Obama stayed on the golf course - well, yes of course he did, not sure if you realise it. He's not President of the USA, George W. Bush is - there can only be one US President at a time. Obama becomes POTUS later this month, then George W. Bush will not be president, and I'm sure will fix everything.

"They talk about justice for all? Yeh ... and pigs might fly." Who says justice for all - so what should the Israelis who get showered with rockets every day get?

You reap what you sow.

Israel's 'disproportionate' use of force

Way to spout the party line and dump all journalistic integrity. Does it make sense that Israel should fire rockets haphazardly at Gazan towns? Send suicide bombers to blow themselves up at weddings, teenage clubs and cafes? What is proportionate when you have an enemy that targets civilians? Does any international text require proportionate responses to unilateral attacks on a sovereign nation?

Of course Aussie and US leaders want to be seen with Israelis - the rest of the world is so blinded by Arab oil that they cannot appreciate the social, technological, and political innovations that stemmed from a country which, from its inception, has been thwarting off enemies.

What Crap,

I like Obama, in fact i donated to his campaign, but the fact is that his passing the buck was a cop out as he does not want to enter the chair with stances on issues that have already degraded him with the rest of the world or part of it.

I bet he was thinking lucky he was not in the hotseat yet and had to take a position, he will let George get everyone off side and he will try and remain the golden boy for as long as possible. America needs him to. He will most likely go down the line of following what bush will do with the defence that he should not change track once his country has made its position, again insulating him.

Its terrible whats happening, but if next door threw stones over my fence all day especially whn we are in agreement to stop, eventually i would get the shivs too, and eventually, if there is no other way, i would have to act. It is better they go hard and sort it out than do it in dribs and drabs and achieve nothing. i dont blame the israelis for doing something about it, and tell me, what other options could they implement to get results?

The usual rubbish from Barns that nobody of any importance takes notice of.

Thank you Greg for saying the obvious about the hypocrisy over support for Hamas over the view of support for Israel (and indeed the present US policy). The strangling of the resources, the theft of land and farm land in particular by the construction of the Wall, the closing of gates and the use of checkpoints and the blowing up of a tunnel, and the continued refusal of Israel to negotiate a just resolution were all acts of aggression that preceded the Hamas response that became Israel's excuse for invasion.

However ---- I do think that it is easy to focus on the response of a prospective leader's view. The difference between the golf games of Bush and Obama is that Bush was playing golf while he was president. Obama has not taken the role yet. He has not the luxury of comment and rhetoric like many who either support or oppose Israel have; he will be a player. You may well be right; things may not change. But the way to measure the views of anyone is not to judge then for what they may or may not say but look at what they do.

Claire O'Connor

Right on target Greg.Well said!

Clearly, the reality is that President Bush has decided to devote the remaining last days of his bloodstained Presidency to that clutch of Israeli politicians who are battling each other with an eye to becoming Prime Minister at the upcoming election.That Gaza is being battered to pieces is of no consequence to them. The scoffed at denial by Israeli Forein Minister of a human catastrophe in Gaza gathers ridicule by the day. The Chinese leadership has just ridiculed it...and that will surely find an echo soon in Canberra!

Australians from coast to coast will today be applauding those Australian Jews who have stood up in our midst to publicly condemn the horrendous and completely unjustifiable Israeli military assaults on a defenceless Gaza.

The Pope should consider cancelling his planned visit to Israel and instead opt for a visit to the ruins of Gaza.The Israelis say they have no plans to occupy it....who would with its infrastructure shattered...its sewage running onto the streets and power and water denied?. Actually, it would be good to see some of the Israeli leaders forced to live there.

Others might consider throwing shoes at both the US and Israeli embassies in Canberra as a mark of global disgust while those in the US should consider throwing shoes at the gates of the White House.

As I've said before,the suicide bombing and the rocketting of Israel can be stopped oh so simply. All that's required is that the US happily supply the Palestinians with warplanes, missiles, naval gunboats and combat choppers with the same readiness that they do to the Israelis.

