5 ms·

I'd consider it hopeless if I were there. Not many places on earth I'd be less excited about living than there. As far as whether "they" could change.. awful

by jbooth 17y ago

I'd consider it hopeless if I were there. Not many places on earth I'd be less excited about living than there. As far as whether "they" could change.. awfully hard when you've got Israel on one side and Hamas on the other. Not much room for empowered moderate politics there. Hamas could change, sure.. but until they do, nobody without an army is going to change anything.

ars 17y ago
> Not many places on earth I'd be less excited about living than there. Really? They have among the highest life expectancies in the world, and all the health indexes (maternal death, infant mortality, etc) are very high. I'd hate living in places like Rawanda much much more - actually pretty much anyplace in Africa, despite not being penned in. But I could see why you'd hate living in a place controlled by Hamas though.
- jbooth 17y ago
  Well, different strokes for different folks. I'd take the increased freedom along with increased risk of disease, given the choice.
- MichaelSalib 17y ago
  all the health indexes (maternal death, infant mortality, etc) are very high That statement seems to contradict http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Health http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Health ; can you cite any published data justifying your claims?
  - ars 17y ago
    Tons. And the wikipedia text is very misleading, because it does not compare the data to other countries. For example nearly all woman during childbearing years are anemic, there is nothing unusual about gaza. Infant mortality: (for comparison 49.4 is world average) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html#gz https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... It has one of the lowest death rates in the world: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2066rank.html?countryName=Gaza%20Strip&countryCode=gz&regionCode=me&rank=214#gz https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... You can check the rest of the numbers for yourself: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gz.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/...
adelevie 17y ago
Are you implying that Israel has an interest in a radicalized Gaza? I would think that Israel wants moderate Gazans. Fatah, which is only moderate when compared to Hamas, was swept out of Gaza.
- jbooth 17y ago
  No, I'm not implying that, and I said I'm not really into apportioning blame, that's a long conversation and there's more than enough to go around. The net sum of Israel's policies have probably contributed to radicalization in Gaza, but that's more about incompetence than malice.
- MichaelSalib 17y ago
  I think Israel has historically done a great deal to support Hamas. At least that's what the Israeli Prime Minister says ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hamas#Before_1987_.E2.80.94_Palestinian_Islamic_activities_prior_to_the_creation_of_Hamas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hamas#Before_1987_.E... ): In a statement to the Israeli Parliament's (the Knesset) Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday February 12, 2007, Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert said "Netanyahu established Hamas, gave it life, freed Sheikh Yassin and gave him the opportunity to blossom".[4] Since Israel claims that Hamas is a radical organization, that suggests that Israel has acted to radicalize Gaza. Whether that's in Israel's best interest is not for me to say though....
  - adelevie 17y ago
    Olmert is a political opponent of Netanyahu. He's also about to get convicted of supposedly the most serious corruption charges in Israeli history. I wouldn't call him a paragon of credibility.
    - MichaelSalib 17y ago
      I know, but since there are a number of other sources that corroborate that account (see the Wikipedia link above), I think it is credible. Surely you don't claim that absolutely everything Olmert ever said is a lie, do you?
adrianwaj 17y ago
The Gazans voted in Hamas democratically and Israel pulled out of their occupation, if that's the name for it, and now the place is worse than ever.
- jbooth 17y ago
  That's not really the whole story, and given that Hamas forcibly evicted the also-democratically-elected executive branch, I wouldn't exactly call their rule democratic. For a typical Gazan, they're stuck with Hamas and Israel even if they'd rather not deal with either of them.
  - adrianwaj 17y ago
    Israel care more about the people of Gaza way more than Hamas. It's a real tragedy.
- MichaelSalib 17y ago
  Um, I don't think Israel "pulled out of their occupation." I'm pretty sure that Gaza's borders are completely sealed by the Israeli military as is their airspace. There might not be Israeli soldiers inside Gaza, but the occupation continues as long as Israel maintains complete control over airspace and borders.
  - adrianwaj 17y ago
    That's just too bad for Gaza. Hamas will have to learn how to stop firing rockets into Israel's airspace. What sort of borders were you hoping for?
    - MichaelSalib 17y ago
      My hopes are irrelevant to the discussion. My point was that your claim is inaccurate. If you're unwilling to make factual claims, than maybe you shouldn't participate in this discussion. The world needs neither more ignorance nor more lies when discussing global conflicts.

