Okay So It was Not My Last Post of the Year

I'm not sure what the point is in my even clicking that link. I can see the headline in it and if it's that biased (what, firing rockets into Israel doesn't count towards ruining the peace process?), what must the article be like? I don't think I'd learn anything reading a one-sided report so why bother?

It's all Israel's fault for occupying Arab land... oh, wait... it's Jews on Muslim land... no, ummm... it's Israel's sovereign nation that is being occupied by so-called Palestinians... ack.. to confusing for the average news reporter.

It is so much easier to just blame the Jews.

I can't even believe the first article is being considered as valid. The author labels the relatively low number of civilian deaths as outrageous, even though Hamas intentionally targets civilian areas. The worst part of the article is that the author attributes the Israeli retaliation to political factors, such as preparation for the election, but fails to mention that a cease-fire had just ended. Go figure, as soon as the deadline for the cease-fire passed, Palestinian terrorists were back to their old ways, shelling civilian areas without provocation. Fight fire with fire. If the Palestinians cast a pebble, let the Israelis hit them with a stone.

OK, against my better judgement, out of curiousity, I followed that first link. I'm sad to say that it was pretty much what I expected from the URL and I didn't learn anything interesting or new.

The article contained some highly questionable assumptions, the most egregious of which is that there is some kind of diplomatic solution which would stop Hamas from attacking Israel, and especially that Fatah could control them in any way. Assuming Israel did come to some kind of agreement with Fatah, what then? Hamas would just say "we aren't happy until Israel is destroyed" and get back to lobbing rockets. How naive does a reporter have to be to look at the past 50+ years of violence and think "This time will be different! Just give peace a chance!"?

Another questionable assumption is that the Israelis think they are destroying Hamas. I think they're just trying to degrade them. As for the timing - um, didn't a ceasefire just expire? Surely that's a more plausible explanation for why the strikes are occuring now than some political manoeuvring.

There's also the fallacy that the attacks will strengthen Hamas. Is it a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situation? If the Israelis just bend over and take the rockets, that will make Hamas stronger, right? And if they fight back, they will make Hamas stronger? I don't buy it. That doesn't make sense. If everything they do makes Hamas stronger, what are they supposed to do then? Some kind of weak response would make them look ridiculous but so far it seems like they're making sensible strikes which will have some effect and, if nothing else, show that there are consequences for actions.

All in all.. I don't see the value of that article. Sorry. It just reads like some kind of weird conspiracy theory.

The second link is OK but also nothing surprising or interesting there. It's more pragmatic but still doesn't offer any real insight or solutions, if there is one.

Thank you very much!

Great post! Hope to be better. Better means more features.
good post,I think so!

links of london
links of london charm
links of london bracelets

Thanks for your useful info, I think it's a good topic,I’ll keep it in mind.

Great article, Very funny!!Your article very interesting, I have introduced a lot of friends BE look at this article.