Slashdot Mirror


A Skeptical View of Israel's Iron Dome Rocket Defense System

Lasrick (2629253) writes It isn't as if real analysis of Israel's "Iron Dome" isn't available, but invariably, whenever Israel has a skirmish the media is filled with glowing reports of how well the system works, and we always find out months later that the numbers were exaggerated. John Mecklin at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists looks at the coverage of Iron Dome in the recent exchanges between Israel and Hamas and finds the pattern is repeating itself. However, 'Ted Postol, an MIT-based missile defense expert and frequent Bulletin contributor, provided a dose of context to the Iron Dome coverage in a National Public Radio interview Wednesday. "We can tell, for sure, from video images and even photographs that the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all,"' Includes a good explanation of the differences between Iron Dome (a 'rocket defense system') and missile defense systems pushed by the U.S.

379 comments

  1. Subject bait by vivaoporto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This post (like the one with the Brazuca for the World Cup) is certainly subject bait. It works because it attracts lots of tangentially on topic comments but that doesn't have anything to do with the subject matter of the article.

    So please, don't fall for it. Don't spend the whole comment section arguing about causes and consequences of the conflict, who started it, who deserves is, etc.

    Stay on topic and discuss the technical aspects of the missile system, at least that is what should be discussed here.

    On bizarro world Slashdot, maybe ...

    1. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      "tangentially on topic" is better than your offtopic post.

    2. Re:Subject bait by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      It's Bush's fault.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Subject bait by doomer · · Score: 5, Informative

      I worked on the beginning of Regan's Star Wars project. We viewed the problem as one in which you try to stop a bullet with a bullet. Add long range and intelligence to the bullet and the problem gets harder.The problem is hard and physics places many constraints on the solution. At one point management thought that space based defense was what we wanted until we showed that the time/distances were too great to be effective. Now we just have a scaled back terminal defense with very limited capabilities. After all these years the only value that I think that missile defense has is PR. Effective? Not really. Forget Star Wars the movie. It's not going to happen.

    4. Re:Subject bait by istartedi · · Score: 2

      I can't help but picture a sign on the door at the exit of an airport in Israel. It reads "Thank-you for not stirring up ancient inter-tribal conflict".

      I think you're post will be as effective as such a hypothetical sign; but thanks for trying. X --+ (Don Quixote's lance and a windmill).

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    5. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 4, Informative

      Stay on topic and discuss the technical aspects of the missile system, at least that is what should be discussed here.
       

      I live in Beersheba. Of the two hundred or so rockets shot at my city in the past week, we had our first casualty yesterday: an 80 year old woman was injured when a rocket fell outside her house. So far as I know (by hearing the different booms of both successful hits and Iron Dome intercepts) this was only the fourth or fifth rocket to get past the Iron Dome into the city. I'll ask my daughters tomorrow morning: they are the ones keeping score of the booms that they hear.

      So from a technical point of view, the Iron Dome is very effective.

      That doesn't mean that the rockets have no effect on us, even if they are not blowing up our houses. We _still_ have 60 seconds to get ourselves and the children to shelter 2 or 3 times per night when they shoot at us and the alarms go off, so nobody is getting any sleep. All other aspects of life are "get ourselves and the children in 60 seconds" so that means that working is affected, shopping for food is affected, going to the toilet is affected, walking the dog is affected, etc.

      We still have it better than the Gazans, though. They do not have alarms, their only warning is pamphlets dropped from F16s telling them to evacuate buildings used to launch rockets at Israel before they are destroyed. Unfortunately, a large part of their populate screems "Shahid" and actually invite the neighbours over to be a part of "protecting" by being in the building before it is bombed. I understand that their values and their culture is different than ours, but I still feel bad for the children who have to be a part of the "be a Martyr" culture, not the "save yourselves" culture. I really do feel pity for them.

      I understand that of the 120+ people killed in Gaza in the past week, about 20 were civilians (not militants). Israelis mourn those casualties just as we mourn our own. I understand that there is no 100% effective way to remove the Hamas without injuring the civilians, but that does not belittle thier casualties in any way. As an Israeli and a neighbour of Gaza I tell you: pity the Gazans.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    6. Re:Subject bait by phantomfive · · Score: 0

      We _still_ have 60 seconds to get ourselves and the children to shelter 2 or 3 times per night when they shoot at us and the alarms go off, so nobody is getting any sleep

      Why don't you sleep in the shelter?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Subject bait by assertation · · Score: 1

      I hereby declare this the best comment of the thread.

    8. Re:Subject bait by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

      I worked on the beginning of Regan's Star Wars project. We viewed the problem as one in which you try to stop a bullet with a bullet. Add long range and intelligence to the bullet and the problem gets harder.The problem is hard and physics places many constraints on the solution. At one point management thought that space based defense was what we wanted until we showed that the time/distances were too great to be effective. Now we just have a scaled back terminal defense with very limited capabilities. After all these years the only value that I think that missile defense has is PR. Effective? Not really. Forget Star Wars the movie. It's not going to happen.

      Except perhaps in a galaxy far, far away

    9. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 5, Informative

      The 'shelter' is one of two places:
      1) The building stairwell, as it has no outside walls.
      2) The underground shelter, which means that we must run though completely unprotected areas to get there.

      Note that exactly the "unprotected areas" I mention were in fact completely destroyed when a missle hit in November 2012. Luckily, we were in the stairwell at the time, and now we always run to the stairwell for that reason. Of course, the stairwell will not protect us from a direct hit on the building as the undergroud shelter would, but it does protect us from the missles' shrapnell that land outside the building.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    10. Re:Subject bait by lexman098 · · Score: 0

      Why the hell are you still living there?

    11. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why the hell are you still living there?

      It's my home.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    12. Re:Subject bait by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the case of SDI the PR might actually be worse than useless (playing mutually-assured-destruction isn't much fun to begin with; but if one or both sides come to believe the hype about a missile defense system things could really go downhill). In the case of 'iron dome', though, it might actually be helpful. Barring fairly substantial increases in rocket construction expertise, or acquisition of something particularly nasty to fill them with, the attacks it is supposed to defeat are only modestly dangerous; but extremely inflammatory.

      Given how lousy the alternatives for appearing to be taking action against the rocket menace are (grovelling through every last hidy-hole in Gaza is militarily doable but a PR debacle and unlikely to turn up more than a few bits and pieces of impoverished machine tools, because low-end rockets just aren't that hard to build. Paying Hezbollah a visit might turn up somewhat more interesting stuff; but that hasn't turned out well in the past) a system that postpones or prevents somebody taking the bait and trying them might be quite helpful.

    13. Re:Subject bait by ortholattice · · Score: 1

      Why the hell are you still living there?

      It's my home.

      People are constantly losing their "home" for as minor a reason as losing their job and having to transfer to another city. Call me a coward, but I'd move if my city was under long-term, constant attack.

      But regardless of your personal motivation, why would you want to traumatize your children by having them grow up in the midst of such fear and violence?

    14. Re:Subject bait by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      Meta-discussions have to happen somewhere... where do you suggest?

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    15. Re:Subject bait by tepples · · Score: 1

      Because the alternative to violence in Israel could involve seeking a work visa in another country.

    16. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like another program we can start in the US, any Isreali who wants to come here can, free of charge, first in line, free housing, free job(?) - or actually, you won't have to work or anything. We 'll pay all y'all to come here and then pay you to sit around, or maybe go to school.

    17. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ha ha! Well, _technically_, isn't it the palestinian's home? But I suppose might makes right and all that.. ;-)

    18. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'd move

      That is well and good, but it's not their decision. It's their home.

    19. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I understand your position, I suppose that you live in a land that is not the ancestrial homeland of your people? I.e. a North American of European decent? I understand that it is probably difficult for you to understand my need to stay. I find some aspects of other cultures difficult to understand as well, as I've mentioned above.

      I have a personal connection to this land. So does somebody else. Hence, war! I'm sure that the Hamas would love nothing more than for me to pack up and leave.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    20. Re:Subject bait by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Your posting on /. and not sledgehammering a hole in the concrete/digging a foxhole at the base of the stairwell why exactly?

      Railroad ties make decent improvised shelter roofs.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    21. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ha ha! Well, _technically_, isn't it the palestinian's home? But I suppose might makes right and all that.. ;-)

      I don't know what you mean by "technically", but yes both people call this land home. Hence, war!

      Hamas has been shooting rockets at Israel non-stop for years, but only when we shoot back does it become news. Assad kills on average 300 people per day for the past three years, but that is not news. Up until last week, more Gazans have been killed by Hamas rocket launches gone bad than by Israel, but that is not news. 100+ of the 120+ Gazans killed were Hamas militants, that is about 85% militants-to-civilians rate (US in Iraq: 8-15% militants-to-civilians rate, Russians/Soviets anywhere: 2-5% militants-to-civilians rate) but that is not news.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    22. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, we just had another rocket attack while I was composing the previous post.

      I don't think that damaging the building structure is a wise move considering the threat. I do appreciate the idea, though. I have taken some precaution and improvised some things which are likely to be of value considering the situation.

        Railroad ties would make horrible improvised shelter roofs. You don't want that falling on your child's head! Rather, armoured concrete (lots of armoured concrete) and dirt (lots of dirt) make decent shelter roofs.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    23. Re:Subject bait by guantamanera · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why the hell are you still living there?

      It's my home.

      And before 1947 Beersheba was a town of mostly Palestinians. Then in October 1948 the Israeli goverment decided to truck the palestinian's to Gaza. Shortly after having displaced the palestinians their houses got occupied by people from the newly formed Israel. I am sure there are still people alive in Gaza who remember when their house was stolen.
      I am sephardi, from mexico. I did the Aliyah and went to israel. I was not happy with what I saw. I found converted indigenous people from Latin america living in the farthest settlements. To me It felt as if they were being used as a shield.

    24. Re:Subject bait by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      What store do you go to for railroad ties?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    25. Re:Subject bait by wagnerrp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Stay on topic and discuss the technical aspects of the missile system, at least that is what should be discussed here.

      The article itself hardly touches on the technical merits of the missile system. It mentions how there are hardly any public releases of technical aspect to discuss, and that the handful of images of the system in operation show intercept angles that are highly unlikely to be successful. The core argument of the article is that the whole situation is nothing more than a PR campaign on both sides.

      Hamas fires inaccurate artillery rockets, unlikely to actually hit anything, at Israel, under the hopes Israel counter-attacks and causes lots of collateral damage that looks bad to international press.

      Israel produces a defense system and makes precision counter-attacks to prove their technological and military prowess, and restraint in its use, to international press.

    26. Re:Subject bait by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Assad kills on average 300 people per day for the past three years, but that is not news.

      Well, actually, that's been in the news quite a bit

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 3, Informative

      And before 1947 Beersheba was a town of mostly Palestinians. Then in October 1948 the Israeli goverment decided to truck the palestinian's to Gaza. Shortly after having displaced the palestinians their houses got occupied by people from the newly formed Israel. I am sure there are still people alive in Gaza who remember when their house was stolen.

      And before _whatever_date_is_inconvenient_for_somebody_else Beersheba was a town of Jews. You can go back as far or as close as you want and find somebody living here. I mention that in my other posts.

      I do believe that it was the King of Morocco who moved most of the Muslims out of Beersheba in 1947, with a promise of returning them after the Jews were exterminated. I do know of the forced evacuations at the hand of the Israeli army as well, much as the Jews were forced out of Morocco, Algers, Tunis, Lybia, Egypt, and other nations during the same time frame.

      You might want to research other population swaps, both forced and non-forced. I am aware of what was done to the Muslims who stayed in Beersheba, which is nothing in comparison to what happened to the Jews who were forced out of their homes in Muslim states at the same time. Your recollection of history is one sided.

      I am sephardi, from mexico. I did the Aliyah and went to israel. I was not happy with what I saw. I found converted indigenous people from Latin america living in the farthest settlements. To me It felt as if they were being used as a shield.

      That is an amazing article, thank you.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    28. Re:Subject bait by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      In America? Home Depot/Lowes/anyplace that has landscaping supplies. They're with the retaining wall masonry.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    29. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We already did that for the jews... We also hand them land that's not ours to give, cause you know, because.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_United_States#Immigration_from_the_Soviet_Union

    30. Re:Subject bait by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      'Improvised' is a key word there.

      Depending on the technology used, most of crete slab is not structural. Just stay away fromt the stair footing and the building parameter and it should only be 10cm or so thick and not seriously reinforced. Stay away from plumbing. Look for the drain cleanout and water supply.

      If it's a tension slab you're right, don't touch it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    31. Re:Subject bait by Blaskowicz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Forget Star Wars the movie anyway. Vader royally fucked up on planet Hoth, seemed to have an overwhelming position but for some reason he decides to go on foot to capture Luke & Leia personnally. But everyone manages to escape and the scary star destroyers in orbit don't manage to destroy or stop any ship. The star destroyers are managed by grossly incompetent captains.. But even with such idiots at the bar, victory would have been certain would all the ships and stuff have burnt the rebel place to the ground with a giant laser/blaster/plasma massacre.

      As for the first movie, it has manually aimed WW2-style air defences ;). "The rebel fighters are too small for our turbolasers", or something like that.
      Star Wars is about resistance/terrorists defeating an evil military industrial empire that suffers from royal fuck ups and ineffective pork barrel weapon projects.

    32. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 5, Informative

      (1) Out of two hundred or so rockets shot "at" your city, how many were on a trajectory that they'd actually have landed "in" your city? Not many because they're so wildly inaccurate? Or most because your city is large?

      When someone is shooting at you with a rifle, do you not take cover if the bullet will not hit you? How would you even know that the bullet will not hit you?

      When a rocket is launched, seconds count. All population centers in the direction of the rocket's travel are warned by alarm. That means that we grab our children and run, no matter if we are working, eating, shitting, sleeping, or anything else.

      The nature of this particular question seems very naive. I suppose that you haven't been shot at much!

      (2) You mentioned 200 hundred rockets shot at your city. Is this the sum of the tallies of "two different kinds of boom" you mentioned, or does the number come from a different source?

      The number comes from a few sources. The army says this many have been shot, the citizen guard says another number, Hamas says another number, we count another number, the neighbours count another number. You'll never get an exact count, but they are all within a few tens of percent from each other. Interestingly, the Hamas numbers seem to be the highest.

      Is the low casualty rate better explained by a high intercept rate by Iron Dome? Or by the inaccuracy of the rockets coupled with the fact that statistically a high proportion of possible landing targets wouldn't hurt someone? Or by the fact that so many people in your city sensibly seek shelter? Or by the fact that the rockets are fairly rudimentary and don't pack much explosive and are unlikely to do damage unless they randomly score a hit almost on top of someone? I suspect that the other factors are dominant and the low casualty rate is therefore not a good guide to the effectiveness of Iron Dome.

      The low casualty rate is undoubtedly due to the fact that so many people sensibly seek shelter. The high COP of the missiles mean nothing when shooting at civilians, and they do have between 40 - 90 KG of HE, with lots of nasty shrapnel. These are not the pop rockets that were being shot ten years ago. These are Iranian and Soviet designed weapons.

      The Iron Dome is a factor for the low damage, but the alarms are what is saving lives. Excellent question!

      If by sound you distinguish an IronDome hit from a rocket that hits the ground, do you assume that all "ground" hits land in your city?

      We can tell by how bad the building shakes and how much damage was done (i.e. broken windows, which we have had at my house).

      In your tallies, you said you heard 4-5 rockets hit the ground. How many did you hear intercepted by Iron Dome?

      I'll ask my daughters for their current count next time the alarms go off. I'm pretty sure that they are both well above 150 by now. Each volley is a few rockets (6-12), and we've had between 4-8 volleys per day for the past week.

      Do you think the range of your hearing hit-the-ground and hit-by-IronDome are equivalent?

      I really doubt it. The Iron Dome intercepts are in the air and relatively far from the city, thus they are harder to hear. Plus, they have far less HE than do the rockets they are intercepting. I suppose that we may be under heavier fire than I've thought. I'm not sure that is a perspective that I wanted!

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    33. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 2

      I mention COP, that was meant to be CEP:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    34. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The ancestral land of your people is whoever you were pissing off last. The Jews have roamed the entire fertile crescent and have been told to get the fuck out, or got used by those already there in each and every land. Maybe if you didn't think the world is supposed to cater to you, you could spend less time putting up "Tolerance Museums" and more time actually being tolerated.

      Actually, that is true of every civilization that had roamed the fertile crescent at the beginning of recorded history. As you can see, we're the only ones left!

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    35. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And before 1947, say back about 1500BC there was this guy named Moses that led his people out of slavery from Egypt and set up their homes there. There was no such thing as a Palastenian at that point. So we could go back to your arbitary date to make your point, or we can continue going back if its your cliam that those there first own it, in which case the Jews have right to it by over 3000 years.

      Nice using history to make your point and ignoring most of it while at it.

    36. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are use of the contraction "you're" in place of the possessive pronoun "your" was interesting. It also made me stop right there.

    37. Re:Subject bait by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      The nature of this particular question seems very naive. I suppose that you haven't been shot at much!

      It's a semantic question to determine if your numbers for "shot at city" and "into city" are referring to the same thing, or to different things.

      The [200] number comes from a few sources.

      It sounds like, from what you say, the only number comparison that gives a meaningful idea of IronDome effectiveness is "count of audible intercepts" vs "count of audible impacts". All other numbers are incomensurable.

      [You have heard+felt 4-5 rockets hit the ground] and [have heard] above 150 [aerial intercepts] by now

      Those are the key numbers. You indicated that you believe that all of the aerial intercepts were of rockets that were going to head into your city. And you believe that the 4-5 rockets on the ground were in the city (which we can assume IronDome also tried to hit). Therefore, from your numbers, and based on your beliefs, you think IronDome is able to hit 97% of rockets.

      You also indicated that you think your hearing of aerial intercepts isn't as effective as your hearing of ground impacts. Therefore the number might be higher than 97%.

      The Israeli army says the number is slightly lower than 90%, so your numbers are in the same ballpark - http://thebulletin.org/iron-do...

      In the frustrating interview with NPR, the expert said "5% or lower". But it wasn't clear, and Siegel didn't think to ask, whether this was referring to the chance of stopping a rocket that they intended to stop (which is what you're measuring), or to the chance that a single interceptor would stop a single rocket. I can't tell whether IronDome fires multiple intercepts per incoming rocket or just one.

    38. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over time, you and other worthless punks like you have hounded the Jews out of practically every part of the world where they were living,.Then you tried to murder them all in WW2. Now you would take the one tiny homeland they have away from them? You are a fucking sad excuse for a human being. Go find Adolf Eichmann so you are in the company of someone at your own level.

    39. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meta-discussions have to happen somewhere... where do you suggest?

      In your head.

    40. Re:Subject bait by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Don't spend the whole comment section arguing about causes and consequences of the conflict, who started it, who deserves is, etc.

      Stay on topic and discuss the technical aspects of the missile system, at least that is what should be discussed here.

      Why? Surely analysing the mechanisms of society and their failure modes are far more deserving of the title "stuff that matters" than the mechanisms of systems used in the resulting mess. Or do you have some kind of ulterior motive to keep this conflict from being discussed or analysed? Do you, for example, fear that your side - whichever it is - might come up looking bad?

      And if that's the case, perhaps you should look beyond whatever gains you think your side might have from the conflict to the long-term benefits of establishing a less violent and chaotic world.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    41. Re:Subject bait by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Here, we have a railroad out at the back of our land. I call it my 1:1 layout when talking to model railroad buffs. I suppose I could nab as much as every other tie for a bit of the run and they might not notice...

    42. Re:Subject bait by ultranova · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have a personal connection to this land. So does somebody else. Hence, war!

