| Revision as of 01:49, 28 December 2008 editCerejota (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers15,178 edits →Title: neutrality← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 22:16, 4 January 2025 edit undoOnceinawhile (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers49,721 edits →Table |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{ITNtalk|27 December|2008}} |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{WikiProject Israel|class=Start|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
|
{{Notice|<big>'''The ] images have the logo because the Creative Commons license requires it.'''</big><br />These are free images with an attribution restriction.}} |
|
{{WikiProject Palestine|class=Start|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
|
{{Notice|For previously archived Lead section material: ''']''' and ''']'''}} |
|
|
{{Notice|'''Sources''' for the article can be found at ].}} |
|
|
{{Notice|The inclusion of Operation Cast Lead and Gaza Massacre in the lead of the article is discussed in ].}} |
|
|
{{censor}} |
|
|
{{Round in circles}} |
|
|
{{ITN talk |
|
|
|date1=27 December 2008 |
|
|
|date2=17 January 2009 |
|
|
|alt=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low|terrorism=yes|terrorism-imp=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Palestine|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history|class=b|B1=yes|B2=yes|B3=yes|B4=yes|B5=yes|Middle-Eastern=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press |
|
|
| collapsed=yes |
|
|
| title= Hanukkah Games in Gaza |
|
|
| author= Belén Fernández |
|
|
| date= 12/28/2008 |
|
|
| url= http://www.palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=14543 |
|
|
| org= The Palestine Chronicle}} |
|
|
{{Old moves |
|
|
| title1 = 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict |
|
|
| title2 = Gaza War |
|
|
| title3 = Gaza War (2008–2009) |
|
|
| title4 = 2008–2009 Gaza War |
|
|
| collapse=true |
|
|
| list = |
|
|
* Title discussion: 30 December 2008, ]; 30 December 2008, ]; 3 January 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, Multiple options, '''discussion continued''', 4 January 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, Multiple options, '''discussion continued''', 4 January 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict → Multiple options, '''no action''', 10 January 2009, ] |
|
|
* Further title discussions: 13 January 2009, ]; 15 January 2009, ]; 16 January 2009, ]; 22 January 2009, ]; 29 January 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict → Israel–Gaza war, '''no consensus''', 5 February 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM preparatory discussion: 11 February 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict → Gaza war, '''no consensus''', 26 February 2009, ] |
|
|
* Further title discussions: 3 March 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict → Operation Cast Lead, '''no move''', 6 March 2009, ] |
|
|
* Further title discussions: 5 April 2009, ]; 30 April 2009, ] |
|
|
* RM, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict → Gaza War, '''moved''', 6 May 2009, ] |
|
|
* Further title discussions: 20 May 2009, ]; 28 May 2009, ]; 21 August 2010, ]; 23 December 2010, ]; 24 June 2011, ] |
|
|
* RM, Gaza War → Operation Cast Lead, '''no consensus''', 20 March 2012, ] |
|
|
* Further title discussion: 10 March 2015, ]; 26 July 2015, ] |
|
|
* RM, Gaza War (2008–2009) → 2008–2009 Gaza War, '''no consensus''', 22 March 2021, ] |
|
|
* RM, Gaza War (2008–2009) → 2008–2009 Gaza conflict or 2008–2009 Gaza incursion, '''not moved''', 21 May 2021, ] |
|
|
* RM, Gaza War (2008–2009) → 2008–2009 Gaza War, '''not moved''', 14 October 2023, ] |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{ARBPIA}} |
|
|
{{tmbox|image=]|text=<center><big>'''WARNING</big><br>In accordance with ], editors of this article are restricted to 1 ] per 24 hours'''. Violations of this restriction will lead to blocks.}} |
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
|
|target=Talk:Gaza War (2008–2009)/Archive index |
|
|
|mask=Talk:Gaza War (2008–2009)/Archive <#> |
|
|
|leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=no}} |
|
|
{{Controversial-issues}} |
|
|
<!-- Do not remove the sanction template --> |
|
|
{{Banner holder|collapsed=yes| |
|
|
{{OnThisDay|date1=2015-12-27|oldid1=696788414|date2=2018-12-27|oldid2=875589318}} |
|
|
{{page views}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
== Palestinian casualty figure == |
|
|
<s>It appears that the user LOTRules insists on re-adding a death toll of 225 to the article. Where is the source? I have read the article and watched each video on 3 times, and there is no indication of the number 225 anywhere. Either I've missed something, and will gladly be corrected when the precise location of the figure is given, or please find another source/stop adding incorrect figures. -- ] <sup>(])</sup> 21:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)</s> |
|
|
