But when I stand in front of it with flags...
But how will they see me when I am in protesting in front of it waving flags?
Somehow I'm reminded of this.
The Israeli armed forces have announced plans to double their existing force of robot bulldozers, after unmanned "Black Thunder" droid diggers apparently covered themselves with glory during the recent Gaza incursion. The IDF armoured version of the Caterpillar D9 bulldozer An IDF killdozer in a quiet moment. According to …
As it's mostly used against civilian buildings, the armour was probably added to stop stone-throwers having a go at the driver. But obviously improvised devices are all the rage these days
As with all tracked vehicles, the tracks are the things to target, still exposed on these dozers according to that pic.
Now Mek-Quake, he was a Killdozer!
If the movies have taught us anything, its that track based machines can be stopped by a sock bomb to the tracks.
Turns it into just another roadblock. Just need a way of blinding all the snipers protecting said killdozer....
Mines the one with the socks and tub of grease in the pocket
"No, but short of antitank weaponry you won't be slowing this thing down much. And if you blow it up, what exactly have you accomplished? It isn't like killing an enemy soldier, or even a military transport or combat vehicle."
Resource exhaustion. A D9 isn't cheap, you know. Blow up enough of them and you start to drain the resources of your foe. At minimum, you can at least really annoy them.
Exhaust pipe? You mean "Thermal Exhaust Port", surely?
And how come military machines are always so freakin' dull? Come on, guys! Paint a tail motif on the back of it, dress it up as a dragon! At least paint a whole load of Cyberdyne logos all over it...
I mean it's not like it's particularly stealthy. Why not make the final moments of your targets a little more interesting?
OMG! I can't believe The Followers of Saint Rachel The Pancake can spare the time from telling the rest of the World how to live their lives to actually read an Internet website dedicated to IT! Amazing! Aren't you all supposed to be out spending your benefit money protesting the G20 conference this week?
The D9 is heavily armoured as it regularly gets attacked with RPGs, Sagger ATGMs, AT mines and roadside IEDs. If all you had to worry about was stones you'd just use an unarmoured D7. The D9 is used by the Israelis to clear the camouflague and rubble used to hide arm caches, tunnels and IEDs, and Hamas and co hate them because they are very good at it. They also are very useful for persuading jihadis to leave buildings they have vowed to stay in until they are martyred - hilariously, all the D9 has to do is push one corner of a house for all those lightweight martyrs to come rushing out! Another interesting use found in the recent Op Cast Lead was that if a D9 was used to shake a building it also detonated many of the boobytraps set by Hamas. The Israelis have found it's also very good for clearing illegal settlements in the West Bank, but strangely you don't see any complaints from the Pancakers about that.
It is so successful that the US has used them in Iraq (yeah, that's right, frothing Libtards, your tax dollars paid for your GIs to use these too). They proved their worth in Fallujah, amongst other combat operations. In fact, the US had the original D9 and lighter D7 in Vietnam long before the Israelis got them.
And for the Followers of Saint Pancake that want to follow in her footsteps (or should that be scrape marks), first you have to go stand in front of a concealed weapon cache or smugglers tunnel in Gaza, ignore polite requests to stay out of the way from Israeli troops, then be stupid enough to stand in a spot where the driver can't see you (because of all the armour that stops your Hamas buddies from shooting him). Burning your own flag beforehand is optional but sets the right tome of gormless self-hate. Follow these simple steps and you too can become a propaganda "martyr" to the cause of Hamas, the same people that celebrated when the jets hit on 9/11! Please hurry up, you're just wasting resources here at home. Oh, and warn your parents that travelling to Gaza after your martyrdom can be a bit risky - the Corries were nearly kidnapped by gunmen during their visit, but I hear the people responsible were Fatah-alligned so they've probably been killed by Hamas anyway.
Yes, that's right, Rachael Corrie was the only person to die at the hands of the IDF. I bet she was hard to see in her flourescent jacket by those IDF observers sitting in full view of her and the bulldozer. Maybe one day you'll get off your fat 'ass' and protest about something. Preferably something you understand in a country you can find on a map. Ah, I see your problem there...
Not to mention the amazing revelation that the US supply Israel with stuff to commit warcrimes with. Well, you are well informed. Thanks for reinforcing stereotypes about American Idiots though. Just when you'd gained some respect for electing a non-retarded President as well.
... as the Israelis love to say. A remote controlled 60-ton armoured bulldozer is going to go a long way towards bolstering that rather shaky premise. Like so many of Israels 'proportionate' and 'reasonable' actions, it probably all looks very reasonable and proportionate in the context of the Israeli national discourse. But, like the guy caught having sex with a bicycle, looks a little less so to the average, sane, observer.
Still, as the old saying goes in Israeli politics, "there's no lost votes in killing Arabs". Or in flattening their hovels, apparently.
Joke Alert, cos in a normal world, this would be the April Fool
Lol, I thought you lot gave up when your comic suit against Caterpillar got thrown out for it's obvious political and frivolous overtones? Of course, you guys never focus on the use of the D7 and D9 for such life-saving operations as firefighting (the robotic one was actually developed originally for use in fighting fires where an operator would most likely be cooked). People like you make me want to go out and buy a D9 just to keep the money flowing in to Caterpillar. Hey, now there's a thought - would be great for sorting out the garden! Bit slow for the daily commute, though.