      I'm starting to wonder if the best thing anyone could do for the Holy Land and its residents was to detonate enough dirty bombs there to force everyone to decide whether living there is worth more than their own lives, rather than just their neighbours.

      Oh well, with any luck climate change will clear the place through desertification.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    43. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And before _whatever_date_is_inconvenient_for_somebody_else Beersheba was a town of Jews.

      Where these "Jews" more likely to be the ancestors of the Palestinians or Israelis...
      Did Plaestine cease to be "Jewish" because of migration or because the Arabs "upgraded" to V2 or V3 of "The religion of Abraham"?

    44. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike the previous poster, your history is unsupported outside of religious texts.

    45. Re:Subject bait by r1348 · · Score: 1

      Highly debatable, actually Palestinian Arabs are descendants of Levantine Semites as much as Jews, so you wouldn't say that yours is the only civilization still around.

    46. Re:Subject bait by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      Palestinian Arabs are descended from the same people as Syrian Arabs, Lebanese Arabs, Jordanian Arabs and quite a few other Arabs.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    47. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am sephardi, from mexico. I did the Aliyah and went to israel. I was not happy with what I saw. I found converted indigenous people from Latin america living in the farthest settlements. To me It felt as if they were being used as a shield.

      Apostates!

    48. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand that their values and their culture is different than ours, but I still feel bad for the children who have to be a part of the "be a Martyr" culture, not the "save yourselves" culture. I really do feel pity for them.

      It is unfair of you to include exactly the kind of commentary that OP railed against in the one line of his post that you quoted.

      You should understand that being a martyr is all they have. It isn't their fault that they have been marginalized so much that they have no other way to make their suffering known than to sacrifice themselves on an israeli missile. Malnutrition is already rampant, no one would even notice a hunger strike.

    49. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 0

      I worked on the beginning of Regan's Star Wars project. We viewed the problem as one in which you try to stop a bullet with a bullet. Add long range and intelligence to the bullet and the problem gets harder.The problem is hard and physics places many constraints on the solution. At one point management thought that space based defense was what we wanted until we showed that the time/distances were too great to be effective. Now we just have a scaled back terminal defense with very limited capabilities.

      After all these years the only value that I think that missile defense has is PR. Effective? Not really. Forget Star Wars the movie. It's not going to happen.

      Star wars to me actually made sense (although maybe not in the way it was pitched to the public).You could use a small nuclear device to screw up a much larger nuclear device while both were at very high altitude. Ok, you are going to cause a shit load of nuclear fallout to come down but hopefully that will be somewhere else like over the atlantic, pacific or mainland Europe. Either way, better a bit of fallout than an actual missile targeted at Washington or New York.

      The things about Iron Dome though, is that the rockets they are trying to hit are basically crap. The rockets might have a decent range but they have no way of targeting them so they generally do sod all apart from scare people. Hamas have been launching them for days with no real effect in the latest conflict but even if you go back years they have very rarely killed or even hit anyone. Israel on the other hand kill hundreds of Palestinian civilians every year with their very advanced military hardware, often provided by the US for free.

      Don't get me wrong, I think the launching of rockets randomly against the civilian population of Israel is utterly wrong, but the reality seems to be that both sides are quite happy to kill civilians on the other side its just that Israel is much better at it.

      Maybe, the people of Gaza should all just up and leave so that Israel can have its promised land. It's not like then being there is stopping Israel building new settlements anyway and with the US always backing Israel there is no chance of that changing.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    50. Re:Subject bait by doomer · · Score: 2

      We also speculated that our effort with lots of new parking lots and the building of large tempest proof buildings visible from space by the USSR was a key goal of the administration. At the start we had lots of true believers and we thought that all we had to do was to build it. It took some time to the techs to realize that physics would severely constrain us, but it was not something that we ever admitted officially. After all this was Regan's signature project. Perhaps the USSR did not know this and took all the activity as something to be feared? As one example, our new facility, in modular building units, had state of the art satellite communications that was to allow the various SDI centers to easily communicate. However, someone forgot to take into account the round trip delay (~1 second) of going to geosynchronous orbit satellite and back again. That coupled with our disk less synchronous Sun workstations made it all but unusable for any kind of interactive work over the satellite system. Within a year our 40 foot satellite dishes were quietly dismantled.

    51. Re:Subject bait by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      What about west bank where people are kicked out of their homes so that settlers can move in? The real problem over there is not the weapons, but the attitude that keeps the weapons alive. There is not good guys versus bad guys, but bad guys and other bad guys. Every time someone attempts to start a peace process one or the other side, or *both*, do something to hijack it. Everyone in the world except for Israelis know that the settlements are illegal and every new house causes immense anger. If the Israeli government bulldozed the settlements that the Palestineans would listen to the peace process. As it is today, the dialogue seems to be "we'll stop hitting you when you stop hitting us".

      Yes, Israelis have a right to defend themselves. And ALSO the Palestineans have a right to defend themselves. One side elects some idiotic war mongers, and the other side elects some idiotic war mongers. You honestly think Bibi wants peace, no he wants war because war keeps him in power. He's every bit as evil as Hamas.

      Iron Dome is just part of the propaganda machine. Rather than reduce the number of rockets by reducing tensions, this way they can keep the animosity high while reducing casualties on one side only.

      Here's some advice: America is getting sick of all of this. The old guard that defends Israel no matter what they do is dying off, the evangelical view that Israel must exist before we can convert them to Christianity is dying out, everyone is just too tired. Even the Jewish community in America is sick of Israel. I think in a decade or two that all support will vanish, including money to buy weapons, including the raising of trade blockades. By that time you should hope you make peace. Best chance is to be like Northern Ireland, and just stop fighting out of sheer exhaustion of seeing all the dead children.

    52. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 0

      I understand that of the 120+ people killed in Gaza in the past week, about 20 were civilians (not militants).

      No, 20 were children. The number of civilians is more like 53 according to this article: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/israe...

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    53. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Why the hell are you still living there?

      It's my home.

      The Palestinians who have their houses pulled down each year to make way for more Jewish settlements probably said that too. That is the real problem, until Israel stops expanding on land that is being stolen from others around it this conflict will carry on.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    54. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      You might want to research other population swaps, both forced and non-forced. I am aware of what was done to the Muslims who stayed in Beersheba, which is nothing in comparison to what happened to the Jews who were forced out of their homes in Muslim states at the same time. Your recollection of history is one sided.

      You seem to ignore that Israel is STILL doing this now though. The IDF tears down hundreds of Palestinian homes each year in the name of punishing those involved in terrorism, and the dept of agriculture builds more and more Israeli settlements. You might do it more slowly now, but the end result is still that Israel is expanding and taking more and more land.

      Do you actually want Israel to be the size of this map?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

      The problem is that other people live there now and they have a right to carry on living there.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    55. Re:Subject bait by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Used to be in Israel you could get them directly from Israel Railways Company(state owned) right from the rail yard, that was 13+ years ago doubt you still can. But they could probably point you in the right direction. Here in the Americas, either your local building company or right from a rail company themselves. I used to buy them here in Ontario from the local CN dispatch office where the guys who did repairs worked. If you wanted more than half a dozen ties, they'd order them in for you. They were about half the cost of buying them anywhere else.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    56. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you've got a great idea.

      Salt every square inch with Cobalt-60. Welcome the refugees, and call it a day.

    57. Re:Subject bait by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Vader could have killed Luke many times. He just insisted on trying to take him alive. His first big mistake was in hiring an incompetent engineer for the first death star who doesn't understand the concept of 'single point of failure' and managed to design a supercapital ship that could be destroyed by a single shot in just the right place. His second mistake was in relying on his huge team of elite soldiers to repel an attack consisting of two men, a pampered royal, a service droid and a translater. A fine plan, except that those two men were protected by plot-powered blaster-deflectors.

    58. Re:Subject bait by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, in the case of Iron Dome, that's only PR too. They're shooting $50k+ missiles at $800 rockets. Even after factoring in that Israel's per-capita GDP is 20 times that of Palestine's, that's still a losing proposition, even *if* they had a 100% hit rate (which this article is suggesting it's anything-but) and assuming that you get the launcher, radar, etc for free instead of the actual $55 million per unit. It's in Palestine's best interests that Israel deploy as many of them as possible and try to shoot down every last rocket, because every shekel they spend on Iron Domes and missiles is a shekel they don't spend on jets, tanks, and bombs.

      --
      Fox: "I think we should call it... your grave!" Cast: "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
    59. Re:Subject bait by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      Using a nuclear device at high altitude? You do know what happens if you do that, right? That one test bomb knocked out street lights and long distance phone service nearly 1000 miles away and took out a third of all satellites in orbit around Earth at that point in time.

      --
      Fox: "I think we should call it... your grave!" Cast: "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
    60. Re:Subject bait by Rei · · Score: 1

      I can't help but picture a sign on the door at the exit of an airport in Israel. It reads "Thank-you for not stirring up ancient inter-tribal conflict".

      Now I can't help but think of this excellent video :)

      --
      Fox: "I think we should call it... your grave!" Cast: "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
    61. Re:Subject bait by Snotnose · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So a bunch of insane asshats decide to shoot rockets at you, and you're supposed to pull up stakes and move elsewhere? In this example, from Israel to the US?
      I have to admit, I must be missing something. If a bunch of nutjobs in Tijuana decided to shoot rockets into my hometown of San Diego I would certainly hope the government would respond.

    62. Re:Subject bait by JabrTheHut · · Score: 0

      As an Israeli and a neighbour of Gaza I tell you: pity the Gazans.

      But not enough to stop bombing them....

      --
      Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
    63. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What an asshole!

    64. Re:Subject bait by billstewart · · Score: 1

      And Iron Dome hasn't been doing anything to protect the Palestinians from missile attacks.

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    65. Re:Subject bait by Nemyst · · Score: 2

      So it's basically like real life?

    66. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you are saying Israel should be compared to Assad and Hamas?

      Fine, if that's the comparison Israel is looking for.

      Hey guys look! I may be bad, but am not as bad as the other guys over there!

    67. Re:Subject bait by sumdumass · · Score: 0

      Where these "Jews" more likely to be the ancestors of the Palestinians or Israelis...

      Neither. They are largely from the same gene pool if you consider most of the y chromosome in the populations being of the same pool.

      Of course the ottoman empire actually sold land to European Jews (likely from different genetics) off and on since the 1600s.

      Did Plaestine cease to be "Jewish" because of migration or because the Arabs "upgraded" to V2 or V3 of "The religion of Abraham"?

      Largely because of V3 and the Muslim conquests in the 7th century. The Muslim conquests also brought about quite a bit of conversions (I don't know if it was forced or not). This also brought about the Arabization of the area.

      It should be noted that Palestine has never been a country or state. The area got the name due to Hellenization. It was a Hellenized location so the Greeks or other Hellenized people could reference it. The lands have always been occupied by some power other than the Palestinian people since they got the name. DNA studies seem to link the Palestinians close to the Jews and early Christians (who were converted Jews) quite closely.

    68. Re:Subject bait by Sun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because:
      A. No place in Israel is truely safe.
      During the second Lebanon war, the most safe place was around where I live (maximal distance from both Gaza and Lebanon). I live 5 Kilometers from the green line. If the Palestinians around my area decide to join in, my house will be in more danger than Dotan's.

      B. Not living in Israel is not really an option.
      Obviously, for some, it is. Long term, however, history showed that Jews don't fare well when not under self government. Thankfully, antisemitism suffered a major blow back after the Nazies lost WWII, and so people who grew up in western countries don't think of it as something real. It is illegitimate, and still fairly rare. That is a good thing. Sadly, it is also very far from non-existing. Jews in many western European countries don't wear external religious signs, and if they do, experience daily harassement. What's more, the current trends are not promising.

      Maintaining Israel is a survival need. The fact that Israel's current strength pushes the danger back quite a bit is proof that the need is real, not vice versa.

      Shachar

    69. Re:Subject bait by DMiax · · Score: 2

      100+ of the 120+ Gazans killed were Hamas militants, that is about 85% militants-to-civilians rate (US in Iraq: 8-15% militants-to-civilians rate, Russians/Soviets anywhere: 2-5% militants-to-civilians rate) but that is not news.

      You have clearly shown that you shouldn't take your 100/120 number seriously. None of those other cases admitted to killing civilians in large percentages either.

    70. Re:Subject bait by pehrs · · Score: 1

      Railroad ties make decent improvised shelter roofs.

      Decent but not good. They are likely to create really nasty shrapnel if hit. They are heavy. And they are typically covered with creosote, which is something you do not want in your home if you can avoid it. In general, wood may be cheap, but it's not a very good material for building shelters against explosives..

      If you spend the time and energy building a bombshelter you use the right materials, which are typically steel and reinforced concrete.

    71. Re:Subject bait by advocate_one · · Score: 0

      Mod parent back up please... it doesn't deserve this stupid low rating

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    72. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      I understand that of the 120+ people killed in Gaza in the past week, about 20 were civilians (not militants).

      No, 20 were children. The number of civilians is more like 53 according to this article: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/israe...

      Thank you for that link. I was going by the figures that Hamas provides, not by the Gaza ministry of health. I wonder if Hamas inflates its numbers to show that they being targetted, or if the ministry of health is unaware of some of the people being affiliated with Hamas.

      Either way, it shows that there are statistics, and there is the truth!

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    73. Re:Subject bait by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      When someone is shooting at you with a rifle, do you not take cover if the bullet will not hit you? How would you even know that the bullet will not hit you?

      You duck, duh! Haven't you ever played Contra, bullets are easy to dodge! If you can't duck, jump over the bullet.

    74. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your pity. I will make sure to pass it on.

      Let me describe to you what it feels like to be on the receiving end of an F-16 dropped bomb:
      YouÃ(TM)re minding your own business, playing with the neighborsÃ(TM) kids, or going to the next door shopæ maybe just coming home from a long day of work at a shitty job and you hear a deafening noise zooming at speeds of sound just over your head. You feel time stopping still as you watch the dropped object hurling towards the ground. No one can help you here. It's you and your luck.

      If youÃ(TM)re lucky to be far enough from the intended target, which is not always a military-related one as the media would like you to think, you will enjoy a deafening boom and a shockwave that will literally make you feel like Neo dodging agent SmithÃ(TM)s handgun. You float in time and space and you are praying for a smooth landing on a cushioning surface. Causalities usually donÃ(TM)t remember a thingæ due to comas, concussions, and/or more severe brain injuries. If youÃ(TM)re REALLY lucky to Ãbe a MartyrÃ(TM)æ well your earthly vessel will burn to ashes or will be torn into pieces and your heavenly component will get 72 virgins, others say 72 raisins, and an eternal life of first class heaven.

      Now, the question remains, why donÃ(TM)t Palestinians leave to safer grounds and leave the ones who want to fight, to fight it out?

      Believe it or not, not a single Palestinian ever died and came back to tell us what is happening on the other side. No one I know wakes up in the morning saying Ã(TM)Gosh, I just canÃ(TM)t wait till itÃ(TM)s my time Ã" really need to get laid in heavenÃ(TM). I have yet to see any people standing in line waiting for the shuttle route: ÃoeImpoverished Gaza-Holy HeavenÃ.

      We stay at homes that are to be bombed because itÃ(TM)s a defiance act. A final fuck-you to this life that was only misery from day 1. 50+% unemployment, prison (which is what Gaza has been for decades), forced displacement after forced displacement, exile, Ãoeinternational aidà aka beggary, and NIMBY neighbors from all sides. Yeah, heaven! Why not? It sounds like a pipedream to you but itÃ(TM)s much better than the nightmare cards many have been dealt. And before any asshole jumps to lecture me about Ãwell do something to change the situationæ and itÃ(TM)s your fault because you allow itÃ(TM), please stfu. Take a look in the mirror and tell me how much you have changed in your democratic and law-abiding country and when youÃ(TM)re full on your own bullshit, send me your magical change recipe and the place where I can cash it.

      I need not your pity, Mr. Cohen. I, like an anonymous coward, came to America and left them sand niggers with their heavenly dreams. I am not angry and I donÃ(TM)t hate you or your daughters. I am, however, bitter at this life, my cowardliness, and human nature. Nietzsche nailed it: ÃMan is the cruelest AnimalÃ(TM).

    75. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for your pity. I will make sure to pass it on.

      Let me describe to you what it feels like to be on the receiving end of an F-16 dropped bomb:
      You're minding your own business, playing with the neighbors' kids, or going to the next door shop... maybe just coming home from a long day of work at a shitty job and you hear a deafening noise zooming at speeds of sound or close enough. You feel time stopping still as you watch the dropped object hurling towards the ground.

      If you're lucky to be far enough from the intended target, which is not always a military-related one as the media would like you to think, you will enjoy a deafening boom and a shockwave that will literally make you feel like Neo dodging agent Smith's handgun. You literally float in time and space and hopefully end up with a smooth landing on a cushioning surface. Causalities usually don't remember a thing... due to comas, concussions, and/or more severe brain injuries. If you're the lucky one to 'be a Martyr'... well your earthly vessel will burn to ashes or will be torn into pieces and the heavenly component will get 72 virgins, others say 72 raisins, and an eternal life of first class heaven.

      Now, the question remains, why don't Palestinians leave to safer grounds and leave the ones who want to fight, to fight it out?

      Believe it or not, not a single Palestinian ever died and came back to tell us what is happening on the other side. No one I know wakes up in the morning saying 'Gosh, I just can't wait till it's my time - really need to get laid in heaven'. I have yet to see any people standing in line waiting for the shuttle route: "Impoverished Gaza-Holy Heaven".

      We stay at homes that are to be bombed because it's a defiance act. A final fuck-you to this life that was only misery from day 1. 50% unemployment, prison (which is what Gaza has been for decades), forced displacement after forced displacement, exile, "international aid" aka beggary, and NIMBY neighbors from all sides. Yeah, heaven! Why not? It sounds like a pipedream to you but it's much better than the nightmare cards many have been dealt. And before any asshole jumps to lecture me about Ãwell do something to change the situation... and it's your fault because you allow it', please stfu. Take a look in the mirror and tell me how much you have changed in your democratic and law-abiding country and when you're full on your own bullshit, send me your magical change recipe and the place where I can cash it.

      I need not your pity, Mr. Cohen. I, like an anonymous coward, came to America and left them sand niggers with their heavenly dreams. I am not angry and I don't hate you or your daughters. I am, however, bitter at this life, my cowardliness, and human nature. Nietzsche nailed it: 'Man is the cruelest Animal'.

    76. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I can't tell whether IronDome fires multiple intercepts per incoming rocket or just one.

      To get a higher probability of kill two interceptors, separated by a short-time delay, can be fired at the same target. (I have not seen any estimate on what fractions of the engagements have used two interceptors.)
      http://mostlymissiledefense.com/2012/12/05/ballistic-missile-defense-iron-dome-description-december-5-2012/

    77. Re:Subject bait by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      And before _whatever_date_is_inconvenient_for_somebody_else Beersheba was a town of Jews. You can go back as far or as close as you want and find somebody living here. I mention that in my other posts.

      Yes, but going back indefinitely is pointless. Memories have half-lives. What matters most for resolution of conflict is what people who are alive today remember and feel, not what some goat herder did a thousand years ago (maybe, assuming the historical texts are accurate).

      Within living memory, Beersheba started out as being Palestinian. That's the start date that matters. If in 50-100 years or so when everyone who remembers that is dead, pointing this out will be as stale as the statement I quoted above. But not today.

      Honestly, when ordinary people outside that place look at the state of Israel and Gaza it's hard not to conclude that Israel should never have been created at all. The Jews who were living around the world could have stayed there, or moved to places with no anti-semitic political forces.

