”keep the discussion as well as you can stay moderate and avoid ad hominem...”
?

Hmmm...well guess what!!!
Their genius plan costed the lives of 74 children, and 26 women so far...
still counting...

Moderation guaranteed!! If those are the rules of the game, let’s go!!!

Hi H.A., Hope you’re well.

As Wa’d has said, I deplore the deaths of anyone, let alone children.

As you know, I am a fervent supporter of the right of Palestinians to live in peace, on land that is theirs, and ONLY theirs in a negotiated settlement that gives them what is their right. That’s the the only realistic way, I believe, to end this tragic conflict. The only alternative right now is more killing.

I also believe fundamentally that Israel’s existence is a fact that cannot, should not, and must not, change.

In that context, may I say the following.

Whatever people’s opinions, these two peoples are in a state of war, and this is not an intellectual game where past rights and wrongs are righted and wronged.

It’s serious and it’s real.

The Constitution of Hamas expressly states that it does not recognise the existence of Israel. In concrete terms, that means Hamas’s goals, in it’s own words, involves the dismanteling of Israel.

At the same time, Israeli intrangigence and talk-stalling diplomacy is not helping things, just as the disproportionate use of violence against Hamas attacks is to be condemned.

BUT THEY ARE STILL AT WAR!!

So, to conclude, just as Hamas would not hesitate to kill prominent Israeli politicians and military commanders if it could, Israel would not hesitate to do so reciprocally either.

That’s the name of the game. When you are at war, you try to incapacitate the organisational structure of the enemy.

There is nothing ”wrong” with that, in the context of war.

What Israel is planning here is logical. Just as what Hamas would do if it could is logical too.

War, H.A., has its own logic.

More important than the war plans though is to find a way of making them unnecessary.

Respects.

Me again,

just to say that I would say that both sides have been trying to find chinks in each other’s armour for a while, and laying plans to further their military/diplomatic goals at the same time.

Moreover, it would (and I am sure you’re not) be naive to believe that Hamas was unaware of a hit-list. On the contrary, as realists in a real world, they expected it, and have, as the fact that many of those listed have not been killed attests, made contingency plans to protect them.

By the same token, the Israelis are realists too, and, like Hamas, keep details of the movements of senior political and military personnel secret.

All is fair in love and war.

This isn’t about sterile ”is it legal” or ”is it justified” or ”who started it” criticism being aimed at Hamas or Israel, it’s about stopping the fighting.

That’s why the article would only be taken seriously by partisans or those who do not know the reality.

Thanks.

@ Wa’d apparently the majority of them has nothing to do with Hamas. After 8 days, the Israeli war is still unable to accomplish a serious victory, especially while Hamas’s missiles are still coming down, which really put us before three probabilities:

1) the Israeli strikes are mostly based on false information.

2) The Israeli strikes are performed blindly due to lack of information.

3) The Israeli campaign is aiming to emphasize a negative chain reaction from the civilians against Hamas. (they have tried the same tactics in the war on Lebanon.)

either ways, it is apparently that they have accomplished the least of their goals, and in result will be lead inevitably to some massive invasion. (the same scenario happened in the war on Lebanon.)

@Michael: I cannot see why you’ve suffered to put out some common sense. of course Hamas predicted an act of hostility from Israel side, after all the two sides are at war.

the aim of this article is to discuss whether the arabic governments knew about it or not. you may not understand the need that triggers the urge of acquiring such knowledge, but an arabic citizen considers this critically important.

”@Michael: I cannot see why you’ve suffered to put out some common sense.”

”Ad Hominem consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim. Ad hominem argument, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument.”

Wikipedia.

Well H.A., if answering my comment involves telling me that you don’t understand why I bothered to take the trouble to write it in the first place isn’t ad hominem, I don’t know what is.

I just wanted to talk about a specific aspect of all this, that’s all.

Apparently that is not what you want.

You seem to want direct answers to only one question, ”did the other Arab countries know?” and think other comment is irrelevant.

Fair enough. It’s your post. You’re the boss here. I didn’t respect the rules.

Well,

Wa’d ALSO wanted to speak about a specific aspect of all this. She spoke about casualties, which doesn’t answer the ”other country” question EITHER. It doesn’t address the ”aim of the article” EITHER.

But, apparently, casualties don’t count as not being worth commenting on or being irrelevant, because you chose not to bring up the question of relevency with her.

Why is that? What do casualties have to do with the ”Aim” of the article, which is ”whether Arabic governments knew about Israel’s plans or not”?

The rules and guidelines for what kind of comment is acceptable, or worth submitting, do not seem to be very clear on this post, nor are they equally and evenly applied.

That’s called arbitrary judgement.

As I said, sorry to have bothered you, Mister Policeman-of-the-how-to-comment, and I certainly won’t do it again.

Peace.