by jbooth 17y ago

ars 17y ago

> Not many places on earth I'd be less excited about living than there. Really? They have among the highest life expectancies in the world, and all the health indexes (maternal death, infant mortality, etc) are very high. I'd hate living in places like Rawanda much much more - actually pretty much anyplace in Africa, despite not being penned in. But I could see why you'd hate living in a place controlled by Hamas though.

jbooth 17y ago
Well, different strokes for different folks. I'd take the increased freedom along with increased risk of disease, given the choice.
MichaelSalib 17y ago
all the health indexes (maternal death, infant mortality, etc) are very high That statement seems to contradict http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Health http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Health ; can you cite any published data justifying your claims?
- ars 17y ago
  Tons. And the wikipedia text is very misleading, because it does not compare the data to other countries. For example nearly all woman during childbearing years are anemic, there is nothing unusual about gaza. Infant mortality: (for comparison 49.4 is world average) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html#gz https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... It has one of the lowest death rates in the world: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2066rank.html?countryName=Gaza%20Strip&countryCode=gz&regionCode=me&rank=214#gz https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... You can check the rest of the numbers for yourself: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gz.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/...

adelevie 17y ago

Are you implying that Israel has an interest in a radicalized Gaza? I would think that Israel wants moderate Gazans. Fatah, which is only moderate when compared to Hamas, was swept out of Gaza.

jbooth 17y ago
No, I'm not implying that, and I said I'm not really into apportioning blame, that's a long conversation and there's more than enough to go around. The net sum of Israel's policies have probably contributed to radicalization in Gaza, but that's more about incompetence than malice.
MichaelSalib 17y ago
I think Israel has historically done a great deal to support Hamas. At least that's what the Israeli Prime Minister says ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hamas#Before_1987_.E2.80.94_Palestinian_Islamic_activities_prior_to_the_creation_of_Hamas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hamas#Before_1987_.E... ): In a statement to the Israeli Parliament's (the Knesset) Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday February 12, 2007, Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert said "Netanyahu established Hamas, gave it life, freed Sheikh Yassin and gave him the opportunity to blossom".[4] Since Israel claims that Hamas is a radical organization, that suggests that Israel has acted to radicalize Gaza. Whether that's in Israel's best interest is not for me to say though....
- adelevie 17y ago
  Olmert is a political opponent of Netanyahu. He's also about to get convicted of supposedly the most serious corruption charges in Israeli history. I wouldn't call him a paragon of credibility.
  - MichaelSalib 17y ago
    I know, but since there are a number of other sources that corroborate that account (see the Wikipedia link above), I think it is credible. Surely you don't claim that absolutely everything Olmert ever said is a lie, do you?

adrianwaj 17y ago

The Gazans voted in Hamas democratically and Israel pulled out of their occupation, if that's the name for it, and now the place is worse than ever.

jbooth 17y ago
That's not really the whole story, and given that Hamas forcibly evicted the also-democratically-elected executive branch, I wouldn't exactly call their rule democratic. For a typical Gazan, they're stuck with Hamas and Israel even if they'd rather not deal with either of them.
- adrianwaj 17y ago
  Israel care more about the people of Gaza way more than Hamas. It's a real tragedy.
MichaelSalib 17y ago
Um, I don't think Israel "pulled out of their occupation." I'm pretty sure that Gaza's borders are completely sealed by the Israeli military as is their airspace. There might not be Israeli soldiers inside Gaza, but the occupation continues as long as Israel maintains complete control over airspace and borders.
- adrianwaj 17y ago
  That's just too bad for Gaza. Hamas will have to learn how to stop firing rockets into Israel's airspace. What sort of borders were you hoping for?
  - MichaelSalib 17y ago
    My hopes are irrelevant to the discussion. My point was that your claim is inaccurate. If you're unwilling to make factual claims, than maybe you shouldn't participate in this discussion. The world needs neither more ignorance nor more lies when discussing global conflicts.