    78. Re: Subject bait by sandertje · · Score: 2

      You can compare shit to other shit, but in the end two wrongs doesn't make a right. Civilians are killed in Gaza, and that is always bad. Although, in the end, it's Hamas who is the ultimate culprit. They are launching and storing their rockets from urban areas, in or next to homes, hospitals, schools and mosques. They are using their own people as a human shield. It's their choice to do so. They could have also chosen to launch from a field, where civilian casualties would have been extremely unlikely.

      As for Iron Dome, I'm glad it exists. It has knocked out all rockets launched at my family's town so far. Who knows how many Israeli casualties there would have been if it didn't exist; probably many.

    79. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      I understand that of the 120+ people killed in Gaza in the past week, about 20 were civilians (not militants).

      No, 20 were children. The number of civilians is more like 53 according to this article: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/israe...

      Thank you for that link. I was going by the figures that Hamas provides, not by the Gaza ministry of health. I wonder if Hamas inflates its numbers to show that they being targetted, or if the ministry of health is unaware of some of the people being affiliated with Hamas.

      Either way, it shows that there are statistics, and there is the truth!

      Hamas probably try and bolster their numbers by counting all adults as being serving members :)

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    80. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Using a nuclear device at high altitude? You do know what happens if you do that, right? That one test bomb knocked out street lights and long distance phone service nearly 1000 miles away and took out a third of all satellites in orbit around Earth at that point in time.

      Yup, that is the point. You do not have to actually HIT the incomming nuke, as the effects of nuclear weapons in the upper atmosphere cover such a huge area. Like I said in my post, the outcome you describe is a far better one for the US that a nuke landing on Washington or New York.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    81. Re:Subject bait by JabrTheHut · · Score: 1

      But regardless of your personal motivation, why would you want to traumatize your children by having them grow up in the midst of such fear and violence?

      Because there is actually very little violence directed at them, as the vast majority is directed at the Palestinians. And they want the Palestinians gone. They get upset when the Palestinians fight back, but it happens so rarely that they don't leave Israel over it.

      --
      Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
    82. Re:Subject bait by Nimey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How much is Israel spending, though, and how much of Iron Dome's cost is borne by American foreign aid?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    83. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you really are an ignorant fuck, why don't you try reading a book? You might learn a real, actual fact in the process.

    84. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a bunch of insane asshats decide to shoot rockets at you, and you're supposed to pull up stakes and move elsewhere?

      You do know that Israel actually fired first this time, right? It is collective punishment for the alleged kidnapping and murdering of 3 Israeli. I say alleged because it's quite unclear what has happened there. No doubt they are dead, but the circumstances are really unclear. They might as well have died in a car accident.

      I have to admit, I must be missing something.

      The above is what you missed.

    85. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet their genes tell a very different story.

    86. Re: Subject bait by arendjr · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're not taking into consideration that Iron Dome does a trajectory analysis of the rockets and when the rocket is determined to fall safely outside of populated areas (like the vast majority of them do) they don't even attempt to intercept them. So they only have expenses for rockets which actually threaten to hit any cities.

    87. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Ottoman government never sold Palestinian land to the Jews you blatant liar.

    88. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We will wipe the very memory of Palestine from the world, as you describe.

    89. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The western world should give hamas the best weapons technology we have, so that they only hit military targets

    90. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was always our land. They were trespassing. How would you treat trespassers on your land? You'd shoot them too, no?

    91. Re:Subject bait by mikelieman · · Score: 1

      On the upside, I totally credit SDI's concept of aiming the laser with the mirror to have inspired VariLight's innovative stage-lighting technology, the benefits of which we are still reaping...

      --
      Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
    92. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are strong enough now that anti Semitic morons like you can be ignored. No longer must Jews be subject to the dictates of non Jews. The land is ours, history has given it to us. Your pathetic cries will be soon forgotten.

    93. Re:Subject bait by r1348 · · Score: 1
    94. Re:Subject bait by strikethree · · Score: 1

      The nature of this particular question seems very naive. I suppose that you haven't been shot at much!

      Hm. I would guess his question should be interpreted as: How accurate do the rockets seem to be?

      But on to what I want to ask you:

      I have had rockets and mortars fired at and land near enough to me that I could hear the air moving around the outside of the mortar casing and feel the pressure wave from the rocket. Scary stuff. I lasted two and a half years under such a bombardment and I then I had to leave or weird things would have irreversible in my brain. That makes me ask this: How can you sit there and take it without just going over to Gaza and smashing them until they become peaceful? I ask this on a personal level as I know the answer on a political level.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    95. Re: Subject bait by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

      Israeli Jews are hardly free loaders.

      There be reasons to dislike Israel, but what the Jews that have accomplished there is incredible. Especially whey you consider that they do it all under constant terrorist attacks.

    96. Re:Subject bait by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      I worked on the beginning of Regan's Star Wars project. We viewed the problem as one in which you try to stop a bullet with a bullet. Add long range and intelligence to the bullet and the problem gets harder.The problem is hard and physics places many constraints on the solution. At one point management thought that space based defense was what we wanted until we showed that the time/distances were too great to be effective. Now we just have a scaled back terminal defense with very limited capabilities.

      After all these years the only value that I think that missile defense has is PR. Effective? Not really. Forget Star Wars the movie. It's not going to happen.

      The bait is to prove that the Iron Dome did not work well enough. From the Israeli TV (in Canada), we saw to the contrary. There were some misses, but many successes.

      If the Iron Dome can zero in on rockets, the next generation of rockets will be able to evade the Iron Dome software and the cycle of development for better defense/offense rockets/missiles continues.

      Iron Dome is version beta, with real-time non-laboratory use. The next release candidate will be much better. And would/could be deployed globally. Remember, it is a defense system, not an offense system.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    97. Re: Subject bait by sumdumass · · Score: 0

      No one said the ottoman empire sold palestine to the Jews. What was said was they sold land to European Jews. Pay attention.

    98. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Stealth Tech is complete B.S. too. How was that F117 shot down in Serbia???

    99. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a personal connection to this land. So does somebody else. Hence, war!

      I'm starting to wonder if the best thing anyone could do for the Holy Land and its residents was to detonate enough dirty bombs there to force everyone to decide whether living there is worth more than their own lives, rather than just their neighbours.

      Oh well, with any luck climate change will clear the place through desertification.

      Perusing the comments I think you win the prize for the dumbest comment of the week. Congrats. Actually it could be a contender for the dumbest comment of the year.

    100. Re:Subject bait by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      Hamas fires inaccurate artillery rockets, unlikely to actually hit anything

      Huh? What are you smoking? They're 100% gaurunteed to hit something as what goes up must come down. The problem they pose to Israel is that the something their going to hit is somewhere in a crowded city, meaning potential civilian casualties.

    101. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God fucking forbid we actually talk about real world things instead of technical aspects of a machine developed for philosophical warmaking purposes.

    102. Re:Subject bait by doccus · · Score: 1

      I worked on the beginning of Regan's Star Wars project. We viewed the problem as one in which you try to stop a bullet with a bullet. Add long range and intelligence to the bullet and the problem gets harder.The problem is hard and physics places many constraints on the solution. At one point management thought that space based defense was what we wanted until we showed that the time/distances were too great to be effective. Now we just have a scaled back terminal defense with very limited capabilities. After all these years the only value that I think that missile defense has is PR. Effective? Not really. Forget Star Wars the movie. It's not going to happen.

      That's why they switched to lateral thinking.. To try to "catch a bullet with a net". New systems work much better, but of course you're not going to get much PR on that, "if" for instance, they might be classified ;-)

    103. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I'm starting to wonder if the best thing anyone could do for the Holy Land and its residents was to detonate enough dirty bombs there to force everyone to decide whether living there is worth more than their own lives, rather than just their neighbours.

      Wow, I thought the "I may be a coward, but don't you care enough about your kids to move out of the country" remark was offensive, but this one is ignorant to a degree rarely seen even on Slashdot. I can just imagine how Churchill would have responded to such a comment circa 1941. After a millennium of wars between England and Germany and their forebears, maybe the only solution would be to wipe out as many of those silly British as possible to force them to move someplace where their kids could be safe from German air strikes. France or Samoa or Texas or wherever. Or, more to the point, "they" (whoever "they" are) should have carpetbombed Belfast and London in the 1990s, to similar effect. Guess that would have been an efficient solution to the Troubles.

      See my point? I'm sure you didn't mean to be an arse about it, but given everything happening to people in the Middle East now, such a comment comes is not helpful at best.

    104. Re:Subject bait by bware · · Score: 1

      It took some time to the techs to realize that physics would severely constrain us[...]

      The physicists knew that from the beginning.

    105. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      I once did have a mortar explode just a meter or two from me. Luckily, it was all HE and no shrapnel. I was out for a few minutes, or perhaps seconds, I don't even know. I think I remember the 'just before', but I'm not even sure of that.

      How do I not go over there and smash them? I would just love if they would stop coming over here and smashing here (i.e. with rockets). Who would I go over and smash?

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    106. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      I don't know how far back your living memory goes, but mine goes back to the time when my parents' parents' ... parents' were exiled from Jerusalem.

      By your own reasoning, if we can "keep up the war" for another two generations, then it will be the Gazans who have no claim to the land. I'm of no illusions to their claims, in fact, I recognize that _both_ sides have a claim to the land.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    107. Re:Subject bait by strikethree · · Score: 1

      How do I not go over there and smash them? I would just love if they would stop coming over here and smashing here (i.e. with rockets). Who would I go over and smash?

      Yeah. That would be best. Them stop lobbing rockets and such; however, that is never going to stop with the current status quo. Something needs to change. What that something is, is totally irrelevant the question that I asked from a personal point of view.

      To answer my question to you, I would do it in a Biblical manner: I would kill all males of combat age and slay all non-virgin women. I would keep the rest as slaves.

      Not politically correct for this day and age? The whole situation over there is straight out of prehistory and should be solved that way. The Israelis want to tear down Palestinian owned buildings? The Palestinians, as the weaker group, should send rockets back. Should this state of affairs be tolerated? No. One side or the other needs to crush the other side until there is peace. Or, one side has to make zero aggressive moves for long enough (5 years?) that it is demonstrable to anyone who is unbiased that one side is clearly abusing the other. At that point, we get back to the Biblical solution but without fingers being pointed.

      I can understand if you do not feel like answering freely in a public forum. It is a highly charged situation and you are in the center of it. I personally do not care in the slightest if everyone assumes that I am a bloodthirsty monster or an asshole. I speak truth instead of hiding behind weasel words so I do not have to defend myself. The situation over there is just insane and political correctness does not seem to solve it.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    108. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. however, your'e disregarding the material damage that a $800 rocket can do - if it hits a car or a house the damage sometimes can surprass $50k. also the positive effect on morale might be worth even more.

    109. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what border?

      Given the current flood of people needing handouts, I don't think you can count on a response.

    110. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. I thought the best idea was nuclear bomb driven X-ray lasers. Might have worked too. Who thought bullet hitting bullet was anything but PR.

    111. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All wars are, ultimately, about the same question: who gets to live on this land? Your question could be rephrased as "why don't you just give up?", and the honest answer is, as always, "because then I'd have to go somewhere else and probably fight someone else instead".

      "Just move" is a solution for individuals. Not for whole towns, much less an entire country.

    112. Re: Subject bait by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Israel covered the R&D and installation of the first two batteries themselves. Since they were shown effective, the US is in for $200 million a year since 2012 to finance another 8 batteries, in exchange for rights to the technology. Half of that money is required to be spent on US contractors.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    113. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could use it at my house around July 4. The neighbors are apparently Hamas, as they are shooting off large rockets in random directions.
      "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department,' says Wernher von Braun."

    114. Re: Subject bait by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Just a big sukkah.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    115. Re: Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Safer than a us big city.

    116. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 0

      They're shooting $50k+ missiles at $800 rockets.

      And that matters why, exactly? You're completely ignoring the most important cost in that equation - that of lives saved (and not just direct one, but also indirect morale/propaganda boost).

      What matters is that those things actually intercept missiles. Spending the same shekels on jets, tanks and bombs does not solve this problem. Well, it can, but it would basically require leveling Gaza to the ground completely and killing everyone alive. Which is something that Israelis will never do, for all the flak they get about being "fascist pigs" etc.

    117. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I think the launching of rockets randomly against the civilian population of Israel is utterly wrong, but the reality seems to be that both sides are quite happy to kill civilians on the other side its just that Israel is much better at it.

      I wouldn't say that Israelis are quite happy to kill civilians. At the very least, they don't see to be intentionally targeting civilian targets (I know that it still happens occasionally, and that when it does, they try to look the other way rather than put one of their own on trial; but it's not the official orders or ROE, and is frowned upon by both military brass and society at large). The ones that they kill, are either - and most often - collateral damage from strikes on military targets (exacerbated by the fact that Hamas really likes to set up missile launchers and mortars near or right on top of high profile civilian targets); or near misses that hit something that they didn't intend to hit. OTOH, Hamas is intentionally targeting civilians - the more dead, the better.

      That Israel still manages to rack up a higher civilian kill count than Hamas just goes to show how severe the power disparity is. At the same time, it goes to show that Israel is not the "evil fascist regime" that it's so fashionable to identify it as - if they were, they would steamroll over Gaza decades ago, they certainly have the means.

    118. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a personal connection to this land. So does somebody else. Hence, war!

      Why not peace? What's wrong with it? As far as I know currently Israel is hindering the peace efforts. In fact, this round of violence was started by Israel, as a collective punishment for the alleged kidnapping and murdering of 3 Israelis. Unfortunately, there's little information about what happened to them. As far as we know, they might as well have died in a car crash.

    119. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      moved to places with no anti-semitic political forces.

      There were no such places, pretty much.

      The idea of moving the Jews somewhere where they wouldn't be unwelcome was, in fact, floated - even before WW2. It even got Hitler's personal approval - in 1938, he said that he would let go of any Jews that would want to leave, so long as some other country would accept them. Evian Conference was convened by US for the explicit purpose of determining who that would be. And guess what? None of the states involved, including those that would later become WW2 Allies, agreed to take any additional amount beyond whatever immigration quotas that they had. They were pretty explicit about the reasons, too:

      "As we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one" - Australia

      The only country that did accept a significant amount (in proportion to its size and population) was Dominican Republic - ironically, because the dictator in power at the time was a white racist, and considered Jews as white for his purposes (as opposed to black Haitians), and hence wanted an "infusion of white blood" for his nation.

      Regarding the whole living memory thing, I think that what matters is how most of the people who are alive today remember it. Basically, if you kick Israelis out and put Palestinians back, how many people would be leaving the homes and the land they were born on and personally grew up on, vs how many would be returning into the homes and land that they were born on. That's what matters because that's the real effect that it would have on people involved, in direct rather some nebulous "historical justice" way. I suspect that such accounting would favor Israelis rather than Palestinians at this point.

    120. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The entire Israel is "land that has been stolen from others", depending on who you ask (e.g. Hamas believes that to be the case). So if Israel stops expanding, or even lets go of most of what it took after 1948, the rockets won't stop flying.

    121. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Why not peace? What's wrong with it? As far as I know currently Israel is hindering the peace efforts. In fact, this round of violence was started by Israel, as a collective punishment for the alleged kidnapping and murdering of 3 Israelis. Unfortunately, there's little information about what happened to them. As far as we know, they might as well have died in a car crash.

      Are you kidding? What you call "this round of violence" started when Hamas started shooting rockets at Israel, _before_ the kidnappings. I know that Western media does not report this. The bombings are never news until Israel shoots back.

      So far as "what happened to them" the three Israelis were found with bullets in their heads outside Hebron. The brother of a close friend was with them when they were kidnapped.

      As for Israel hindering peace efforts, the last time the peace-process was going, the Palestinians demanded that we stop building houses for them to even talk to us. We stopped building houses and stated that this stop is for nine months, to appease the Palestinians. After those nine months, during which the Palestinians did _not_ agree to talk about peace, we extended the no-build policy for another month. Only one week before the end of the extension did the Palestinians come to the negotiating table, and when we refused to extend the no-build policy further, the Western media condemned us for "building on Palestinian land" and not meeting the demand to stop building in order to negotiate. WTF?

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    122. Re:Subject bait by jandersen · · Score: 2

      Hmm, let me see; during this recent exchange, how many Israelies were killed or injured? You mention 1 elderly lady, so that is 1 that I have heard of so far. You also mention 20 civilians in Gaza, but in the same breath imply that it is probably their own fault. Now, if you step back a bit and look at what you are saying, can you understand why so many people in the rest of the world feel less than convinced of your sincerity?

      You guys enjoy the protection of the US, you have overwhelming, technological advantages over your opponents, you have throughout history shown little to no interest in finding peace with your neighbours, and a large proportion of people outside of Israel feel that you are engaged in shameless landgrabbing, apartheid and collective punishment of the Palestinian population. And as your own words demonstrate, you don't actually give a sh*t about it; but you still expect the rest of the world to feel sorry for you.

      This is what I think should happen: the US should withdraw all military and economic support from Israel with about a year's warning. Then you guys will have a bit of time to try to find another way to deal with your neighbours - I suspect you will become really nice and open to sincere negotiations and find a solution that is sustainable in the long term, instead of being the bully hiding behind America's skirts.

      As a side note: I am not an anti-Semite. For one thing, I don't think the state of Israel are worthy representatives of Judaism (just like 'Islamists' are not Muslims), and any way, Jews are not the only Semites.

    123. Re:Subject bait by Xest · · Score: 1

      If Hamas wanted to hit military targets they wouldn't be aiming rockets at civilian population centres.

      So whilst I realise you were being sarcastic, the point you were sarcastically trying to make is nonsense all the same.

      Hamas could fire at military targets with their current weapons, but they explicitly choose to fire at civilian population centres because they simply don't have an interest in military targets, they just want to kill jews regardless of whether they're military or not.

    124. Re:Subject bait by Xest · · Score: 1

      So you advocate restoration of British rule of India, return of apartheid and white rule to South Africa and to Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe)?

      What an odd world you must live in to be so backwards.

      Oh, and back at the start of living memory the current territory of Israel was neither under Palestinian or Jewish control, it too was British territory, or part of the Ottoman empire depending on where exactly you draw the line, so regardless, your argument is completely broken anyway.

    125. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I note you've posted quite a bit in this thread.

      So let's get this straight. Israel says "we'll stop stealing your land temporarily, but you have to come talk to us". When they didn't come talk in time, you started stealing land again, as though you were doing them a favour by stopping your illegal actions temporarily.

      Let's analogize. In 1941 Hitler says to the international Jewry "we'll stop gassing you guys, but only for a few months, and you have to send a delegation to meet me". If nobody went to talk to him, he starts gassing again, and says "well, they didn't come talk to me so it's their fault".

      The world is wising up to the twisted logic of the Jew. The insidious, parasitic nature of your race is becoming obvious. The manipulation of politics through the weilding of ill-gotten wealth is becoming more and more obvious with every absurd statement by whipped world leaders. This situation is unsustainable for you, as much as you may think it is. Like parasites, Jews grow in host societies, until an extreme immune reaction kills them off. This cycle has repeated many times in history. Jews have never managed to live peacefully with any other civilization.

      The next time someone tries to off your worthless inhuman species, we will all remember why, and you won't be able to mobilize your history rewriters to spin it as though it was all because some deranged lunatic got blocked from art school. History is now recorded in widely distributed photos and field reports from aid workers.

      I wait until next time a Hitler rises. If he does his job right, we have a shot at world peace. A world with Jews is a world at war. That much has become apparent.

    126. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you have to continue the ethnic cleansing in order to prevent ethnic cleansing?

    127. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are strong enough now that anti Aryan morons like you can be ignored. No long must Good Germans be subject to the dictates of Jew Bankers. The land is ours, history has given it to us. Your pathetic cries will soon be forgotten.