The reason the Israelis have switched to the robot model is because they have lost several D9s to very large IEDs, and unlike the Palestinians, the IDF tries to protect their people (the Palestinians are happy for more "martyrs", especially white Amercians or Brits via the ISM.) In Gaza, the explosives for such IEDs are smuggled in through the tunnels under the borders to Egypt. When Israel controlled the Gaza Strip and created the Phillidelphi Corridor, it was in direct response to the smuggling in via tunnels of weapons, explosives and rockets used by Hamas, Fatah, and Islamic Jihad to attack civillian targets in Israel. Rachel Corrie died accidentally (even the ISM witnesses admit she panicked and wasn't trying to "martyr" herself) because she thought she was defending Palestinian homes - the reality was she died protecting terrorists that delight in shooting rockets at schools, and they have milked her death ever since for their propaganda.
Let me guess, you're a fully-paid-up believer that the ISM are some sort of Ghandi-like group of like-minded hippies, just out to "protect" the "poor, oppressed Palestinians"? So, did they tell you that in March 2003, fugitive Islamic Jihad terrorist Shadi Sukiya was arrested in a house the ISM rented in Jenin? The ISM version was that Sukiya went "door to door, looking for refuge from the Israelis" - the reality was he went straight to where he knew he would get shelter and protection. Unluckily for him his ISM buddies weren't as good liars as he thought they were, and the Israelis searched the building and found the brave jihadi hiding behind his friendly ISM human shields. For such a commited jihadi, he didn't put up a fight - when he was warned the Israelis were coming he dumped his weapons and ran to hide. A planner of suicide bombings targeted to kill Israeli civillians (note, not soldiers), he must have been much more comfortable sending others to "martyr" themselves.
Like the two suicide bombers from the UK - Asif Mohammed Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif - who got into Israel through the ISM, went straight to meet with the ISM, and then went on to blow up Mike’s Place, a bar in Tel Aviv, killing three people and wounding more than fifty in the process. Nice friends you have! Both Hanif and Sharif were carefully groomed for their roles in Internet chat rooms and at Islamic websites by those that knew "British" bombers would make much better news than just ordinary Palestinians.
But to get back to the Rachel Corrie myth, did they tell you she was "protecting the home of pharmacist Samir Nasrallah"? Bet they forgot to tell you she was actually over one hundred yards from the building when she stupidly decided to play chicken with the D9, which wasn't even facing the pharmacists building. And did they forget to mention the dozer was actually clearing scrub in the area so that the accompanying Israeli troops could search for IEDs, arm caches and tunnels? No, I guessed not. Or that she probably died because her ISM colleagues were so busy distracting the accompanying soldiers there was no-one to warn the dozer driver that she had got herself stuck in the rubble under one of the dozer's blindspots, so the driver couldn't see her? Quite ironic really that she probably died due to the nuisance actions she and her colleagues pursued.
Well, here's a tip - when you decide to emulate Saint Pancake, I suggest you check first if the D9 is a manned or robot one. You see, the robot ones are completely reliant on cameras manned by a remote operator, and there is already the suspicion that this will actually make the blindspots worse rather than better. As a last warning, please note the robotic one doesn't have a camera right over the blade looking down for the naive trapped in rubble and going under the vehicle.
"Yes, that's right, Rachael Corrie was the only person to die at the hands of the IDF. I bet she was hard to see in her flourescent jacket by those IDF observers sitting in full view of her and the bulldozer....." Try a little background reading - the accompanying soldiers were in a closed-down APC due to the risk of snipers that had previously used such protests to target IDF soldiers. Rachel's ISM colleagues were also distracting the APC and D9 crew - the D9 crew were actually looking to the rear as to check where the ISM twits were when Rachel went under the vehicle. If they hadn't been distracting the crews the tragedy might have been avoided. But then you wouldn't have your "martyr" to howl about.
".....Maybe one day you'll get off your fat 'ass' and protest about something....." I did my student days, I did my protests, and it opened my eyes as to how many of these groups use the naive for their own political ends.
".....Preferably something you understand in a country you can find on a map. Ah, I see your problem there...." Jokes on you! I've actually been to Israel. And Bahrain, Saudi, Quatar, Abu Dhabi, Oman, Dhubai and Sharjah in the UAE, and Egypt. Bet you haven't even been close to any of those countries.
".....Not to mention the amazing revelation that the US supply Israel with stuff to commit warcrimes with....." So how is Rachel Corrie's death a warcrime, it was more a crime of immense stupidity on her parents part that they could let her get engaged with such people as the ISM. And let's not even discuss the smuggling tunnels she was shielding, which are used to bring in the rockets purposely shot at civillians in Israel (which, by the way, is a definate warcrime).
"....Well, you are well informed....." Obviously better than you. Did you do anything other than browse Indymedia before posting here?
"....Thanks for reinforcing stereotypes about American Idiots though...." Even more of a LOL - I'm British! Are you struggling to type with that big chip on your shoulder? Actually, sounds like you have a whole load of chips up there! Not surprising then that you have such a problem getting a realistic view of the World.
"....Just when you'd gained some respect for electing a non-retarded President as well." Sorry, can't take any credit for that, but if it pains you more I'll admit to voting for Maggie Thatcher! Twice (I missed the '79 election as I was in the Middle East at the time)!
RE: Martin Lyne
"You lack of sensitivity is astonishing...." Interesting - it's OK to talk of her death as long as it's in reverant tones? So, she got herself crushed by accident and that somehow makes her too holy to poke fun at? You must be a real drag whenever they discuss the Darwin Awards in your office! Or is it that you think she's above humour because of her politics? Would you be OK with the humour if it was Dick Cheney that got run over? I seem to recall many such a coments on websites by sensitive, moral souls like yourselves wishing all kinds of nasty fates on Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, etc, etc. Do I detect a little double standard here?
I do commend the inclusion of the wiki link though, it is one of the few relatively balanced accounts available, though it does leave out some points. The majority of others are so biased one way or the other you have to read a dozen from each side to get most of the facts.
