ONTD Political

Hamas prevents humanitarian aid delivery to Gaza

6:44 pm - 06/07/2010
The bulk of the humanitarian aid from the Turkish flotilla that has been confiscated by Israel has been released and is awaiting delivery to Gaza, however Hamas prevents the goods from being delivered according to Der Spiegel.

"The aid shipment that the Palestinian activists' flotilla was hoping to bring to Gaza before they were halted by Israeli commandos is now awaiting delivery. But Hamas will only let the badly needed goods into the territory under certain conditions. "

When and if Hamas eventually lets the goods in, it is unlikely that they will reach these in need. Most probably that the aid will be distributed among Hamas supporters.

"Hamas supporters get prefabricated housing, furnishings and paid work. We get nothing"

syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 05:29 pm (UTC)
So the OP's point is invalid.
gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 05:43 pm (UTC)
Oh, please, try not to pretend to be more stupid than you are. Terrorists attack in order to create TERROR. This is their major objective. This is the case with Hamas. This is not the case with Israel.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 05:55 pm (UTC)
So Israel flattening houses with bulldozers in Gaza is not terrorism? Lobbing shells at them isn't? Blocking food and aid and construction material from getting to them while the average Gazan family lives in tents or falling down housing isn't? I would argue that the people living in Gaza right now are living in terror, and they aren't blaming Hamas for it.

The situation is a lot more complicated than anything we know, and you are oversimplifying it to the point of meaninglessness. Yes, Hamas is a former terrorist group, but was democratically elected by the people to be the legitimate government. You were the one who made the point that a legitimate government couldn't be a terrorist group. Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza. Hence your argument is invalid.

And please think before you call someone stupid. You don't know me.
gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 06:10 pm (UTC)
Not it is not. Israel's objective is to destroy/disarm Hamas gunmen, not to create terror.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 06:12 pm (UTC)
And I am sure flattening homes is a step in the right direction, and the people of Gaza don't feel terrorized at all.

Edited at 2010-06-07 06:13 pm (UTC)
gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 06:18 pm (UTC)
People of Gaza (and I happen to KNOW and SPEAK TO some of them) feel terrorized by Hamas, not by Israel.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 06:34 pm (UTC)
Hey, I am not saying that Hamas are good guys, here. They may be the democratically elected government, but lots of legit governments are really horrible to their own people. But that's not really the point of the conversation.

The point is that Israel and Hamas are in conflict. You are saying that one is a terrorist group, and the other isn't. I would argue that both are, to be honest. Israel is terrorizing Gaza. Hamas is terrorizing Israel. The people of Gaza lose either way.
gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 06:43 pm (UTC)
You don't get my point. I will repeat it. The way things are right now is that Israel's actions are primarily targeted to preventing Palestinian gunmen from killing Israelis and generally forcing them to leave us alone. Hamas actions, on the other hand, are targeted to creating terror among Israelis. There is a huge difference.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 06:49 pm (UTC)
Oh, I get your point. I just don't agree with it. I think it's way more complicated than that, and you are oversimplifying things so that they fit into easily definable terms.
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 06:52 pm (UTC)
Just jumping in to say that Israel is a legit state, and at this point, Gaza isn't.

syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 06:54 pm (UTC)
Well, that's a whole other issue, and one I am not really qualified to comment on.
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 06:51 pm (UTC)
'flattening houses with bulldozers in Gaza' - where? As far as I know, Israel has no bulldozers in Gaza {I might be misinformed}. Israel pulled out of Gaza.

However, if you're talking pre-disengagement, Israel came up with flattening houses as a way to discourage terrorists from suicide-bombing {and later, all terror}. The idea is that if a suicide-bomber knows that if he DOES blow himself up, then his family will be punished in his stead. Flattening houses happens as a reaction to something specific, not as a random decision.

syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 06:59 pm (UTC)
I may be referring to pre-disengagement. I will admit that I am not as up to speed on the situation as I would like to be. However, I do think that bulldozing peoples' homes was pretty reprehensible, whether they were targeting the families of bombers or not. Especially since they used it as a preemptive strike several times. And did it really discourage bombing all that much? I don't think it did, since suicide bombings still happen.
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 07:02 pm (UTC)
I don't think it did, since suicide bombings still happen.