    128. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It depends on your definition of "ethnic cleansing". I don't think that "people who launch shrapnel-loaded rockets" is a race or ethnicity per se, so killing them doesn't count as such. If it so happens that they all belong to a single ethnicity in practice, that is an unfortunate coincidence, but it's not the reason why they were targeted.

      If you mean that "stealing land" amounts to ethnic cleansing (some people do believe that), then I suppose your formula is valid. Pretty much all land in Israel is claimed by either side, and which one gets to actually hold it is determined solely by "might is right". There doesn't seem to be any solution that would change that at this point - a compromise was possible with PLO of old, but Israel did not pursue it; Hamas, on the other hand, is not willing to compromise, and is now in charge because PLO got nowhere.

    129. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? What you call "this round of violence" started when Hamas started shooting rockets at Israel, _before_ the kidnappings. I know that Western media does not report this. The bombings are never news until Israel shoots back.

      Then why did you need the excuse of the 3 dead Israeli to start firing "back" again? Doesn't make much sense.

      So far as "what happened to them" the three Israelis were found with bullets in their heads outside Hebron.

      Is there some public statement about this? Was there an autopsy done? Since this is the cause for attacking Gaza, I expect no less than a full public report on this. Even so, collective punishment is NOT acceptable. I also find it very interesting that this murders happened in an area that is under full Israeli military control.

      The brother of a close friend was with them when they were kidnapped.

      If there's definitive proof as to who actually killed them, why attack Gaza again? Just find the guilty, which shouldn't have been hard considering that the area is under full Israeli military control, and punish them according to the law.

    130. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearing land of one ethnic group so you can build colonies exclusively for some other ethnic group is ethnic cleansing. Israel does it every day, it has nothing at all to do with rockets or Hamas since it has been going on for decades prior to that. Meanwhile, the people who haven't been chased away are rounded up into ghettos and subject to apartheid. Millions of people living under Israeli rule for five decades and they don't get to vote for the government that controls their lives. Israel even has separate roads, something South Africa didn't even have.

    131. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "funny" moderation was an accident. I was trying for "Informative."

    132. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      The situation in Gaza has no direct relation to the kidnappings. Here is the indirect relation:

      After the three bodies were found murdered, three to six idiots kidnapped an Arab teenager and burned him to death. This is widely seen (and I also believe it is) a revenge killing. Let me tell you something: I find those three to six people (who have been found) to be worse than the Hamas. They are as low as a human can go. When even Netanyahu condemns them, you know that they are scum!

      After the revenge killing there were many riots. Even the Beduin, who usually try to distance themselves from the other Arabs in Israel and do _not_ call themselves Palestinian, were rioting. I myself was attacked in my vehicle on the way home from work, as I work near a Beduin settlement and in fact on my floor at work there is an office of Beduins and we are very friendly to one another.

      In addition to the riots, Hamas stepped up the rocket attacks. Before the revenge killing, there were maybe a dozen rocket attacks per day on the towns near Gaza, such as Sderot. As the Israeli arrests in the West Bank mounted (I'm sure that you've heard: a few hundred arrests) so did the rocket attacks. After the revenge killing, Hamas went even further, using longer-range weapons against all major Israeli cities. Thus, the operations into Gaza to target Hamas.

      Be there no mistake, there have been attacks on Hamas infrastructure in Gaza before the current mess. I don't know the numbers but at least a few rocket cells have been hit while deploying their wares on Sderot. That is why the situation is often called a "cycle of violence": X shoots at Y who retaliates who then retaliates who then retaliates ad infinitum. Are we (Israelis) perfect angles? No! I completely disagree with some of the Gazan targets, which seem to have been selected out of spite. However as objective as I try to be, I really do see that 90% of our actions target the proper targets and do so in a fashion that protects civilians. In the same sense, I see how the Hamas targets specifically our civilians.

      As I'm typing this we just had an alarm. I counted one air burst (Iron Dome) and one ground hit. I don't know if the ground hit is inside or outside the city, it sounded close but not too close.

      You should know that Israelis mourn Gazan casualties as well. We hate the Hamas, but certainly not the people of Gaza. They are, have been, and will continue to be our neighbours. The idea that we would even target civilians is so disgusting that if any politician or general tried it he would be lynched by the Israelis before the Arabs even got to him. The soldiers wouldn't even carry out the orders. And yes, I do know of artillery specifically that refused to fire on targets due to not being able to keep the minimum safe distance from civilians.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    133. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a personal connection to this land.

      Maybe it's a personal question, but what is this connection you are talking about?

    134. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This explanation makes perfect sense if you ignore the fact that Israel, after many decades of such behavior, continues to use force to acquire more land without the people who live on it. In other words, ethnic cleansing. A genocide when you consider that Israel's leaders insist that Palestinians do not exist. Why do you so support such crimes against humanity, writing dozens of posts in support of Israel "mowing the lawn?"

      ...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

                      (a) Killing members of the group;
                      (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
                      (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
                      (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
                      (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

              — Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2

    135. Re:Subject bait by Some_Llama · · Score: 1

      "Are you kidding? What you call "this round of violence" started when Hamas started shooting rockets at Israel, _before_ the kidnappings. I know that Western media does not report this. The bombings are never news until Israel shoots back."

      Let me interject from a western point of view.. someone who only knows of your conflict originally from news reports/papers/and general "western media".

      I was ALWAYS under the impression that Palestinians were terrorists persecuting Jews with rocket attacks and suicide bombings for returning to basically what is the Jewish homeland.

      Any Israelis attack on Palestine was a return of aggression.

      what i've come to see after looking into the conflict on my own and doing my own investigation is that it seems to me Israel was given Palestinian land, US support, and outguns Palestine 100:1, they fight against israel the only way they can and yet all i hear about is how evil they are and how righteous israel only defends themselves.

      i've realized that marketing is always to hide a deficit and now see the conflict reporting in western media as such the same as i see your post (never have i heard western media decry anything isaelis do).

    136. Re:Subject bait by Sun · · Score: 1

      I have to admit I did wonder about it.

      Shachar

    137. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Search for the definition of genocide according to the international treaty that Israel is a party to. Israel wants the Palestinians to disappear so their land can be used to settle Jews and annexed. This intention is clear from decades of settlement construction and statements of their leaders. Inflicting living conditions calculated to destroy a national group in whole or in part is genocide. Killing members of the group as part of a campaign to get rid of them is genocide. You don't have to start up gas chambers or ovens to have genocide.

    138. Re:Subject bait by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Inflicting living conditions calculated to destroy a national group in whole or in part is genocide.

      Well, if they are indeed meant to be so calculated, then, apparently, Israelis are very shitty mathematicians.

    139. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      I'm really glad that you posted this. Thank you!

      (a) Killing members of the group;

      While I do not dispute that Gazans have been killed at the hands of Israelis, the only _targeted_ Gazans are the Hamas. Yes, we both know that innocents have been caught in the crossfire. That happens from both sides. About two weeks ago (just a few days before the current problems started) a four year old girl Gzan girl was killed when an errant missile fired at Israel didn't make it over the border and hit her house. I know that is not news for the West.

      I argue that we kill less Gazans than the American government kills Americans, both per capita and percent. Not to talk about what America did to the Iraqis. However, our follies make the headlines and make people (rightly) angry, while those of other nations do not. If you want to (right) direct vitriol at the killing of innocents, then you have a lot of other nations to get through before you get to the level that Israel does it.

      (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

      Bodily harm we don't do other than that discussed in the above section, so lets talk about mental harm. It is very clear from every perspective that the mental harm that Hamas does to the Gazans and to the Israelis far exceeds that done by the Israelis to the Gazans.

      (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

      This is a terrific point to address, and I wish that I could expand on it more. The siege of Gaza is in fact designed to cause the destruction of Hamas. The population is in fact suffering because of that, even more than Hamas. There is much contention of this, especially since Hamas is successfully importing and improvising weapons despite the siege. I don't suppose that it was reported in the Western media when the Hamas confiscated tons of aid from the UN, such as blankets, some time back.

      Many Gazans, and indeed the Israeli viewpoint, see the situation as Hamas spending resources on weapons instead of on their people. Just as a single example, for years concrete was banned as part of the siege due to the fear of Hamas building tunnels and bunkers. That restriction was lifted about two years ago, and within a few weeks Hamas had dug a tunnel into an Israeli schoolyard with the concrete. That's right: no new homes, kindergartens, or infrastructure was built with the concrete, only a kilometer-long tunnel to do whatever your imagination will to an Israeli schoolyard.

      (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

      Nope.

      (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

      Nope.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    140. Re:Subject bait by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Thank you for providing that viewpoint.

      The short, short history as I know it. Of course, there is my side of the story, the Arab side of the story, and somewhere in the middle is the truth.

      The Jewish people (race and religion, as they were more tightly coupled before Constantine) have lived our entire existence in the land of Judea (since about 1040 BC). We were mostly dispersed by the Romans in 70 AD, but having been trying to return ever since. In the mean time, lots of other peoples have settled here. Most have come and gone (Romans, Byzantine, etc) and as of 1900 AD there were about 94% Muslims, 5% Jews, and a few others in the area. That was the start of the modern Zionist movement, when a series of political events came together and the time was deemed right to stop yearning for a return to Judea and to pack up and go. Nobody really had a problem with this yet: the Ottomans tolerated us and the Europeans were happy to see us go! Arabs and Jews were for the most part friendly, the place was barely populated (well under one million people).

      With the fall of the Ottoman empire all the differing groups wanted their own state. Jews were pouring in from Europe, especially after the second great war, and tensions flared between the Jews who considered the land their ancestral homeland and the Muslims who have been living there for as long as they remember. Both have a claim to the land: the Jews have considered the land "theirs" for millennia and in fact it was made clear to them that nowhere else is safe for them (See: holocaust), and the Arabs were already living there.

      Both sides tried rewriting history and both committed atrocities. A bunch of disinterested foreigners (UN) split up the land between Jews and Arabs: the Jews said thank you and the Arabs said "War!": thus the war that is today known as the War of Independence to me and is known as The Catastrophe to the Arabs. The Jews won that war, and the one after it (1956, started by Britain and France to steal the Suez canal from Egypt) and the one after is (1967, started by Egypt to destroy Israel) and the one after it (1973, started by Egypt and Syria to destroy Israel) and so on.

      Just as an aside, with specific regard to Gaza, that area fell from Egyptian hands in 1956 and when that war ended Egypt refused to have it back! There are those (Gazans themselves, mostly) who argue that Gaza was deliberately ignored by Egypt to fester a people of hate to be used as a weapon against Israel. It worked: we were stuck with Gaza which had seen no development for the seven years following the 1948 war. Just look at where it is geographically in Egypt, and understand that Egyptians (yes, I have been to Egypt more than once) don't consider even Sinai to be a part of Egypt Proper just like Americans don't see Guam as part of America Proper. The Egyptian government barely has any control over the area, even today. Gaza especially was completely ungoverned during that (1948-1956) time. Since then, it has only gotten worse.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    141. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter who Israel says they are targeting because it's all part of a single ethnic cleansing program. Israel is clearly using force to acquire as much new territory as possible with as few non-Jews as possible. This is not permissible because of the many treaties signed in the wake of WWII and WWI.

      You would be right if Israel wasn't clearing the land of undesirables and constructing colonies for the exclusive use of another ethnic group on territory that doesn't even belong to it.

      You would be right if Gaza had not been under siege for twenty years prior to the creation of Hamas.

      You would be right if Israel didn't block the importation of food.

      You would be right if Israel didn't stop the export of food.

      You would be right if Israel didn't construct roads on Palestinian land that Palestinians aren't allowed to drive on.

      You would be right if Israel didn't target power plants, sewage plants, hospitals, schools, chicken farms, or flour mills.

      You would be right if Israel didn't shoot on sight anyone attempting to farm 1/3rd of the arable land in Gaza.

      You would be right if Israel didn't count the calories of Gazans while restricting their access to food in an attempt to bring them to the brink of starvation.

      You would be right if Israel didn't destroy the houses of innocent people because an accused terrorist lived there.

      You would be right if Israel didn't refuse to hook up towns to electricity or sewage because they don't have Jews living there.

      You would be right if Israel didn't knock down the houses of undesirables because they want to hand the land over the JNF.

      You would be right if Israel didn't weld shut the doors of undesirable's houses and forbid them to walk down their own street so they are forced to climb over fences and clamber across rooftops to go home.

      You would be right if Israel's leaders didn't say things such as "there is no such thing as a Palestinian" or that Israel has a "demographic problem" and part of the solution may involve "transfer."

      That, among many other reasons, is why what might normally be "self defense" is actually part of a genocide.

    142. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but the fact that Israel has been the spiritual and actual homeland of Jews for millenia doesn't give them the right to remove people living there totally legitimately. Just like the fact that Germany had been the spiritual and actual homeland of Aryans for millenia didn't make a spit of difference. We're talking about events in the modern era, after WWII, when such things are frowned upon.

      Oh poor israel stuck with Gaza, why did they spend 40 years trying to cleanse it by establishing colonies for the exclusive use of Jews there? While half the population languished in refugee camps just a few miles from their homes in Israel which they can't return to because only Jews can return to Israel. Now they are just turning the screws in an attempt to get the people in Gaza to flee to Egypt. Then Israel can come in and "redeem" the land. It's also a convenient feint; "see! we aren't occupying it any more! We're just continuing a 50 year old blockade."

      Both sides have committed atrocities but only one is engaged in a decades long and successful ethnic cleansing program. Israel has cleared a lot of land in the West Bank is on track to annex most of it without hardly any non-Jews living there. You must certainly be proud of Israel's accomplishments.

    143. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kill the gazans for supporting hamas' strategy of killing innocent ppl, even if not actively engaged.

      These ppl are supporting a military agenda that targets civilians.... and also support genocide..
      Its one thing to target a nation state and then attack its military or gov't targets.
      But to attack civilians in this way is cowardly and is the definition of murder.

      Ppl like this that have no sense of right and wrong, dont deserve the precious limited resources this planet has to offer.
      How can u say their values are different... That have no values or value...
      I say kill em and dont pity em.

    144. Re:Subject bait by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      The entire Israel is "land that has been stolen from others", depending on who you ask (e.g. Hamas believes that to be the case). So if Israel stops expanding, or even lets go of most of what it took after 1948, the rockets won't stop flying.

      I personally think that if Israel stopped tearing down Palestinian homes and agreed to the immediate formation of a Palestinian state with borders that were where they are now then peace could be attainable. The huge problem though is that many Zionist Jews would find that utterly unacceptable as it as such a departure from the promised land as it was given to the Jews by god.

      I don't think Israel needs to tear down a single settlement, just promise not to build any more and then actually live up to that promise for a year or two.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    145. Re:Subject bait by IHateEverybody · · Score: 1

      Vader was Luke and Leia's father and embittered by years of service to the emperor. He deliberately hired incompetent engineers and starship captains in hopes that his children would be able to fix his mistakes and help him kill the emperor.

      --
      Does this .sig make my butt look big?
    146. Re:Subject bait by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

      Hamas fires inaccurate artillery rockets, unlikely to actually hit anything

      Huh? What are you smoking? They're 100% gaurunteed to hit something as what goes up must come down.

      "That's not my department." - W. von Braun

    147. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing two important points:

      1. Iron Dome only bothers intercepting rockets that will land in populated areas (i.e. 75% of rockets are ignored)
      2. The cost of a rocket successfully hitting a populated area surpasses $100k. It doesn't matter how much it costs to intercept each rocket, so long as that amount is less than the cost the incoming rocket would have caused.

      There is also the indirect cost of 8 million people having to skip work in order to sit in bomb shelters. With a 90-95% intercept rate, Iron Dome allows people to go about their business which saves the economy billions.

      All in all, Iron Dome is a major win.

    148. Re:Subject bait by N1AK · · Score: 1

      You should know that Israelis mourn Gazan casualties as well. We hate the Hamas, but certainly not the people of Gaza.

      Many Israelis don't even if you do, and you certainly don't respond to suffering on both sides in the same way. As a Brit I know the rocket attacks the Israelis are coming under are terrible compared to my cosey little existence, but they're almost comical compared to the suffering of the Palestinians: Hundreds of dead, thousands of injured, hundreds of thousands forced to flee their homes and over a million without basic utilities, struggling to find food and water.

      People wonder why so many Palestinians support Hamas when they 'bring these attacks upon the Palestinian people' but they're missing the point. The existence of the French resistance during WW2 led to thousands of the French suffering in response, but they considered the resistance as the only way to fight back against an oppressor. In Palestine the Israelies are seen as that oppressor, and even if the resistance is largely ineffective and leads to reprisals, they will be supported because people support those they see as fighting for them against an oppressor.

      Israelis constantly make the point that Hamas targets civilians when they don't. Firstly, given the vastly larger number of Palestinian civilians killed it's a pretty arbitrary point and secondly Israel can effectively strike at Palestinian military organisations with minimal risk, how exactly do you suggest that Hamas fights a conventional war agains the IDF? Lastly, look back at the post WW2 period and the founding of Israel and the acts of terrorism, including many targetting civilians, by Jews at the time. Back when your country didn't have overwhelming military power your ancestors were perfectly happy to use terrorism to achieve its goals; which makes this protest agains the same methods 60 years later look more than a little hypocritical.

    149. Re:Subject bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel produces a defense system and makes precision counter-attacks to prove their technological and military prowess, and restraint in its use, to international press.

      It's a hell of a pinpoint operation

    150. Re:Subject bait by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      He probably booted you from the project when you failed to spell his name right.

      --
      -Styopa
  2. Belief by trdtaylor · · Score: 2

    The rockets being sent against Israel are small, sporadic, unguided, and mostly lack the range to hit major population centers (Tel Aviv). On the rare occasions it does hit a building, it won't destroy the building but will gut a room.

    If the Iron dome is effective, great. If the belief of the people is it's effective, even better, especially for politicians in power. Pretty much what the article says.

    1. Re:Belief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If the Iron dome is effective, great. If the belief of the people is it's effective, even better, especially for politicians in power. Pretty much what the article says.

      Dunno, if it's cost-effective anyone else but the weapon vendor.

      Perhaps few hundred bucks palestinian ballistic rocket needs to be shot down with a highly precise guided missile which cost is more propably than tens of thousands fold more expensive. And it's not just few missiles they have to spend every day. Someone's got nice business there.

    2. Re:Belief by dotancohen · · Score: 4, Informative

      The rockets being sent against Israel are small, sporadic, unguided, and mostly lack the range to hit major population centers (Tel Aviv). On the rare occasions it does hit a building, it won't destroy the building but will gut a room.

      I suspect that you're just trolling, but you might just be 10 years out of date.

      Unguided missiles have no military value as they cannot be aimed at military targets, that is true. However, unguided missiles are best for terrorizing civilians, and of course those rockets have the range to hit major population centers. I've had about two hundred shot at my city in just the past week. The current rockets are variants of the Soviet Grad and Iranian Fagar 5 missiles. Plenty of range, unguided but with a COP of about a kilometer, and 40-90 KG of HE.

      With the Iron Dome with only get a few hits in the city, and due to the alarms the population is in shelters when the rockets do hit. Without the alarms, my children would have been dead in November 2012 when a rocket landed were they were playing outside our building. Tens of apartments across the street from the blast were damaged very heavily, only to be rebuilt because they were in a building with undamaged apartments on the other side. About ten or twenty vehicles were destroyed. Nobody was even injured, because the whole city fled to shelters. No injuries, nothing on the news. We usually like it that way.

      If the Iron dome is effective, great. If the belief of the people is it's effective, even better, especially for politicians in power. Pretty much what the article says.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    3. Re:Belief by sycodon · · Score: 1

      It's better than nothing.