RE: cassidy macfarlane
"Regardless of your personal opinion of the IDF vs Hamas in Palestine/Gaza, I find it immensely tasteless and shocking that you refer to the person killed by one of the 'dozers' as flippantly as you do....." But you think it's fine for pictures of her dying body to be constantly used in attempts to smear the IDF as "killers of unarmed protestors". Even the ISM have (finally) stopped insisting her death was deliberate. Can we say "hypocritical"? Grow up! Death is usually nasty and horrid, even when it's not accompanied by immense idiocy. Would you think it smart to play chicken with a D9? If you were the parents, would you then feel driven to tour the World telling all you were so proud of your daughter when there are a million other ways she could have been of real benefit to the World? Ignoring the ways she could have been a productive citizen at home in the US, if she wanted the thrill of travel and "saving the World" she could have used her time and energies defusing landmines in Cambodia, or driving food across Ethiopia to the starving, or even bringing healthcare to the poor of Gaza. But instead, she chose to actively try and obstruct a democraticly elected government from trying to prevent rocket attacks on their civillians by entering a dangerous warzone and playing chicken with an armoured D9. I'm sure that in doing so she was "striking a blow against Zionist Israel" had nothing to do with her choice. Of course, she was relying on the same democratically elected "Zionist" country's laws to keep her safe - I don't see the ISM protesting in countries like Iran, North Korea, Mozambique or even China, where they can't bank on the same decency to keep them out of prison. What do you think Mugabe used to flatten the shantytowns, a lawn roller? Rachel Corrie's unfortunate death was largely her own doing, aided by the manipulations of the ISM and her obtuse parents. If you don't think humour is fitting then I can type a scathing appraisal of such a naive, stupid and senseless waste of a young person's life.
And if I were her parents, I wouldn't have tried suing Caterpillar, I'd have been suing the ISM for deliberately endangering my daughter for their own political ends.
But give me a Military spec JCB any day :D
And regarding the Rachel Corrie affair, from what I can see (as an Impartial welshman) she was there of her own choice and decided to stand in front of 40-odd metric tonnes of armorued earthmoving equipment in a warzone, not usually the plan of action for a long, healthy life.
Sorry, but Matt is right.
Corrie's death is the result of the rebellious student mindset taken to the absolute extreme. When people are young, particularly around university age they want to stick it to the man. That means supporting a cause that's unpopular.
Most people support causes like we're seeing in London today such as anti-globalisation, extreme green agendas and that sort of thing. They go out and protest, maybe join in if it gets a bit out of hand and might go as far as smashing a shop window, but other than that they then go home, maybe do this a few times more over the next few years, then they grow up and often realise their view was idiotic and naive.
In the recent spat between Israel and the Palestinians something like what, 1200 Palestinians and 13 Israelis died? We had uproar over that, whilst in the meantime we've heard fuck all on Darfur where 200,000 have died and 1 - 2million displaced. Of these many have been raped, maimed and pretty much all of them are entirely innocent civilians. The same cannot be said for Hamas where the Israelis at least don't go in and cut a whole villages hands off and rape all the women and so on and where Hamas are absolutely not an innocent party. If these protestors really cared about making the world a better place and really had a clue about what's wrong with the world they'd start with stuff like this, where things are much more clear cut and much more tragic.
I find it rather odd the idea that the IDF are evil because they ran her over. It's a fucking bulldozer, a massive fucking armoured bulldozer and not the fastest moving vehicle on earth. You have to be pretty stupid to get yourself run over by something like this. This is a tragic case of the most extreme of young protesters supporting a cause they have no real understanding about to stick it to the man and getting themselves killed through sheer stupidity.
The only part I don't agree with Matt is your used of "LibTards"! I'm as liberal as they come, but don't disagree with your points! In fact, a Liberal viewpoint will generally involve letting things sort themselves out, which is arguably what happened here - a problem (a foolish and ignorant protestor) sorted itself out. What you have a problem with Matt is stupidity, and unfortunately stupidity effects all philosophical leanings.
The sooner we stop making it cool to fight against the man to people who are too young and too naive to know why things are the way they are the better. Look at the kid arrested in the armoured vehicle in London today - another fine example of someone too young and too naive to know what he's doing, and now he's been arrested because he had a police uniform and it's illegal to impersonate a police officer. Great start to his adult life that could've been avoided if he had even an ounce of common sense and didn't subscribe to ignorance all for the sake of fighting the man.
The world is very fucked up when Darfur is not an acceptable cause because the man agrees it's a problem and so it's not a cool cause but supporting terrorists is however acceptable because they too are fighting against the man and that's apparently cool.
"OK, judging from a quick perusal of your previous comments on stories in el reg, it is quite patently obvious you are misguided, or a troll (or both)....." OK, I can probably admit to the anti-Sun trolling, but who exactly am I supposed to be trolling for here, Caterpillar?
"....You do not seem to care about the insensitive tone of your comments, and are obviously some sort of daily fail-reading twat...." Sorry, but I actually don't read newspapers, I get my news and opinion from a variety of websources from both sides of the political divide. Shame, you'll have to formulate a new stereotype to pigeonhole people with. Or maybe that should be wait for someone to give you a new stereotype seeing as you seem incapable of formulating any original thought.
"....You have made up a highly offensive nickname for a civilian needlessly killed by overzealous IDF actions..." Firstly, the sarcastic title "Saint Rachel of The Pancake" appeared on American websites years ago, so I can't claim any original work there. I just know it winds up people like you. Secondly, Rachel died because she took her game of chicken too far. If anyone was overzealous it was her.
