Talk:Al-Khisas raid

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

massacre?

[edit]

Is 10 a "large number"? I personally think not. In which case this should be renamed to "incident" or "attack" or similar. Otherwise any terrorist attacks that kill 10 or more people should likewise be listed as a "massacre". Wikipedia will quickly fill up with "massacres" diluting those that really are massacre of large numbers of people. Oboler (talk) 13:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Renaming, per the discussion here NoCal100 (talk) 19:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I disagree. ten people killed is enough to qualify as a massacre and the reliable sources cited use the term "massacre" and not "raid. Tiamuttalk 13:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, which cited source calls it a 'massacre'? The Benvinisti books calls it "attack" (4 times), "retaliatory raid" (once) and "raid" once. The NYT article also calls it a raid, in the headline. NoCal100 (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. My bad. I thought this was another article where I remember such a source being appended. No worries. For now, because of the lack of a reliable source, I'l accept "raid". Please note however, that the definition of a massacre that was operative at Wikipedia for some time was more then 10 civilians killed in a single incident. This was qualified under that definition. But I'm not willing to war over it, particularly if a new consensus on how to define a massacre is emerging. Tiamuttalk 16:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess Oboler and NoCal100 will agree to moving Mercaz HaRav massacre to Mercaz HaRav attack ? After all, fewer people were killed at Mercaz HaRav... While we are at it: Munich massacre should be moved to Munich raid?? Anyway, KimvdLinde collected definitions of the word "massacre" here:[1] I suggest we move this back. Regards, Huldra (talk) 19:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I see now I could have been clearer when I wrote "Agreed". I agreed with Oboler's suggestion that the article should be renamed to "incident" or "attack" or similar, but not with his rationale of "10 is not a large number". The number of those killed is not a factor in deciding what to call the article - which should be what reliable sources call the incident. That is why I referred to the discussion here, which ended with an apparent consensus to name articles "by the name most commonly used in reliable sources". The reliable sources for this article call the incident a raid or an attack, not a massacre. NoCal100 (talk) 03:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Archived version of that discussion here, --Huldra (talk) 17:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I think the more pertinent discussion is here. Cheers, pedrito - talk - 03.12.2008 07:58

Rename to "Al-Khisas massacre"

[edit]

Any objections to changing the name to "Al-Khisas massacre"?

See: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/About the use of the word massacre

IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

details wrong

[edit]

I was skimming through this article. Some basic information here is wrong:

  • This raid could not have been conducted by the Yiftach Brigade as it did not exist at the time. The Third Battalion of the Palmach was active in the area and later became part of Yiftach.
  • The Palmach Book Vol 2 page 32 notes a raid conducted on the village of חסאס (likely Khisas) on 28.12.47. And while that book is not objective, it tends to get dates right.

Tzafrir (talk) 22:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be right on the Yiftach Brigade not being formed at the time. As for the date: I just checked Bevenisti; and he says 18 December; I'll try to check the other sources , too, Huldra (talk) 22:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Benny Morris, 2004, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee, revisited pp. 79-80, says the same ("he night of 18–19 December") Huldra (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And Ilan Pappe says the same (though I put less trust in him: he is notoriously sloppy on details), Huldra (talk) 22:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Tzafrir: I have corrected the Yiftach Brigade info, but not the date, due to all the sources giving the 18th as the date, Huldra (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What sources support that it was Palmach's "3rd Battalion,
which later became part of the Yiftach Brigade"? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I took that from the Yiftach Brigade-article, the source is the Palmach website (in Hebrew), Huldra (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Palmacb website in Hebrew? Is that a good source? Maybe we just attribute the attack to the Palmach. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I would say it is a good source about what became of the Palmach Battalions, IMO, this isn't terribly important, except it is in line with Yiftach Brigade later behaviour in the 1948 war, Huldra (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 August 2025