      Any anyone who would make an issue of it has waay too much time on their hands.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    4. Re:Belief by trdtaylor · · Score: 2

      10 years out of date? I lived in Israel between 2009-2011, I was a block away from the Beersheva preschool hit in Dec 2008 which first taught me about what rocket attacks were like. It sounded like a suitcase dropping on the ground. I don't know what it's been like since 2011 first-hand, but Wikipedia/current news tells me it's closer to my recall then yours. >90% are Qassams, because they're cheap, the launchers look like irrigation equipment, and the launcher team can scatter immediately after firing before the Israeli helicopters.

      Here's a picture from Wiki of that Qassam hit
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

      and yeah, the alarms work great, but people want active defense measures. Iron dome does that for them.

    5. Re:Belief by Uberbah · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Unguided missiles have no military value as they cannot be aimed at military targets, that is true. However, unguided missiles are best for terrorizing civilians, and of course those rockets have the range to hit major population centers.

      Of course they're gloried roman candles, which is why your fellow racist colonialists are sitting on top garages and bluffs to watch bombs rain down on Gaza in spite of the scaaaaary rockets. Qassam's haven't killed anyone since 2012, as opposed to your typical IDF ordinance which wipes out a dozen or more people in a single shot.

      We usually like it that way.

      Yes, do you do like murdering 100 Palestinians for every lost Israeli.

    6. Re:Belief by JabrTheHut · · Score: 1

      Unguided missiles have no military value as they cannot be aimed at military targets, that is true.

      Is that true? I recall several cases where Hamas rockets have hit the IDF bases around Sderot.

      --
      Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
    7. Re:Belief by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Unguided missiles have no military value as they cannot be aimed at military targets, that is true.

      Is that true? I recall several cases where Hamas rockets have hit the IDF bases around Sderot.

      You are right, when we are talking about such a short range unguided projectiles are effective against military targets. I was referencing the longer range rockets, such as the ones which hit Beersheba and other large cities.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    8. Re:Belief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not murder when it's justified you anti semitic fuck. They can stop this conflict any time they want by leaving. European Jews left their homes when they were persecuted. That same course of action is open to the Palestinians. They choose to stay and keep firing rockets. This conflict is their fault. Fuck them, and fuck you.

    9. Re:Belief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ten years out of date? "Militarily useless but dangerous and terrifying for civilians" accurately describes the V-1 and V-2 rockets aimed at southern England during 1944-45. Sounds like nothing much has changed in 70 years, except the countermeasures.

    10. Re:Belief by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

      I was a block away from the Beersheva preschool hit in Dec 2008 which first taught me about what rocket attacks were like. It sounded like a suitcase dropping on the ground... Here's a picture from Wiki of that Qassam hit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P......

      You must have a much heavier suitcase than I do.

    11. Re:Belief by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The victims of land theft can make it stop any time by giving into the occupiers and, as Mitt Romney put it, self deporting? Thanks, it's rare for you racist colonists to be so honest in your pursuit of ethnic cleansing.

  3. Believe what you want... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need such complex analysis to demonstrate this theory ? Then you are wrong by default.

    If the system didnt work you only need to show the 100s of housed hit in tel aviv.

    If all you have is that then believe what you want results are results.

    Im sure you also believe American fighter planes and tanks are fake, though Kosovo and Iraq fell in hours.

    But surely you have a great indirect analysis of X that tells you for sure that they are fake, though you have never been there and there are no pictures.

    The shield is not perfect, but works.

    Same like patriot missile, not perfect but it can shoot down missiles in flight.

    But, again, if the dome is not stopping the missiles lets wait for Israel to be destroyed.... sure man.

    1. Re:Believe what you want... by Imrik · · Score: 1

      To find out if it works you either need to have a comparison to without the shield or you need records of the attacks actually stopped.

  4. Re:If Israelis would just stop terrorism and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see what you did there...

  5. It's hard by penguinoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's difficult to find a technological solution to a combination of relatively minor disagreements as to the exact details of the God of Abraham, plus disagreement over land ownership.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:It's hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When people are stubborn, and arrogant, and too intellectually lazy or dishonest to work on negotiating a settlement, we can always count on the endless supply of US Military aid, funded by the taxpayers, so the politicians can fall back on violence, instead of doing their fucking job and being leaders. But it's okay, because at least the shareholders of the arms manufacturers make a profit. Right?

    2. Re:It's hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Stolen" is such a strong word. Israel was founded by the same means the US was and every other country. It is now a civilized, functioning democracy with a strong economy and wealthy citizens. That it displaced some backwards tribes is of no consequence. Indeed, if they knew what was good for them, they'd integrate into Israel rather than fighting it, and then they too would benefit from the development that was brought to a backwards, uncivilized region.

    3. Re:It's hard by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry you misunderstood me. The minor disagreements are about the details of the God of Abraham. Disagreements over land ownership are seldom minor, though at some point one has to wonder how much bloodshed it's worth.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    4. Re:It's hard by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Which other countries have been created by superpowers, for the benefit of wannabe settlers not even from said superpowers? Australia might have been created by the British, from lands stolen from Aboriginees, but it wasn't done so the Romani could have a homeland of their own.

      Speaking of the Romani, they were also slaughtered by the Nazis in the Holocaust. Where's their homeland?

  6. Ted Postol very bias opinion. by bongey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ted Postol cannot be, even from being from MIT be considered a realable source for opinion. Postol has a large bias against anti-missle systems, which is down right dumb. The rockets are almost the size of small airplanes, but we don't consider anit-aircraft missles to be completely ineffecitive.

    1. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't expect a critical appraisal from the vendor, do you? Take his, and everyone else's reporting with some degree of skepticism.

      One notable fact that was tangentially mentioned is that one doesn't see any 'hits' in the media. I would think one would be able to see the effect of the missile intercepting the targets at least some of the time. Given the intense media coverage, one wonders. It's certainly possible that by the time the interceptor hits the target it's too small to visual, but there is one hell of a lot of energy involved. Kinetic energy often creates sparkly bits that can be seen.

      It is also hard to argue that this ISN'T just one more aspect of the public relations game that is endemic to this conflict. Both sides (as is pointed out in TFA) engage in trying to get the other side to look mean and nasty. It's way more complicated than that.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I have a video from my brother of two intercepts in about a 2 minute time span.

    3. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by bongey · · Score: 2

      Reality is there have been more than 600 hundred rockets lanched, 137 were calculated as a threat. With 0 fatalities, either the rockets are really crappy, Israel is incredibly lucky or no shit they are being intercepted.

    4. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I have a video from my brother of two intercepts in about a 2 minute time span.

      I have a supercut video of about 100 iron dome launches failing to intercept.
      But I am not going to post it to youtube or anywhere else so you'll have to take my word for it.

    5. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > either the rockets are really crappy,

      You hit the nail on the head. You just didn't realize it.
      The vast majority of hamas's rockets are crap, locally manufactured with shit fuses.

      But they are getting better. So far it is just a handful. But it is inevitable that they will get even more and even better models And when they start using them in earnest, that iron dome propaganda won't protect anyone.

    6. Re:Ted Postol very bias opinion. by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, the key thing for them is "cheap". They need to keep costing sub-$1k missiles in the ballpark of these Iron dome systems - the more, the better. They might as well just omit the warheads to save money and increase range. Every $50k shot Israel fires with those systems costs 25 Israelis' annual tax contribution to the IDF. Every $55m system they deploy costs 27.500 Israelis' IDF tax contributions.

      Palestinians are poor, but they're not *that* poor that they can't leverage those kind of lopsided financial ratios.

      --
      Fox: "I think we should call it... your grave!" Cast: "Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!"
  7. France built something like this back in the 1930s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe it was called the "Maginot Line".

  8. Obligatory star trek quote by hsthompson69 · · Score: 0

    "The notion of transwarp beaming is like trying to hit a bullet with a smaller bullet, whilst wearing a blindfold, riding a horse."
    – Montgomery Scott, 2258 (Star Trek)

  9. why he thinks that by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    It's important to understand why people claim things, instead of just taking them at face-value.

    After reading the article, his reasoning is that the Iron Dome is mostly chasing the rockets from behind, and therefore cannot be effective, because a rocket cannot effectively be caught from behind, or from the side. Furthermore, previous anti-missile systems (the patriot) have had their success rate exaggerated.

    I have no idea if that is reasonable, but it's why he thinks it.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:why he thinks that by Tailhook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He "thinks that" because for him, and many many like him, a system that successfully neuters Hamas is very troubling; Iron Dome removes a pain point for Israel and a bargaining chip for Hamas, and Ted Postol and his NPR ilk don't like it. The fact that Israel has created the antidote for Hamas and their ballistic pipe bombs means Israel can exist relatively untroubled, and this reality is so disturbing to these people that they will grasp for and cling to any claim to the contrary.

      In the long run they need not worry. This is an arms race and eventually Hamas will be given something better to use. The qassam rockets themselves were just another step in that progression after Israel isolated itself from Gaza suicide bombers with the West Bank wall, another successful and effective Israeli creation that NPR routinely lambastes.

      Eventually Hamas will be given new weapons, Israelis will start dying again and all will be well. Until then it's all hands on deck at NPR to downplay and discredit Iron Dome, and if you've got a claim that will convince any of the vast hoard of Israel Derangement Syndrome sufferers that Iron Dome doesn't work, they have the air time.

      Israelis have interwebs just as good as you and, unlike the subjects that live in the surrounding dictatorships, theocratic monarchies and failed states, they're allowed to use it. Despite this there is very little video evidence of damage in urban areas and Israeli civilians aren't being killed. Given the quantity of rockets fired and past performance of qassam barrages, it is not possible that the rockets are getting through in large numbers.

      "But they're covering up the deaths!!!!1" you say.

      Ok, well, the burden is on you to prove your conspiracy based argument then; what's the "real" body count and were are you getting it?

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    2. Re:why he thinks that by mpe · · Score: 1

      After reading the article, his reasoning is that the Iron Dome is mostly chasing the rockets from behind, and therefore cannot be effective, because a rocket cannot effectively be caught from behind, or from the side.

      Without knowing the actual flight characteristics of both the rockets and the missiles you can't really say if "tail chasing" is a viable interception approach or not.

      Furthermore, previous anti-missile systems (the patriot) have had their success rate exaggerated.

      It's likely to be harder hit an unstable missile than one which stable. IIRC this was one of the issues with Scuds. Ironically "proper" rockets might be easier to intercept than something scratch built from whatever materials might be to hand.

    3. Re:why he thinks that by dbIII · · Score: 1

      At least until recently (and very likely still) these things were far more primitive than Scuds. It started off with Iran cleaning out any missiles that were not good enough to be used in the Iran-Iraq war and giving them away.

  10. France built something like this back in the 1930s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe it was called the "Maginot Line".

    Except that the Arabs haven't managed to find an Ardennes forest.

  11. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by assertation · · Score: 1

    Almost. They never finished it. The Nazis were able to around it.

  12. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Do you have a plan for ending the 'apartheid,' or are you just expressing generic dislike of the situation?

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  13. Re:Parent is a libtard by Jahoda · · Score: 2

    So, you're spending your saturday anonymously posting to slashdot about "libtards" and the persecution you face from them every day. i don't really need to say much of anything else, do I?

  14. Iron dome is NOT supposed to detonate the warehead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The Iron Dome rockets work just as designed: the system selects those missiles that are likely to hit populated/industrialized areas, and explodes near them to change their route. That way, the Qassams and other missiles from Gaza join the rest that falls in un-inhabited areas.

    Trying to detonate the warehead would be dangerous in the sense that it increases the likely hood of missing the projectile completely.

  15. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by itzly · · Score: 2

    Traditionally these conflicts are resolved by one party eliminating the other.

  16. I've always thought that the best way for Israel by Chrisq · · Score: 0, Troll

    I've always thought that the best way for Israel to deal with the Muzzy threat is to send in the tanks and bulldozers. Just flatten the area the rockets came from. Offer peace if the other side stop attacking (of course in the case of the Muslims that would be against their religion) but otherwise go in with full strength.

  17. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by dotancohen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think that it means.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
    http://allenbwest.com/2014/04/...

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  18. Propoganda runs both ways. by DerekLyons · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA in the Bulletin: "Regular readers of the Bulletin are well aware of the long history of inflated claims of missile defense efficiency."

    Regular readers are also well aware of the extreme and longstanding bias (running back to the 1960's) of the Bulletin's editors against missile defense (because even a partially effective defense weakens their case for nuclear disarmament, their true goal) and the long history of inflated "criticism" that purports to claim that it cannot possibly work. This... is just more of the same. They don't actually have any numbers or anything resembling hard data - just the opinion of expert(s) whose bias on the issue is well known.

    1. Re:Propoganda runs both ways. by smaddox · · Score: 1

      Well, you're right that missile defense leads to nuclear armament, but it doesn't really matter if it's effective. MIRV's and decoys can cheaply and easily neutralize any form of missile defense.

    2. Re:Propoganda runs both ways. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > (because even a partially effective defense weakens their case for nuclear disarmament, their true goal)

      No, a partially effective defense actually strengthens the argument for disarmament.

      The reason that is the case is because a partial defense just means the ability to stop one or maybe two warheads. But they are no good against 5+ simultaneous launches. Just look at even the most recent ballistic missile defense test - it was just against one rocket. They have never even tested with more than rocket and most of the time they miss anyway.

      So by demonstrating partial effectiveness they are actually making the inability of the system to counter any sort of realistic threat plainly obvious.

    3. Re:Propoganda runs both ways. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The second link after your quote is to an article in the Bulletin written by George N. Lewis and Postol. Apparently, the National Academy of Sciences wrote a report that claimed boost-phase missile defense systems wouldn't work against Iran and North Korea. Lewis and Postol argue that the assessment is incorrect and that the missile defense system is actually more effective than stated (although it also says the report overstates many other things like radar range). Note that we're talking about a missile defense system, not rocket defense systems like the Iron Dome.

    4. Re:Propoganda runs both ways. by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      MIRV's and decoys can cheaply and easily neutralize any form of missile defense.

      Well, no. Because MIRV's can't defeat terminal defenses and effective decoys generally either a) aren't cheap, and/or b) have noticeable and significant impact on the weapon's performance. Much of the propaganda about decoys comes from either the 1960's (before the advent of modern signal processing techniques) or from folks who oppose the systems but haven't actually been able to provide examples of such cheap decoys.

  19. Re: Parent is an anti-Israel libtard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posted under said "anonymous coward"

  20. Chain of reasoning by Cold+hard+reality · · Score: 1

    Nuclear weapons are bad
    Missile defense reduces the need for nuclear disarmament
    Working rocket defense might be seen as strengthening missile defense
    Therefore, working rocket defense it bad
    Therefore, Iron Dome doesn't work

    1. Re:Chain of reasoning by Strange+Attractor · · Score: 1

      Reading TFA, that chain of reasoning occurred to me too. While I share some of TFA author's prejudices, I am persuaded by the comments here from folks claiming to be in Israel. I prefer judgement based on facts to facts based on values.

  21. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

    Well, really France's mistake was assuming that during war the Germans might actually respect international boundaries. Either that or they simply forgot what happened only 30 years earlier.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  22. It works quite well. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My family is all over Israel and I was just there visiting when the barrage of rockets started (incidentally before the killing of the three teens). I can say Iron dome works quite well. My father just told me he actually saw a rocket right near his building get intercepted. Had it not been there would have been untold damage to life and property.

    I'm not sure how the original article can say the technology is anything other than a success. It's a defensive measure and as such it works well. Sadly Israel really needs to be allowed to take more offensive action or else things will simply continue in this steady-state for the foreseeable future.

    1. Re:It works quite well. by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Sadly Israel really needs to be allowed to take more offensive action or else things will simply continue in this steady-state for the foreseeable future.

      Their quarry is systematically marginalized and trapped in a small area. A concentration camp if you will. The only thing that can be done to "take more offensive action" is to ramp up the current extermination program.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:It works quite well. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      I think that's an excellent solution. Shame it's not really final, though.

    3. Re:It works quite well. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > is to ramp up the current extermination program.

      Given the rate of current Palestinian losses, it seems that the Israeli "extermination program" is totally ineffective; possibly even more ineffective ("roman candles") than many posters here claim the Palestinian rockets are. So, I guess we should just not worry now, eh?

      I find it weird, this image many posters here have of Israel being similar to the bad guy who could easily accomplish his evil goals but instead he just decides to talk about it with the supposedly neutralized good guy, until the good guy somehow stops him.

  23. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Maxwell · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They do that occasionally, and are universally condemned for it. Remember Israel is not allowed to defend itself. They have to just accept 100's or rockets a day lobbed at them and not react. If they do fire back, and go as far as to warn the targets, Hamas gathers their children and brings them to the target creating mini-martyr's and generating huge sympathy, especially from the west.

    They have a standing offer: it Hamas stops the rockets, they stop theirs. Not difficult, unless your Hamas

  24. Hard to tell if it's working. by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's the promotional video from Rafael, the system's maker. If the Iron Dome launchers are in a position to hit incoming rockets when they're still in boost phase, they're clearly effective. When they hit, the ascending rocket's flare disappears. Israel has Iron Dome launchers both forward postioned near Gaza, for boost phase defense, and near cities, for terminal defense. For terminal defense, it's harder to tell if they worked. The incoming rockets are just falling at that point, and success requires blowing up their warhead, not their rocket engine.

    Videos show the missile's warhead exploding. That's triggered by a proximity fuse. There's a spray of shrapnel from the warhead; it doesn't have to be a direct hit. Whether that sets off the incoming rocket's warhead isn't visible from the videos of terminal defense.The Patriot missiles used in the Gulf war were able to hit incoming Scud missiles, but often didn't detonate the warhead.

  25. Another Tale from Israel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I live in Tel-Aviv. Even though we don't get as much heat as the Ashdod or Beer-Sheva dwellers, we do get our fair share of alarms and attacks. This is the second article I'm seeing in two days regarding the alleged ineffectiveness of the system, and how we're all just being bamboozled by our evil government (The second article was posted in a local Israeli newspaper, but its idea was mostly the same). Honestly, I find this utterly silly. I mean, we simply don't get any ruined houses or anything. You can't hide something like that. If the system works so bad, why is Tel-Aviv essentially unaffected by the attacks? All we get is debris falling out of the sky (Which is far from harmless, but at most it dents a car or something. That's not a rocket hit). This seems like some disgruntled "missile expert"s very lame attempt at solving some very unnerving cognitive dissonance.
    Maybe he should simply come over and observe the system, get some ideas and stuff.

  26. What is the motivation? by bluegutang · · Score: 1

    I don't know why Israel would try to exaggerate the success of Iron Dome. I think that the opposite is true - the less successful the system is, the more sympathy people will have for Israelis under bombardment.

    1. Re:What is the motivation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same reason the US outright lied about the Patriot system during the first Gulf War: to reassure people at home that they were being defended.

    2. Re:What is the motivation? by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

      I think in previous iterations journalists weren't particularly interested in the damage on the Israeli side.
      So might as well calm the population, show the other side their attempts are futile and maybe make a few sales to India and South Korea along the way.

    3. Re:What is the motivation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking they'd exaggerate the effectiveness of the system so the people launching the rockets will decide launching the rockets isn't worth the effort.

      If the system isn't successful that would make the Israelis look incompetent. Especially if they keep using their ineffective system.

    4. Re:What is the motivation? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I suspected this hit piece was just an moral encouragement for hamas to keep up the fight.

      I don't know if they are anti Israel or pro hamas or completely clueless but a lot of speculation could have been avoided if they waited until after this was resolved. As it stands now, Israel's citizens will likely be convinced it is useless and demand the military invade every time there is a rocket attack. There could be a lot more violent killing and subjugation than currently in place.

  27. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    They remembered too well what had happened 20 years earlier and prepared to fight WWI again. Right down to the incompetent leadership sitting in chateaus sipping brandy.