"....and when reasonable people complain or point out your apparent lack of empathy, you repeat your slurs...." I'm guessing you only label people that agree with your point of view as either reasonable or empathic. Can't say I'm upset as I really wouldn't think myself at all reasonable if I managed your level of obtuseness.
"....You have also piped up with a load of unsubstantiated information, designed to further annoy and 'wind up' the majority of people who read the register...." Unsubstantiated? Which bit? Would you like reference links to really show up your ignorant and biased bigotry? Hold on a sec, I anticipate a big admission of lack of knowledge hiding somewhere soon in your replies.....
"....you are a troll. fuck off back under your bridge...." You are obviously well-versed in the art of debate - not! Still, not surprised you'd sink to that level so soon.
"....dick." I though your name was Cassidy?
And on to your feeble attempt at round three!
"Whatever, sheesh, I think you have issues....." Everyone's entitled to their opinion in a democracy. Mine of you, for instance, is that you are naive and uninformed, but then maybe that will change when you get out of school, get some real life experiences, and maybe develop the mental capability for objective thought.
".....I could break down your arguments, but what's the point? I dont have the time nor the inclination to clash heads with such an ignoramus....." Hmmmm, I suspect that translates to "Whoa! In my tight-knit little group of the like-minded and hip I've never had anyone question the validity of what others have told me is The Truth. Cr*p, I don't know how to formulate an argument - real discussion isn't tolerated here, it's just so uncool - I'd best just act blase and pretend I don't care!" Evidently, you think Rachel Corrie's death is important, just not important enough to mount any kind of defence that requires independent thought.
"....You obviously have lots of time to sit and write screeds and screeds about the 'ISM' (which I was not familiar with before today)....." Took about five minutes. Oh, and is that the admission of complete ignorance I predicted? Spot on! Don't you do any research before wading in and defending someone that "died for a cause", just to make sure you understand what that cause is all about? Or do you just pick the causes others tell you are "cool"? Can't say I'm surprised, but it does give a lie to your saying "I could break down your arguments" when you haven't even heard of the ISM. In future, I suggest a little preparation before you start digging yourself such a big hole to climb out of, otherwise you will look like - how did you put it? - an ignoramus!
"....Some of us have jobs to do....do you?" Yeah, quite a nice job, actually, with one of those big, nasty, capitalist corporations. Hope that winds you up some more! But today, in anticipation of the lunatic antics of your like-minded anti-G20 chums, I'm on holiday, so I have plenty of spare time to expose people like you.
Let's just make it clear for you lot from the Indymedia fringe - this is a technical website, and the readers are largely tech types. We specialise in sarcastic humour, bad-taste jokes and the kind of "wrong-minded thought" that will make the PC brigade like you lot blanche. We all also read a lot, and can craft an accurate websearch faster than you can say antidisestablishmentarialism, which means we will know what we're talking about. Heck, we invented the flamewar whilst you dweebs were busy pretend debating Vietnam/capitalism/globalisation/whatever-was-popular-flavour-of-the-week-in-protest-land. We also like our heavy-metal death-pr0n, and will be unamused if you interupt our mech worshipping with political propaganda pieces, so don't be surprised if you get highly offensive and annoyingly accurate posts exposing your stupidity.
By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 1st April 2009 13:52 GMT:
"Matt = Truth. Sorry, but Matt is right."
By Billy Posted Wednesday 1st April 2009 14:31 GMT
"cassidy macfarlane is the ignoramus"
"Must be a bit of a deterrent to the suicide bomber knowing that to destroy an Israeli robot will only get him 70 inflateable virgin vinyl sex dolls in paradise."
@Matt Bryant - cant say I agree with you but your arguments are well backed up.
@Everyone not agreeing with matt bryant - His style of dialogue is confrentational and he voted for thatcher twice - of course he is not going to apoligise or be nice to you.
On the article itself - The only place Ive seen a machine like that is the pages of 2000ad - all our tech - electric cars , flying cars , fighter drones, arial drones and now utility vehicles are all looking more like the future we were promised/warned about. Im not sure if I should be worried about that .
Dear Matt - I have never seen anyone bend over so far to swallow the Israeli 'defence' force version. Erh Matt 'shaking houses to make the bombs go off' - yup, thats called bulldozing. To be honest we could sit here swapping facts all night long - the way you blame the media for not endorsing your position demonstrates what I call 'conspiracy theory logic' (I'm a psychiatrist). You'll never admit you're wrong because if you are - it's the media's fault for telling the wrong story!
I think your tasteless disregard for a human life tells us all we need to know about you and people like you, and your stories will be interpreted with that in mind.
Other examples of humour which Matt might enjoy are the IDF's habit of commissioning T-shirts glorifying the deaths of Palestinian women and children. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7960071.stm
I'm not angry, I just feel sorry for you.
Someone disagrees with you ooh their so evil and wrong- only you have a monopoly on being right. Listen to yourself will you?
Well I disagree with you too and the Media especially the BBC is pretty feckin far from neutral. Try googling the Balen report - even they think they are biased!.
Ask yourself how Pallywood operates. Ask yourself why Arabs can live in Israel safely but Jews cannot live in Arab Countries. Try asking questions.
As I said earlier, everyone is entitled to their opinion in a democracy. My opinion is that you can't be a very good psychiatrist as I've always thought you had to be capable of comprehending a persons thoughts from their words before making a prognosis, not just jumping to pat conclusions that suit your own preferences. You base your whole idea of "conspiracy theory logic" reagarding the media on my simply saying I don't read the newspapers - that is not due to some paranoid fear of the papers and whether they are trying to force-feed me a certain point of view, it's simply that I'm too tight to pay out for a paper when I can get dozens of news sources for free off the Web (including many newspapers' websites). Of course, it could be what I wrote was irrellevant and you just label anyone with a contradictory view as "suffering from a condition".
