shot in the legs.
How anyone with suspected Fatah sympathies has been rounded up and accused of being Israeli spies?
How people spoke about Hamas atrocities against their own people provided their identities were hidden?
But then I don't accept everything or anything I see on C4 or BBC the way others do automatically..........unless of course it's anti-Israel in which case it must be true.......huh?
And the man who said he was a Hamas supporter and next year his son - standing there - was going to be given to Hamas. The father said it was his fervent wish his son would be killed - a shehad ("martyr").
Oh yes, good negotiating partners, huh?
Richard

So now we see the real war crimes. And the identities of the people who systemicaly and deliberately kill and maim moderate and peaceful Palestinian civilians.

Charts or Gausie, I thought one of you was writing under a pseudonym.

I missed Channel 4 news, but with have a look tomorrow.

Was is propaganda as per usual?

What was the background scenery like?

Fred1new or MrAshleyJames - I think of you in the same way. When's the next Birmingham meet?

:o)

i didn't see the news last night, but i think i saw that BBC are not now showing a film asking for charitable donations to Gaza lest they (BBC) lose their reputation for impartiality.

hmm! .... BBC has always been alleged to be slanted to being anti-israel and/or pro-arab as has the UK establishment in general.

so who does one believe?
Telegraph is heavily right wing and one doesn't even mention the likes of the Guardian ...... tabloids are OK for pretty girls and articles on fashion.

the answer of course is no one, and the easiest solution being a (virulent) pox on both their houses!

on a marginally more serious note, perhaps i should have the same discussion with my m8 in israel as i did with another (palestinian) in abu dhabi .... both are sensible and "real" people with brains

Honest Reporting
just a very banal example of how reporting can be misleading.....

yesterday evening there was a news clip about how the recession was even hitting wealthy towns like marlow.
the main location for filming was outside a shut down pub in the high street, which was held up as a typical example.
fact - this pub closed down due as being unsafe due to structural problems - subsidence or similar.
focus then moved across to a top-class jeweller over the road, which has also closed down.
again, nothing to do with the recession, but because their lease expired and they did not like the new terms ..... they also have a couple of branches elsewhere.

so while it is true that there are a good number of empty shops (and offices) in marlow that have indeed been forced into liquidation - e.g. viyella, wittards and several small indies - the examples chosen were false but made for a better story

cynic, Caroline Thomson (BBC CEO) has defended their position by stating that they would lose the trust of the veiwing public if they aired the clip. She basically said that natural disasters would pass unquestioned, but something as political as Gaza is a risk that the BBC cannot afford top take. Their stance is correct imo.

Re Marlow, you'll know its serious when every other building is a takeaway or bookies. :)

ladbroke's was clearly that and has shut!
btw, i did not say BBC's stance was incorrect re Gaza film

cynic, i didn't think you did. I was expecting a response from Fred slating my opinion. One other point, I do object to Douglas Alexander sticking his nose in. The BBC should be completely isolated (or at the very least seen to be) from political pressure.

sorry to be totally ignorant, but who is Douglas Alexander?