|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 6:56:39 GMT -5
Like a drowning man you're grasping at straws now. So the Palestinian minority in Israel demographically is not a threat to Israel’s preferred identity as a Jewish state but the Palestinians in Gaza are? Aren't you one of the people who claim that the Palestinians in Gaza and Hamas are separate entities and should not be conflated. The fact that Israeli Arabs can be citizens alarms you. Don't be scared. Take a deep breath and blow into a bag. Then stick the bag... never mind. The truth will set you free. Exactly where did I say that Israeli Arabs being citizens of Israel alarms me? The exact quote please. And another gasbag bites the dust.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 7:01:09 GMT -5
See my response to SF above re the 1.8 million Palestinians living in Israel. Not sure you have a point here. There are Palestinians living in Israel so that makes their abhorrent bombing and starvation of those in Gaza ok? Here’s what SF and the rest of you are trying to make me believe… Israel divided the Palestinians into 2 groups, the bad Palestinians, i.e., those living in Gaza and the good Palestinians, i.e., those living in Israel. Then Israel promulgated a policy calling for the extermination of the Palestinians. Then Israel said “Oops, we’ve got a problem. How do we exterminate the bad Palestinians and leave the good Palestinians unscathed without being accused of having a double standard re our Palestinian genocide policy.” Solution? A very simple game. Say that the good Palestinians are not Palestinians at all, they’re Israeli-Arabs. Thus with one stroke of the pen, or more likely a few taps on a keyboard, 1.8 million Palestinians are erased off the face of the Earth to be replaced by 1.8 million Israeli-Arabs. Now Israel can proceed with its extermination of the bad Palestinians without harming the Israeli-Arabs, formerly known as good Palestinians, while at the same time avoiding being accused of having a double standard re their Palestinian genocide policy. That kind of twisted, perverted reasoning is reminiscent of the newspeak doublethink that George Orwell warned us about in his novel 1984. You can take the situation in Gaza and spin it, massage it, manipulate it anyway you want. You can deplore it, evade it, deflect from it, tap dance around it or even flat out lie about it but there are 4 incontrovertible facts that you can not hide from intelligent, rational people: 1. Israel and Hamas are at war. 2. Innocent people die in war. 3. Hamas started this war. 4. There is no Palestinian genocide being carried out by Israel. I can’t wait to see what frenetic fantasy you all come up with next to prop up the absurd notion that Israel is engaged in a genocide against the Palestinian people.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 7:12:07 GMT -5
Not sure you have a point here. There are Palestinians living in Israel so that makes their abhorrent bombing and starvation of those in Gaza ok? That's exactly what he's saying. Next he'll bring up the "nature of war" and something about WW2. He has no problem with any of the death and destruction in Gaza from the comfort of his home in the US. Wrong again. The fact that you see no correlation between the nature of war and the history of WW2 speaks either to your appalling ignorance of history or your visceral hatred for Israel. As to me commenting from the comfort of my home in the U.S., have you ever commented about conditions in another country, e.g Ukraine, Russia, China, etc. from the comfort of your home in the U.S.? I guess you haven't otherwise your comment about me, my comments and my home would make you a phony.
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 7, 2024 7:25:35 GMT -5
That's exactly what he's saying. Next he'll bring up the "nature of war" and something about WW2. He has no problem with any of the death and destruction in Gaza from the comfort of his home in the US. Wrong again. The fact that you see no correlation between the nature of war and the history of WW2 speaks either to your appalling ignorance of history or your visceral hatred for Israel. As to me commenting from the comfort of my home in the U.S., have you ever commented about conditions in another country, e.g Ukraine, Russia, China, etc. from the comfort of your home in the U.S.? I guess you haven't otherwise your comment about me, my comments and my home would make you a phony.
I don't know what is funnier coming from you, "appalling ignorance of history" or "your visceral hatred of Israel". You seem to be the one who's ignorant here. WW2 was over 80 years ago and I'm not sure if you're aware, warfare has changed. Also, WW2 was a global war involving many nation states on a massive scale. The Israel/Gaza conflict is taking place on a tiny strip of land. But if you insist on a comparison, the German siege of Leningrad comes to mind. The people can't leave, are starving and and continue to be bombed.
