Israeli - Palestinian Conflict

What collective punishment? It's the homes of murderers that are being demolished here.

Their families aren't murderers. What if someone else wanted to move into the home after? If someone blew up a house on my street because a suspected (as is often the case) or even convicted murderer lived there i wouldn't be too happy.

It's undeniably a collective punishment.
 
Their families aren't murderers. What if someone else wanted to move into the home after? If someone blew up a house on my street because a suspected (as is often the case) or even convicted murderer lived there i wouldn't be too happy.

It's undeniably a collective punishment.

Yup, the houses of murderers have never been destroyed before:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3593137.stm

Edit: That's a bad example :nervous:
 
What collective punishment? It's the homes of murderers that are being demolished here.

Its often the case that family members are unaware of an individual's actions or intentions. In Europe, you have all these young men joining ISIS much to the bemusement and shock of their families. It would be unfair to collectively punish other people because of one person's actions. These men might have left behind a wife and children who were oblivious to their intentions, but now have to be homeless because their home's destroyed.

As someone has already alluded too, destroying the homes of their families is akin to a suicide bomber carrying out an attack in a public place to target someone specific.
 
Yup, the houses of murderers have never been destroyed before:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3593137.stm

Edit: That's a bad example :nervous:

Yes but these homes did not have people living in them (serial killers usually being loners) and were destroyed as a means of eradicating a macabre legacy. These Palestinian homes still have widowed families in them and demolishing it achieves no purpose besides vengeful spite...towards someone who's no longer alive. You're clutching at straws.
 
Their families aren't murderers. What if someone else wanted to move into the home after? If someone blew up a house on my street because a suspected (as is often the case) or even convicted murderer lived there i wouldn't be too happy.

It's undeniably a collective punishment.

Can you direct me to those often occuring cases? Whether you'd be happy or not at the punishment depends on whether this punishment would potentially prevent the slaughter of your loved ones.
 
Its often the case that family members are unaware of an individual's actions or intentions. In Europe, you have all these young men joining ISIS much to the bemusement and shock of their families. It would be unfair to collectively punish other people because of one person's actions. These men might have left behind a wife and children who were oblivious to their intentions, but now have to be homeless because their home's destroyed.

As someone has already alluded too, destroying the homes of their families is akin to a suicide bomber carrying out an attack in a public place to target someone specific.

I'm sure you could distinguish between taking one's home or life. Killing the terrorist is also a collective punishment in the form of grief to his loved ones, whether oblivious to his murderous intentions or not.

If effective in preventing loss of life, I'm all for demolishing murderers' homes. As I have already pointed out I would apply the same procedure to Arab and Jewish murderers.
 
Can you direct me to those often occuring cases? Whether you'd be happy or not at the punishment depends on whether this punishment would potentially prevent the slaughter of your loved ones.

I'm on my phone so searching for links is a bit difficult right now but I'm pretty sure the one i posted earlier was a suspect not convicted.

I still don't see how it helps save anyone to destroy a house and you haven't expained it to me.

You put murderers in prison, you don't blow up their houses.
 
I'm on my phone so searching for links is a bit difficult right now but I'm pretty sure the one i posted earlier was a suspect not convicted.

I still don't see how it helps save anyone to destroy a house and you haven't expained it to me.

You put murderers in prison, you don't blow up their houses.

The chap from the story you had posted was a murderer released from prison, who then went on to murder again. I'm quite happy with seeing his home being demolished.
 
I'm sure you could distinguish between taking one's home or life. Killing the terrorist is also a collective punishment in the form of grief to his loved ones, whether oblivious to his murderous intentions or not.

If effective in preventing loss of life, I'm all for demolishing murderers' homes. As I have already pointed out I would apply the same procedure to Arab and Jewish murderers.

You could use this to justify anything. Why don't we just rape the daughters of anyone terrorists we kill? They'll already be upset that their love one is dead so it's not like it matters and it could save lives.
 
The chap from the story you had posted was a murderer released from prison, who then went on to murder again. I'm quite happy with seeing his home being demolished.

First of all, it's not just one person. Homes were demolished of 3 suspects and I can't see anywhere in the story that it says they had been convicted. Suspects and alleged were the words used.
 
First of all, it's not just one person. Homes were demolished of 3 suspects and I can't see anywhere in the story that it says they had been convicted. Suspects and alleged were the words used.

The murderers from Tuesday's massacres haven't been convicted either. Still, in these borderline circumstances I'd support home demolition subject to the procedure actual effectiveness.
 
The murderers from Tuesday's massacres haven't been convicted either. Still, in these borderline circumstances I'd support home demolition subject to the procedure actual effectiveness.

So seeing as there is no proof that is effective, I'm guessing you don't support it now?
 
You could use this to justify anything. Why don't we just rape the daughters of anyone terrorists we kill? They'll already be upset that their love one is dead so it's not like it matters and it could save lives.

Punishing murderers with house arrests would be the equivalent of your ridiculous suggestion here. It would guarantee that the culprit does not murder again, and at the same time preserve the integrity of his kids' nuclear family.
 