    Plan B had a punchline: 'Table for 250,000 misure?'

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  28. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by dotancohen · · Score: 0

    They do that occasionally, and are universally condemned for it. Remember Israel is not allowed to defend itself. They have to just accept 100's or rockets a day lobbed at them and not react. If they do fire back, and go as far as to warn the targets, Hamas gathers their children and brings them to the target creating mini-martyr's and generating huge sympathy, especially from the west.

    They have a standing offer: it Hamas stops the rockets, they stop theirs. Not difficult, unless your Hamas

    Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven. If someone is killed in war, then themselves and 300 of their family are guaranteed a place in heaven:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

    Some people like to laugh and say that 72 virgins are waiting for them. That's ridicule, but not far from the truth depending on whose writing you are reading, but it is not in the Koran.

    So yes, they do invite neighbours and children when a building has been marked (and warned) for destruction. But that is not cause for ridicule but rather a difference in values between them and you and me.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  29. Kosher Meat Harvest Yields Bumper Crop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Iron Dome may be fictional but the latest war in Gaza is yielding tons of dead Palestinians for Israel to grind into Kosher sausage.

  30. Target Selection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I watched a long video a while ago about the Iron Dome Missile Defense System. The most impressive thing was the target selection system. Their radars and computer systems estimate the trajectory and impact point of each incoming rocket. Using GPS, it ignores those rockets that will impact in empty fields, unpopulated areas and so on. Only the rockets destined for targets that threaten people at home or at work are selected for counter attack. That's pretty darned impressive and the United States should continue its investment and support of this system, for Israel's sake and our own. (from: Jim Lynch, Grand Island, NY, USA)

  31. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by LavouraArcaica · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not defense, it's a rampage. Almost a genocide.
    You should remember that Israel (which have one of the best armies in the world) is fighting against a ethnical group without army.
    If anyone else in the world did that, We could call it a massacre, a butchery or even a genocide.

  32. Re:Parent is an anti-Israel libtard by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Even mention conservatives and you get modded until oblivion.

    As a moderate conservative, I think your post is stupid and ignorant. Stop watching Fox News, leave your mother's basement, and visit the big blue room with the yellow light bulb.

  33. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, no. Sending bulldozers into Palestine is exactly what caused them to start shooting rockets in the first place. Israel basically had a simple choice: treat Palestinians like human beings or try to invent crazy technology to defend themselves. It is amazing that those fascists continue to choose the 2nd.

  34. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virtually nobody would complain if Israel fired paint bombs that flag everyone in the area with a UV-sensitive dye that they can use to track them down, arrest them and then release anyone that has no possible connection to the event, before giving the rest due process in an independent (to avoid bias from years of history with each other) court of law. That is not what is happening. Instead, Goliath is stomping ten Davids every time one David throws a rock, and a hundred if it's a credible throw (e.g. a rocket). Nobody is ignorant of the fact that Hamas and others are playing the media card as hard as they can (just like the IDF tweets about how a neighbourhood woke up to a fire and three injuries, without comparing it to the other side). Israel still manages to come out the bad guy.

    Now... Israeli Jews have a standing offer: if Israel stops killing children, the rest of us stop seeing antisemitism as merely being good sense.

    See how that doesn't really fly?

    When you attack a bunch of civilian children because you're unable to isolate the individuals, you legitimize being treated at a group level without regard for individual lives yourself. And with a majority of Israeli Jews now stating they're enlisting to kill Arabs, where they (a decade ago) used to enlist to challenge themselves or any of the other decent reasons for enlisting, while people drag couches and popcorn up on Golan to watch the bombing of Palestine as entertainment, legitimizing that mode of reasoning is not a particularly good move for Israeli Jews.

    Hamas is a label, one applied to anyone it might be convenient to slap with that label.

    You will find provocateurs, hooligans and other troublemakers in any group. Or outside the group, but included in it by enemies of the group for convenience. And you will find people who are too sick and tired of seeing their friends and relatives bombed to bits or shot or burned to death to really give a fuck anymore, and who have nothing to lose anyway. In effect, you cannot stop the occasional missile. What you can do, is lower tensions, build relations and be the adult party in the conflict (palestinians aren't adults... their life expectancy does not support an adult population). Or, at the very least, you can try to be porportional about your retaliation.

    That would earn Israel a lot more sympathy. And, frankly, they could use it... cuz the Holocaust card is not just spent, but overdrawn by now.

  35. Financial issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A major problem with Iron Dome is the cost. In addition to the cost of building the system, each interceptor missile costs about $50,000, about 50 times greater than the cost of a Qassam missiles which it destroys. Granted, Israel has a lot more funds than the Palestinians, especially since they receive so much financial backing from the US, but still, maintaining this system could cause budget shortfalls, leading to cuts in other crucial areas.

  36. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by assertation · · Score: 1

    Neither.

    I learned about the wall on a History Channel documentary.

    Nobody was an idiot back then, everyone knew Hitler was a problem. The wall wasn't finished because France was exhausted in resources from WW I. French politicians and people simply didn't want to pay for it.

  37. Critics like to criticize by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    Critics do not like to assist in making things better.

  38. how about an objective view? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    seriously, this is just bullshit on par with fox news.

    "We can tell, for sure, from video images and even photographs that the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all," Postol said. "It—my guess is maybe [it hits a targeted missile] 5 percent of the time—could be even lower. ... And when you look—what you can do in the daytime—you can see the smoky contrail of each Iron Dome interceptor, and you can see the Iron Domes trying to intercept the artillery rockets side on and from behind. In those geometries, the Iron Dome has no chance, for all practical purposes, of destroying the artillery rocket."

    "for sure," really? how about some actual numbers instead of speculation?

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:how about an objective view? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "for sure," really? how about some actual numbers instead of speculation?

      Besides that, how many missiles were not destroyed, but 'deflected' from their original trajectories? And we already know that the Iron Dome let's missiles that are going to hit unpopulated areas i.e. fields fall.

    2. Re:how about an objective view? by EnsilZah · · Score: 2

      He can look at shaky videos some people shot on their phone of rocket flares in the distance and make all the assumptions he wants but if you look at the actual impacts, This is what an unintercepted impact looks like and This is what a piece of an intercepted rocket that landed a few hundred meters from my house looks like and the vast majority of impacts are of the latter variety.
      Not that a hunk of metal falling on falling from the sky is nothing to sneeze at, but the shrapnel doesn't seem to have quite the penetrating power and if you're indoors you should be relatively safe.

    3. Re:how about an objective view? by lgftsa · · Score: 1

      "Why is he pointing his pistol at that missile? Is he arresting it? Does he have to read it's ri... Oh, he's pulling on his second glove. Never mind."

    4. Re:how about an objective view? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      I have seen pictures of it and my guess is maybe its working as designed within acceptable tolerances

    5. Re:how about an objective view? by EnsilZah · · Score: 1

      I thought he was just happy to see it.

    6. Re:how about an objective view? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      This is what an unintercepted impact looks like

      Hey, that looks conspicuously like my room! Damned Hamas. I knew there was something wrong when no amount of tidying up could make any marked difference in neatness.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  39. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck your absolute moral relativism

  40. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by gtall · · Score: 1

    I think at this point the Palestinians are rather like the Black Knight of Monty Python. There's nothing you can do short of killing every last one that won't result in the remainders claiming "we was robbed" and declaring Holy Jihad in the name of Muhammed and Allah.

    This Allah character is a weird dude in Islam. He is supposed to be so other that he only communicates to humans through angels and them mostly in dreams...which of course is only tailor made for every two-bit Imam and Mullah to declare a visitation in a dream in which all the Jews were seen to be dead by the hand of...yadda, yadda, yadda.

    Personally, I think if Allah had any balls he write in clear Arabic over the entire sky what the hell he's after. Short of that, he's just a figment of imagination.

  41. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by gtall · · Score: 1

    Hmmm...so we are to attribute some sort of ethereal "values" to encouraging your kids to whacked on the basis that someone wrote down in a book over 1000 years ago that they'd go to Heaven for it? Sooooo...what's the point of the kiddies being here in the first place. How come Allah doesn't just whack their asses at birth and cut right to the chase?

  42. Re:Patriot Missiles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What you say is true about needing to get the warhead during terminal phase. It should be easy to tell, though. The incoming rocket's radar track should continue uninterrupted on a miss, or be deflected or break up on a hit.

    The Patriot had a terrible success rate in Gulf War I: At most 4 kills in 42 engagements. At the time, the US was claiming 41 kills. Note that those 4 kills aren't confirmed, just no reported damage on the ground. Some could have just been misses by the SCUDs, or ones that broke up during reentry.

    The Patriot II has a pretty good kill rate against friendly aircraft.

  43. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When South Africa complements you on committing apartheid, it's time to take a good hard look in the mirror.

  44. No there there... by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    This is why I have a tendency to dislike "skeptics".. from my experience they too often tend to commit same errors in reasoning as their opposition. Only by virtue of operating from a safer default position do they end up being on the right side of objective reality.

    How does one ramble on about lack of data driving a position and concurrently while admitting ignorance and having no data yourself go on to commit the very same error?

    If you want to point out news articles on the effectiveness of Iron dome are misleading public by invoking implicit assumptions not actually made...this would have been great if only you just stopped there.

  45. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by dotancohen · · Score: 1

    Like I said, their values are different than yours and mine!

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  46. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Vapula · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Palestinians have an army...

    Not regular army but a terrorism/guerilla kind of army...

    If you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...

    And they prefer to create martyrs than go to a safe place when Israelian raids come... They want to get the whole world destroying Israel... They want to use US against Israel...

    They prefer to choose war, to kill the Jews that are thought about as worse than dogs by the Muslims. Quran and other clearly say "you may not trust a non-muslim"... If you're Christian, better be warned, we are the next target on the list... well, maybe after agnostics...

  47. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by dotancohen · · Score: 2

    +5 inciteful!

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  48. I'm in Israel - I can HEAR the intercepts by dudeman2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm in Israel with my family this month. We've had to go to shelters several times over the past week (f- you very much, Hamas). You can hear the difference between successful Iron Dome intercepts vs. the rockets that land (most, presumably, in unpopulated areas). The system is working and saving lives; that's good enough for me.

    1. Re:I'm in Israel - I can HEAR the intercepts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You can hear the difference between successful Iron Dome intercepts vs. the rockets that land

      You are fooling yourself. What you are hearing is the warhead on the tamir intercepter exploding. It makes the same noise whether it hits a rocket or not and it is a lot louder than a rocket that lands, especially a dud which many of them are since Hamas doesn't have any actual missile factories with quality control technicians.

  49. Really good to know if you're Hamas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glad to have Slashdot on board the skirmish/war.

    1. Re:Really good to know if you're Hamas by ahaweb · · Score: 1

      Wait, did you just imply that it's security via obfuscation?

  50. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Did you read that Wikipedia article you linked to? It makes a pretty good case that it's apartheid:

    The analogy has been used by scholars, United Nations investigators, human rights groups and critics of Israeli policy, some of which have also accused Israel of committing the crime of apartheid.[2][3] Critics of Israeli policy say that "a system of control" in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, including Jewish-only settlements, the ID system, separate roads for Israeli and Palestinian citizens, military checkpoints, discriminatory marriage law, the West Bank barrier, use of Palestinians as cheap labour, Palestinian West Bank enclaves, inequities in infrastructure, legal rights, and access to land and resources between Palestinians and Israeli residents in the Israeli-occupied territories resembles some aspects of the South African apartheid regime, and that elements of Israel's occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law.[4] Some commentators extend the analogy, or accusation, to include Arab citizens of Israel, describing their citizenship status as second-class.[12]

    You know the old expression about "looking like a duck and walking like a duck and sounding like a duck"? Well, Israel has been quacking for quite some time now when it comes to it's treatment of Palestinians.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  51. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, in recent history, these conflicts are resolved by pressure from the international community. It's how apartheid in South Africa ended, to a great extent.

    I don't know if you're old enough to remember Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher referring to Nelson Mandela as a "terrorist" and his party as a "terrorist organization". It turned out they were dead wrong. Last year, the philosophical progeny of Reagan and Thatcher hailed Mandela as a hero.

    History is not going to be kind to the government of Israel in the first decades of the 21st century (if not longer).

    It didn't have to be this way.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  52. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In my book, if you believe something ridiculous, that is cause for ridicule.

  53. Re:hitler tried to solve this problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOD UP!!

  54. The guardian of Israel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Missile shields do not protect us. I sleep soundly at night knowing that the Almighty Creator of heaven and earth protects His people.

  55. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, no. Sending bulldozers into Palestine is exactly what caused them to start shooting rockets in the first place.

    Fucking liar.

  56. Ah, yes... the BDS scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the new tan shirt and red armband. "BDS" is just the new "fashionable" form of Jew-hatred where you're too gutless to herd Jews into gas chambers yourself, so you pretend to be "principled" while actually just pushing to make the only Jewish safe-haven on Earth sufficiently vulnerable to its enemies so that they will kill all the Jews for you...

    The Jews have a teeny tiny sliver of land in the middle east that was theirs long before Islam even EXISTED and yet somehow we're supposed to think that the muslims, arabs, africans and persians who own 90% of the land in the region NEED that last little sliver and are justified in their repeated attempts to kill all the Jews. We hear shrieks of "aparteid" levelled against the Jews, but the REALITY is that the muslims in the area only want the barriers lowered temporarily so they can flood into Israel in order to commit the ultimate act of "aparteid" ... separating Jews from the living. The "BDS movement" is nothing more than the continuation of Hitlerism with a bit of powder and mascara applied as long as the Muslims refuse to renounce the goal of killing all Jews.

    1. Re:Ah, yes... the BDS scam by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      The "BDS movement" is nothing more than the continuation of Hitlerism

      So, not investing in companies that support the Israeli government is exactly the same as the Holocaust?

      That's reasonable.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  57. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah. And now South Africa has gone from being a nuclear power with a space program to a third world shit hole that's mostly known for it's murder rate. I don't think history is going to be very kind to the Enlightened(TM), either.

    See Desmond Tutu's comments.

  58. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by fnj · · Score: 2

    No, you're both wrong. In recent years, these conflicts are never resolved at all. They fester forever.

  59. Severely tainted source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any article on ANYTHING nuclear- or missle-related that involves Ted Postol is a joke.

    The guy, like all the rest of the dirtbags at the "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists" is about as biased as it is humanly-possible to be. That organization was fervently committed to the Western world losing the cold war and keeping itself as vulnerable to any enemies as possible... they used their phony "doomsday clock" to propagandize westerners into being scared of defending themselves but never seemed particularly worried about the nukes the "commies" had (probably because of their ties to the treasonous nuclear scientists who'd helped Russia get access to "the bomb")

    The Bulletin jerks always insist that anything that might defend western nations from missiles is in some way unworkable, impossible, etc and therefore they NEED to prove all missile defense systems "don't work". Funny thing that - given that missile defense (like nuclear bombs) is basically a physics problem that sooner or later WILL be easily solved. Physics guys spending decades insisting that a physics problem will never be solved is one the best tip-offs possible that they are more political and biased than scientific and unbiased. I debated one of these anti-missile and anti-nuke guys (not Ted Postol) back in the seventies over whether cruise missiles would work.... the guy insisted that the problems involved were all too complex and that the "obvious" countermeasures so simple that they'd never be workable or practical. Total joke. Some people with a good education peer "into the abyss" and get frightened and then go all-wacko political and decide that honesty needs to be sacrificed on the altar of "saving the world". Such people should NEVER be trusted by anybody on either side of any argument - their criticisms are too easily tainted by emotion.

  60. Congrats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just made a comment that was less rational and less supported by facts and evidence etc than any Slashdot posting by any "religious" person. Quite an achievement! Yup. You've just convinced everyone of the correctness of your beliefs.

  61. Re:Oh well by dryeo · · Score: 0

    Maybe you should read the book of dryeo which clearly states that slashdot user #100693 has ownership of the world.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  62. From a list of Fallacious Arguments .. by lippydude · · Score: 1

    @DerekLyon: "Regular readers are also well aware of the extreme and longstanding bias .. of the Bulletin's editors against missile defense" ..

    "Poisoning The Wells: discrediting the sources used by your opponent. This is a variation of Ad Hominem."

    1. Re:From a list of Fallacious Arguments .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That could be the case. I will note that I was atleast greatly disappointed by a lack of any real data and there only being some opinions on it not being effective. I was kind of hoping for a fact driven presentation and didn't get it.

      So in that light, the source still is pretty bad regardless.

    2. Re:From a list of Fallacious Arguments .. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2

      I am so glad you brought that up because I was reading a post elsewhere earlier today when I realized a problem with many of the people who cry "ad hominem fallacy" in arguments. The poster you responded to pointed out that the article does not contain any actual data, just the opinion of "expert(s)". When considering arguments made by someone who does not provide any actual data, it is entirely relevant to consider the credibility of the person who is making the argument. If that person, or organization, has been known to distort facts in order to support their position, it throws into doubt the validity of the claim they are currently making.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  63. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We value life, they value heaven.

    According to yourself, you value an personal ancestral connection to the land. And you also said you think it's the same for Hamas. So please don't try to twist things into a "good vs. evil" or even "sane vs. insane" narrative. It's not.

    --

    Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  64. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by mpe · · Score: 1

    Goliath is stomping ten Davids every time one David throws a rock, and a hundred if it's a credible throw (e.g. a rocket).

    It seem more that they will blame "David" every time a rock gets thrown. Some of these rockets are being fired from Lebanon yet Hamas, rather than Hezbollah, being blamed. Co-operation between Shia and Sunni not being likely either. Those launcing the rockets are also being refered to as "Hamas supporters". Rather implying "With friends like these who needs enemies".

  65. It works well enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bottom line is does it work well enough, and if it prevents rockets from exploding in inhabited areas then it works.

  66. Addressing the Cost and Nature of a SCUD by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    SCUD's are cheap, light, and do the job they're supposed to do. Wouldn't it be cheaper to design, and build a 50 cal with radar, and laser tracking? 3 taps, next; repeat as needed.

    1. Re:Addressing the Cost and Nature of a SCUD by TTL0 · · Score: 1

      from what i have read that is indeed the next step with each zap costing $2,000

      --
      Sanity is the trademark of a weak mind. -- Mark Harrold
  67. News for nerds? by buckfeta2014 · · Score: 1

    Since when did Slashdot start caring about world politics?

    --
    Buck Feta. You know what to do.
  68. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by MechEMark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's really nowhere else to put this, so here goes:
    Thank you dotancohen for all your comments. They are insightful, mature, and, perhaps most importantly, civil.

    As a general on the discussion so far, I find it informative that the most vitriolic comments directed against Israel and Jews were posted anonymously; the posters are well aware that their remarks are defamatory and have no appropriate place in civil discourse.

    Per the preceding discussion, the staggeringly different perspectives on life, the afterlife, martydom, etc. add a dimension to the conflict that is not easily resolved. As the product of a "modern", western civilation and education, I personally find it impossible to subscribe to any sort of notion of the promise of heaven, nor do I have any willingness to sacrifice myself for a religious cause. The asymmetric philosophy that enables suicide bombings, among other atrocities, has had an outsized influence on the conflict and global perception thereof.

    Mark it as flamebait all you want:
    "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." - Golda Meir

  69. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Informative

    f you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...

    Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

    --
    I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  70. Re:Parent is an anti-Israel libtard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -Slashdot has the Anonymous Coward feature which means libtards can show their real racist tendencies.

    Since you are an AC, you must be a libtard trying to make conservatives look like dumb-asses.

  71. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

    If you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...

    How could they repair the buildings, when the Israelis won't let them import building materials?