I'm not sitting at home casually brushing off widespread civilian deaths and suffering like yourself.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 8:29:31 GMT -5
Wrong again. The fact that you see no correlation between the nature of war and the history of WW2 speaks either to your appalling ignorance of history or your visceral hatred for Israel. As to me commenting from the comfort of my home in the U.S., have you ever commented about conditions in another country, e.g Ukraine, Russia, China, etc. from the comfort of your home in the U.S.? I guess you haven't otherwise your comment about me, my comments and my home would make you a phony. I don't know what is funnier coming from you, "appalling ignorance of history" or "your visceral hatred of Israel". You seem to be the one who's ignorant here. WW2 was over 80 years ago and I'm not sure if you're aware, warfare has changed. Also, WW2 was a global war involving many nation states on a massive scale. The Israel/Gaza conflict is taking place on a tiny strip of land. But if you insist on a comparison, the German siege of Leningrad comes to mind. The people can't leave, are starving and and continue to be bombed. I'm not sitting at home casually brushing off widespread civilian deaths and suffering like yourself. Not that much. Bullets, bombs, tanks, aircraft, artillery, death, destruction, displacement, disorder. All existed in WW2. All exist in the Israeli-Hamas War. And by your own admission the Israel-Hamas war is very much like WW2; the people can't leave, are starving and continue to be bombed. It happened in WW2. It's happening now. And acknowledging that widespread civilian deaths and suffering are a part of all wars and that the Israel-Hamas war is not unique in that respect is not the same as casually brushing it off. Of course it you were to admit that then your whole attempt to characterize me as some kind of warmonger would fall apart. We can't have that now, can we?
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 7, 2024 8:49:38 GMT -5
I don't know what is funnier coming from you, "appalling ignorance of history" or "your visceral hatred of Israel". You seem to be the one who's ignorant here. WW2 was over 80 years ago and I'm not sure if you're aware, warfare has changed. Also, WW2 was a global war involving many nation states on a massive scale. The Israel/Gaza conflict is taking place on a tiny strip of land. But if you insist on a comparison, the German siege of Leningrad comes to mind. The people can't leave, are starving and and continue to be bombed. I'm not sitting at home casually brushing off widespread civilian deaths and suffering like yourself. Not that much. Bullets, bombs, tanks, aircraft, artillery, death, destruction, displacement, disorder. All existed in WW2. All exist in the Israeli-Hamas War. And by your own admission the Israel-Hamas war is very much like WW2; the people can't leave, are starving and continue to be bombed. It happened in WW2. It's happening now. And acknowledging that widespread civilian deaths and suffering are a part of all wars and that the Israel-Hamas war is not unique in that respect is not the same as casually brushing it off. Of course it you were to admit that then your whole attempt to characterize me as some kind of warmonger would fall apart. We can't have that now, can we? More comedy.
Since nuclear weapons were used in WW2, I'm guessing you'd find them acceptable in this conflict? Is there any level of Palestinian civilian deaths that you would find unacceptable?
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 9:34:04 GMT -5
Not that much. Bullets, bombs, tanks, aircraft, artillery, death, destruction, displacement, disorder. All existed in WW2. All exist in the Israeli-Hamas War. And by your own admission the Israel-Hamas war is very much like WW2; the people can't leave, are starving and continue to be bombed. It happened in WW2. It's happening now. And acknowledging that widespread civilian deaths and suffering are a part of all wars and that the Israel-Hamas war is not unique in that respect is not the same as casually brushing it off. Of course it you were to admit that then your whole attempt to characterize me as some kind of warmonger would fall apart. We can't have that now, can we? More comedy. Since nuclear weapons were used in WW2, I'm guessing you'd find them acceptable in this conflict? Is there any level of Palestinian civilian deaths that you would find unacceptable? You seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between the things that the Israel-Hamas war has in common with WW2 and the things that those 2 wars do not have in common. You seem to be saying these 2 wars must have 100% commonality or no commonality at all. No acknowledgement that in some aspects they are the same and in some aspects they are not. In depth analysis of the situation does not seem to be one of your strong points. And asking how many deaths are acceptable in a war is an absurd question. Do you really think any of the parties in a war say "Our objective in this war is not to kill over X number of people." There is only one objective in a war and that's to win it. And acknowledging the realities of war is not the same as approving those realities. That's a concept that seems to elude you.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on May 7, 2024 9:51:02 GMT -5
