Isreal has dismissed calls for a 48-hour halt to its Gaza offensive as unrealistic. But officials rejected the idea as unrealistic and vowed to continue its assault on the strife-torn region. And they have warned that the threat of a ground offensive remains if the Hamas attacks continue. Thousands of ground troops, backed by tanks and artillery, are in position along the border and Israeli aircraft have kept up a relentless string of airstrikes with the most recent raids smashing a government complex, security installations and the home of a top militant commander. The offensive was launched on Saturday after the Islamic movement Hamas defied Israel's warnings that it would not stand for the rocket attacks on the south of the country that resumed nearly two months ago, toward the end of a recently expired ceasefire. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told President Shimon Peres that the aerial phase of the operation was the first of several stages that had been approved. Almost 370 Palestinians have been killed, most of them members of Hamas security forces, but at least 64 of them civilians, according to UN figures. More than 1,400 people have been injured in the attacks. Hamas officials have declared they will never accept a truce with Israel "under these circumstances". Spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said talks to stop the fighting and enter an agreement would be "a matter of bargaining between the victim and the executioner." The Quartet of Mideast peacemakers - the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia - has called on Israel and Hamas to implement an immediate cease-fire in Gaza and southern Israel. Mr Barhoum called on Arab and Islamic countries "to unite and stop this aggression, lift the siege, open the crossings and rebuild Gaza." Meanwhile, Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called for an urgent ceasefire amid the "humanitarian crisis" in Gaza. Mr Brown said: "It is vital that moderation must now prevail - there's a humanitarian crisis." Britain is donating £5 million towards humanitarian aid in the crisis-stricken region. A spokesman for the US President said: "President Bush thinks that Hamas needs to stop firing rockets and that is what will be the first steps in a ceasefire.
One of these days Israel is either going to have to sufficiently stomp the surrounding area and leave heads on pikes, or some group is going to finally put together the necessities for a nice bomb to punch a hole in the map where Israel once was. Considering the holy sites involved, I suppose it'd be nice if Israel would just resume with the stomping. It's either that or years of canal work and earth moving projects to turn Israel into either an island or the world's largest floating mass with exception to the polar ice.
Is attacking Israel an IQ test? The outcome is always the same...seems pretty stupid to jump into the cage with a 600lb gorilla.
Which makes it increasingly difficult to even blame Israel. One, I suppose they are doing us a favor in proceeding to practice a form of Darwinism...and Two, Israel is a small boat in a sea that largely wants to see her sunk. So It's not just jumping in after a 600lb gorilla, but one who is already cornered and pissed off because someone keep throwing wasp nests in with it. By all accounts if someone were to do this to a real gorilla, it'd have the legal and binding right to put its stocky foot into your skull and wear your skin on its head to keep the rain out of its ears.
I have a lot of sympathy for Israel. They are surrounded by countries who openly declare their intentions to anihilate them, and when they retaliate against agressive moves by other countries, the press places the blame on them.
Other countries; We will anihilate you! Israel; Not if we anihilate you first! To be honoust, I can't have sympathy with any of those countries. I'm one of those fools who still believes talking is a better solution then killing.
Anyone missed these bits, or not think about them? Hamas WANTS to goad Israel into hitting back. The last thing Hamas wants is peace--they'd all be out of a job.
As it always seems: One side is concerned about innocent civilian casualties and tries to avoid them. The other side hopes to inflict injury and death on civilians (that effort over the years is what drives this conflict, I believe), and by hiding among civilians, hopes to force the opposition to inflict casualties upon innocent victims. The notion of moral equivalency of actions and tactics in the conflict needs to be thrown aside and focus on what is 'really' happening and why. Those innocents caught in the middle (in many cases intentionally place there without their concent) is the real tragedy.
