| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Middle East | |
| Another Hamas leader killed in Gaza | |
| 2003-06-12 | |
| From Fox, EFL [T]he third Israeli air strike against Hamas targets in 24 hours . . . came shortly after the Islamic militant group ordered its fighters to continue their attacks on Israelis. A leader of the Islamic militant group, Mahmoud Zahar, said those killed in the airstrike were Yasser Taha, a member of the Hamas military wing, Taha's wife, and the couple's two small children. A baby bottle was among the items pulled from the burning car. It's unfortunate that the sins of the father were visited on the children.
| |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #24 There was talk a couple of weeks ago, of Israel contemplating joining the EU Bulldog, Israel has been trying for a long time to become part of the European Common Market for obvious economical reasons. However, becoming a member of the EU is a different story altogether. First, I dont believe that the french will let this happen becuase that will cuase them difficulties with the arabs which they want to avoid at all cost. Second, while there may be clear economic advantages, I dont think Israel can give up it's political and millitary independence and agree to receive orders from a bunch of non-elected Eurocrats (especially not from Belgians;)). Third, I personally think it may be a big mistake because I think Israel should rather follow the American economic model (which is already gradually being implemented)than the European more sociallistic model(we have been there and it doesn't work well IMHO). I am also very worried about the long term stability of the EU when some of the biggest national entities in it are demographically close to 10% arabs, in a situation of negative population growth of the european part of the population. Just imagine Israel joining the EU and having to face a Sharia controlled France, Belgium, Holland,and maybe certain parts of the UK, in twenty years. I would be very surprised if this (joining EU) happens anytime soon. |
| Posted by: The Dodo 2003-06-12 16:39:40 |
| #23 Dodo, I think we're way past the stage of sympathy for the Palestinians. As rock throwers during the first Intifada, there was some sympathy for them. As suicide bombers during the second Intifada, Palestinians are getting sympathy only from the media elite. (Palestinians, and Muslims generally, lost a lot of goodwill with their celebrations of 9/11. There are a lot of Americans who won't forget that anytime soon). I stopped reading the New York Times when it started doing sympathetic profiles of suicide bombers. I think Israel could do a Dresden and not provoke much of a reaction, except among the journalists, who spend most of their time writing for each other, anyway. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-06-12 16:35:28 |
| #22 aris - today an ij leader in jenin was killed by a sniper. yes there are clean killings. you dont hear as much about them, for obvious reasons. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-06-12 16:24:04 |
| #21 The problem with Arabs is they not been shown the consequencies of failure. There are several reasons for this, not least oil. Israel is a liberal democracy and this limits the extent to which they can/will punish the paleos for not participating in win-win cooperation. However, each new suicide bombing pushes them closer to decisive action. And IMHO that must include bulldozing Hamas etc neighbourhoods and mass expulsions. |
| Posted by: Phil B 2003-06-12 16:07:02 |
| #20 The Israelis have shown a great deal of restraint in dealing with terrorsts. I am sure that they could JDAM their way and be done, but they are trying to minimize collateral damage and casulties. Abbas is helpless. I am sure that he is hoping that Babywipes goes away. Someone is going to have to deal with Hamas. The only two will be the IDF and the US. Hamas has to go. We have played this game for years and it is a dead end. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-06-12 16:06:11 |
| #19 Bush has Ok'd the crackdown on Hamas "Bush administration officials also signaled support for a crackdown on the Islamic militant group Hamas, responsible for Wednesday's deadly suicide bus bombing in Jerusalem. Bush had criticized Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for trying to kill one of Hamas' leaders earlier this week -- drawing fire from some of Israel's staunch supporters, who defended the assassination attempt as part of Sharon's war on terrorism. "The issue is Hamas. The terrorists are Hamas," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters traveling with Bush to Connecticut. The administration also refrained on Thursday from criticizing Israel's lethal military response in Gaza to the bus bombing." |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-06-12 15:54:47 |