:Nevermind, it appears that the article has been updated (I refreshed). My apologies. -- ] <sup>(])</sup> 21:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::"Debka" is not a reliable source... linking to Reuters instead.] (]) 22:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I added the link to the BBC previously. What is this "debka" nonsense you speak of?. ] <sub>]</sub> <sup>]</sup> 23:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<!-- Metadata: see ] --> |
|
== Title == |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|
|
|counter = 70 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
|algo = old(14d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Gaza War (2008–2009)/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Hamas claims of casualties== |
|
Could we discuss the Title of this page because all other pages about the attacks on Gaza strip by Israel are in Hebrew Operation Names.--] (]) 23:00, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Hamas never said that 600-700 of its members died. The Haaretz article in fact quotes Hamas as saying 200-300 Al-Qassam brigades members died, but also quotes Hamas saying 49 of its members died. It also quotes "250 killed" at the police station, but these are not strictly from Hamas, nor is it clear if they are combatants at all. It also quotes an additional 150 security personnel, and again its not clear if they were combatants in the Gaza war or not.''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 02:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
: I agree. The operation has a name. ] (]) 23:08, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Al-Qassam Brigades actively works with Hamas, but is not Hamas. In fact, it was originally part of Fatah. Here, I think Hamas is just specifying the number of combatants each group lost, rather than contradicting itself. |
|
::I don't. The current ''"2008 Gaza Strip Bombing"'' seems fine. ] <sub>]</sub> <sup>]</sup> 23:18, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:<br> |
|
:::Other IDF operations' articles are called by the name of the operation. Why should this article be different? ] (]) 23:33, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:Israel considers police and security officers to be combatants if they enter combat when they're on duty -- regardless of whether they're Israeli or Palestinian. As far as I've been able to tell, Hamas doesn't count them as combatants even if they enter combat and are on duty. |
|
::::If we change this one we'll have to change all but that's ok. It seems actually unfair to have an article about a military act with that many civilian casualties named after a poem. My problem with the gaza strip bombing is that there were many bombings in 2008 against gaza, see ]. So we should find a better name or leave this one but not return to the operations name as it is only called that way by the IDF and the rest of the world calls it gaza bombings or something... --] (]) 23:40, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:<br> |
|
:::::What about ''"Late 2008 Gaza Strip bombings"''? I think it avoids both ambiguity and the not-widely-known operation names. ] (]) 00:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
: |
|
|
:<br> |
|
|
:"To deconstruct these figures properly, the status of the Gaza police must first be considered, since approximately 250 of them were among those listed as 'civilians' who were killed. Although the Goldstone Report concludes that the Gaza police force was a 'civilian law-enforcement agency,' there is overwhelming evidence to suggest otherwise. |
|
|
:<br> |
|
|
:"The Gaza police has its origins in the Hamas Executive Force. When the Executive Force was formed in 2006, its commander announced that the force was 'the nucleus of the future Palestinian army. The resistance must continue. We have only one enemy. They are Jews. We have no other enemy. I will continue to carry the rifle and pull the trigger whenever required to defend my people.' According to the report, the Executive Force merged with a reorganized PA police in October 2007. |
|
|
:<br> |
|
|
:"Despite the fact that the Executive Force no longer technically exists, during Operation Cast Lead a police spokesman said, 'Police officers received clear orders from the leadership to face the enemy, if the Gaza Strip were to be invaded.' This is conclusive evidence that the Gaza police were not entitled to the protections accorded to civilians in war. In addition, evidence suggests many policemen were combatant individuals regardless of their connection with the police. |
|
|
:<br> |
|
|
:"According to one count, 91% of the policemen killed were either members of a terrorist organization or in infantry training, with a 'decisive majority' of casualties belonging to military wings. |
|
|
:<br> |
|
|
:"In any event, reasonable people can and do disagree as to the status of the Gaza policemen killed by Israel. they cannot simply be lumped together with infants and other obvious non-combatants for purposes |
|
|