More comedy. Since nuclear weapons were used in WW2, I'm guessing you'd find them acceptable in this conflict? Is there any level of Palestinian civilian deaths that you would find unacceptable? You seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between the things that the Israel-Hamas war has in common with WW2 and the things that those 2 wars do not have in common. You seem to be saying these 2 wars must have 100% commonality or no commonality at all. No acknowledgement that in some aspects they are the same and in some aspects they are not. In depth analysis of the situation does not seem to be one of your strong points. And asking how many deaths are acceptable in a war is an absurd question. Do you really think any of the parties in a war say "Our objective in this war is not to kill over X number of people." There is only one objective in a war and that's to win it. And acknowledging the realities of war is not the same as approving those realities. That's a concept that seems to elude you. War is "politics" with violence. Politics is "war" without violence. Every war comes to an end eventually. Simply waging war without a political strategy for ending the war and winning the peace is barbaric. Nothing Israel is doing will make them more secure in the future. At worst, something worse than Hamas will be the consequence of all the killing of civilians. Just as the Iraq war made Iraq the breeding ground for ISIS, what Israel is doing to Gaza will likely lead to something worse than Hamas. Hamas is an insurgency. They don't hold territory. Israel can militarily occupy any part of Gaza they want but they haven't been able to secure any parts of Gaza after their troops plant their flags. They just take an area and then their troops get ambushed. They haven't successfully removed Hamas from any parts of Gaza after six months. And after the IDF troops get ambushed, they massacre Palestinian civilians. This has happened several times over the last few months. This type of warfare is not comparable to WW2. It's more comparable to Vietnam or Afghanistan. I understand why older folks romanticize WW2 but the lessons of that war don't apply to most modern wars. No offense but it's dumb to act like every war is like pre-1945 wars.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 10:41:42 GMT -5
You seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between the things that the Israel-Hamas war has in common with WW2 and the things that those 2 wars do not have in common. You seem to be saying these 2 wars must have 100% commonality or no commonality at all. No acknowledgement that in some aspects they are the same and in some aspects they are not. In depth analysis of the situation does not seem to be one of your strong points. And asking how many deaths are acceptable in a war is an absurd question. Do you really think any of the parties in a war say "Our objective in this war is not to kill over X number of people." There is only one objective in a war and that's to win it. And acknowledging the realities of war is not the same as approving those realities. That's a concept that seems to elude you. War is "politics" with violence. Politics is "war" without violence. Every war comes to an end eventually. Simply waging war without a political strategy for ending the war and winning the peace is barbaric. Nothing Israel is doing will make them more secure in the future. At worst, something worse than Hamas will be the consequence of all the killing of civilians. Just as the Iraq war made Iraq the breeding ground for ISIS, what Israel is doing to Gaza will likely lead to something worse than Hamas. Hamas is an insurgency. They don't hold territory. Israel can militarily occupy any part of Gaza they want but they haven't been able to secure any parts of Gaza after their troops plant their flags. They just take an area and then their troops get ambushed. They haven't successfully removed Hamas from any parts of Gaza after six months. And after the IDF troops get ambushed, they massacre Palestinian civilians. This has happened several times over the last few months. This type of warfare is not comparable to WW2. It's more comparable to Vietnam or Afghanistan. I understand why older folks romanticize WW2 but the lessons of that war don't apply to most modern wars. No offense but it's dumb to act like every war is like pre-1945 wars. Where to begin? 1. You need to get your facts straight. "Israel can militarily occupy any part of Gaza they want but they haven't been able to secure any parts of Gaza after their troops plant their flags." Wrong. "Israel fully controls all access in and out of Gaza since the war began."2. "This type of warfare is not comparable to WW2." Some aspects of it are, some aspects of it aren't. You're suffering from the all or nothing problem that Ivanbalt has. 3. "I understand why older folks romanticize WW2 but the lessons of that war don't apply to most modern wars." I can't speak for all older folks like you can. What I do know is that I have never romanticized any war. And again, you're operating under the all or nothing delusion. Some of the lessons of WW2 are applicable to war today, some are not. 4. As to whether or not what Israel is doing will make them more secure in the future, that all depends on what Israel does in Gaza after the war is over. On the bright side I'm glad to see you finally gave up on that genocide canard.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on May 7, 2024 10:59:02 GMT -5
War is "politics" with violence. Politics is "war" without violence. Every war comes to an end eventually. Simply waging war without a political strategy for ending the war and winning the peace is barbaric. Nothing Israel is doing will make them more secure in the future. At worst, something worse than Hamas will be the consequence of all the killing of civilians. Just as the Iraq war made Iraq the breeding ground for ISIS, what Israel is doing to Gaza will likely lead to something worse than Hamas. Hamas is an insurgency. They don't hold territory. Israel can militarily occupy any part of Gaza they want but they haven't been able to secure any parts of Gaza after their troops plant their flags. They just take an area and then their troops get ambushed. They haven't successfully removed Hamas from any parts of Gaza after six months. And after the IDF troops get ambushed, they massacre Palestinian civilians. This has happened several times over the last few months. This type of warfare is not comparable to WW2. It's more comparable to Vietnam or Afghanistan. I understand why older folks romanticize WW2 but the lessons of that war don't apply to most modern wars. No offense but it's dumb to act like every war is like pre-1945 wars. On the bright side I'm glad to see you finally gave up on that genocide canard. I stand by my view that Israel is committing acts of genocide with genocidal intent. Choosing to move on rather than keep arguing over things where we'll never agree is my attempt at trying to avoid derailing topics.
