Rolling MENA 2014 (Middle East)

I watched a documentary about the second intifada last weekend ("Arna's Children") and there's a scene where you see a group of Palestinians talking about the Battle of Jenin--one of them was a fighter who was among the first to give himself up, and the others are mocking him for it. The dialogue something like

"You could have kept shooting! I had to give up or die, they had killed everyone else with me--"
"It would be better to die than be the first to surrender."
"And what did the rest of you do as soon as I gave up? The shooting stopped, as soon as I gave up you all gave up."
"Well because we had lost our best fighter, obviously."

despite the emphasis i've put on the arab street's hatred for israel, this has definitely been a trend this year:
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/180254/if-you-want-to-find-support-for-israel-read-the-newspapers-in-cairo

i've seen similar stuff in al-arabiya too (which has run some really fantastic stuff as of late and is def worth following imo - better than al-jazeera which has been shit since becoming al-jazeera america) re saudi arabia, egypt, even turkey (despite ertogan's rhetoric to the contrary), even PA - abbas has made unprecedentedly critical remarks of hamas this go-around.

http://www.itv.com/news/2014-07-24/itv-news-witnesses-aftermath-of-un-school-attack-in-gaza/

UN gave Israel coordinates of where the schools were located where civilians and children were hiding from the shelling. Israel bombed away anyway. Same with the children on the beach. The bombing of a hospital. It's indefensible and appalling.

NYT says it's unclear who hit the school and apparently Hamas is not letting them investigate the site:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/world/middleeast/despite-talk-of-a-cease-fire-no-lull-in-gaza-fighting.html

The local director of the United Nations agency operating the shelter, in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanoun, initially said the cause appeared to be an Israeli strike, and many Gazans presumed Israel’s military was responsible.

But United Nations officials said later that they could not be sure, and Israeli military officials said errant Palestinian munitions might have been the source. The Israelis denied having intentionally targeted the school and said they had warned the United Nations three days earlier that the school should be evacuated because the surrounding area was a combat zone.

[...]

Mr. Turner said he had few details about the strike in Beit Hanoun, because when he went to investigate, “we got a hostile reception.”

With Friends Like These, ISIS Is Doomed

“All we are doing now is just a liberation,” Abu Mustafa says. “After the liberation of Baghdad the Islamic state will be finished. The Sunni rebels are only using them against the corruption of the government.”

This is a view more common than one might expect among the Sunni Iraqis who have taken up arms against the government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, although it rarely is voiced so brazenly from inside the capital. They look at ISIS not as a religious prophecy come true or an end unto itself but as a weapon that will be used up after it is has done their work.
“They stay together only to fight the enemy,” and that is Maliki, says Najim al Kasab, an Iraqi political analyst with contacts among the Sunni insurgent groups. “The main force keeping them together is Maliki himself. If Maliki is replaced, the Sunni armed groups will turn on ISIS,” Kasab says.

Terrible clashes in the old city of Jerusalem right now. I fear for a third intifada :-(

(Ps Mordy, Israel claimed attack on school just now: http://www.buzzfeed.com/sheerafrenkel/at-least-13-palestinians-were-killed-inside-the-un-school-wh )

If they did, it's not in the link you posted, which reads: "Israel’s military spokesman said it was investigating the incident and did not have an immediate comment."

Sorry, I didn't see the tweet at the bottom:

IDF@IDFSpokesperson Follow
Today Hamas continued firing from Beit Hanoun. The IDF responded by targeting the source of the fire.

12:34 PM - 24 Jul 14
Reply Retweet Favorite

Sorry. Wrong link apparently. Buzzfeeds correspondent: https://twitter.com/sheeraf/status/492415601189462016

Anyway, this is seriously taking a turn for the worst right now.

Xp it was my bad

what americans think:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/174110/americans-reaction-middle-east-situation-similar-past.aspx

"Where are the people who think that Gidon Levi is annoying, but don’t hope he gets killed? Where are the people who think the occupation is bad, without calling Israel an apartheid state? Where are the people who can disagree with their workers without firing them? Where are the people who think the government is making mistakes, without comparing the country to Nazi Germany?"

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/zero-shades-of-grey/

I think there are a lot of people who think the occupation is bad but don't call Israel an apartheid state.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/25/after-leveling-iraqs-tomb-of-jonah-the-islamic-state-could-destroy-anything-in-the-bible/?tid=hp_mm&hpid=z3

xp Yeah, that's me and most of my friends. I don't know who she's talking about but in my circle most people are critical of Israel without even thinking of using the word apartheid or any Nazi comparisons.

As this is an all-encompassing thread, I should point out that my loathing for ISIS far surpasses any feelings I have about Israel.

i am sad that isis is (among many other things) destroying sites like that but who the fuck wrote that article? it was terrible, has this dumb jokey tone throughout.

But then Yahweh sent a great storm. When Jonah’s shipmates found out he was running from the Man Upstairs, they regretfully threw him overboard. Rather than let Jonah drown, God sent a great fish (or a whale, depending on the translation) to swallow him and — yuck — vomit him on dry land.

huhuhuh you're an asshole dude.