:of listing the number of dead civilians." ] (]) 06:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Forgot to ping: @] ] (]) 06:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{re|Oakling}} Sorry for the delay. The source you cited seems to be a ] work by two authors known to be pro-Israel advocates. There are a few misleading claims here: |
|
|
::*"The Gaza police has its origins in the Hamas Executive Force." |
|
|
::**What the police ''used'' to be has no relevance. We know that ] used to serve in the IDF, but given his IDF service ended in Apr 2023, he was rightfully considered civilian on Oct 7. |
|
|
::*"According to one count, 91% of the policemen killed were either members of a terrorist organization" |
|
|
::**Well, yes. According to Israel all Hamas members are considered terrorist, yet we know that Hamas also runs the civilian aspects of Gaza. |
|
|
::*"Police officers received clear orders from the leadership to face the enemy, if the Gaza Strip were to be invaded." |
|
|
::**This appears to be a misleading translation. The man who made these instructions clarified "{{tq|Mr. Shahwan stated that the instructions given at that meeting were to the effect that in the event of a ground invasion, and particularly if the Israeli armed forces were to enter urban settlements in Gaza, the police was to continue its work of ensuring that basic food stuffs reached the population, of directing the population to safe places, and of upholding public order in the face of the invasion. Mr. Shahwan further stated that not a single policeman had been killed in combat during the armed operations, proving that the instructions had been strictly obeyed by the policemen.}}" (416) |
|
|
::**Further, the Goldstone report notes that 75% of police had been killed in a surprise Israeli attack before the ground invasion began. |
|
|
::*Further, "{{tq|the Mission notes that there are no allegations that the police as an organized force took part in combat during the armed operations}}" (417). Indeed Dershowitz doesn't provide any specific examples of police taking part in combat. |
|
|
::Other RS consider the police to be civilians, for example (page 588) and .''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 02:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 August 2024 == |
|
:The name of the article is bad. Very, very bad. "2008 Gaza Strip bombings" is very ambiguous, because this was not the only bombing to occur in Gaza this year. Further, opening a can of worms here, it sounds too much like ] or ]... those were not military campaigns; this was. There is probably no overtly prominent name for this event, but if there was one, it would certainly be Operation Cast Lead. "2008 Gaza Strip bombings" is just a description -- and not a very precise one. -- ''']''' 23:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|ans=y}} |
|
::Well "Operation Cast Lead" would be actually better than 2008 Gaza bombings, but it isn't known for that name, internationally I mean.It's fine with me if u return it to that name but wait until 3 more Users or the majority of the biggest contributors agree.--] (]) 00:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
, but could someone add the following word in bold, which is gramatically more correct?: |
|
:::I believe the Military History project has been over this countless times, so I'd suggest checking their discussions before adjusting other articles. ] (]) 00:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most right-wing opposition parties, '''including''' ], etc, etc, etc |
|
:Calling the article by its Israeli codename shouldn't be seen as expressing a positive opinion on its morality; Nazi operations are routinely referred to by their codenames, e.g. ]. The article was started at ] and has been moved twice. I don't see a compelling reason to call it something less specific, like '2008 Gaza Strip bombings'. ] (]) 00:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:We should wait and see what unfolds between the two sides. Its current name, 2008 Gaza Strip bombings, fails to indicate that Palestinian rockets had previoulsy fallen, and continue to fall, on Israel - the cause of the Israeli response. ] (]) 00:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:::I endorse the name change. Seriously guys, "Gaza Strip Bombing"? LOL. ] (]) 00:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