  72. Easy answer, and is an election due? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    "and we always find out months later that the numbers were exaggerated" - it's war propaganda. Everyone does it. Wind back to Vietnam and WWII for obvious US examples if everything else is too soon.

    However, all the previous major attacks by Israeli forces, despite plenty of provocation to point to, just happened to coincide with the run-up to an election. Is there an election due soon or am I getting too cynical about the bunch running Israel at the moment?

    1. Re:Easy answer, and is an election due? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Previous major attacks by Israeli forces all coincide with their ongoing program to clear out undesirables and "redeem" the land.

  73. The missiles are free by dbIII · · Score: 1

    If you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians

    If you can find a way to convince the Saudis and Iranians to send free food instead of free missiles there's a Nobel peace prize waiting for you.

    1. Re:The missiles are free by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      If you can find a way to convince the Saudis and Iranians to send free food instead of free missiles there's a Nobel peace prize waiting for you.

      Because other Arab nations are responsible for how Israel treats Palestinians.

    2. Re:The missiles are free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because other Arab nations are responsible for how Israel treats Palestinians.

      They are if they knowingly use them as pawns against Israel.
      Which they do.

  74. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The conflict is resolved when the arms manufacturers supplying both sides decide that they have made enough money.

  75. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Remember Israel is not allowed to defend itself

    The strawman you are looking for is not at this address. How about we get back to discussing iron dome instead of pretending someone stupid enough to think Israel is not allowed to defend itself is reading just to make some sort of very labored political point?

  76. Iron Dome? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    Oh. Regarding "The fireworks display vs. strafe bomber war" thing in the middle east.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  77. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I covered that under "convenient label". The Israeli ascribe everything to Hamas, just like the US essentially slapped AQ on everyone they wanted to legitimize going after (now they've switched to slapping ISIL on them instead, but it's the same game) and conveniently grouped 4-5 different major factions and several independent warlords under the title "Taliban" in Afghanistan (nevermind that some of those were in open conflict with the actual Taliban until they got an external enemy to unite them). Hamas now means "dislikedbyisraelnikim", in practice, thus turning a dislike of someone into a justification for going after them in and of itself.

  78. Sometimes I hate being right by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Politics can be utterly disgusting at times - in two weeks the newly elected President will be sworn in. Yet another pogrom coincided with an election.

  79. nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you think the Israelis would waste hundreds of millions of dollars of their limited funds on a weapon system that doesn't work, well, you don't know much about the Israelis.

  80. you mean you HEAR fireworks by Uberbah · · Score: 0, Troll

    Qassam rockets are nothing more than gunpowder rockets straight out of medieval China. No guidance, no ordinance, which is why it's years since they've actually killed anyone. As opposed to your typical IDF strike, which can kill dozens in one shot.

    f- you very much, Hamas

    Go fuck yourself, racist land thief.

    1. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Qassam rockets are nothing more than gunpowder rockets straight out of medieval China. No guidance, no ordinance, which is why it's years since they've actually killed anyone.

      It doesn't matter. They're aimed squarely at civilians, with shrapnel-heavy warhead that is designed specifically to cause death to as many unarmored "soft" targets in the area as possible - basically, to maximize civilian casualties.

      Go fuck yourself, racist land thief.

      Hamas is a race now? That's funny... last I checked, they are internationally recognized as a terrorist organization.

      I suppose saying "fuck Taliban" is racist too, seeing how it's mostly Pashtun?

    2. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter.

      Disproportionate response is a war crime.

      They're aimed squarely at civilians,

      No guidance systems. And by Israeli logic, any target near anyone who works for any part of the government, or any kind of "militant", is fair game.

      with shrapnel-heavy warhead that is designed specifically to cause death to as many unarmored "soft" targets in the area as possible - basically, to maximize civilian casualties.

      So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.

      Hamas is a race now?

      Hamas is trying to steal land from people on another continent now?

      That's funny... last I checked, they are internationally recognized as a terrorist organization.

      That's funny, since Hamas was created by Israel to oppose Fatah. Like the wingers that complain about Iran's theocracy, racist Zionists and their supporters need to start with the nearest mirror.

    3. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Disproportionate response is a war crime.

      The problem with this is that no-one seems to be able to coherently explain what a proportional response should look like. Every time I ask people, they immediately go into rant mode about "Israeli fascist" and "they've had that coming" etc. But no-one is willing to actually lay out the proper response to the rockets step-by-step.

      No guidance systems.

      They're still aimed, it's just that the target area is very wide. But in most cases, those target areas are city centers.

      So maximized they hadn't killed a single person in almost three years. Try again.

      Not for the lack of trying. It's one of the reasons why I consider Hamas leadership basically insane - it's clear that what they're doing is just plainly not working, and is only making things worse for them, but they're doing it anyway.

    4. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The problem with this is that no-one seems to be able to coherently explain what a proportional response should look like.

      Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.

      But no-one is willing to actually lay out the proper response to the rockets step-by-step.

      There would be no rockets if Israel hadn't responded to kidnappings in the West Bank with a rampage in Gaza, bulldozing homes and arresting people that could have had nothing to do with the three missing teens.

      They're still aimed, it's just that the target area is very wide. But in most cases, those target areas are city centers.

      And so deadly that they hadn't killed anyone in over two years. Give Hamas some guided munitions and I'm sure they'll happily aim them at the military planes sitting at civilian airports. Any civilians dying from those attacks would be the fault of the Israeli government, for making them human shields.

      I consider Hamas leadership basically insane - it's clear that what they're doing is just plainly not working, and is only making things worse for them, but they're doing it anyway.

      Fast death vs slow and brutal strangulation. And the fast deaths draw attention to Israel's war crimes, whereas the U.S. can cover up the slow strangulation with it's Security Council veto pen.

    5. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like willful obtuseness. If the poor bastards in Gaza can afford some gunpowder and tubes, methinks one of the world's top five military powers could manage it.

      Er... are you implying that what Israel should do is fire its own Qassam-style rockets back at Gaza, using the same targeting principle (i.e. aim where the concentration of people is highest)?

    6. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Simple answer for a simple question: how could Israel poooosibly make a proportionate response?

      using the same targeting principle (i.e. aim where the concentration of people is highest)?

      i.e., not killing a single person until late in 2016. As opposed to the current round of mass slaughter that you're endorsing, one that is wiping out entire families at a time.

    7. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The reason why Hamas rockets "didn't hit a single person" is because of a combination of interceptor systems, early launch detection, and well-developed civil defense in Israel. If rockets were fired in the same manner at Gaza, given the population density there, almost every single one would have found a target. Yet that would be exactly a tit-for-tat response.

      You seem to be arguing that if a guy attacks me with a knife on the street, I can't use any force to defend myself until he actually manages to land a stab on me. If that's your notion of "proportional response", it's bullshit.

    8. Re:you mean you HEAR fireworks by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The reason why Hamas rockets "didn't hit a single person" is because of a combination of interceptor systems, early launch detection, and well-developed civil defense in Israel.

      Those helped, but nowhere near close to them being primitive gunpowder rockets based on the finest 14th Century hardware available. Even the IDF dismissed Qassams as any kind of military threat before Iron Dome was rolled out:

      "Clearly everyone wants to be surrounded by concrete block, but we need to remember that Qassams are more a psychological than physical threat. Statistically they cause the fewest losses, and therefore we must develop prevention systems but not invest all the money in this aspect."

      You seem to be arguing that if a guy attacks me with a knife on the street, I can't use any force to defend myself until he actually manages to land a stab on me. If that's your notion of "proportional response", it's bullshit.

      There's the willful obtuseness again, as flatly ignoring the fact that the person with the knife here would be the IDF rampaging through Gaza in response to kidnappings in the West Bank. And if anyone is defending themselves, it's Hamas defending the Palestinians from the latest round of slaughter from the IDF.

      Seriously, how do you manage to compare with the straight face of the killing of a single person (first qassam death since 2012) with 500+ deaths with a straight face?

  81. npr again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is another NPR piece on this subject. It says the system works well. But I suppose it would be too much to ask for Slashdoters to try to hear both sides before reaching a conclusion

    http://www.npr.org/2014/07/11/330631713/israel-s-rocket-defense-system-performs-well-during-gaza-escalation

    1. Re:npr again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another link. I mean, guys, there is this thing called Google if you want to get what different people are saying.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israels-iron-dome-changes-the-face-of-battle/2014/07/10/578c779e-0868-11e4-8615-4eddc1f1cffa_story.html

  82. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...treat Palestinians like human beings...

    What if the Palestinians choose not to reciprocate, you idiot? Which is in fact the case.

  83. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    You mean the nuclear program meant to repel other African nations if they got sick of Apartheid shit and invaded? Your racism is noted.

  84. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as it makes people feel "safe" right?

  85. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Uberbah · · Score: 0

    You keep using that word. I don't think that it means what you think that it means.

    Apartheid Denialist. Even hardcore Zionists from Likkud call it what it is, so take your racist butthurt elsewhere. Or, you know, you could stop ethnically cleansing Palestinians from their villages in the West Bank to make way for "settlements", stop denying them basic human rights, stop taking all the water, or setting up "Jewish only" roads for travel. You know....Apartheid.

  86. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Anyway, Israel/Palestine is a minor problem in the middle east right now. The major action has moved elsewhere.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  87. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Uberbah · · Score: 0

    Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven. If someone is killed in war, then themselves and 300 of their family are guaranteed a place in heaven:

    So not only are you suuuuper racist, you're a dehumanizing eliminationist as well. Thanks for putting that out in the open.

  88. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Uberbah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember Israel is not allowed to defend itself.

    On some other planet where the IDF isn't wiping out 100 Palestinians for every dead Israeli? Where the United States doesn't praise every cluster bomb dropped on Gaza as Israel "defending itself"? Where the Palestinians are on of the world's top military powers and the Zionists are a bunch of unarmed refugees?

    Just another day in this alternate reality built on bald-faced lies you guys have constructed for yourselves....

  89. Look at the map by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well the map of the last 60 years tells a very interesting story.

    http://www.aljazeerah.info/images/2011/May/30%20p/palestinan_map.jpg

    1. Re:Look at the map by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's been the cost of war with Israel. Rather than work trying to foster economic development, Hamas et al work at bombing Israel.

      So, it's natural that they would want to minimize their risk. I would hope that moderate Palestinians would get rid of the terrorists in their midst.

    2. Re:Look at the map by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel continues the ethnic cleansing because the Palestinians fight back against their own ethnic cleansing?

  90. Before the iron dome by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Before the iron dome Hamas rocket were also sent in great quantity in Israel, but never had any devastating effect physically. The rocket are worthless as a destruction item both civilian and military, but because they hit at random they are a perfect tool for terror.

    What you said does not vindicate or falsify the various contention of people that the iron dome is nowhere as effective as pretended by the current PR wave.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  91. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by sumdumass · · Score: 1

    Nobody was an idiot back then, everyone knew Hitler was a problem.

    I guess you never heard of Neville Chamberlain.

    Hitler could have been stopped before a world war happened if the Treaty of Versailles had only been enforced. It would have been minor to stop Germany when they reoccupied the Rhineland. France alone could have done that.

    There was a lot of stupidity in hindsight.

  92. Did you reply to the right post? by dbIII · · Score: 1

    There seems to be a bit of a disconnection here.
    I simply pointed out the problem where some Iranians and Saudis are sending weapons just like that dickhead who used to run the NSA sent money to the IRA so that he could feel better about helping with "the struggle". It's a separate problem to the modern version of pushing the Indians into reservations and then settling the reservations.

    1. Re:Did you reply to the right post? by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      There seems to be a bit of a disconnection here.
      I simply pointed out the problem where some Iranians and Saudis are sending weapons just like that dickhead who used to run the NSA sent money to the IRA

      Disconnection: not looking at the billions in free military hardware given by the U.S. to an apartheid state, turning it into one of the world's top military powers, to focus on gunpowder rockets with the finest unguided missile technology available from the 14th century, given to the oppressed.

  93. Re: Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think Israel managed to keep their side of the deal. why do you. think they were carried off to Babylonia etc. God's promises regarding land were usually preceded with "if you..."

  94. Results... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...speak clearly to the system.

    Most rockets aimed at towns/cities are destroyed, while those not, land in empty fields, etc.

    If the system weren't working, you would see more damage in the towns/cities.

  95. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    That is true.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  96. And Jeff Goldblum uploaded a computer virus . . . by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1
    into the alien net from a Mac Book.

    What you have to realize is that Brent Spiner (the "mad scientist" in Area 51 who related "we don't get out much") had been hacking the alien tech since the early 1950s so Goldblum didn't have to do that much.

    Getting back on topic, the Rebels in St/ar Wars smuggled the plans to the Death Star, which the Grand Moff/Toff/Dufus thought would do the rebels no good because the Death Star was properly engineered.

    The Rebel engineers studied those plans and found a weakness in that reactor exhaust port thingy. Maybe there were her flaws, but this is what they were able to find.

    As to the WW-II style anti-aircraft, the whole attack on the Death Star was supposed to be the Battle of Midway and Waldron's Lost Squadron running their suicidal torpedo attack down to the last man with the tide of the battle reversing at the last minute (the dive bombers sinking the carriers of Kido Butai at Midway, Luke using The Force to guide his last blaster shot to the exhaust port after Han Solo drove off his pursuers in "Star Wars").

    This telling of the tale resonanted with the audience in the late 70's, whose parents of The Greatest Generation told the stories of the WW-II battles. When I first told a friend at work "The whole Star Wars ending scene is just the Battle of Midway", there was this recognition on his part, where he related his father being a Navy submarine combat veteran. Stories of how WW-II was fought from different vantage points was what our generation grew up with.

  97. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by JabrTheHut · · Score: 1

    Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven.

    So you actually believe you are doing them a favour by killing their children? That's why you do it?

    I've heard some low-grade racism in my time, but this takes the cake. I'd like to see you offer a source for this "Palestinians bringing children into buildings designated for destruction" that doesn't come from the IDF's propaganda division.

    --
    Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
  98. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by wchin · · Score: 2

    This reasoning, on the face of it, is absolutely ridiculous.

    Because one side is very advanced militarily and the other side is not, then the side that is very advanced needs to let the other side have a fairer fight? No. Not at all.

    A mugger comes at you with a knife. If you have a gun, that's not fair, you need to let the mugger with the knife stab you a few times before you pull the trigger?

    Or let's say the other side has a stone, and is perfectly happy to hit you over the head repeatedly with it until you are dead. You have a M240 light machine gun. Very asymmetrical. You can take out the guy with the stone and a few of his buddies with a burst. But no! Unfair! They should be given machine guns too to make this fair. You should wait until they are given machine guns. Matter of fact, you can watch them get machine guns. So you wait to make sure they get all set up with their new donated machine guns, make sure they get the right training so that they know how to kill you with it, since it is only fair, right? No. If this were you, you would kill them if they are trying to kill you, no matter what weapons they possess, no matter how asymmetrical the military technology.

    We are in very twisted times, as Hamas knows it can't really hurt Israel militarily with these tactics, but is very willing to provoke the situation such that they get pummeled. Each time Hamas provokes a pummeling, they get more funding and better weaponry from outside sources and more sympathy from both within and around the world. In the short term, Hamas has no hope of winning militarily. However, they hope that in the long term, they can grow strong enough to take on Israel militarily and wipe them out.

  99. Hand wringing of the BAS by Latent+Heat · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The BAS has always been on this tear "oh, noes, missile defense" because they have always been ideologically against any side breaking out of the Cold War Mutually Assured Destruction stand-off. There are always engineering trades in what these defense systems or what defensive systems could do or couldn't do back to the days of walled cities in Mesopotamia (Iraq).

    I remember in the "run up" to the First Iraq War (the "Gulf War') about an interview with some high-ranking Saudi dude being concern-trolled "what about Iraq attacking the oil fields (with Scuds)?" The Saudi official smiled somewhat patronizingly at the news dude and responded, "We are equipped with the Patriot" at the time when the US public didn't know a Patriot from a Tory or that anyone was mad enough to use an ack-ack missile against a Scud rocket.

    War is always about PR (i.e. deception). Everyone knew the Scud couldn't hit anything (except in some lucky for the enemy, unlucky for us shots). The Saudi leaders were just too happy to go along with "the Patriot is a Scud defense shield" because they knew that strategically, the Scud was of no consequence and this way they could tell their people to "just chill, bro, the Americans shared with us the Patriot" as the Scuds rained down. The US hurredly gave the Israelis the Patriot to get them to "just chill, bro", but everyone was coming out of the woodwork about how the Patriot was just a sham defense against an incoming missile not aimed at anything.

    The "Patriot works" fit Saudi propaganda interests, but went against the Israeli propaganda at the time because they Israelis were itchy to get into the fight of "Scud hunting", where air attacks against this mobile platform that couldn't hit anything in the first place were regarded as futile by the U.S.. The Israelis argued that their pilots would press futile attacks against the Scud more aggressively because they were defending their women and children against the largely ineffective Scud attacks, but the US argued this was Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti's war aim, to lob Scuds to draw the Israelis in to fracture the coalition.

    As for Palestinians and the war fighting power they have, suicide bombing are perhaps the most effective thing they have to inflict Israeli casualties, but it really works against them propaganda wise. The singularly most effective thing they had going was the First Intifida, where they were using rock-throwing young people as rubber-bullet sponges. From a propaganda standpoint, that was devastating in its effectiveness of portraying the Israeli troops as hateful goons, whether this was true or not, but the optics on TV were rapidly undermining Israel as a just cause. Why the PLO gave up on a tactic that was working I have no idea, but this may speak to why the conflict has dragged on so long when the Palestinians have demographics and world sympathy in their corner. The Palestinians may simply have bad leaders.

    The rocket attacks are a kind of middle ground tactic in sacrificing your own guys. It is not the casualties inflicted by the rocket attacks, it is the 100:1 casualties of your own people that is a feature-not-a-bug, of rallying your own people and of getting Americans to pray in their Christian churches "for an end to the violence."

    As to why the Israelis are playing along be inflicting so many casualties, maybe that is a feature-not-a-bug. For one thing, they are targeting "the leaders" and trying to be creative in a tactical sense with their tech for giving telephone warnings. Maybe the Israeli calculus is "the leaders talk tough but they are not that keen on being blown up themselves."

    Also, on one hand, Israel is a "Western" country where people get all hand-wringy about the "violence" (I use scare quotes because what is taking place is a war between two sides with irreconcilable national interests and not some unexplained "violence"). On the other hand, Israel is a Middle Eastern country with a substantial Oriental Jewish population displaced from Cairo, Baghdad

    1. Re:Hand wringing of the BAS by Chreo · · Score: 1

      To be fair, it makes about as much sense to group all Israeli together as just saying "Palestinians". PLO mostly "became" Fatah (the political branch) and "they" "ended" their fight when they accepted Israels right to exist (something Hamas does not do). The fact that Palestinians on the Gaza strip does not have much to loose, but their lives, makes any real neartime prospects for lasting peace bleak, at best. Unless they have something to gain or something real to loose then the fighting wont stop. One cannot deny the Israeli their right to self-defense. As you say Hamas should take a reality check and assess the prospects that we ever allow Israel to parish as they desire. The Palestinian children have only to gain from them making peace with the past.

      Rabbin was murdered to stop the peace process and that has indeed been the result. Most other people would act to make sure that such deeds never pay off.

      --

      Life is what happened when Good Intentions met Harsh Reality (the brother of the more infamous Chaos).
  100. Re: You are in the right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't worry. We decide what happens, and we will wipe from the Earth all who oppose us, starting with Gaza.

  101. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike the South Africans, we don't have to worry about the opinions of the world. You think what we tell you to think. Your worthless governments say what we give them permission to say.

  102. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Call it genocide if you want. We are justified. We will have peace if we have to bomb every last Arab home.