"yuck"

http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/180400/hamas-killed-160-palestinian-children-to-build-terror-tunnels

Israel rejects Kerry's cease fire proposal http://www.breakingnews.com/t/SuR

if we really wanted a cease fire we could get one p easily

Five Israeli talking points debunked

5) Hamas hides its weapons in homes, mosques and schools and uses human shields.

This is arguably one of Israel's most insidious claims, because it blames Palestinians for their own death and deprives them of even their victimhood.

This is a person who doesn't understand the difference between blaming Hamas for Palestinian deaths and blaming Palestinians for their own deaths. Hamas is not synonymous with Palestine and we should be trying to avoid that impression as strenuously as possible lest we actually start blaming Palestinians for Hamas.

I've often heard the line of argument from Zionist friends that Palestinians, through their election of Hamas and "refusal to reject" their militancy (whatever that means), are on the whole culpable for Hamas's crimes. Glad to hear you take a more nuanced view.

First point in the Nation piece is fundamental. How can a "war" of "self-defence" take place against an occupied territory rather than a sovereign nation?

Just want to say how grateful I am for the level of debate on ILX at times like this when everywhere else I find either self-affirming echo chambers or bitter namecalling.

First point in the Nation piece is fundamental.

idk this seems largely semantic (Vietnam was a "police action" etc) and just sort of emblematic of how Israel dgaf about UN or int'l conventions because why should they it's not in their interest

But it's fundamental to ideas of proportionality, no? They shouldn't compare casualty ratios with wars between sovereign nations.

Eh you can call it a war or a revolt or a civil war or whatever and it does shift the calculus of international law but what really determines acceptability of tactics imo is public opinion (inside Israel, and maybe the US) and brazenness.

i don't consider myself "pro-israel" but the concept of "proportionality" seems really hollow and catch-phrasey to me.

Not sure I understand how a principle of international law becomes hollow and catchphrasey.

Under international humanitarian law and the Rome Statute, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives,[7] even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) (Article 8(2)(b)(iv))

Thanks for the quote- I think Shakey was asking about proportionality (on the other active thread maybe?)

I get why people bring it up but appealing to Israel to adhere to international law is about as pointless as appealing to America to adhere to international law

(for my part I was unaware of the origin of the proportionality term as well, fwiw)

or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage

"the anticipated military advantage to this attack was, like, so important to us, the incidental civilian casualties were totally worth it, sorry"

stated pedantically proportion indicates quantity weighed against other quantities and nobody agrees on the value of any of the things being compared in the first place.

Israel's rejoinder that the US dgaf about proportionality is OTM. Israel shouldn't be the only nation criticised on these grounds.

Yep. As imprecise as proportionality is as a principle, it is the best one we have.

Israel would be justified in pointing out that at least they're putting soldiers on the ground rather than just dropping stuff on stick figures from 10000ft.

Oops...

fairly pathetic how easy it is to spark a conflict between these two when you want to. everyone's so trigger-happy p much any lone nut w an agenda could do it.

i was working on a quick "waitaminnit, how did we get here anyway?" post re: proportionality of response but those tweets are good enough summary. what a sick joke.

Onion really on their game lately:
http://www.theonion.com/video/israel-unveils-new-defense-system-to-deflect-accus,36548/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Pic:1:Default

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8ZCs4jY

Beit hanoun has been completely destroyed

JERUSALEM — Israel’s top ministers decided Saturday night to extend a humanitarian halt to hostilities in the Gaza Strip for 24 hours, but said their troops would continue to operate to destroy tunnels from Gaza into its territory during Sunday’s pause.

The decision came despite continued fire from Gaza into Israel during Israel’s initial four-hour extension of a 12-hour humanitarian pause on Saturday that both sides had agreed to at the request of the United Nations.

this is nuts:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/american-died-suicide-bombing-syria-u-s-officials-say-n116491

(i realize it's from a month ago - i didn't see it until tnite and i'm a little surprised it didn't make more news when it happened)

http://www.haaretz.com/mobile/.premium-1.607332?v=3AB70A172CE96761671E1E0AC73F54CC

Kerry's latest cease-fire plan: What was he thinking?

Kerry isn’t anti-Israeli; on the contrary, he's a true friend to Israel. But his conduct in recent days over the Gaza cease-fire raises serious doubts over his judgment and perception of regional events.

Yeah, that's paranoid bullshit. 'Other photographs show Kerry carousing romantically with the Turkish foreign minister in the pastoral grounds of the U.S. ambassador's home in Paris' Come on.

yeah, i don't believe there's a conspiracy, but i have no trouble believing that kerry is a singularly incompetent secretary of state

Nevertheless, that article is so drenched in bullshit it negates it's points.

Like, I'm interested in the stuff about different alliances in the region, but how can I use anything which just names Qatar and Turkey 'the most radical and problematic elements in the region' without further explanation? Not Syria, or ISIL? Turkey more 'radical' than Saudi Arabia?

well, Qatar certainly fits the bill since they're the primary bankrollers of ISIS, MB + Hamas from what I understand. Turkey is maybe more bark than bite.