Punishing murderers with house arrests would be the equivalent of your ridiculous suggestion here. It would guarantee that the culprit does not murder again, and at the same time preserve the integrity of his kids' nuclear family.

What?
 
So seeing as there is no proof that is effective, I'm guessing you don't support it now?

I didn't say it wasn't. I am not familiar with the data. As I said earlier, this is hotly debated between different security agemcies here. Supreme Court ruling also suggests that evidence is equivocal.
 
I'm sure you could distinguish between taking one's home or life. Killing the terrorist is also a collective punishment in the form of grief to his loved ones, whether oblivious to his murderous intentions or not.

If effective in preventing loss of life, I'm all for demolishing murderers' homes. As I have already pointed out I would apply the same procedure to Arab and Jewish murderers.

Killing a terrorist can be justified on the premise of it being defensive (as was the case with recent events) and also debately a form of punishment (depending on where you morally stand on a death penalty). The point is, you're directly punishing those held responsible.

I also don't see how demolishing a family home makes you any more safer, if anything it'll only further radicalise and serve as more propaganda for those genuinely trying to kill you. It serves no practical benefit to the safety of Israel's people.
 
I didn't say it wasn't. I am not familiar with the data. As I said earlier, this is hotly debated between different security agemcies here. Supreme Court ruling also suggests that evidence is equivocal.

So you support going ahead with a policy that is potentially very detrimental and which even the security agencies are doubting?
 
If the same standard of destroying homes would be applied to the jewish side, settlements wouldnt be a major issue anymore.:lol:
"democracynow" from Nov.19 is fairly interesting with the interviews of Khalidi and Efrati.
 
Killing a terrorist can be justified on the premise of it being defensive (as was the case with recent events) and also debately a form of punishment (depending on where you morally stand on a death penalty). The point is, you're directly punishing those held responsible.

I also don't see how demolishing a family home makes you any more safer, if anything it'll only further radicalise and serve as more propaganda for those genuinely trying to kill you. It serves no practical benefit to the safety of Israel's people.

We've been going in circles here. The Shin Bet supports home demolition as a deterrent, while the IDF claims it's not effective. I reiterate my disagreement with the notion that demolishing homes of murderers radicalizes a society. As long as murders and murderers are celebrated and supported by the Palestinian administration(s) demolishing a dozen homes is not going to make a difference in that respect.
 
We've been going in circles here. The Shin Bet supports home demolition as a deterrent, while the IDF claims it's not effective. I reiterate my disagreement with the notion that demolishing homes of murderers radicalizes a society. As long as murders and murderers are celebrated and supported by the Palestinian administration(s) demolishing a dozen homes is not going to make a difference in that respect.

This notion that nothing Israel does to the Palestinians can possibly change the opinions and actions of those people for the worse seems naive to me.
 
This notion that nothing Israel does to the Palestinians can possibly change the opinions and actions of those people for the worse seems naive to me.

What would you call the notion that sparing murderers homes is going to outweigh years of antisemitic indoctrination, from school textbooks to mosque sermons, from official media outlets to Hamas summer camps?
 
What would you call the notion that sparing murderers homes is going to outweigh years of antisemitic indoctrination, from school textbooks to mosque sermons, from official media outlets to Hamas summer camps?

It's not about outweighing. Again you seem to be implying that nothing Israel does can make things worse.
 
Wrong.

Demolishing murderers' homes is not going to radicalize the Palestinian society.

Israel could certainly do better on other accounts, there is no doubt about that.
 
Bizarre policy as it seems to dehumanize Palestinian families, which of course would seem to only further radicalize those who may be considering similar acts.
 
Last time you barged in you were telling us about the murder of an Arab bus driver. Perhaps you'd like to share updates on the autopsy results, and report also signed by a Palestinian pathologist?
 
Bizarre policy as it seems to dehumanize Palestinian families, which of course would seem to only further radicalize those who may be considering similar acts.

Yanks should know a thing or two about radicalization. Mission accomplished.
 
Yanks should know a thing or two about radicalization. Mission accomplished.

Instead of the usual tap dance about US policy, since this is the Israel-Palestine thread, how about addressing the issue. Do you honestly believe that Palestinian society observing the destruction of the home belonging to a family who just lost one of their own will not be perceived as anything other than a state sponsored revenge against a family who had nothing to do with the act ?
 
You could use this to justify anything. Why don't we just rape the daughters of anyone terrorists we kill? They'll already be upset that their love one is dead so it's not like it matters and it could save lives.

This is the bewildering part about it. The family may have no had a clue about what was going on (whether in this case or others) and have a bunch of soldiers and bulldozers show up out of the blue one day to destroy their home. Not exactly the type of policy to curb further radicalization.
 
Killing a terrorist can be justified on the premise of it being defensive (as was the case with recent events) and also debately a form of punishment (depending on where you morally stand on a death penalty). The point is, you're directly punishing those held responsible.

I also don't see how demolishing a family home makes you any more safer, if anything it'll only further radicalise and serve as more propaganda for those genuinely trying to kill you. It serves no practical benefit to the safety of Israel's people.