-Nope. They don't.

syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 07:05 pm (UTC)
So, Israel is perfectly safe now? No buses being blown up, or cafés being bombed? It's all sunshine and rainbows and kids playing in the streets?
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 07:13 pm (UTC)
Of course not. There are stabbings, stone-throwing, and rocket-launching. I was just saying that there aren't any more suicide bombings. There hasn't been any since January 2008 {1 dead, 10 injured, in Dimona, which the Hamas helped organise, but was mostly the Islamic Jihad}.

In the south, btw, parents don't trust their kids {or themselves} in the streets. It's raining rockets, you know. . . .

Part of it is the separation wall, but I do think that part of it is that the moderate Palestinians are getting tired of this too.

syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 07:23 pm (UTC)
I'm glad that there hasn't been a bombing in that long, I hadn't realized! Was the house-flattening the direct cause? Or could it be a combination of things?

Part of it is the separation wall, but I do think that part of it is that the moderate Palestinians are getting tired of this too.

I think the wall was more of a deterrent than the bulldozing, because I think the bulldozing made people angrier and just added to a volatile situation. But you're right, I think moderate Palestinians and Israelis alike are tired of living like this and are desperate to find a solution.
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 07:33 pm (UTC)
I'm glad too. :)

I don't know what's the house-flattening to do with that, but even the Israeli authorities have got the point that it's not helping matters. At least that's what I'm sensing -- I can't remember when was the latest a house-flattening debacle.

For all the international criticism the wall generates, it HAS helped in that regard, which was its purpose.

I think moderate Palestinians and Israelis alike are tired of living like this and are desperate to find a solution.

Definitely. The problem is that anytime we think we're getting on the right track, something new happens, and voila, a new mess. :(

slurp 7th-Jun-2010 07:36 pm (UTC)
Most Israel is, except for settlements or mixed zones. Buses being blown up in Tel Aviv? Hasn't happened in several years.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 07:38 pm (UTC)
Glad to hear it!
gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 07:31 pm (UTC)
>Especially since they used it as a preemptive strike several times.
When ?
naatz 7th-Jun-2010 07:33 pm (UTC)
I think I remember something like that sometime between 2002-2004. . . .

ETA: The height of the second intifada.


Edited at 2010-06-07 07:34 pm (UTC)
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 07:37 pm (UTC)
From Wikipedia:

In 2004, Human Rights Watch published the report 'Razing Rafah: Mass Home Demolitions in the Gaza Strip'. The report documented what it described as a "pattern of illegal demolitions" by the IDF in Rafah, a refugee camp and city at the southern end of the Gaza Strip on the border with Egypt where sixteen thousand people lost their homes after the Israeli government approved a plan to expand the de facto "buffer zone" in May 2004. The IDF’s main stated rationales for the demolitions were; responding to and preventing attacks on its forces and the suppression of weapons smuggling through tunnels from Egypt.

The bolding is mine. Sixteen thousand people-- there would have to have been a lot of suicide bombings if every one of the homes razed was a reaction to a bombing and not a preemptive strike.

The full article, with citations, is here:

gruimed 7th-Jun-2010 07:51 pm (UTC)
I'm sure you understand that preventing referred to weapon smuggling via tunnels.
syzygy_lj 7th-Jun-2010 08:00 pm (UTC)
Thanks for the condescension, but no, the "preventing" referred to "attacks on its forces" and "the suppression of weapons smuggling."

In either case, it's a preemptive strike. Prevention of attack by attacking is the very definition of it. The claim up-thread was that the flattening of houses was only in response to bombings which had already taken place. I argued it was also used preemptively. Here's my proof.

This page was loaded Jul 24th 2017, 4:42 pm GMT.