It's also very revealing that, having made your presumptive diagnosis, you then immediately move to discredit anything I posted by saying; "I think your tasteless disregard for a human life tells us all we need to know about you and people like you, and your stories will be interpreted with that in mind." And I always thought a good psychiatrist sought to aid, not condemn. Now I feel really sorry for your patients. That's if you even are a psychiatrist.
Sorry, but either way it looks like it's back to medschool for you!
All people disagreeing with Matt if you can stop just slinging mud and name calling and take your time to express your view maybe people may take a little more serious your comments, as the general El Reg reader has a brain (well that is until they read the BOFH and realise its Friday and time for the pub) on there shoulders (working in the IT industry generally but not always requires a brain) then i may listen, until then i'm sorry i may not agree with everything Matt says as the IDF are not angels but he makes very valid points and if i'm making my own mind up i'm going with the well thought out response and not the 'your an idiot post'.
Look at the broader picture. In 1948, it was all desert and they moved in a bunch of displaced Jews. They toiled and made the land flow with milk and honey. The Arabs were there the last 17 centuries and what did they do? And all they can think of is a convenient excuse to takeover the fruit of someone else' labor. All they can preach is "kill the infidel". Can't they say "build your own house and keep it in order". Little wonder all the poorest countries are muslim countries. And the ummah (greater muslim nation) aren't even lifting a pinky to help. It's all "I'm holier than thou". Anyway, in the muslim calendar, the year is 1430, and their year is 354 days in length only.
re: Matt Bryant and "I could break down your arguments"...It is blatantly obvious that you couldn't, can't, won't and never will. Emotional rants supporting fashionable fads substituting for having a clue are like vampires - don't do too well in sunshine.
Roswell - 'cause a similar logic stream is involved.
I've never seen such a hilarious display!
Quite simply, Matt is coherently forming an argument which appears to contain facts. I wouldn't ever ask him to reference these facts because it's a damn comments thread.
Everyone else that disagrees with Matt appear to be completely incapable of forming anything but what I'm now quite convinced is a misguided opinion.
As for my opinion? Good for you guys, Israel. It's quite a technological achievement and I hope it saves many of your soldiers' (and ultimately civilians') lives. Shame on any clownshoes that opts to get in the way of your noble pursuits of happiness.
..It's an observation, not a diagnosis. You've had more space than anyone else on this forum so you need to take some responsibility for how you have chosen to depict yourself.
Anon coward 1 - thanks for proving my point. If you have read the Balen report I'd love to see the link. My understanding is that no one outside the BBC has seen it yet.
Anon coward 2- I assume this is a spoof?
Another presumption - you immediatley assumed I had to be in some frothing rage, when the reality is you and your buddies are, at most, mild annoyances providing a bit of humour on a slow day. Is it easier for you to assume anyone that posts counter to your own thoughts is ranting? Have you actually ever debated anything? I'm coming to my own presumption that you have led a very sheltered life.
"....You've had more space than anyone else on this forum so you need to take some responsibility for how you have chosen to depict yourself....." Actually you can have as much space as you like. Well, up to the point where Ms Bee starts only letting you post about ice-cream. There is nothing stopping you posting as much material, conjecture or presumptions as you like. Don't blame me if you can't string a coherent argument together after you waded in on your moral hobbyhorse.
Violent uprising might be fine if you live in somewhere where there aren't elected leaders or a free society.
Israel already gets so much flack for what it does. Imagine how much flack it'd get if no one was launching rockets into their civilian population? You know, so much that it might actually stop. I suppose that'd be less romantic, and you know, actually stop the problem.
And yeah, go on and tell me about all the human rights abuses Israel has commited, or how more Palastinians have died than Israelis, and how the Israeli settlers shouldn't be there. I'll probably even agree with you. Israel gets away with it because they're constantly under attack. If they weren't, they would have NO support. It's so easy to paint one side as being evil, though, isn't it?
Actually, I think the balance of blame is in the 60%-40% region. With it being 60% for the Palestinians and 40% for the Israeli's circa 1990. Now it has shifted to 60% for the Israeli's and 40% for the Palestinians.
And as for the Palestinians not fighting? If they weren't fighting they would lose. It would be 2nd class citizenship for Palestinians, think Alabama in the 30's.
Of course, the Israeli's can't stop fighting either, not with settlers getting hit with rockets.
Both sides have a lot of blame to bear, and any solution will require action on both sides.
Ever heard of proportionality? While I do not wish in any sense of the word to condone the actions of Islamic hotheads, there is a grim statistic which is borne out by recent conflicts.
1:100 - The ratio of Israeli deaths to Palestinian deaths.
For every civilian killed by Palestinian rockets, one hundred Palestinians will be killed via Israeli attacks. The ratio of civilian to militant Palestinians is probably impossible to even estimate - the whole point of guerilla warfare is that the militants blend into the community, so until they actually wield their weapon, it is impossible to distinguish militant from civilian. As for why people are tempted into militancy, perhaps the 80+% unemployment rate in Gaza plays a factor. After all, if young local men were gainfully employed in full time jobs, would they be able to spend as much time building rockets and firing them North or East?
It's also worth remembering that Israel has had numerous UN resolutions proposed against it since 1948, pretty much all of which have been blocked by Israel's most powerfully ally - the US.