Thanks--] (]) 19:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}} ] (]) 00:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== First Gaza War == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I propose adding "First Gaza War" as an alternative name for this conflict. I , with supporting references, but was reverted by {{u|Slatersteven}}. I didn't think this would have needed consensus before being added. It's a minor addition, it's properly-referenced (and there are many other references that could be added), and the name is used more often recently to distinguish this war from the other Gaza wars. – ] <sup>(])</sup> 10:22, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:: I'm in favor of the Operation name. That make sens for me. The other israeli operation have a name. Number of casualties isn't a reason for the name of the article.] (]) 00:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:Do any RS call it this? ] (]) 10:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Huh? I added three RS's in my edit. – ] <sup>(])</sup> 10:27, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Sorry, but it does not alter the fact, this should not have been done without consensus. ] (]) 10:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Sorry, I didn't notice the hidden message when making my edit. I should've looked more carefully.<br/>Aside from that, do you oppose "First Gaza War" being in the article as an alternative name? – ] <sup>(])</sup> 13:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::No, I just happen to think the rules apply to everyone, even if I agree with them. ] (]) 13:15, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
*I'm unsure about adding the First Gaza war to the first sentence given ], an eminent scholar on the ], considers it to be the 10th conflict/war over Gaza. I'd propose something like "The conflict is sometimes called the "First Gaza war", while other scholars consider it the 10th round of the Israel-Gaza conflict."''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 18:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Table == |
|
Moved. It's mentioned by "operation Cast Lead" on the ], in news articles, and elsewhere, the "2008 Gaza bombings" title was uninformative/unspecific, and the original move was performed without discussion by a user with less than 50 edits, the majority of which weren't even this year. So, there was also a bit of ]. Plus, we've got a little bit of consensus here already. Let me know if I did it all correctly! ]<small>]</small> 01:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@], do you have any feedback on the table I just added? ''']''' <sub>(Please ] on reply)</sub> 18:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
*'''Fail''' Operation name is not neutral, or all of the suddem neutrality doesn't matter? ] is much more sensible, descriptive, and neutral. Thanks!--] (]) 01:49, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Hi {{ping|Vice regent}} the table is excellent. Really very valuable. ] (]) 22:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
== Public relations campaigns == |
|
|
|
|
|
i've started off the section on public relations campaigns with info from a Haaretz article on the Israeli govt PR campaign. i've added a {{Missing information}} tag warning about the need to get info about any similar campaign by the Hamas de facto govt of Gaza Strip. i would imagine that because the latter do not have a massive international network of embassies/consulates, they cannot carry out a campaign using anything like the same techniques with any chance of efficiency - i.e. they cannot get their ambassadors etc. to put pressure on local media groups around the world and on national politicians around the world. However, what i imagine is not an NPOV fact. Anyone with a non-original-research, referenced idea for what we can put here to balance the section? |
|
|
|
|
|
Just to clarify the tag: IMHO we certainly '''should''' include info about either the Gaza Strip de facto government's public relations campaign (whatever that is) or the lack of such a campaign if it is documented to be absent. i don't (presently) know which is closer to the wikipedia (NPOV) version of truth. ] (]) 00:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:I think you have two options. First is waiting for the ] response and public relations activities (if they'll ever be one!). Second is to consider renaming the section to ''"'''Israili''' Public Relations Campaigns"''. I'm with the second option till any new activities appear from the other side. Thanks for assuring neutrality. ] (]) 00:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Why is this relevant now? this better not be a white-wash attempt to portray the IDF as if it is trying to sell the war to the international community, or give the image that Israel is trying to cover up something. this is a friggin war, not a paparazzi scam. ] (]) 00:44, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I don't get your point. Is this criticism for including such information, or criticism for the acts themselves?] (]) 00:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Criticisms for the motivations. why is an anticipated PR campaign relevant at this juncture? I've seen countless articles on and off wikipedia where many users try to give the appearance that Israel is at the ready to spin whatever war their in, like the country is some coiled up celebrity publicist. ] (]) 01:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Wikifan: i think you missed the point of the {{Missing information}} tag and my two whole paragraphs at the beginning of this section. ] and the media clearly have an important effect on the effectiveness of military/political conflict during the late