Paul L,
You have focused on the first paragraph of my reply, with no evident consideration of the rest, or how it might relate to your question, or to the overall circumstances, both historical and contemporary, which lead us to this moment.

You have gone on at length about Hamas' public leaders' political statements. Thank you for the opportunity to read all that tripe.

You have mentioned Mein Kampf, and reminded us of the 20-20 hindsight of thousands of publicists and millions more of the unheard and unread, and the many dead.

These many, many people, who either saw confirmed their initial intuitions and fears about Hitler, or who philosophised in retrospect. An example of the latter would be the famous industrialist, Henry Ford, whose assembly lines at the German Ford Motor Company (Ford-Werke AG) manufactured vehicles for Hitler's Wehrmacht from 1932 to 1945 - see "Working for the Enemy" By Reinhold Billstein and others (available through Google Books : just Google "German Ford Motor Company")

But you have missed my point. Read my entire post again , if you wish, and have another lash at a more comprehensive reply.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/West_Bank_%26_Gaza_Map_2007_%28Settlements%29.gif
Settlements ...

Survivor.

You say >> “Last night on TV, I saw ordnance used in abundance against the Gazans: ordnance that, in a dense, urban setting, can only be indiscriminate in effect. Is this scale of attack justified by a political tract, by a party platform? Whose tract? Whose platform? Whose policy?”

The Hamas Charter is an accurate reflection of the goals and motives of Hamas. The people of Gaza clearly support the Hamas leadership. I do not however suggest that the Charter by itself is a reason to invade Gaza. Indeed it is disingenuous of you to suggest such a thing. I certainly never suggested it. Israel is attacking Gaza in order to over run the missile launching sites. Two ancillary goals are to weaken Hamas militarily and rebuild Israels deterence capability.

My point in the previous post was to demonstrate that there is no partner in peace for Israel, no matter what they do. You cannot make peace with someone who does not want to make peace with you. It’s that simple. Therefore Israel must follow a short term policy of self-protection, which under other circumstances (ie if hamas really was interested in peace) might legitimately be considered counter productive.

I’m not sure what ordinance you are referring to. Israel’s bombs are virtually ALL guided weapons which have a very high level of accuracy.

You say >> “Is this scale of attack justified … ‘

I don’t believe in any doctrine of proportional response. I think Israel is justified in using the force required to stop the rocket attacks.

You say >> “How do I distinguish this attack from the destruction of Lidice, or Guernica?

Don’t you think that is a little dramatic? Germany was never under attack, day and night, by Spanish rockets. And how can you compare Israel’s attacks with the massacre of every man over 16 and concentration camp liquidation of everyone else in Lidice. Furthermore, the Nazis were bent on conquest. Israel is unlikely to remain in Gaza.

TBC

CONT'

Unfortunately, Israel cannot protect itself without causing civilian casualties. Hamas has seen to that by hiding its men and weapons in densely populated areas. As long as Israel does its best to avoid civilian casualties (and of course NEVER target civilians directly) then I think they are justified. This is not to say that I don’t find it horrific. I feel for Palestinian civilians. But Israel simply has no real alternatives for reasons outlined above.

You say >> “ it was impossible to entirely stop the launching of missiles from Gaza.”

That’s the old excuse Yasser Arafat made time after time. And it was a lie then. It’s simply not true that Hamas were not involved in these attacks. They run the tiny territory. Even if they weren’t personally behind the rocket attacks (debatable), they have the muscle to stop them if they wanted to.

You say >> “the Israeli government has always been like the princess complaining about the pea under the mattress, in demanding an unachievably low level of hostilities.

I simply don’t believe that Hamas can’t stop the rocket attacks. And frankly, if it were you and your family having to spend most days in a bomb shelter, I really don’t think you would be dismissing it as a “pea in the mattress” issue.

To conclude, I apologise. I did not read your post as thoroughly as I should have. Nevertheless I hope I have convinced you that the Hamas Charter cannot be dismissed out of hand.

MX2,

Hamas and Israel are fighting in GAZA. Did you notice on your map that there are no settlements in Gaza?

Did you realise that at the Camp David talks in 2000 Israel offered an eventual 94% of the west bank and 100% of Gaza PLUS an area equivalent to 1% of Israels total land mass in the Negev PLUS Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem. The remaining 6% Israel wished to keep were invariably large Israeli towns, built completely by Israelis, often on land bought freehold by Israel.

Settlements are not the sticking point for Hamas.

i think this link of quotes explains it all

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/palestinians.html?q=palestinians.html

please note the quotes are linked to the story [con-text] in which they were spoken

posted my thoughts here
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/stop_supporting_israeli_apartheid

its a wakeup call

i wish the bloggers supporting israel murder
would not keep posting the same stale lines

and tell libby to stop smiling so smuggly about premeditated murder
[one third of the civilian deaths are kids]