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 7, 2024 12:02:39 GMT -5
More comedy. Since nuclear weapons were used in WW2, I'm guessing you'd find them acceptable in this conflict? Is there any level of Palestinian civilian deaths that you would find unacceptable? You seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between the things that the Israel-Hamas war has in common with WW2 and the things that those 2 wars do not have in common. You seem to be saying these 2 wars must have 100% commonality or no commonality at all. No acknowledgement that in some aspects they are the same and in some aspects they are not. In depth analysis of the situation does not seem to be one of your strong points. And asking how many deaths are acceptable in a war is an absurd question. Do you really think any of the parties in a war say "Our objective in this war is not to kill over X number of people." There is only one objective in a war and that's to win it. And acknowledging the realities of war is not the same as approving those realities. That's a concept that seems to elude you.
You've regularly used WW2 mass civilian casualties as excuse for Israel do whatever is needed to achieve their "goals". You seem to be the one confused as the two conflicts have very few similarities outside of people killing each other.
You should maybe look to Vietnam as a better comparison. Then again, you probably thought in '73 that the war was still winnable no matter how many civilians died.
After all the death and destruction, do you really believe that Hamas (or some similar offshoot) is going to be eradicated?
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 7, 2024 23:02:28 GMT -5
You seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between the things that the Israel-Hamas war has in common with WW2 and the things that those 2 wars do not have in common. You seem to be saying these 2 wars must have 100% commonality or no commonality at all. No acknowledgement that in some aspects they are the same and in some aspects they are not. In depth analysis of the situation does not seem to be one of your strong points. And asking how many deaths are acceptable in a war is an absurd question. Do you really think any of the parties in a war say "Our objective in this war is not to kill over X number of people." There is only one objective in a war and that's to win it. And acknowledging the realities of war is not the same as approving those realities. That's a concept that seems to elude you. You've regularly used WW2 mass civilian casualties as excuse for Israel do whatever is needed to achieve their "goals". You seem to be the one confused as the two conflicts have very few similarities outside of people killing each other. You should maybe look to Vietnam as a better comparison. Then again, you probably thought in '73 that the war was still winnable no matter how many civilians died. After all the death and destruction, do you really believe that Hamas (or some similar offshoot) is going to be eradicated? Do you know of any war in human history where the participants didn't do whatever was needed to achieve their "goals"? If you do please tell me which one(s) it was. Your record for knowing what I probably thought is an abject failure. Word of advice, quit while you're behind. What happens re Hamas or other terrorist groups in Gaza depends on what happens in Gaza after the war is over. If Israel shows even a modicum of concern for the welfare of the Palestinians in Gaza it will be more than Hamas has done for those people.
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 8, 2024 5:19:12 GMT -5
You've regularly used WW2 mass civilian casualties as excuse for Israel do whatever is needed to achieve their "goals". You seem to be the one confused as the two conflicts have very few similarities outside of people killing each other. You should maybe look to Vietnam as a better comparison. Then again, you probably thought in '73 that the war was still winnable no matter how many civilians died. After all the death and destruction, do you really believe that Hamas (or some similar offshoot) is going to be eradicated? Do you know of any war in human history where the participants didn't do whatever was needed to achieve their "goals"? If you do please tell me which one(s) it was.Your record for knowing what I probably thought is an abject failure. Word of advice, quit while you're behind. What happens re Hamas or other terrorist groups in Gaza depends on what happens in Gaza after the war is over. If Israel shows even a modicum of concern for the welfare of the Palestinians in Gaza it will be more than Hamas has done for those people. Do you know what the Geneva convention is?