XX-eth and early XXI-st centuries. At the moment we (wikipedians on this page) don't know if the Gaza Strip de facto government is planning a comparable campaign to that of the Israeli government. However, we do know that the Israeli government has announced that it will carry out such a campaign in parallel with the military campaign. You might also have missed the fact that the source for the paragraph is Israel's oldest daily newspaper, founded in 1918. ] (]) 01:19, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::I didn't miss the point. giving the impression that Israel is trying to spin the war is not an activity that is part of wiki policy. second, i read the source, quite thoroughly, and your paraphrasing is grossly incorrect. for starters, israel new "pr campaign" goal isn't simply to defend this operation: "Livni instructed senior ministry officials to open an aggressive and diplomatic international public relations campaign, in order to gain greater international support for Israel Defense Forces operations in the Gaza Strip" so the root of the section is misleading. i will revise...] (]) 01:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Palestine News Network== |
|
|
|
|
|
It is used as a reference and source, yet it is far from unbiased. It is pro-palestinian, pro-Hamas website and it is against any sort of peaceful solution. It also engages in egregious anti-semitism <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
PNN is the only source for the 780 wounded figure, CNN just said over 400 wounded, and they didn't say whether the 400 wounded were civs or militants. |
|
|
:Probably most news media sources from country X used in any wikipedia article are pro-country-X and pro-government-of-country-X, so that's not any higher degree of bias than is typical of CNN, NYT, BBC, etc. As for "against any sort of peaceful solution", i'm sceptical but you could try to find an external, reliable source for that if you thought it to be relevant. i'm also sceptical regarding the claim of racism, but again, even if it were true, then at the level to which it's true, that would apply to a large majority of news media generally considered reliable in the english language wikipedia. i also strongly suggest you read through and think about ], which is a ] meta-page that discusses the issue of systemic bias in quite some detail. |
|
|
:In any case, given that the bombings are happening to people in the Gaza Strip, maybe you could recommend to us some different news organisations in the ] that you judge to be reliable. The closer a news organisation is to the physical location of the event, the more likely it is to have in-depth information on what's happening rather than N-th hand reports by someone sitting in a comfortable hotel in another country. It will in general also be more biased in favour of the local culture, but that's the case for all news sources. We do not exclude US newspapers for events in the US or British newspapers as sources for events in the UK, so we cannot exclude Palestinian newspapers for events in Palestine. ] (]) 01:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Yes PNN doesn't even meet blog standards. deleted. ] (]) 00:45, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::See above. ] (]) 01:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Done. PNN is akin to a radicalist blog. It's rooted in nationalism and prone to extreme bias pending subject (most notably, Israel). It's like using a fundamentalist Christian site as evidence in determining the pros and cons of atheism. ] (]) 01:39, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reopening of crossing == |
|
|
|
|
|
There are two conflicting reasons for the reopening of the crossing given in the article. The first is that it was in response to international pressure; the second is that it was a deceptive act taken to reassure Hamas. Do we have a conclusive source one way or the other? ] (]) 01:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Pictures == |
|
|
|
|
|
Does someone know where to get free pictures or can someone help with the fair use rationale in the available picture please. I will add another picture of the air strike after a minute. Israel has released a video of their air strike can someone get. It is in the public domain if it's by the government right?--] (]) 01:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Please assist with copyright tags... == |
|
|
|
|
|
before adding to article! ] and ] |
|
Hamas never said that 600-700 of its members died. The Haaretz article in fact quotes Hamas as saying 200-300 Al-Qassam brigades members died, but also quotes Hamas saying 49 of its members died. It also quotes "250 killed" at the police station, but these are not strictly from Hamas, nor is it clear if they are combatants at all. It also quotes an additional 150 security personnel, and again its not clear if they were combatants in the Gaza war or not.VR (Please ping on reply) 02:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Referencing and citation: criterion met
Done