Spot on. Its basically a state sponsored act of revenge and psychological suppression. A feel good tit for tat response to a tragedy that only prolongs the cycle of violence.
 
Families of terrorists celebrate their attack, hail martyrs and heroes

The families of the two terrorists who killed four people in a brutal attack in a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday morning have hailed the two as heroes, as candies to celebrate the attack were handed out in the West Bank and Gaza.

Alaa Abu Jamal, a cousin of the terrorists, said that Israeli policies were to blame for the attack at the synagogue, when the two entered the compound during morning prayers, armed with meat cleavers and a gun.


57046342100992640360no.jpg

Sweets handed out in Gaza to celebrate the attack (Photo: Reuters)

"This occurred because of the pressures of the occupying Israeli government on the Palestinian people and in Jerusalem generally, and the ongoing harm to the al-Aqsa mosque; this act is something normal for any person who is connected to his people, to courage and to Islam."

"We got the usual death notification and we shouted with joy, people here also handed out candies to guests who came to visit and were happy for the martyrs."

He said that the family had been surprised by the attack, and that the two terrorists had not had any political affiliation. "We had not expected it to happen," he said. "One of them is married with three children; I do not know what will happen."

He added: "Praise God. For a person to die as a martyr is a great thing."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4593292,00.html
 
Instead of the usual tap dance about US policy, since this is the Israel-Palestine thread, how about addressing the issue. Do you honestly believe that Palestinian society observing the destruction of the home belonging to a family who just lost one of their own will not be perceived as anything other than a state sponsored revenge against a family who had nothing to do with the act ?


Sorry for their loss, Raoul, are you? Three American citizens were slaughtered in that synagogue. More than it took your air force to renew bombardment of targets in Iraq. I'm sure some homes are gone there too. How about that for promoting radicalization in the region, and boosting IS recruitment?

Do you also think you share some blame for 9/11? After all the state-sponsored cruise missile attack on Kabul in 1998 may have contributed to radicalization there.
 
BTW, we don't do homes in Jordan (yet)

Jordanian parliament honors Jerusalem terrorists
Despite Amman's official condemnation of synagogue attack, Jordanian parliament recites prayer to commemorate terrorists behind massacre of five Israelis in Jerusalem.

A day after the massacre of five Israelis at a Jerusalem synagogue, the Jordanian parliament agreed to a request on Wednesday by MP Khaled Hussein al-Atta to read a prayer from the Quran in memory of the two terrorists, Rassan and Uday Abu-Jamal.

Al-Atta first raised the notion to recite a prayer for the two terrorists killed in the Jerusalem attack during the Jordanian parliament's morning session on his Facebook page Wednesday, after which the parliament approved the request.

570811701001691640360no.jpg

The Jordanian parliament.


"This is a natural response to the Zionist occupation against our people in Palestine," wrote Al-Atta on his Facebook page.

According to the Jordanian newspaper al-Rai, MP Mohammed al-Ktatsh also asked the parliament to issue a statement condemning what he called a "Zionist attack against Jerusalem and its inhabitants after the heroic operation carried out in Jerusalem."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4594073,00.html
 
Sorry for their loss, Raoul, are you? Three American citizens were slaughtered in that synagogue. More than it took your air force to renew bombardment of targets in Iraq. I'm sure some homes are gone there too. How about that for promoting radicalization in the region, and boosting IS recruitment?

Do you also think you share some blame for 9/11? After all the state-sponsored cruise missile attack on Kabul in 1998 may have contributed to radicalization there.

The home destruction policy seems counterproductive irrespective of how often you attempt to switch the topic towards Iraq, Afghanistan, or Timbuktu. Its a tragedy irrespective of nationality and your continued support of it seems like an emotional overreaction that seeks out revenge before reason.
 
The home destruction policy seems counterproductive irrespective of how often you attempt to switch the topic towards Iraq, Afghanistan, or Timbuktu. Its a tragedy irrespective of nationality and your continued support of it seems like an emotional overreaction that seeks out revenge before reason.

If you read my posts rather than come in and spout your shite irrespective of what I said you'll find that I am not in the business of changing policies when the blood is boiling so soon after a massacre. This is a matter of cold analysis, and I believe our security forces have the data and experience to factor in the pros and cons of any measure taken.

Forgive me for passing on a lecture about revenge vs. reason from a person who supported the invasion of Iraq following 9/11.
 
Spot on. Its basically a state sponsored act of revenge and psychological suppression. A feel good tit for tat response to a tragedy that only prolongs the cycle of violence.

A lot of this goes on in wars though.

I mentioned The Blitz earlier, acts which were designed to crush the spirits of the population, but had the opposite effect overall. In the same way that The Allies bombed German towns & cities to crush their spirits.

It's a pretty disgusting way to wage war, but it has, unfortunately, been effective in many cases since the beginning of time, such as the raping and pillaging by the Vikings, Romans etc etc. Fear us and you shall be subjugated.
 
A well-known contemporary regime that goes after criminals' homes is North Korea.
Just leaving that here...