However, despite all the gestures to the media, neither side appears interested in peaceful co-existence. Each side has distrusted the other since 1948 (and I suppose for the past few thousand years, as evidenced by a cursory glance at the Judeo-Christian religious texts) - and documentaries have shown that schoolchildren on both sides are taught that the opposition is evil / subhuman / no right to live on the land etc.
Israel has consistently refused to legally define its borders, and many politicians have gone on record as desiring a larger area than that defined by the UN 'Green Line' - from the relatively conservative line being marked out by the "Security Fence" to politicians wanting the Gaza Strip and West Bank to be part of a unified Jewish state, to those (mainly from previous decades) wanting the whole of Transjordan as well.
Similarly, many Palestinian politicans have gone on record (and received more media attention) for wishing the exact opposite - a (conservative) Islamic state.
Fatah have adopted a more moderate line recently, but many Palestinians associate them with being corrupt and inefficient . Besides which, when they had democratic elections a few years back (which IIRC were certified as free and fair), Hamas won.
It has to be remembered that Hamas isn't just a bunch of military hotheads - one of the main reasons they have such high levels of support amongst the population is their extensive social welfare network. Which has caused problems for several charities working in Gaza and the West Bank - Israel and the international have often shut them down even though they are not associated in any way with Hamas, on the merest (unsubstantiated) suspicion that funds may find their way into the wrong hands.
Due in part to their history, many Israelis are paranoid about their state - as they have been engaged in numerous conflicts with their neighbours over the past few thousand years they regard any attack on their territory as a direct threat to the very existence of their state. Their ideal scenario for surrounding states is for them to be either demilitarised or run by puppet governments who will always back Israel's stance on any issue. Check out their vision for the Palestinian half of the "two state solution" - completely demilitarised, with Israel retaining some settlements and "strategic corridors", some internal checkpoints remaining, and definitely checkpoints at all points of entry into Israel.
The other fallacy of a two state solution is Gaza - how could the Palestinian administration in the West Bank effectively administer a satellite territory to which they wouldn't be able to access?
Well, congrats to you guys for turning a forum on a mech article on a tech site into another home-from-home for your fashionable political outrage. You obviously didn't understand the bit where I politley asked you to go have sexual intercourse somewhere else.
"Actually, I think the balance of blame is in the 60%-40% region. With it being 60% for the Palestinians and 40% for the Israeli's circa 1990. Now it has shifted to 60% for the Israeli's and 40% for the Palestinians...." And with no reasoned argument to back up your "thinking". What exactly do you perceive as an being the reason for blame shifting more to Israel than the Palestinians?
"....And as for the Palestinians not fighting? If they weren't fighting they would lose. It would be 2nd class citizenship for Palestinians, think Alabama in the 30's...." Actually, the "Palestinians" that didn't leave Israel in 1948 are full Israeli citizens. As such they have access to far better healthcare, education and employment prospects than any "Palestinian" in either the West Bank, Gaza, or neighbouring Arab countries, with Israeli Arabs as members of the Knesset.
"....Of course, the Israeli's can't stop fighting either, not with settlers getting hit with rockets....." The rockets are being fired by HAMAS and co out of the Gaza Strip into the internationally recognised country of Israel. The rockets are not being fired at the settlers, they are being deliberately trageted at civillians in Israeli towns. Places like Ashkelon and Sderot are not settlements in any way, the settlers were all pulled out of the Strip in 2005. Your poor grasp of geography is not doing much to convince me of your "60-40" blame statement.
"....Both sides have a lot of blame to bear, and any solution will require action on both sides." A rather unconvincing close, still with no justification for blaming Israel more than the Palestinians. I suggest you try a LOT more historical reading before you try debating that one again.
"Ever heard of proportionality? While I do not wish in any sense of the word to condone the actions of Islamic hotheads, there is a grim statistic which is borne out by recent conflicts.
1:100 - The ratio of Israeli deaths to Palestinian death..."
So exactly how many Israelis need to die compared to Palestinians for you to be happy? Surely the best result would be none dying and all pursuing peaceful lives? Kind of hard when one party keeps firing rockets at your cities. Let's put it another way - when the UN-backed troops fought Saddam in 1991, did you think there needed to be an acceptable ratio of UN troops killed for each Iraqi? Why do you think the US-led UN op managed what was effectively as high as a 1000:1 death ratio? Because the US-led troops had better equipment, tactics and were better led. So why should the Israelis surrender their superior equipment, intelligence and training just because HAMAS can't match it? Israel went into the Strip determined to avoid losses of their own troops and hoping to avoid civillian casualties. HAMAS operates on the principle of killing as many Israelis as possible, be they civillians or military, and doesn't seem to care about the cost to their own people. Any Palestinian that is killed by Israel is simply recreated as a "martyr" for the international propaganda theatre. Given the demographics of the area, accepting a 1:1 death ratio would be suicidal to Israel, as it has been in every conflict they have been involved in since 1948.
"For every civilian killed by Palestinian rockets, one hundred Palestinians will be killed via Israeli attacks...." Ignoring the fact that Israeli strikes target known "millitants" whereas HAMAS and co don't care who they kill, let's not forget the numbers killed in inter-factional and inter-clan fighting. Indeed, up until Op Cast Lead, the largest killer of Gazans since the 2005 withdrawl has been other Palestinians, with HAMAS being the worst culprit. Even the UN admits to at least 256 Palestinians killed by other Palestinians so far in 2009 alone! At that rate, the Palestinians will have surpassed Op Cast Lead by the end of the year, without the Israelis lifting a finger.