Brian Haill

Someone mentioned that Mr Obama is not pres yet... LOL, good point! I can't believe it... also might be worth mentioning that Hamas are a terrorist organization... and yes no one likes them.

Obviously Israelis can't just pick up and leave Israel now, even if they wanted to. It's a physically impossible and ridiculous proposal isn't it.

I would assume Palestinian supporters would hope for sane leadership, which will work for peace. Peace brokering is the best solution for Palestine as Israel is a lot stronger. Hamas need to to be voted out in favor of pro peace Palestinians. Israel only want to be left alone.

Prolonging this with support for the impossible is idealistically selfish and killing people on both sides.

Two Pro Palestinian posts and five against, make that six if you include this one.

Sydney, regarding “its sewage running onto the streets”

No, that is just another Hamas killer trying to find a vantage point….

GREG BARNS.... you could not hit truth if it was as bit as the broad side of your surname.

BUT WAIT.... you did come close there.. when you admitted. (was this painful?)

<<The pro-Israel lobby says Hamas is an organization that is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. True, but this only tells part of the story. >>

Err....what was that word... “TRUE” ? And that's just PART of the story?

Let's get some TRUTH here first up.

1/ NO NO NO...it is not the 'PRO ISRAEL' lobby saying that Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel...it is HAMAS ITSELF...

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

Page 1

<<”Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" >>

WHAT THE HECK are you people who can read this but NOT understand it?

Are you dimwits..morons.. mentally challenged.. Intellectually disabled ?

MYYYYyyyyy GOD!.. “O-B-L-I-T-E-R-A-T-E” (who does not 'get' this?)

This is not a Christmas card... it is a foundational document which defines the purpose of Nazi/Islamist/Genocidal HAMAS....who.. run Gaza and for whom the Gaza people.. VOTED.

Palestinians who voted for HAMAS share their guilt 100%

BARNS says: “The leadership of Israel is today morally and ideologically corrupt.”

What the? Why does he not say that about HAMAS? “ideologically”... “obliterate” come on Greg...put down the turps mate, or whatever ur smoking... .. it isn't helping-change your supplier..

I can only opine that Grupenfeurher Barns supports GENOCIDE.. against Jews.... has he recently joined Stormfront?

Poly,

I can never grasp that either, what part of...

"Israel has no right to exist"

"We will annihilate Israel"

...does Greg and those in agreement think is OK or fair?

Meri.... Barns and Loewenstein think differntly to normal human beings.

Here is the all time classic example.. from Loewensteins book "My Israel Question" Page 244 bottom of page:

"HAMAS HAS A HISTORY OF LAUNCHING TERROR ATTACKS AGAINS ISRAELI CIVILIANS AND A CHARTER WHICH SPECIFICALLY SEEKS THE DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL"

Now..if he had used THAT starting point to condemn Hamas in every way possible.. it would have been appropriate.

BUT.... he then goes on to babble as follows: (top of page 245)

"but numerous hamas spokespeople have suggested that a negotiated settlement with Israel within 67 borders is possible"

he doesn't provide any reference or source for these 'numerous' Hamas spokespeople..and the only quotes I can find are those which say things like "Long term truce" + Full right of return of all refugees.

Foxy refers me to page 314 and note 62 which links to a Guardian story quoting Mashaal. In that story he says:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/31/comment.israelandthepalestinians

"We shall never recognise the right of any power to rob us of our land and deny us our national rights."

and

"But if you are willing to accept the principle of a long-term truce, we are prepared to negotiate the terms."

"LONG TERM TRUCE" ? coupled with 'right of return' ?= GENOCIDE of JEWS....maybe not tomorrow..but oooh yes..it will come.

The trouble with "long term truces with Muslims" is found in the first verse of surah 9 of the Quran

9-1. Freedom from obligations (is declared) from Allâh and His Messenger to those of the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh), with whom you made a treaty.

TIME IS ON ISRAEL'S SIDE...

the settler population is growing at THREE times the rate of the rest of Israel :)

...it might also be said "and so are their ideals"....

