world

Israeli air strike hits Gaza militant base after rocket fired

9 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2013.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

9 Comments
Login to comment

Israel should make the terrorists in Gaza pay dearly for aggression. The price SHOULD be SO high that the exchange ought not be worth it.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

after rocket fired

I'm surprised. They usually leave that part of the story out of the headline and just say "Israel attacked Palestine today."

3 ( +6 / -3 )

This is somewhat off topic, but as "holy" as Israel supposedly is there sure is a lot of violence there.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Superlib,

I disagree. Articles consistently represent the events as Israel retaliating to Palestinian violence. There is rarely any mention of why the Palestinians allegedly fired the rockets. The above article follows that template.

I find Roger Waters explained it well a few months ago in a speech he gave at the UN:

"Did Hamas start IT? When did IT start? How we understand history is shaped by when we start the clock. If we are to start the clock when rockets are fired from Gaza into Israel on a certain afternoon, that is one history. If we start the clock earlier that morning when a 13 year old Palestinian boy was shot dead by Israeli soldiers as he played soccer on a Gaza field, history starts to look a little different. If we go back further, we see that since operation Cast Lead, according to the Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem, 271 Palestinians were killed by Israeli attacks, and during the same period not a single Israeli was killed. A good case can be made that IT started in 1967 with the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. This crisis in Gaza is a crisis rooted in occupation."

-21 ( +2 / -23 )

I disagree.

Really?

Israel bombards Gaza Strip

and

Israeli aircraft hit Gaza in first strikes since November

and

Israel launches more airstrikes on Gaza Strip

and

Israeli aircraft strike Gaza targets

and

Israel launches scores of airstrikes into Gaza

The last one is my favorite since the headline didn't bother to include, "The new attacks followed an unprecedented rocket strike aimed at the contested holy city of Jerusalem that raised the stakes in Israel's violent confrontation with Palestinian militants and extended the battlefield."

And I've made the same comments on at least a dozen articles over the years. The headlines above obviously make it look like Israel broke the lull in violence and started an attack. The fact that it was prompted by rockets is always buried in the article.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"Did Hamas start IT? When did IT start?"

IT starts when there is a lull in violence that hopefully be used to create calm and present conditions for peace talks. But since Palestine has no control over it's own militants, they really can't go for any amount of time before more rockets are fired and IT starts all over again.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Oh, I see now; you were only referring to headlines. I was referring to the entire articles.

-20 ( +1 / -21 )

@Bluescript - Why don't we "start the clock" a little further back?

A good case can be made that IT started in 1967 with the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. This crisis in Gaza is a crisis rooted in occupation."

"Between 1966 and 1967 Israeli borders saw repeated Arab terrorist attacks and Syrian military activity. On May 11, UN Secretary General U Thant leveled criticism at Syria for its sponsorship of Palestinian terrorism, denouncing those attacks as deplorable, insidious and menaces to peace."

Maybe that was one of the reasons for IT?

Or let's "start the clock" a little further back, in 1947, when the UN created and proposed the 'Partition Plan' to the Israelis and Palestinians. This was the original 'two state solution' and would have provided for the peaceful coexistence in the land that is now Israel proper; an agreement which the Israeli's accepted and which Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians (at the urging of the Arab League) rejected.

That was the original reason for IT!!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Or let's "start the clock" a little further back, in 1947, when the UN created and proposed the 'Partition Plan' to the Israelis and Palestinians. This was the original 'two state solution' and would have provided for the peaceful coexistence in the land that is now Israel proper; an agreement which the Israeli's accepted and which Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians (at the urging of the Arab League) rejected.

Are you surprised?

How do you think the Australian government would react if the aboriginals proposed a "two state solution", on the basis that the land is theirs according to their tradition? Northern half for the settlers, southern half for the aboriginals. Fair enough, cobber?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites