This is a very dangerous step.

Dangerous step? lol Please, you act like this is new. This is a cyclical event, utterly predictable.

Cyclical? When was the last serious Israeli ground offensive in Gaza?

5 years ago.

You really need to learn how to use an ellipsis correctly, NigeeBaby.

You seem to be operating under some riduclous notion that the Middle East is a generally peaceful region, and that this time of violence is somehow unique.

As with all the nail-biting and pretend worry from the sheeple, nobody seriously buys into the notion that anyone *really* gives a shit. After all, a good number of you have been fully behind a President who's foreign policy is almost non-existent, and whom has showed a complete lack of support for Israel.

Like it or not, a strong US has the ability to wag a finger at Israel and keep them in check...but when Israel senses that the US can not be a trusted ally, they take matters fully into their own hands.

Under a strong US President, there is every possibility this would not be happening right now.

You can blame Obama for a lot of what's going wrong in the Middle East right now, but this current war in Gaza is not one of them.

"Under a strong US President, there is every possibility this would not be happening right now."
Obama has either gone into hibernation or he is completely behind the attack, is it vacation season in Washington ..... the silence is deafening !!

Also need to learn that you don't put a space between the last word in a sentence and the exclamation point. When did people start doing that? It's horrible.

Invictus I'm not quite on your planet right now ..... have a nice evening though, looks like you have a supporter here so be grateful for that, are you on medication?

I'm not blaming the war in the Gaza directly on Obama, but to say the the US's involvement with Israel doesn't have any impact on what goes on there is *stupid*.

Obama has turned his back on Israel over and over and over again. Israeli diplomats for years have been openly questioning whether or not they had US support in the region anymore -- meaning that if the US tells them to stay there hand, they have no reason to listen.

When the US sends Kerry (or Clinton before that) to talk with Israel / Palestine, *everyone* at the table knows that the US has no teeth - that they bitch and moan and plea for peace on the global *stage*...but that's all it is - an act on a stage.

Meaning that if the US declares they want one thing or another, it is **no different** than a petulant child whining for a candy bar in line at the grocery store, and they will do nothing to back up there desires. Israel neithers waits for the US to protect its rights to defend itself, nor does Israel fear that the US will take sides against them.

So no, the US can not be held responsible for the war if Gaza....but neither can anyone say the the US has exercised *any* of its (former) authority/strength to quell the warring parties and bring them to the table by suing for peace....under threat of the might of the US.

So for those that bitch and moan when the US exercising it's military strength - by the legitimate threat of the use of force, and occassionally carrying through on said threat - this is the result of nobody fearing the US will use force against them.

Syria thumbs its nose at the word and slaughters tens of thousands without fear of reprisal. (A story e have forgotten about already)

ISIS rolls over Iraq, slaughtering anyone who gets in their way (a story we have forgotten about already)

Russia does as it please in the Ukraine, without fear of reprisal. Sanction?

Laughable. Ask the victim of the latest downed jet liner -- which comes not surprisingly a day after US sanctions -- Russias fully extended middle finger to the US.
And from Israel...Fuck you, US. We'll finish out ground assault in a couple weeks, and a new story will cross the headlines of CNN, and nobody will care.

Yep, it appears that Obama has gone missing when his country needs a strong leader, what a difference he has made ......

In the UK Cameron has already claimed he is Jewish by descent so he is supporting the violence, Edward Samuel Miliband has Jewish parents and loves Disraeli so we can guess his stance on Palestinian deaths ..... you know sometimes you think you are right but everyone you look to for support is on the other side, that is how I feel now. What legitimacy can any Western political leaders have when they support the culling of a nation in this manner, I'm disgusted, disappointed, disillusioned.

Nigee - ironically, throughout Obama's Presidency the overriding concern was that Obama was abandoning Israel, and was in favor of the Palestinians in a manner inconsistent with past US foreign policy. One would have thought that Obama would have taken a firm stance in support of Palestine...that he would have done something...anything...to stay Israel's hand. Hell, it wouldn't have shocked me to see US "peace keeping" forces deployed to Gaza...

But he has done nothing...literally (almost) nothing, other than a 20 second (at most) statement here and there about how everyone deserves a right to live a life without fear...and then on to the next topic...or the next round of golf...or next fund raiser...or next photo op with a celeb drinking a beer.

It's truly bizarre behavior by *any* standard of conduct for a global leader.

"It's truly bizarre behavior by *any* standard of conduct for a global leader."

I agree, it's like all the Leaders have gone quiet on the issue .... move along, nothing to see here, just a few Palestinians getting twatted by our comrades in the IDF.

I take issue with that article, because it made mention of several cases of harm caused by Israel, but relatively few of those made by Hamas. Yes, the fight is incredibly one sided, but the article subtly puts it in the context that this action by the IDF is unwarranted. There have been numerous rocket attacks made against Israel recently, that the article simply glosses over. Israel is not taking extreme measures to protect its people. Whether its people are in violation is another matter...

