And the Oscar goes to.....Hamas

[Plane]

They would be a complete success if they caused public opinion to favor the Palestinians. They don't. Killing random civilians is ineffective.

They would be far more effective to use passive resistance techniques as Gandhi did. The rockets are a dumb idea. Israel obviously has a right to do all it can to prevent citizens from being hurt by rockets.

Assassination of a Hamas leader by the Israelis is every bit as illegitimate as the assassination of Netanyahu by Hamas. I am sure that assassinating BB would cause major mayhem by the Israelis.

This is discouraging .

I agree with most of that.

I must be wrong.

[sirs]

*snicker*

[Plane]

*snicker*

Hey , this could be bad.

Am I gonna start having to argue with you?

[sirs]

Perish the thought.  I need at least one person to agree with my bingos, to debunk Xo's claim that no one does     

[Xavier_Onassis]

There are doubtless idiots available who would agree with sirs. stupidity is commonplace.

Netanyahu knows that if he can fend off Hamas, he will be a hero to many, and be reelected.

So at at a well-scheduled moment, he provokes Hamas by ordering the assassination of its leader, knowing that this will provoke more rockets. Beating the Gazans is child's play for the IDF. They cannot stop Netanyahu from invading and having his way with them.

[sirs]

Wow Plane......I sure as hell would never call you an idiot or stupid

[Plane]

Wow Plane......I sure as hell would never call you an idiot or stupid

You can if you want to.
But if you want me to believe it .
I want evidence!

[Xavier_Onassis]

Actually, Plane was agreeing with  ME, nor sirs.

[Plane]

Yes , uncomfortable isn't it?

Killing the leadership of your opposition is a good move in a war of attrition, there is a lot of investment in the training of a leader and the loss of skill and drive and inspiration cuts deep. The loss of Stonewall Jackson or the loss of Yamamoto strike me as good examples of this.

But it is not always a good move , because some wars are not won by attrition.

If there is going to be a negotiation and genuine hope that there can be a negotiated peace , then killing off the people that you need to be negotiating with becomes a bad habit, who will you be talking to?

The replacement leadership is not likly to be chosen on the basis of reasonableness and they are not likly to be in a good mood.

So it is a judgement call, if there is no hope for negotiating a peace , or no desire to negotiate a peace because an unconditional surrender or a wipeout or maintence of war is preferred , then the leadership is just as legitamate for targeting as any rifleman.

In my own estimation , poor choices have been made in this reguard.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Again, the Zionists killing a Hamas leader is no more  or less different than the Palestinians killing Netanyahu.

It would be more effective, as Hamas has had rather stupid and fanatical leadership, while Netanyahu is cunning, manipulative and sly. He is a more effective leader of a much more powerful state. But morally, killing him is no worse than killing any Hamas person.

[sirs]

Actually, Plane was agreeing with  ME, nor sirs.

Actually, I was referring to when Plane agrees with my many "bingos", in which you made it painfully clear no one does......outside of apparently those stupid idiots.  Again, I'd never call Plane such.  Your mileage may vary, I suppose

[Plane]

Again, the Zionists killing a Hamas leader is no more  or less different than the Palestinians killing Netanyahu.

It would be more effective, as Hamas has had rather stupid and fanatical leadership, while Netanyahu is cunning, manipulative and sly. He is a more effective leader of a much more powerful state. But morally, killing him is no worse than killing any Hamas person.

Yes , killing leadership of opposition is not really worse than killing low ranking soldiers, they are alike acts of war.

But there may be differing practical effect, and it is the hight of irrisponsibility to not think through the consequence .