Doesn't sound like you have much faith in Hamas being eradicated no matter how many civilians are killed.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 8, 2024 16:29:29 GMT -5
Do you know of any war in human history where the participants didn't do whatever was needed to achieve their "goals"? If you do please tell me which one(s) it was.Your record for knowing what I probably thought is an abject failure. Word of advice, quit while you're behind. What happens re Hamas or other terrorist groups in Gaza depends on what happens in Gaza after the war is over. If Israel shows even a modicum of concern for the welfare of the Palestinians in Gaza it will be more than Hamas has done for those people. Do you know what the Geneva convention is? Doesn't sound like you have much faith in Hamas being eradicated no matter how many civilians are killed. Yes I do. Are you so naive as to believe that if a country has it's back up against the wall in a war they're going to abide by the Geneva Convention? The eradication of Hamas probably won't end terrorist activities against Israel. If may prevent or forestall another October 7.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on May 8, 2024 17:11:05 GMT -5
Do you know what the Geneva convention is? Doesn't sound like you have much faith in Hamas being eradicated no matter how many civilians are killed. Yes I do. Are you so naive as to believe that if a country has it's back up against the wall in a war they're going to abide by the Geneva Convention? The eradication of Hamas probably won't end terrorist activities against Israel. If may prevent or forestall another October 7. Israel’s back is not against the wall. It’s not an existential fight for them. They suffered a horrible terrorist attack on Oct 7th last year. Zero Israeli civilians have been killed since then. Lots of countries, including our own, have suffered from terrorism but no country has mass murdered as many women and children as Israel has in retaliation for a terror attack. Infants and toddlers in Gaza, who had nothing to do with October 7th don’t deserve to suffer.
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 8, 2024 19:25:46 GMT -5
Do you know what the Geneva convention is? Doesn't sound like you have much faith in Hamas being eradicated no matter how many civilians are killed. Yes I do. Are you so naive as to believe that if a country has it's back up against the wall in a war they're going to abide by the Geneva Convention? The eradication of Hamas probably won't end terrorist activities against Israel. If may prevent or forestall another October 7. Israel hasn't had their back up against the wall in a war since the Yom Kippur War in 1973.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 8, 2024 19:54:10 GMT -5
Yes I do. Are you so naive as to believe that if a country has it's back up against the wall in a war they're going to abide by the Geneva Convention? The eradication of Hamas probably won't end terrorist activities against Israel. If may prevent or forestall another October 7. Israel hasn't had their back up against the wall in a war since the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Biden was OK with a minor incursion into Ukraine. It appears you're OK with what you perceive to be a "minor" terrorist attack on Israel. And then there's this: Hamas uses human shields.The use of human shields violates the Geneva Convention.So if you're going to drag out the Geneva Convention and you want to be objective you've got to include Hamas in the conversation. You haven't done that.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on May 8, 2024 20:02:45 GMT -5
Israel hasn't had their back up against the wall in a war since the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Biden was OK with a minor incursion into Ukraine. It appears you're OK with what you perceive to be a "minor" terrorist attack on Israel. And then there's this: Hamas uses human shields.The use of human shields violates the Geneva Convention.So if you're going to drag out the Geneva Convention and you want to be objective you've got to include Hamas in the conversation. You haven't done that. Define “Human Shield” I’ve seen photographs and videos of the IDF using Palestinians as human shields but never Hamas. If you mean Hamas fighters don’t wear uniforms so it’s difficult to distinguish them from civilians, I agree that it’s a war crime for combatants to blend in with civilians. But when you use inaccurate terms, it makes your points imprecise…
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 8, 2024 20:44:34 GMT -5
Define “Human Shield” I’ve seen photographs and videos of the IDF using Palestinians as human shields but never Hamas. If you mean Hamas fighters don’t wear uniforms so it’s difficult to distinguish them from civilians, I agree that it’s a war crime for combatants to blend in with civilians. But when you use inaccurate terms, it makes your points imprecise… The term “human shields” describes a method of warfare prohibited by IHL where the presence of civilians or the movement of the civilian population, whether voluntary or involuntary, is used in order to shield military objectives from attack, or to shield, favor or impede military operations.
Does Hamas use human shields? Yes.And yes.And yes again.And yes yet again.I could go on posting links but why don’t you save us both a lot of time and tell me how many sources I have to link to to give you precise proof that Hamas is using human shields?
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on May 8, 2024 20:53:13 GMT -5
Define “Human Shield” I’ve seen photographs and videos of the IDF using Palestinians as human shields but never Hamas. If you mean Hamas fighters don’t wear uniforms so it’s difficult to distinguish them from civilians, I agree that it’s a war crime for combatants to blend in with civilians. But when you use inaccurate terms, it makes your points imprecise… The term “human shields” describes a method of warfare prohibited by IHL where the presence of civilians or the movement of the civilian population, whether voluntary or involuntary, is used in order to shield military objectives from attack, or to shield, favor or impede military operations.