Israel has hurting people too. They just happen to have better means of protecting their people.

"Israel has hurting people too. They just happen to have better means of protecting their people."
Yes, they are being supported politically and financially by Western govts and militarily by Western arms manufacturers ..... they hold the aces and the Palestinians have the jokers

Giving the Palestinians the same kind of support will only provoke more violence on a wider scale. And what would be worse than initiating an arms race between the two?

Again, Nigee....Syria...Iraq....Ukraine...

The world is suddenly supposed to act for the few hundred lives of Palestinians? Please my good man...we've been quite content to watch foreigners die by the tens of thousands and did little more than draw an imaginary line in the sand, which we quickly scuffed away with out foot when someone pointed out what he had done. "Uhhh....that's not the line you're looking for" we said, waving our hand in the face of the press an scurrying off to feed the media another story to distract us from the topic at hand...

Krellin the difference being we are helping the opposition in Syria to defend themselves against the Assad regime (some of them anyway), we are supporting the Ukrainians and the Iraqis against the Russian separatists and Isis.
It seems like in Gaza we are supporting the wrong side, we are aiding the aggressors and not defending the people who need the help.
That is the difference....

"It seems like in Gaza we are supporting the wrong side, we are aiding the aggressors and not defending the people who need the help."

You are so right. We are supporting the wrong side.

Ever since after the Gulf War when Bush withheld aid to Israel to force the prime minister out of office to get one that would kow tow to him. Israel signed the Oslo Accords to give the PLO as the Palestinian government to get US aid restored.

Israel moved out of the Gaza Strip and it got take over by terrorist aggressors that regularly fired rockets into Israel. Israel had to build a fence around itself to keep out suicide bombers.

The US and Western Europe keeps telling Israel to make concessions without Hamas having to make any like recognizing Israel right to exist, stopping bombings, or preventing terrorism.

http://972mag.com/why-i-object-to-this-military-campaign-even-as-missiles-fall-on-my-city/93246

More than 1500 rockets.

Hamas broke the ceasefire.

Hamas' popularity is low when there's no conflict, and it spikes with every Palestinian death.

The blood for this conflict at this point, post-ceasefire, is squarely on their hands--they had a chance to abide by a ceasefire and pursue a path to peace, whether they like Egypt or not, and instead they chose to continue to rocket Israel and force Israelis to hide in bomb shelters and flee for their lives.

This is entirely down to Hamas' continuing this conflict FAR past the point the Israelis wanted to end, as each death in this conflict, be it Israeli OR Palestinian, helps solidify THEIR political power.

You answer that, Nigee--

HAMAS broke the ceasefire.

They can say they didn't like the Egyptians as mediators, but that does NOT mean they had to still shoot rockets, did they?

Objecting to the Egyptians as mediators DOES NOT mean they had to keep shooting while Israel honored a 5-hour ceasefire...one, I might add, that was mainly intended to help the Palestinians provide humanitarian aid.

If Hamas truly cares about the well-being of the Palestinian people, why shoot during a ceasefire that's for the benefit of humanitarian aid for your OWN PEOPLE?

Before you blithely paint the Israelis as the only party here to blame, Nigee, answer me that...if they truly cared about their own people, why fire during a ceasefire which 1. Israel abided by and 2. Was designed to help their own people?

All you look at is the disparity in the death toll...not the 1500 rockets, not the fact that these attacks are a daily part of Israeli life, not the fact that Hamas has done nothing in the cause of peace this whole time...and you claim *I* am the bloodthirsty one? Because I want a regime like THAT destroyed?

Answer, please...

Obi - when you quote figures like "More than 1500 rockets." you really should try and put that into context. 1500 rockets versus 2 Israel rockets mean 1 thing, 1500 rockets v 30,000 Israeli rockets means something else.

I know the number are hard to come by. try and reference 'impartial' news agencies. FYI the BBC is quoting Israel as saying it is 1380 Hamas Rockets and 1960 Israeli attacks since 8th July. Some 267 Palestinians - three-quarters of them civilians - have died compared to 1 Israeli civilian.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28365425

I'm not saying the death toll or rockets fired indicate who is to blame, but you must accept when you give only one side of the figures you are undermining your arguments.

@Maniac:

Well, in fairness, Maniac, everyone else seems so keen to be giving information on what Israel's doing, to list of the statistics in order to try and build their case against them, that I frankly didn't feel to add to my posts' length with that.

What's more, I did give a context for those figures, albeit of a different kind--

I said that Hamas has been firing them on a regular basis, even before this latest war, and that Hamas fired during a ceasefire which, regardless of who brokered it, was brokered for Palestinian and humanitarian ends.

The target of this latest invasion are tunnels dug by Hamas to both transport rockets and move militants to the border/into Israel, BBC reporting that such an incursion was beaten back before this ground offensive began. So, that's another form of context.