| #18 These Hamas guys have been warned that they will be taken out. If someone wants to hang around, then they, by using common sense (Paleo moron, oxy)will possibly get what is coming to aforesead hamas guy. A few more of these and folks may learn that being around Hamas guys is a liability and not an asset. It is absolutely horrible to have children die, but it is absolutely horrible to wage the kind of boomer war on Israeli civilians, using explosives, nails, bolts, germs, including boomer human schrapnel with AIDS or Hepatitis riding shotgun. The only way we can get to a peaceful settlement is to eliminate these terrorist organizations. THEN we talk. The rest is hot air and wasted Jet-A. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-06-12 15:48:40 |
| #17 Hamas,Al Aqasa,Hezbolla,etc. absolutly no mercy,no quarter.2 choices lay down your arms or die,if you hide amongst your familys or other civilians it be on your heads.Hamas and the rest have stated loud and often the only peace they want is the total and complete destruction of Israel,they(not Israel)have declared Total War. I don't want to hear but that is terrorisam,not even in the same ball park.I don't see Israel targetting buses,and pizza parlors. |
| Posted by: raptor 2003-06-12 15:45:34 |
| #16 Aris, I sincerely believe that these strikes are "target of opportunity" and not "as violent way as possible to attack this terrorist leader, to send a message of their own". It would be stupid of the Israelis, who are being constantly held on the defensive by the court of public opinion (i.e. the media) to start discounting collateral damage for "message" value. If they REALLY wanted to do that, a "daisy cutter" type bomb on an Arafat cabinet meeting would be far more effective. |
| Posted by: Hodadenon 2003-06-12 15:30:53 |
| #15 Generationally focussed killings may be the smartest thing to do, throughout history that has been the rule, but I think we and Israel would lose our moral identities by going down that path. I understand the IDF has been directed to wipe out Hamas - no more restraint. That has been what the Paleos have been asking for all along with their attacks, knowing that Europe and the US would rein in Israel. I think Bush will tut-tut about it, but Hamas has chosen this path after a real chance for peace was offered, and he knows it. He can no more ask Sharon to offer up busloads of dead Jews than he would offer an American city to an Al-Qaeda nuke. Good hunting IDF, and hit what you aim for, with as little collateral as possible. Now then, a couple ISM casualties (St. Pancake's group) wouldn't cause me to lose any sleep. A massive cause/effect demonstration is in order Frank |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-06-12 15:22:17 |
| #14 Dodo: There was talk a couple of weeks ago, of Israel contemplating joining the EU. Can you comment on that? |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2003-06-12 14:36:41 |
| #13 Dodo: Here's my $0.02: Up through 9/10/01, I would have expected a fair bit of sympathy to go to the Palestinians. That would have been attributable in part to the anti-Israel spin in the mainstream press, and in part to the American cultural tendency to root for underdogs. After 9/11/01, I think most Americans (though not necessarily most American pundits, professors, media types, and other "opinion leaders") see Hamas (correctly) as cut from the same cloth as al-Qaida and the Taliban and Saddam. Therefore, I would expect no significant negative reaction against Israel on the "American street." In fact, there would probably be a significant fraction of the American street which would quietly be glad that Israel got the bastards. Over to you, Zhang and Frank . . . |
| Posted by: Mike 2003-06-12 14:29:13 |
| #12 Very underhand that, their way of not standing in fields waving flags for the benefit of the IDF. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2003-06-12 14:24:06 |
| #11 No moral equivalence. Hamas is genocidal, the Israelis are not. That's clear. But I do wonder, though, whether the Israeli army chose as violent way as possible to attack this terrorist leader, to send a message of their own... Is it just that they didn't know his location most of the time and were afraid they'd lose him again if they didn't strike at that precise moment? It's just that we rarely seem to hear about precise killings/assasinations of terrorists. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2003-06-12 14:21:58 |
| #10 ZhangFei, Mike, Frank G, What do you think would be the reaction of most americans (not politicians but the common guys in the street)to an Israely military action in Gaza that will result in a few thousand dead Hamas members ??? Do you think the majority of american people will understand the inevitability of such a bloodbath in order to make the pali's undarstand where they stand ?? |
