Hamas leader survives attack

[bn880 5]

Any UK weapon system used by the IDF is not allowed to be deployed in the occupied territories. They tried it last year, and had a short term embargo slapped on them.

Very good, I didn't know that.

[Schoeler 0]

My questions is...why lob seven missiles when they could try and disable the car they were in somehow and use a few well placed snipers. This would prevent all of these tragic incidents of "collateral damage", which has to be a large factor in keeping the war going.

Both sides are wrong.

My question in response to your question is; if Hamas had Apache gunships and snipers in Israel then don't you think they would go after Israel's leaders in exactly the manner you've just described rather than shooting a salvo of rockets at a crowded street?  Both sides may be wrong but the one side clearly has the means and opportunity to fight differently, but instead chooses reckless brutality.

I'm still waiting for USSoldier11B's answer about why Israel doesn't go take the target out of the Gaza hospital, right now.

I'd say it's because attacking a hospital could be taken as a war crime, and would at least certainly be considered a very bad PR move for Israel. I'm sure they'll finish the job. I too think both sides are at fault, but that in the two examples given in this discussion so far, neither is terrorism. Attacking legitimate military targets is an act of war, despite the effort to achieve maximum psychological impact on the enemy. Shocking and terrorizing your military opponent has been a fundamental part of war since the dawn of mankind, it's not going to go away any time soon.

[toadlife 3]

It doesn't work that way, sitting here at a $2000 computer it makes sense, but if you grew up as a Palestinian with Israeli tanks and watch towers haunting you constantly, and have the occasional US made chopper manned by an Israeli firing missiles at cars you would not have the patience. None at all, because you would have no hope for any future.

These people are not "born terrorists" they are just like you and just like me, their intolerance is a result of their surrounding conditions. Any one of us here could have been a "terrorist" if we grew up in Palestine under certain conditions.

The problem is that both sides think that it doesn't work that way, when in fact, it does. Unfortunately, it takes extraordinary leaders to get people to actually believe in and practice non-violence.

I'm sure many Blacks in the U.S. felt 'hopeless" in the 50's before the U.S. civil rights movement.

[MrMilli 0]

Come on, so you really think that the attitude of  'oh the snipers could do it easier' is really a good alternative?

If they couldn't do it without placing an enourmous risk on innocents, they shouldn't have attempted it at all.

I'm not saying firing off missiles is the answer but please, a little more thought into comments. Which is easier and risks the fewest Israeli lives?

So your implying that an Israeli soldier's life is more valuable than an innocent Palestinian's?

Sending in a group of soldiers who have to infiltrate the area, set themselves up, kill the guy and then sneak out without getting into a contact requiring weeks of planning and risking some of the best soldiers they have to offer?

or firing off a missile from a few miles away and a few thousand feet up?

Of course. It's what special forces from all over the world do.

I'll be honest and say it pisses me off when people say things like that, how many people just went 'Oh they could of just got a few snipers and killed Saddam' a few months ago?

I sure never said that about Hussein. There is a difference between Saddam Hussein and the leader of Hamas - the Isrealis knew where the leader of Hamas was.

1) Two killed.

Bad, but hardly enormous civilian casualties.

2) To an Israeli Commander?

Any day of the sodding week.

3) So, your saying you'd rather an infantry force get into a fight in a crowded street?

How many do you think would die then? Bullets flying about, adrenaline filled soldiers and militants whose leader they just killed firing away at each other?

4) didn't say you did, doesn't mean it doesn't piss me off.

[Schoeler 0]

I'm not saying firing off missiles is the answer but please, a little more thought into comments. Which is easier and risks the fewest Israeli lives?

So your implying that an Israeli soldier's life is more valuable than an innocent Palestinian's?

No, what I got out of that is that it would be stupid from a tactical standpoint to risk troops when the objective can be accomplished much more simply. Israel didn't use those tactics in the 70's because they didn't have hellfire missiles and airborne sensor technology acute enough to accomplish the mission back then. They have that technology now, thus it makes more sense for them to use it. The Palestinians fight the way they do because they lack that very same technology. Neither side is more honorable than the other. I'm sure if the Palestinians had the same capabilities, they would employ the same tactics. This isn't a chivalrous duel people, its warfare. Both sides are going to try and attain the maximum advantage in killing one another. Bringing honor and bravery into play, while earning you respect and admiration in certain ignorant circles, only invites disaster and reflects extremely poor planning and leadership. Use of daring tactics only comes into play when there are no viable alternatives to their use.

Thus:

Quote[/b] ]

Sending in a group of soldiers who have to infiltrate the area, set themselves up, kill the guy and then sneak out without getting into a contact requiring weeks of planning and risking some of the best soldiers they have to offer?

or firing off a missile from a few miles away and a few thousand feet up?

Of course. It's what special forces from all over the world do.

Those special forces are used only when it is absolutely necessary. Why do you think they are called Special Forces? It's because they are trained only for use in special circumstances. It makes no sense at all to use such troops in ordinary circumstances, and is a waste of time, money, effort and possibly lives. Why use the wrong tool for a simple job? It would be like planting carrots in your garden using a jackhammer. Or, more accurately, using a laser designed for precision eye correction surgery to try and repair a blownout eyeball. Can it be done? Certainly, but that doesn't mean it should.

[bn880 5]

It doesn't work that way, sitting here at a $2000 computer it makes sense, but if you grew up as a Palestinian with Israeli tanks and watch towers haunting you constantly, and have the occasional US made chopper manned by an Israeli firing missiles at cars you would not have the patience. None at all, because you would have no hope for any future.

These people are not "born terrorists" they are just like you and just like me, their intolerance is a result of their surrounding conditions. Any one of us here could have been a "terrorist" if we grew up in Palestine under certain conditions.

The problem is that both sides think that it doesn't work that way, when in fact, it does. Unfortunately, it takes extraordinary leaders to get people to actually believe in and practice non-violence.

I'm sure many Blacks in the U.S. felt 'hopeless" in the 50's before the U.S. civil rights movement.

What I'm saying is no matter who the leader, Palestinian Police is now ineffective (the leadership is ineffective in a Western policing state sense), this is not some coincidence, this is caused by the ISraeli leaderships' greed to take over most of Palestine(whatever is useful). By Israel showing Palestinian leadership can not stop extremists, and as long as they have more extremist acts coming from Palestine, it gives the Israeli leadership permission in the mind of USA and some others to occupy and control/use all the land they wish.

They made conditions for extremists ("terrorists") by making sure they are hopeless, without any policing force or authority of their own. The thing to do is send the UN in there like it is sent to Congo, then build a berlin wall kind of deal... this is going to happen when pigs fly.

[toadlife 3]

Can it be done? Certainly, but that doesn't mean it should.

Please just forget about military strategy for a second. If they really want peace, killing innocents is not the way to bring it about, which was my point. My point wasn't that shooting missiles was safer than using special forces to do the job - that's is a no brainer.

Regardless or Israels methods, killing the leader of Hamas won't solve any problems as long as they have sympathy from the public and financial backing from various governments.

Neither Isreal or the Palestinians seem to want peace in the first place, so when accomplishing their military objectives, they don't care how it gets done.

Neither blowing up buses or indescriminatly firing off rockets into residential neigborhods are good ways to bring about peace.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

This would look good in the Middle East thread wouldnt it?

Anyway on the slightly less bad side of the Israel/Palestine situation, the Sharon government has recently begun small scale demolitions of illegal settlements (most reportedly uninhabited so far)

I dont expect peace but slightly less war would be a start.

[Guest]

Since I have a compulsory need to stuff everything in obnoxiously large threads, I'm merging this one with the Mid East thread