Israel is better funded, and has more of an arsenal, so I'd argue to focus on their greater inventory or the skewed likewise skews the truth of intention--

What was the INTENT of those 1500 Hamas rockets, vs. the INTENT of the Israeli airstrikes and now the ground operation?

We know Hamas' "Kill all Jews" policy, and they've fired further into Israel and even more indiscriminately than before...that is their intent, the intent of their 1500 attempts to kill Israeli civilians.

I would argue that, while civilian deaths in an area as densely populated is unavoidable, Israel's intent is not to kill civilians...even for those who believe the worst of Israel, practically-speaking, as I've said, the death toll for the Palestinians ONLY helps Hamas. Israel loses in a PR way, and the Palestinians lose hundreds of lives...only Hamas gains, in terms of power, and aid, and support.

That is the context of those 1500 rockets--a persistent power grab on Hamas' part, regardless of the death toll and, indeed, perhaps even desiring that death toll due to the role it plays in helping to secure their political position.

Obi - you keep making the point that Palestinian deaths help Hamas. This is a bizarre argument, in effect you are saying Israel is helping Hamas to get more aid, gain support and popularity. If true maybe Israel should rethink what it is doing.

Your intent point is bogus. The intent of either side is to 'win'. They both know that means killing people. Sure both sides may rank who is killed on the other side as being a 'better' kill. Hamas may think killing an Israeli soldier or politician is better than killing an Indian tourist and israel may think killing Hamas leader is better than killing 30 Palestine children, but if either side bomb in a way that killing innocents is likely than neither side can claim the moral high ground.

With regards to the cease fire, I think both sides should try and conform with cease fires whoever suggests them, Egypt or whoever. But Israel can't say 'we're the good guys when we are shelling the other side', 'We're the good guys when we stop shelling the other side' and then 'we're the good guys when we resume shelling the other side and send in the tanks.'

War is horrific. We seems to think that if we don't use really bad weapons, or we allow other side to get some aid, or we play football on Christmas day that somehow our killing of people is OK because we're doing it in a gentlemanly way.

@Maniac:

"you keep making the point that Palestinian deaths help Hamas. This is a bizarre argument, in effect you are saying Israel is helping Hamas to get more aid, gain support and popularity. If true maybe Israel should rethink what it is doing."

It is bizarre, but so is that region, frankly speaking, and that is the bizarre political reality--Hamas' popularity was built, has always been built, and is built up again, both at home and abroad with other anti-Israel states, when it takes on that Big Bad. As for Israel "rethinking" it's policy--well, what would you have them do?

It's easy to say they should rethink their strategy, but really, they've now exhausted quite a few of them.
They went in there full-force in the past--that ended badly for all involved, including Israel.
They gave Gazans free elections--that led to Hamas.
They had a somewhat more limited shooting war in 2012 to reduce Hamas' arms capacity--they built it right back up.
They entertained peace talks--both Israel and Hamas really went into those talks with bad faith.
They got this Iron Dome from the US--that's cut down casualties, but as a result, Hamas has fired even more, and the skewed death toll damages Israel's PR.
They used airstrikes, avoiding this ground invasion--and that didn't stop the attacks.
They abided by a ceasefire for the purpose of Palestinian humanitarian aid--Hamas did not respect that ceasefire.

What would you have them DO, at this point, Maniac? They've done and tried quite a bit by this point.

"Your intent point is bogus. The intent of either side is to 'win'. They both know that means killing people. Sure both sides may rank who is killed on the other side as being a 'better' kill. Hamas may think killing an Israeli soldier or politician is better than killing an Indian tourist and israel may think killing Hamas leader is better than killing 30 Palestine children, but if either side bomb in a way that killing innocents is likely than neither side can claim the moral high ground."

But Hamas has explicitly stated, time and again, that EVERY Israeli, men, women, and children, military or no, are considered targets, they want to kill ALL Israelis.

The reason there are so many Gazan deaths is two-fold--Hamas operates in civilian areas, and Gaza is just so densely populated...it is cut off and blockaded due to weapons and terrorists being smuggled in, so the area's a ghetto because of terrorism flourishing there, and terrorism flourishes there because it's a ghetto, it's a Catch-22. You lift the blockade, and more weapons and terrorists come in (and that might not make Egypt happy, either, it's not just Israel unhappy with this group), but if you have a blockade, you encourage home-grown recruitment efforts.

Israel doesn't intend civilian deaths, because frankly, it does them zero good--even for those that hate Israel, the point has to be admitted, killing civilians has done them zero good. Worse than that, in fact, as it's hurt their PR image immensely.

By contrast, Hamas counts every Israeli civilian death as a win, and every Palestinian death DOES boost their cause and garner them more aid, arms and sympathy from anti-Israel groups and nations.

So Hamas has the motive for killing and being OK with the killing of Palestinians in the sense that it DOES further their political means, whereas civilian deaths only ever hurt Israeli interests, so they have no motive for going after them.