| Posted by: The Dodo 2003-06-12 14:17:19 |
| #9 I'd have to disagree that the "sins of the father" is morally indefensible. The conflict clearly has a generational aspect. Killing the children along with the parents is going to be more effective, much as removing tinder from a forest fire would be. I suggest that the world accept that Isreal won the war that took the west bank. Standard occupation rules include curfew, roadblocks, and execution of hostile elements. Like anyone who is stupid enough to associate with Hamas for example... |
| Posted by: flash91 2003-06-12 13:59:43 |
| #8 In most places, resistance fighters leave their wives and kids behind and assume noms de guerre in order to avoid having them caught in a crossfire. These guys not only openly conduct their operations under their own names - they live and go out with their families. If Palestinian terrorists selfishly choose the company of their kin over the personal safety of that kin, that's their funeral. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-06-12 13:57:58 |
| #7 I didn't read Aris' comment as implying any sort of moral equivalence. I thought the point he was making is that Hamas et al. believe it's OK to kill Israelis because of something their ancerstors supposedly did to Arabs back in, oh, say, 1948 or 1375 or some such. Which is morally indefensible, of course. As for my own comment, let me elaborate: I'm glad Taha got toasted, I just wish the babies hadn't been. I hadn't really seen it as a "human shields" issue, but if that's why Taha had the kids in the car with him--well, there ain't no circle in hell low enough for someone who can do that to their own kids. |
| Posted by: Mike 2003-06-12 13:24:52 |
| #6 nice moral equivalence Aris. Unfortunately, the innocents in the buses are not being held tight around Sharon or Barak or other high-ranking Israelis as human shields. The Paleo killers are cowards and scum, and there is no moral equivalence. I'm sure his daughter would've been sent out as a martyr (yeah, right...that's only for the other families). Damn shame she was born to a piece of shit like this, but sometimes human shields don't work. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-06-12 13:08:44 |
| #5 In the last three days the israelis have targeted many hamas terrorists in their cars...and Taha thinks that to go for a ride in the car with wife and children is a good idea ? He was using them as human shields. And that's another act of terrorism HE has committed. Period. And I am sick and tired of parallels between Israel's self-defense and the terrorism of the arabs. They moved war in 1948, in 1956, in 1967, in 1972 to destroy Israel and still Israel has not destroyed them as they deserve. Then they started with the terrorism. And still Israel has not destroyed them. If it were a one to one thing and you had attacked me all these times, you would be dead. But for the european leftists the war is allowed only for the arabs, the Israelis are criminals if they defend themselves. |
| Posted by: Poitiers 2003-06-12 13:05:20 |
| #4 "Sins of the fathers being visited on the children" seems of course to be the justification that the various terrorists/suicide bombers of Hamas and similar organizations are also using for the massacres of innocents... |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2003-06-12 12:47:12 |
| #3 Hamas,Al Aqasa,Hezbolla,etc. absolutly no mercy,no quarter.2 choices lay down your arms or die,if you hide amongst your familys or other civilians it be on your heads.Hamas and the rest have stated loud and often the only peace they want is the total and complete destruction of Israel,they(not Israel)have declared Total War. I don't want to hear but that is terrorisam,not even in the same ball park.I don't see Israel targetting buses,and pizza parlors. |
| Posted by: raptor 6/12/2003 3:45:34 PM |
| #2 In most places, resistance fighters leave their wives and kids behind and assume noms de guerre in order to avoid having them caught in a crossfire. These guys not only openly conduct their operations under their own names - they live and go out with their families. If Palestinian terrorists selfishly choose the company of their kin over the personal safety of that kin, that's their funeral. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 6/12/2003 1:57:58 PM |
| #1 nice moral equivalence Aris. Unfortunately, the innocents in the buses are not being held tight around Sharon or Barak or other high-ranking Israelis as human shields. The Paleo killers are cowards and scum, and there is no moral equivalence. I'm sure his daughter would've been sent out as a martyr (yeah, right...that's only for the other families). Damn shame she was born to a piece of shit like this, but sometimes human shields don't work. |
| Posted by: Frank G 6/12/2003 1:08:44 PM |