I cannot see either Hamas or the Idealistic Israelis sitting down and smoking the peace pipe in the next 1000 yrs.

Polycarp is happy to justify Israeli government policy and actions,by quoting the Koran.

Hundreds of women and children are getting killed ? It's OK because Polycarp can quote the Koran, regarding what he considers to be a related subject.

White Phosphorus causing horrific burns and fires in dense populated areas? Polycarp thinks it's OK because his chosen verses from the Koran justify IDF atrocities.

Israeli border guards feeling up children and old women, in case they have explosives or other contraband tucked away in their knickers? Hey, Polycarp's quotes from the the Koran make everything OK.

(see http://ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/childabuse.html)

With friends like Polycarp, the Israelis don't need enemies.

Whose side is he on, anyway?

Just some thoughts on the following from Claire O'Connor:

"Thank you Greg for saying the obvious about the hypocrisy over support for Hamas over the view of support for Israel (and indeed the present US policy). The strangling of the resources, the theft of land and farm land in particular by the construction of the Wall, the closing of gates and the use of checkpoints and the blowing up of a tunnel, and the continued refusal of Israel to negotiate a just resolution were all acts of aggression that preceded the Hamas response that became Israel's excuse for invasion."

Israel and Palestine were attacking each other long before I was born. Hamas has been part of this for almost as long as I have been alive. Article Seven of the Charter of Hamas clearly states their intentions towards Israel; Article Thirteen denounces peaceful solutions to the problem, noting that Jihad is the only way.

Faced with this obvious plan for its destruction, calling Israel's actions 'disproportionate' is a bit rough.

Otokonoko,
It is not OK for any nation to ignore International Humanitarian Law (IHL) during war. How do you think Muslims will see the acquiescence of the US, UK and Australian governments? This is not just a matter of Israel and Hamas fighting since before you were born, any more than the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand was inconsequential violence in the Balkans, back in 1914, best forgotten.

The item below offers a wider perspective. I hope you have time to read all of it:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gg8fFoccVwzh4-cgOrG7CSDGcTng

American Jews split over Israeli offensive
46 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) — American Jews are divided over the Israeli military offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which is being vigorously denounced by an increasingly active progressive Jewish movement.

The war has sown divisions among Jews here, according to Ori Nir, spokesman for the US branch of the Israeli pacifist movement "Peace Now," long overshadowed by the America-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

"Many American Jews view this as a legitimate war," Nir said.

"There are however people who are very uncomfortable with the way in which it was carried out and with the extend to which diplomatic means were not exhausted ... to prevent this war," he added.

Divisions within the US Jewish community burst open in 2006 with the scandal over the publication of a book critical of the influence of the pro-Israel lobby group, AIPAC, on US foreign policy.

Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, co-authors of "The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy," were accused of anti-Semitism and pilloried by AIPAC, which the pair said gave unconditional support to the right-wing Likud party.

However, their criticism made its way to the heart of the US Jewish community and a progressive Jewish organization, J Street, was established several months ago to defend the goals of pacifist Jews before the US Congress.

Sir Vivor, thanks for the article. It is interesting, and it is good to see that not everyone sees things as "black and white". Certainly I agree with the gist of what they are saying, however it doesn't change what I said (perhaps not very well) before:

* Claire O'Connor's selection of a handful of events or issues as the "cause" of the current problem is an over-simplification. Just as she has cited Israeli wrongdoing as the cause, another commentator on the issue could easily select a chain of events beginning with Palestinian and, specifically, Hamas wrongdoing. We could isolate fifty individual "causes" of the problem in the blink of an eye. That is what I meant when I noted that it has been going on since before I was born.

* We quickly point the finger at Israel for overusing their military capacity, but somehow excuse Hamas's "mission" to destroy Israel. Were Hamas the stronger party, would we still see things this way?

* Hamas's very own charter rejects diplomatic means of solving this dispute, so there is no reason to believe that they would honour a ceasefire any more than Israel.