[edit]

the bit about a thing written in gurions diary on 1 jan 1948 should be be noted that this is the recording of a statement by Gad Machnes one of Ben-Gurion’s advisers on Arab affairs, where he says 'I think that today there is no question whether or not to respond. But for the response to be effective, it must come in the right time and the right place and take the form of a strong punishment. Blowing up a house is not enough. Blowing up a house of innocent people is certainly not enough! The response must be strong and harsh because it must create the [right] impression, must punish [the perpetrators of violence] and must serve as a warning. If our responses are not impressive—they will create the opposite impression. These matters necessitate the utmost precision—in terms of time, place, and whom and what to hit ... If we operate against, say, a specific family in a known place, a known village [i.e., identified perpetrators of violence], then there should be no mercy! But only a direct blow and no touching of innocent [by innocent he means not associated to the perpetrators in anyway; so (for example) family members -including women and children and the elder - of the perpetrators of attacks are not innocent] people! We have already reached a position that necessitates a strong response. Today one should not even avoid hitting women and children. For otherwise, the response cannot be effective.' i just need that disclaimed or at least the person the statement is coming from - as that being what Pappe doesn't tell his readers (most likely unwittingly) Nuttas03 (talk) 19:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have source for this being "the recording of a statement by Gad Machnes"? Interestingly, Pappe does say "In his diary he [Ben-Gurion] laconically summarised the meeting by repeating Allon's words."
Jawad attributes the statement to Ben-Gurion: "Ben-Gurion commented on the Khassas operation in his Diaries on 1 January 1948" IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 13:25, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it was from an article by Efraim Karsh called 'Benny Morris and the reign of error' published in middle east forum around 2000. He sources the quotation correctly. I actually have checked the diary entry of ben gurion 01/01/1948 but the file of the diaries was in arabic, so i had to screenshot the pages from the diary entry form that dat, extract the texts then google translate; then i noted that Karsh was correct and Pappe (dissapointingly) was dead wrong, as Yigal Allon wasn't even in the mmeeting described. It was Gad Machnes who suggested it. Nuttas03 (talk) 20:38, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Think you could share the Arabic text of this diary entry? Or the translation. Thanks, IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 August 2025

[edit]
        • Source based for my claim*** 'Benny Morris and the reign of error" by Efraim Karsh ---- the bit about a thing written in gurions diary on 1 jan 1948 should be be noted that this is the recording of a statement by Gad Machnes one of Ben-Gurion’s advisers on Arab affairs, where he says 'I think that today there is no question whether or not to respond. But for the response to be effective, it must come in the right time and the right place and take the form of a strong punishment. Blowing up a house is not enough. Blowing up a house of innocent people is certainly not enough! The response must be strong and harsh because it must create the [right] impression, must punish [the perpetrators of violence] and must serve as a warning. If our responses are not impressive—they will create the opposite impression. These matters necessitate the utmost precision—in terms of time, place, and whom and what to hit ... If we operate against, say, a specific family in a known place, a known village [i.e., identified perpetrators of violence], then there should be no mercy! But only a direct blow and no touching of innocent [by innocent he means not associated to the perpetrators in anyway; so (for example) family members -including women and children and the elderly - of the perpetrators of attacks are not innocent] people! We have already reached a position that necessitates a strong response. Today one should not even avoid hitting women and children. For otherwise, the response cannot be effective.' i just need that disclaimed or at least the person the statement is coming from - as that being what Pappe doesn't tell his readers (most likely unwittingly) Nuttas03 (talk) 19:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC) Nuttas03 (talk) 21:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Could you clarify what exactly you'd like done? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:28, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
clarification of who ben gurion is refferring to have been speaking the words he recounted in his diary, and plausibly the rest or part of the rest of the full quoatation Nuttas03 (talk) 22:42, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm just going to remove the info altogether.
Also Benny Morris writes about this, agreeing with Karsh, in Morris, Benny. “Falsifying the Record: A Fresh Look at Zionist Documentation of 1948.” Journal of Palestine Studies 24, no. 3 (1995): 44–62. https://doi.org/10.2307/2537879.
He says that Ben-Gurion was writing about a meeting with other leaders and the quotation in question was the words of Machnes. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:21, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]