well thats a good point, one often hears the overreaction or disproportionate use of force argument, the problem is that nobody seems to suggest a viable "proportional" strategy. what would be proportional? would it be better if Israel took an equal amount of explosives and just randomly fired it at the Gazans? if Israel actually did that, it would get accused of indiscriminately firing at civilians.

At the end of the day Israel is only using a fraction of its capabilities (if the intention was to flatten Gaza, it would have happened long ago). Alot of people seem to link "primitive rockets" with some sort of low threat. Yes there are relatively few casualties (only due to the fact there are bomb shelters and the Iron Dome defense system), but they disrupt the normal life , and also hurt the economy, and given past examples in the world, Israel isn't overreacting anymore than any other country would. I honestly think alot of people in both Western Europe and North America , have not had a situation similar to this for 70 years, and would have no idea how their country would respond (and Im not including 9/11 , that was a bit different). In the Middle East in particular, part of the idea is deterrence , the only way your country is left alone is when others are terrified of it (nobody is scared of Lebanon , and as a result its used and abused by everybody, on the other hand , most states in the region are terrified of Iran , and therefore have mostly left it alone for the past 25 years despite its meddling in their affairs).

@poptart:

Im not asking you to be an expert, but there is a difference between not being an expert and not having a clue.

for a start, that series of maps is incorrect, for instance, it switches constantly between ethnic and state, often on the same map and applying different standards , in 1946 all people living in the British Mandated Palestine, were called Palestinians be they Jews or Arabs (and often Arabs rejected that term at the time, believing it to be an attempt to supersede their tribal/religious identity) when was there Palestinian land in 1956 for instance? or for the last (outdated) map seems to apply state ownership for the Jews, but ethnic for Arabs, where I could claim a big chunk of northern Israel is populated by Arabs.

and why even start in 46? go back 40 years and Palestine itself didn't really exist even as a province (being a part of the Shaam , or greater Syria province of the Ottoman Empire). and it goes on and on.

@poptart:

so if you admit to knowing very little on the subject , why make stupid comments?

and yes that statement you made is incorrect. as is that series of maps

that deal was a desperation deal by Hamas who needed money to pay their employees , and wanted to use the PA budget to pay (which leads to a situation where donations from the US or EU end up paying Hamas salaries). I honestly don't think that deal was worth the paper it was written on .

the reason this fighting started was not due to the deal, it started following the kidnapping and killing of those 3 Jewish teens. the Israeli response was to tear down Hamas' infrastructure in the West Bank (due to the fact that the kidnappers are believed to be Hamas members). Hamas felt humiliated by this and the firing of rockets started around then , most likely to cover up the shame (thats how the Middle East works after all)

Most of the comments on Jpost are not from Israelis, given that its in English it shouldn't be surprising.

Though to answer that question , there is a fair amount of hate, what does one expect? there is a lot of history and religion involved in this (its not one sided either, there are a lot of people in the Arab/Islamic world that despise Jews despite never even meeting one). That said I wouldn't say its a majority thing in most cases the fact that the Arab towns of the Galilee get thousands of Jewish visitors every weekend should tell you something.

@sibu_xgamer:

I see your are still avoiding the question , rather cowardly I have to say, so far it seems this external view of yours is not very clear.

and I'm still waiting for you to prove to me or show me why you are correct on what you stated.

and actually to an extent , yes, the average Arab probably knows more than me on Arabs, its not crazy , regardless of his political opinion and whether I agree with him

of course you yourself push the Jewish aspect of the people you champion , which has nothing to do with your argument, youre guilty as well.

and yet Ive never claimed to hold an absolute truth nor did I really base anything like that on me being a Jew , the reason I know more than you is that I know more about my own people, and I know Hebrew as a native speaker, you don't. Your idea of academically prepared is really someone who suits your views and preaches to the choir, not necessarily a sin , but given the fact

I wish my university dissertation was that easy, not argue anything, not know any facts, just claim some guy as a source with supposed facts I won't understand. If only it was that easy. Fact is I'm actually still waiting for some sort of justification or argument for your statements.

so show me your ability to think for yourself and actually explain your ideas.

lol , ok , apparently the dictionary is wrong and you are right.

I don't think Ive ever said all anti Zionists hate Jews, certainly thats not true , but at the same time , the lines are often very blurry, and frankly I think alot of anti Zionists are indeed motivated by hatred of Jews.

Norman Finkelstein is considered a fool by most Jews, you consider him knowledgeable because you approve his views, so you're really no different. Nor am I aware that having a large part of your family die in the Holocaust gives you some sort of legitimacy (a big chunk of my family is in mass graves because of the Holocaust, doesn't say much about me). What you are doing is picking and choosing your supposed intellectual champion , no more.

And yes using the "Im right because this guy says so" argument is dumb. You are not a zombie, you have a head and can think for yourself, so try it. Doesn't mean you can't sometimes refer to a supposed higher authority, but so far I haven't seen any real articulation of ideas come from you, no real arguement. your points can basically be summed up as

1) There are Jews who are anti Zionist so Anti Zionism is not hatred of Jews (with you moving the goal posts to refer specifically to 2 individuals you like because they preach to the choir)

2)Zionism has racial supremacist ideals and feels its entitles to a land , the first idea is false, the 2nd is both hypocritical unless you're willing to apply that rule to any other people, which you wont.

Its even dumber when you specifically try and look for Jews to justify your views because again , it shows total insecurity on your part in terms of a lack of legitimacy for your argument, a fig leaf for an otherwise nonsensical series of statements.

and yes I always read various sources even from people who are not supportive of my views, and in some cases want to remove my head from my neck . On the other hand , I very much doubt you read anything regarding Jews, because so far most of what I'm hearing is nonsense.

@themajormayor:

I don't even know I would put Hitchens in the same place as someone like Chomsky, Chomsky is an anti Zionist as part of his general ideology of blaming the west and pandering to dictators. Hitchens was actually logical , and I wouldn't even call him anti Zionist in the way most of them are, he didn't want to tear down the Israeli state at the end of the day, nor did he pander to dictators.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FJzNvIaOLE

I actually find this lecture by Hitchens on the general topic of anti semitism , Zionism and such very good , quite reasonable.