"....The ratio of civilian to militant Palestinians is probably impossible to even estimate - the whole point of guerilla warfare is that the militants blend into the community, so until they actually wield their weapon, it is impossible to distinguish militant from civilian...." So if HAMAS cared so deeply about their people, surely they wouldn't hide in civillian areas, use civillians as human shields, or base their headquarters in hospitals. Face facts - if Israel really didn't care they could have surrounded Gaza City, flattened it with artillery fire and bombing, and slaughtered any Palestinian attempt at a breakout in the open ground. The fact that even the average Gazans on the street didn't expect that to happen speaks volumes about how much they realise the Israelis are not out to kill them all. In fact, even during the fighting, Israeli hospitals were treating the sick from Gaza as well as the injured from both sides!
"....As for why people are tempted into militancy, perhaps the 80+% unemployment rate in Gaza plays a factor....." In fact, the UN's economic statistics say that the average Palestinian - West Bank included - was better off before the first Intifada. The rise in suicide bombings and consequent Israeli security measures not only damaged the local economies of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, it stopped those same young Palestinians gaining employment in Israel which has a more developed economy than any Arab nation. In short, HAMAS and the PA have both managed to create their massive unemployment problem, in HAMAS's case probably deliberately as young, bored and demotivated people both make easier converts to suicide bombings and become completely dependent on you for their livelyhood. But before we get too weepy over all those "poor Palestinians", please don't forget to mention that the Palestinains are the most subsidised people in the World. Per capita they get more aid from the US, EU, UN and sundry other NGOs and charities than any other population on the planet. And still they won't focus on building a viable country, they'd rather kill Jews or each other. Strange when you condsider the UN reckons up to 50% of Gazans are dependent on UN food hand-outs.
"....It's also worth remembering that Israel has had numerous UN resolutions proposed against it since 1948, pretty much all of which have been blocked by Israel's most powerfully ally - the US...." <Yawn> Any member in the UN can propose a resolution. Most don't even reach the Security Council as none of the Council members will back them. Are you seriously trying to tell me you're surprised the Islamic countries have failed to get resolutions against Israel passed because you think every one was justified? I'll tell you what - you go away, check all the resolutions, then write out why you think they should have been accepted and enacted. Don't cheat and just copy others, research the background, content and proposer of each resoluton and produce some original argument. That should at least give the rest of us a few years peace and quiet.
"...However, despite all the gestures to the media, neither side appears interested in peaceful co-existence....." Israel accpeted the UN-mandated and much smaller than promised State of Israel, based on land already owned by Jews occupied and owned by Jews in Palestine, in 1948. The Palestinians and Arabs wouldn't accept any State of Israel at all. Until the Egyptians made peace in 1978, trying to broker peace with Israel was a swift way of getting killed by other Arabs (just ask the Jordanians).
"....Each side has distrusted the other since 1948 (and I suppose for the past few thousand years, as evidenced by a cursory glance at the Judeo-Christian religious texts) - and documentaries have shown that schoolchildren on both sides are taught that the opposition is evil / subhuman / no right to live on the land etc...." One; I'm not religeous, so you're barking up the wrong tree. Two; I'm guessing your "cursory glance" was as fleeting as dave's reading of modern history.
The rest of your post can be summarised as "HAMAS are just a cuddly-fluffy-bunny charity, Fatah are thieves, and Israelis are just land-grabbing paranoids, if only they could all get along everything would be so gosh-darn wonderful!"
HAMAS gets the majority of their funds and weapons from Iran, which established HAMAS in 1987 in an attempt to copy their success with Hizbullah in Lebanon. Sheikh Yassin never made any secret that he received his backing from Iran, or that he had no intention of any peaceful settlement with Israel. Sheikh Yassin, formerly a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, formed HAMAS because he was unhappy at the PLO's negotiating with Israel. The "charitable" work done by HAMAS was a copy of the tactics used by Hizbullah, to enforce support amongst the population whilst they attacked opponents (including charities that already supplied many services HAMAS wanted to run) - the old carrot and the stick approach, only you also drive out anyone else likely to have a carrot. Fatah and HAMAS support is mainly clan-based, and in Gaza HAMAS managed to boost support amongst the larger clans not alligned to Fatah to the point where they could take control. In the West Bank, Fatah still has enough support amongst their clans to suppress HAMAS. Both use nepotism and favour to maintain that support. Fatah has been doing it for more than thirty years, hence the wide reporting of their corruption, but HAMAS have proven just as bad. Both use their "police" to intimidate, imprison and murder their political opponents. Not much of a choice for Palestinian voters, and given boths murdering of political opponents, it is unlikley any time soon that a "third way" party will be starting up in Gaza.
But to get back to the article - you only need tools like robotic D9s when you mean to send troops into civillian areas to ensure you are targetting the right people, their smuggling tunnels, arm caches and IEDs. If the Israelis just wanted to destroy buildings in Gaza and kill indescriminantly without risking their troops, they'd do it from over the border with a laser-guided 155mm shell or a Predator-launched missile.
Yes, Matt, do let's get back to the article
I do not condone the actions of the Palestinian behind the original attack, but the IDF pulling down his house about a year later as (in their own words) a 'deterrent' surely gives the lie to the notion that the IDF only ever bulldoze (Sorry, 'rock gently') arms caches, tunnels etc. Or are you calling the IDF liars? Shame on you for even thinking such a thing!
Well, Brian, actually you went off to a completely new article. You also failed to show in any way that a robot or armoured D9 was used for destroying Hussan Dwayat's home. It could have been an ordinary D9, D7 or even a bog-standard front-loader of the type Dwayat used on his rampage (the latter is the most likely). You also failed to point out the Israeli Border Police (note, not the IDF) that completed the demolition carefully ensured the family were not in the part of the building they demolished, the part Dwayat used as his home, and that they left his family home undamaged. Due to the legal process, the family even had time to remove all the belongings from inside long before the demolition date, which they were informed of in advance.
But here's something that will really surprise you, especially given all your preconceptions - I actually don't agree with the policy of demolishing terrorists' homes after they have been captured or killed. I don't think it really does provide any deterrant value as groups like Fatah and HAMAS both use them as opportunities for negative propaganda against Israel, and positive propagande for themselves when they reward the families of the terrorists. It also stirs up the local hotheads, as proven by the idiot that got shot when he tried to run over the accompanying policemen, and the subsequent rioting.
So I'm not calling the IDF liars, I'm just calling you an incompetent for not being able to read and comprehend the very article you tried to use. Shame on you for not being able to mount an intelligent defense of what is obviously a topic of great emotion to you. You may now froth and rant about me being heartless, sociopathic, etc, etc, etc.
"Look at the broader picture. In 1948, it was all desert and they moved in a bunch of displaced Jews. "
No historian believes this myth.
If the Israeli state chose to build on the land to which they are legally entitled, they wouldn't require fortified bulldozers. Perhaps a better use for them is to help clear 500,000 cluster munitions from Southern Lebanon?
"....If the Israeli state chose to build on the land to which they are legally entitled, they wouldn't require fortified bulldozers....." There are no settlers in the Gaza Strip, Israel pulled them all out. One of the reasons they need the D9s is because people like HAMAS don't think Israel has a legal right to exist at all. To make it perfectly clear, even to someone with as obvious and blind a bias as you have displayed, HAMAS states they would not stop attacking Israel with rockets and suicide bombers even if Israel pulled back completely to the 1969 borders and left the Palestinians to their own devices.
".....Perhaps a better use for them is to help clear 500,000 cluster munitions from Southern Lebanon?" Which ones? Do you mean the ones fired by the Lebanese at each other during the Civil War? Or maybe the one Hizbullah artillery fired at Israel in 2006? Oh, don't tell me, you never knew Hizbullah used cluster munitions too. Excuse me whilst I feign surprise. Both in '82 and '06, Israel's attacks into Lebanon were as a direct response to multitudes of attacks on their civillians by groups like the PLO and Hizbullah from Lebanese territory. You may want to check the history of Lebanon with those historians you mentioned, you obviously didn't do so before your post.
In fact, one of the armoured D9s Israel lost was as a result of an unprovoked Hizbullah attack in 2004. The D9 was clearing mines laid by Hizbullah two weeks earlier, when Hizbullah fired an anti-tank missile at it, killing the driver. Hizbullah claimed the D9 had crossed into Lebanon, even though Israeli pictures show it burning with the border fence in the background. So, do you think it is likely that Israel will send any of their people or equipment into Lebanon to help Hizbullah clear areas? Ah, I see the problem - you don't really do much of that thinking stuff, do you. I suggest you join dave and mittfh down the library in a little historic research.
"HAMAS gets the majority of their funds and weapons from Iran, which established HAMAS in 1987".
Shia Iran had nothing to do with the formation of Sunni Hamas.
Hamas was formed out of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.
Hamas is largely funder by Saudi Arabia (also Sunni). Iran supports Hamas out of animosity towards Israel.
"....Shia Iran had nothing to do with the formation of Sunni Hamas....." Sorry, you're completely wrong. Sheikh Yassin himself is on record admitting the prime power behind their break away from the Muslim Brotherhood (which backs Fatah) was backing from Iran. Iran seized the opportunity as it allows them to attack Israel via two proxy parties from both the North and the South, with very little Israel can do to directly retaliate. I'm assuming you failed to notice that every time the UN or US gets too interested in the Iranian nuke project we see HAMAS rocket attacks increase.
"....Hamas was formed out of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood....." Correct, some members including Sheikh Yassin were members, but the Brotherhood backs Fatah. Originally, HAMAS was to be the Palestinian Mulsim Brotherhood, but Yassin and co left when the Brotherhood endorsed the idea of the PLO negotiating wiht Israel. Co-founder al-Rantissi is known to have had links with Iran revolutionaries during both his time in Egypt and later directly with the new Islamic government of Iran. Whilst many in the Bortherhood saw negotiations as a way to push Israel into a corner where a final push could overwhelm her, Yassinand al-Rantissi - having seen Egypt accept a peace deal - feared any negotiated peace could crumble further support from other Arab states for completely destroying Israel.
"....Hamas is largely funder by Saudi Arabia (also Sunni). Iran supports Hamas out of animosity towards Israel." Yes, they are a Sunni group, but that is simply demographics - the area is predominantly Sunni with very few Shia, and the major clans are all Sunni. The Sauds are Sunni, but HAMAS has often denounced the Saud family as despots and tyrants. The Saudis government prefer and fund Fatah, having always been a source of funding for the PLO in general, but do not fund HAMAS as they see them as both an enemy to their friends in Fatah and becasue they view the link to Iran as a threat. Some HAMAS funding from "charities" has come from Saudi sources, but the official Saudi line is that Abu Abbas (and therefore Fatah) is the one with the right to talk as representative of the Palestinian people. The Sauds want a negotiated peace ASAP as they now see a nucleur Iran as a greater threat than Israel.
If Hamas stopped firing rockets out of said schools, hospitals, and refugee camps, things might be a little clearer. As it is, you're most likely getting your information (probably second hand via BBC news or some equally credulous organization) from Hamas themselves. Remember, Hamas? The guys who send women and teenagers into cafes to blow themselves to bits along with everyone else around?
Oh, sorry, those are just -freedom fighters-. Goodness knows they wouldn't purposely distort casualty figures in order to gain sympathy! That would be immoral!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019