Palestine congragulates Obama by shooting upon Israel

[driftingthoughts]

This is still Bush's watch. Why do people want to make up wild storys that what happens now is Obama's fault, heck something like this wouldnt even be Obama fault if on his watch. GROW UP!! I realize there are haters of Obama, but you really need to get a grip... for the sake of our country at least.

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

Nomander

from the Wall Street Journal: Palestinian Militants Launch Missiles at Israeli Towns - WSJ.com


The sequence of events: Israel detects a tunnel in the Gaza strip. They infer that the tunnel is to be used for kidnapping Israeli soldiers. They launch an operation into the Gaza strip to blow up the tunnel and fire missiles into the area as air cover. 6 Palestinians are killed.

Hamas responds by firing missiles to Israel. No Israelis are killed, though some buildings are damaged and 4 people are injured.

I don't think tunnel building is an attack. Evidently you do. Tunnel building takes time. The Israelis could have responded more diplomatically to the issue because there was certainly time to do that, instead they chose a much more aggressive action.

Well, considering that hamas had used tunneling before to take hostage, yes, I would say that properly in context, it is an attack. You are arguing semantics to make your point valid. The logic you are using attempts to proclaim that an attack is not made until it contacts or does damage. If that were the case, the crime of "assualt" would not exist on the books today.

Due to their past deeds, the digging is a clear indication of an attack. I guess you would rather have them wait till they kill people or kidnap them before they defend themselves? Sorry, you are twisting here.

[Nomander]

Originally Posted by TnHilltopper

That is right, you are correct, this wasn't our discussion, this was your discussion. I was pointing out the OP's statement was not only false but ridiculous. In the words of Samuel Johnson, Sir, I have found you an argument. I am not obliged to find you an understanding.

Here, since it means so much to you.

You are right, I am wrong. /boggle

[zman0]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

Sir, I have provided you with a response to the argument. It's a link to the Wall Street Journal that gives insight into the sequence of events, which is the basis of my response to NOMANDER, not the OP. That fact was indicated by the first line in my post: "Nomander,". So even though I was not obliged to find you an understanding, maybe you are a little more clear.

Well I'm sorry for responding to you on a public message board. If you're interested in private discussions, take it elsewhere. Your public post was not addressing the point made by the OP, I supplemented it.

By the way, this is from a site which is clearly anti-Israel:
The Daily Star - Politics - Six dead as Israeli forces shatter truce in Gaza

"A unit of paratroopers, backed by sappers and the Air Force, intervened," a military spokesman said, adding that "armed terrorists opened fire at the troops from a structure above the tunnel.

Israel wasn't the first to fire on Hamas.

If you want an AP article:
The Associated Press: Israeli officials report rocket barrage from Gaza

The Israelis went in to destroy the tunnel. Hamas fired on them. The Israeli soldiers fired back.

The next two steps are unclear, either Hamas fired mortars and the Israelis conducted an airstrike, or Israel conducted an airstrike and Hamas fired mortars.

Finally, Hamas fired rockets into Israel.

The first shots fired were not by the Israelis.

But like I said, this isn't about who acted first, but whether the OP's position is supported. The southerner from atop the atoll says Israel started it all with an airstrike. That ignores the gunbattle and tunnel construction issues altogether. The moderator is respectfully incorrect in his assertion.

Any questionable motives are left to the reader to discern.