  103. My Wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And who do you really think is paying for these defenses? Israel? Really? No, it is US taxpayers. How and why that happens is a whole 'nother story.

    1. Re: My Wallet by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Israel developed it on their own budget. The uS bought in when it was demonstrated to work.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  104. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Wrong.

    Israeli airstrikes are a response to Palestinian aggression. Were it not for the rocket attacks, Israel would not have launched air strikes.

    The entire thing started because Israeli teenagers were kidnapped and murdered.

    Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews - it's right in the Hamas charter.

    Israel may not be perfect, but let's not pretend that the Palestinians are just innocent victims in all this.

  105. Define "working" by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    So the iron dome gets about 90% of the rockets, and the rest get though. And the missiles used for the iron dome cost nearly 10X as much as the Hamas rockets.

    Is the iron dome "working" or not?

    1. Re:Define "working" by davidkessler · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if a financial analysis is valid. The cost of medical and surgical treatment for a person with a gunshot wound is less than the cost of a bullet - or even the cost of a gun. Does that mean that medicine is not working?

    2. Re:Define "working" by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Why is everyone comparing the costs of the missiles themselves?

      The point of Iron Dome is not to bankrupt Hamas by forcing them to make more missiles. It's to save lives. How do you measure the value of a life saved that way?

      (there's also property damage, but that at least is quantifiable)

    3. Re:Define "working" by Talderas · · Score: 1

      If anything, you can make an argument that while it's intent is to save Israeli lives a side effect is that it is also helping save Palestinian lives by reducing the Israeli desire for retribution.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  106. Long on conclusion, short on evidence by davidkessler · · Score: 1

    I followed the link past the Mecklin article - which is short on detail - to the Theodore Postel interview and was surprised to find that his "expert" opinion consisted of the claim that "the Iron Dome system is not working very well at all" followed by the "guess" (his word) that "maybe" (his word) it was "working 5 percent of the time." This rigorous and scholarly analysis was in turn followed by the very scientific words "could be" prefixing the statistically precise "even less." He then went on to claim - in response to a leading question - that in order to work, the intercepting missile has to hit the rocket head on. He offered no evidence of this, nor any explanation of why this should be the case, nor any evidence of rockets hitting targets in populated areas. Again, He offered no statistics of his own nor did he state whether "WORKING 5% of the time" means failing to intercept 95% of the time after being launched or being launched only in a small sub-set of cases and thus intercepting only 5% of the rockets with the others being perrmitted through because they are not heading towards populated areas. Finally neither the Postol interview nor the Mecklin article says anything about the opinons of other academic military experts or whether there is support for Postol's conclusions amongst his peers.

  107. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When we are done with the Arabs, we will come for anti semitics like you. Your government will not protect you, we practically are your government.

  108. deconstruct Postols motives by peter303 · · Score: 1

    As a long term opponent of US Star Wars expensive & mediocre results, Postol may fear the succes of Iron Dome could revitalize US efforts. Star Wars is still a multi-billion dollar annual project a quarter century after its inception. I do have to compliment Postol for poking holes in the over optimistic propaganda of both systems, even if I think he is too skeptical.

  109. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when do you allow terrorists to rebuild the infrastructure from which they launch their attacks? What would be the point of bombing them if Israel just let them rebuild?

  110. Iron Dome answers half-full half-empty debate? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I remmeber US Star Wars detractors said the system would be considered a failure if it allowed a single nuclear missile to strike the US. On the other hand supporters said it would be a success if it created uncertainty in the attacker and was partially succesful. Well, seeing Iron Dome in action after a couple couple battles now, it seems to be pyschologically beneficial to the Israeli population. This is whether you belive it has been 25% or 90% successful in knocking out rockets. Then I would say the "hal-full" side has won the debate.

  111. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel isn't just advanced militarily, it has been using that military power for nearly fifty years to occupy the Palestinians land, pillage it of its resources, clear it of undesirables, and establish colonies for the exclusive use one particular ethnic group. Half of the people suffering right now are refugees from an earlier ethnic cleansing in 1948 and are still trying to return to their homes only miles away but they can't because they weren't born to a jewish mother. It's a program started over a century ago to "redeem" the Holy Land from the a-rabs.

    You forgot that part.

  112. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    If stopping Germany would have been a minor effort at that point the French could have done it themselves.

  113. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

    I meant would.

    Its not like Germany was really disarmed after WW1 and without occupation the limits on their military could hardly be relied upon. They simply left Germany far too powerful after WW1.

  114. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by dotancohen · · Score: 1

    Regarding Hamas bringing children to the buildings designated for destruction: you should realize that their values are different than yours and mine. We value life, they value heaven.

    So you actually believe you are doing them a favour by killing their children? That's why you do it?

    I've heard some low-grade racism in my time, but this takes the cake. I'd like to see you offer a source for this "Palestinians bringing children into buildings designated for destruction" that doesn't come from the IDF's propaganda division.

    It was in Al Jazeera just a few days ago. The Al Jazeera journalist seems to be as disgusted with the practice of bringing neighbours (not specifically children) to the buildings warned for destruction as you and I am.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  115. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by JabrTheHut · · Score: 1

    Ah, right, it was on a web site a few days ago but you can't provide a link? Are you sure you didn't make it up?

    --
    Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
  116. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    History is not going to be kind to the government of Israel in the first decades of the 21st century (if not longer).

    History is not going to be kind to the only liberal democracy in the middle east?

    Boy, your future sounds like a complete horror-show.

  117. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    You should remember that Israel (which have one of the best armies in the world) is fighting against a ethnical group without army.
    If anyone else in the world did that, We could call it a massacre, a butchery or even a genocide.

    Maybe in your special little universe. Here in the real world, Israel isn't fighting against "a ethnical group", it's fighting against a bunch of primitive fanatics who insist on constantly trying to kill Israeli citizens.

    If Israel actually wanted to carry out a genocide Palestine would be devoid of life in a week; instead the Palestinian population continues to grow at a rate far higher than the population of Israel.

    Worst. Genocide. EVER.

  118. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:

    Seriously? Let's think about this:

    He says if Hamas stops with the rockets, they can use the money to make repairs to buildings.
    You say "but they can't fix stuff because they can't get concrete".
    Israel says they can't import concrete because they keep launching rockets.

    Hrm. I don't know about you, but I think I see a solution somewhere in there.

  119. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

    Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:

    Seriously? Let's think about this:

    He says if Hamas stops with the rockets, they can use the money to make repairs to buildings.
    You say "but they can't fix stuff because they can't get concrete".
    Israel says they can't import concrete because they keep launching rockets.

    Hrm. I don't know about you, but I think I see a solution somewhere in there.

    Even during the last ceasefire the blockade was still in effect so it is not as simple as you suggest.

    --
    I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  120. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    History is not going to be kind to the only liberal democracy in the middle east?

    That's correct. A "liberal" democracy the same way South Africa was a "liberal democracy" during apartheid.

    Now that I think about it, the Weimar Republic was also a "liberal democracy", as was the United States during the genocide of Native Americans and it's promotion of slavery.

    Atrocity in a country that is otherwise supposedly "enlightened" stands out more, doesn't it? And make no mistake: the current government of Israel is perpetrating an atrocity right this minute.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  121. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Even during the last ceasefire the blockade was still in effect so it is not as simple as you suggest.

    You mean the ceasefire where Hamas stopped attacking for like a day?

    Well, you know, it takes more than 24 hours for the memo to be drafted and sent out.

  122. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by c6gunner · · Score: 1

    Atrocity in a country that is otherwise supposedly "enlightened" stands out more, doesn't it? And make no mistake: the current government of Israel is perpetrating an atrocity right this minute.

    Oh yeah. You're right; I completely forgot that only civilized countries can perpetrate those kinds of atrocities. I mean who cares that a backwards-ass country like Palestine wants to completely exterminate the Israelis - what matters is that Israel are refusing to be exterminated! That's the real atrocity, and I'm sure your version of history will not look kindly upon it.

  123. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Israel is nothing more than a piece of shit propped up on paper. They have proven no redeeming values and no raison d etre, other than being the US's bitch so they can maintain a foothold in the region. They kill Palestinians at will, far more than the Palestinians do Israelis. This is just soooo wrong. Fuck Israel. And fuck you false douchebag Israeli supporters.

  124. Re: Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the African democracies where everyone, regardless of color, is allowed to vote for the one legal party and where dissenters are fed to the crocodiles?

  125. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    I don't know if you're old enough to remember Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher referring to Nelson Mandela as a "terrorist" and his party as a "terrorist organization". It turned out they were dead wrong.

    They were? Did you read the Truth & Reconciliation Commission reports on ANC activities? A lot of it reads like textbook terrorism to me. Numerous intentional massacres of civilians (in churches etc) to make a political point.

    I'll grant you that the end of apartheid was a good goal, but that doesn't mean that terrorist acts committed to further it stop being terrorism.

  126. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Oh, and as for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict this way... the big difference is that ANC's goal, as elaborated in their platform and preached by their leaders, was equality in South Africa, and a real democracy. The goal of Hamas, on the other hand, is the complete destruction of the State of Israel and Jews as people - basically, genocide - again, as elaborated in their official platform documents, and made clear by their preachers. So, what common ground does Israel have to even begin negotiating with these guys? What compromises can they do to make the other side agree to peace (rather than a ceasefire)?

    A compromise, like the two-state solution, was possible 30 years ago. But it was not acted upon by Israel, and now Palestinians are too radicalized to accept any such. You can argue with nationalists like Arafat - in the end, what they want is for their nation to prosper, and they'll make pragmatic choices to make that happen, even conceding their ideological goals. But you can't argue with religious fanatics like Hamas - people who are willing to make children into suicide bombers clearly don't have any concern for the future of their nation; all they care about is to fight because "God told them so".

  127. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mostly concurr. but

    As much as I like pointing out my disgust for the treatment that mandela had. I really can't accept the parallel.

    Mandela refused to give up the right to fight with violence for an oppressed people. That was a philosophical and political stance. But I don't remember any escalation of military violence. Also I don't remember calling for the physical destruction of the enemy.

    Gaza is not under occupation since 2005. Its also not under siege in a strict sense. And common sense would want to ask why gaza can't commerce thorugh egypt.

    All this violence is in the interest of extremist positions on both sides. regular israelis will unfortunately pay the price of decades of hate. There is an immediate majority in both people for a 2 states solution. Anyone that on BOTH sides is pushing the agenda of "eliminating the other party" is a criminal.

    As you might know, although in the racist sectors of israel's society this view is present, and given the general situation it has appeal to a scared population, its not politically correct to ask for one directly.

    Hamas asks for the destruction of israel in its charter.

    please don't compare mandela with these criminals.

  128. Re:France built something like this back in the 19 by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Nope. The French saw two possible invasion routes: over the Rhine, which was to be stopped by the Maginot Line, or through the Belgian plains, where the mobile parts of the French army, as well as the British force, were supposed to meet them. The part between was covered by the great Ardennes forest, which the French considered impractical for a major attack.

    As we found out in the Battle of the Bulge in 1944, the Ardennes is a really difficult area to attack through. It has good roads, and isn't all that bad to advance through if you don't intend to fight until you get out of it. Thing is, no Ally had significant forces in it. It was Belgian territory, so the French couldn't deploy in it, and the Belgians didn't really care about it, and so had two battalions in it which were supposed to go north and help defend the important Belgian territory. Had there been significant Allied forces there, the campaign might have gone much differently.

    So, while the main fighting seemed to be north on the Belgian plains, large German mobile forces advanced through the Ardennes and defeated the weak French screening forces around Sedan, on the other side of the forest. From then on, they advanced too fast for the unwieldy French command structure to react. They reached the English Channel, driving most of the British off the Continent and destroying the most of the mobile part of the French army.

    The defeat wasn't the fault of the Maginot Line, which held strong. It was bad strategic planning by the French that lost France.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  129. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that Israel has spent many decades clearing land of Palestinians so they can build colonies exclusively for the use of Jews, it is no wonder at all that Palestinians want to completely exterminate the Israelis. Except that isn't true, the Palestinians don't want to completely exterminate the Israelis, they just want to end the ethnic cleansing campaign, vote for the government that runs their lives, and return to or receive just compensation for their homes and property that were confiscated by the Israeli government so it could be leased out to Jews only. Israel wants none of that of course, because it would upset the delicate "demographic balance" they have worked so hard to create over the years.

  130. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    As you might know, although in the racist sectors of israel's society this view is present...

    And currently running the government.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu is someone who has benefited from and promoted death his entire career. And not just beginning with leading a parade which carried a mock coffin of Yitzhak Rabin, who was murdered by one of Netanyahu's followers shortly thereafter.

    When Netanyahu called for generalized violence against Hamas in response to the crimes of the few who were involved in the death of those three teens, he knew exactly what he was starting. It's his goal to "cleanse" Gaza, once and for all, and he's been itching for this opportunity. It's as if the United States had responded to the assassination of President Kennedy by bombing and invading Texas.

    Just go read Netanyahu's series of statements and tweets following the discovery of the deaths of the teens. Look at the timeline of his incitement of violence against Palestinians, the subsequent murder of the 15 year old Palestinian, the severe beatings of others and the burning death of a Palestinian child. And finally, his use of so-called "DIME weapons" against Palestinian civilians. Committing war crimes to stay in political power is pretty despicable.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  131. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    The goal of Hamas, on the other hand, is the complete destruction of the State of Israel and Jews as pe

    Or so we are told by Israel.

    The only thing is, the very existence of Hamas and their stance on recognizing Israel is a product of Israel's double-dealing with Fatah, and before that the PLO.

    I'm convinced that the government of Israel wants this conflict to continue, because it guarantees them political power, support from the US and each time there is a flareup, there are more Palestinian houses bulldozed to make way for settlements. It's a classic expansionist/eliminationist game plan.

    My entire view of the situation has changed over the past 10 years from absolute support of Israel in their struggle against their hostile neighbors to questions about Israel's unorthodox way to seek peace through expansion to horror over the Israeli concentration camps where Palestinians are held and the cage they have made of Gaza to my current inability to believe anything that comes from the Israeli government or the Zionist press. It has not been a willing or comfortable transition. I had to undergo the conversion from hasbara tourist (as a non-Jew) to someone who has seen the horror in Gaza with his own two eyes.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  132. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Or so we are told by Israel.

    We are told so by Hamas program documents. The question is to which extent those claims are up to date. On one hand, Hamas did suggest something akin to a two-state solution (in 1967 borders), but the problem is that their offer used words like "truce" instead of "peace" to describe what they would be signing up for. That, combined with their seeming lack of desire to amend the written documents of the party, cast the honesty of their intentions in doubt. There is even more doubt given their radical Islamist ideology that seems to have strong Salafi influence - if you've read Qutb, you know that for those guys, the existence of Israel in any shape or form is plainly unacceptable, and its destruction, on the other hand, is a divine prophecy.

    The only thing is, the very existence of Hamas and their stance on recognizing Israel is a product of Israel's double-dealing with Fatah, and before that the PLO.

    That is true, but does it really matter for any purpose other than assigning blame (mind you, it's a useful purpose and it would be nice to see it carried through all the way - but it's orthogonal to the peace process)? Either way, Hamas is now running things, and their propaganda is effected on new generations of Palestinian kids... which doesn't bode well at all for any sort of compromise to be achievable in the foreseeable future. I just don't see how they could "reboot" the whole thing and get people who can be negotiated with back in charge, even if they wanted to.

  133. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    but the problem is that their offer used words like "truce" instead of "peace" to describe what they would be signing up for.

    Given what happened to Fatah for using words like "peace", I'm not sure why any other words should be used with Israel.

    That is true, but does it really matter for any purpose other than assigning blame

    I'm just afraid that "assigning blame" is something only Israel is allowed to do.

    I wouldn't want to be the person tasked with solving this problem. It's way hard. But I do believe that pressure should be applied to the combatants a little more evenly. As you say, Hamas may not be a party that can be negotiated with, but it's pretty clear that Netanyahu most certainly cannot be negotiated with. He has said so both with words and actions. There is a right wing in Israel that is holding the whole region hostage, and the current administration does not appear willing to put them in their place, because they are the "base".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  134. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I mean who cares that a backwards-ass country like Palestine ...

    Thank you for acknowledging that they are a country. Maybe you can convince the government of Israel to do the same.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  135. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    "Terrorism" is a word that only the winners are allowed to use, apparently.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  136. Hard to tell if it's working. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recall the Patriot debate. At first fantastic success rates were claimed (something ~90+%). Later it became clear that the actual effectiveness was much lower than that. And that's when a more complete and believable story came out.

    IIRC, the military analysis was that Patriot was successfully targeting parts of the Scuds but it was being distracted by a debris cloud, in which the warhead was hidden. This was not a case of Cold War-style deliberate hiding of MIRV warheads with dummy warheads either. The Scuds were actually breaking apart as they flew towards the target. My recollection was that all this was unintentional and basically a result of poor quality parts and assembly in the Scuds.

    Finally, I also recall that some of the Patriot batteries were less sophisticated version one or two systems. So the manufacturer/military excuse was, "well, yeah, we know the first-gen Patriots had poor targeting. Who cares, we don't make those anymore!"

    Therefore it makes some sense to me that Iron Dome might have some of the same problems.

  137. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    f you count the prices of the missiles launched at Israel, you'd have enough to get food to most of the Palestinians, to repair most of the buildings, to create medic centers, schools, ...

    Their not allowed to repair the buildings as concrete is on the list of goods that Israel prevents from being imported:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

    Factually incorrect. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_imports concrete is imported by the tons so long as its use is monitored by outside parties. And in spite of that, do you know how many tons of concrete ended up getting used in Hamas' terror tunnels?

    The problem is not the lack of funds of materials. It is the will to use the funds/materials to build up a society instead of using it to buy weapons to destroy someone else's society.

  138. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Except the ANC "won", and they were still labeled as terrorists afterwards. That doesn't sound like "winners writing history" to me. That sounds much more like "the truth will prevail".

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  139. Re:Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Except the ANC "won", and they were still labeled as terrorists afterwards.

    You may have noticed how with the death of Nelson Mandela, the only mention of "terrorist" came in the form, "I can't believe that monster Margaret Thatcher called Mandela a terrorist way back in the bad old days".

    Today, "terrorist" is what you call the other guy. It has no meaning any more.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  140. Re:I've always thought that the best way for Israe by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Israeli airstrikes are a response to Palestinian aggression. Were it not for the rocket attacks, Israel would not have launched air strikes.

    Every racist colonialist nazi shitbag motherfucker throughout history has excused their aggression and genocide by pretending to be the victim. English colonialists did it to the Peqout indians, the Dutch did it to the Zulu tribes, and European Zionists have been doing it to the Palestinians for over 70 years.

    The entire thing started because Israeli teenagers were kidnapped and murdered.

    Not when the IDF straight up murdered two Palestinian kids the month before? But okay, lets start your timeline with the three Israeli teens kidnapped in the West Bank. Why then, did Israel start arresting people and bulldozing homes in Gaza? Speaking of, why aren't you demanding that Hamas be allowed to arrest anyone they want in Tel Aviv as well as bulldoze hundreds of Israeli homes for the Palestinian kid that was burned to death?

    Hamas is committed to the death of all Jews - it's right in the Hamas charter.

    Why don't you try reading it some time, as no such stipulation exists. The propaganda you tried to whip out is calling for the end of the Zionist regime, which the victims of land theft and occupation are entitled to do. But while you're reading the Hamas Charter, read the Likud Charter while you're at it, which lays claim to all of the West Bank and Jerusalem.

    Israel may not be perfect, but let's not pretend that the Palestinians are just innocent victims in all this.

    Serves them right for being on Zionist land before they got there, right? You are supporting racist colonialism and Apartheid.