Does Hamas use human shields? Yes.And yes.And yes again.And yes yet again.I could go on posting links but why don’t you save us both a lot of time and tell me how many sources I have to link to to give you precise proof that Hamas is using human shields? This entire war is happening on social media. There’s hours and hours of video footage of battles. I’ve followed this stuff for years and Israeli forces have occupied Gaza for months yet there’s very little evidence of: - Hamas hiding military infrastructure in civilian buildings/residences - Hamas firing on Israeli forces from schools, mosques, churches, or hospitals You expect me to take the Israelis at their word despite the fact that they’ve been proven to have lied over and over again in the last few months. What we know about how Hamas fights is that they have miles and miles of tunnels under Gaza and they use the tunnels for smuggling and hiding from Israeli airstrikes. The IDF knows this but they need to justify destroying every building in Gaza, so they pretend that Hamas is hiding in every building. Very convenient…
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 8, 2024 21:31:57 GMT -5
The term “human shields” describes a method of warfare prohibited by IHL where the presence of civilians or the movement of the civilian population, whether voluntary or involuntary, is used in order to shield military objectives from attack, or to shield, favor or impede military operations. Does Hamas use human shields? Yes.And yes.And yes again.And yes yet again.I could go on posting links but why don’t you save us both a lot of time and tell me how many sources I have to link to to give you precise proof that Hamas is using human shields? This entire war is happening on social media. There’s hours and hours of video footage of battles. I’ve followed this stuff for years and Israeli forces have occupied Gaza for months yet there’s very little evidence of: - Hamas hiding military infrastructure in civilian buildings/residences - Hamas firing on Israeli forces from schools, mosques, churches, or hospitals You expect me to take the Israelis at their word despite the fact that they’ve been proven to have lied over and over again in the last few months. What we know about how Hamas fights is that they have miles and miles of tunnels under Gaza and they use the tunnels for smuggling and hiding from Israeli airstrikes. The IDF knows this but they need to justify destroying every building in Gaza, so they pretend that Hamas is hiding in every building. Very convenient… 1. This entire war is happening on social media? No, I see stories on the war on TV and in newspapers and magazines every day. There is something about this war that is causing you to make totally irrational statements. 2. You didn't answer my question, proving that there is no amount of proof that will convince you that Hamas is using civilians as human shields. This is your way to avoid believing in a psychologically uncomfortable truth. 3. None of the sources I linked to are Israeli sources. Is it your contention that none of those sources I linked to bothered to verify the accuracy of the claim that Hamas uses human shields before they published that claim?
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 9, 2024 5:18:56 GMT -5
Israel hasn't had their back up against the wall in a war since the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Biden was OK with a minor incursion into Ukraine. It appears you're OK with what you perceive to be a "minor" terrorist attack on Israel. And then there's this: Hamas uses human shields.The use of human shields violates the Geneva Convention.So if you're going to drag out the Geneva Convention and you want to be objective you've got to include Hamas in the conversation. You haven't done that. Huh? Not sure what you're even saying, but do you really think 20k Hamas fighters were a threat to invade Israel, defeat the entire IDF and occupy the country effectively eliminating the state of Israel? That's my definition of back up against the wall.
Hamas is a terrorist group that did not sign the Geneva convention. Israel is a nation state that did sign the Geneva convention. I hold Israel to a higher standard just as I would any nation state. You apparently do not.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 9, 2024 13:48:31 GMT -5
Huh? Not sure what you're even saying, but do you really think 20k Hamas fighters were a threat to invade Israel, defeat the entire IDF and occupy the country effectively eliminating the state of Israel? That's my definition of back up against the wall. Hamas is a terrorist group that did not sign the Geneva convention. Israel is a nation state that did sign the Geneva convention. I hold Israel to a higher standard just as I would any nation state. You apparently do not.
OK, let me ask you this. What would you have had Israel do in response to October 7?
|
|
|
Post by ivanbalt on May 9, 2024 15:29:01 GMT -5
Huh? Not sure what you're even saying, but do you really think 20k Hamas fighters were a threat to invade Israel, defeat the entire IDF and occupy the country effectively eliminating the state of Israel? That's my definition of back up against the wall. Hamas is a terrorist group that did not sign the Geneva convention. Israel is a nation state that did sign the Geneva convention. I hold Israel to a higher standard just as I would any nation state. You apparently do not.
OK, let me ask you this. What would you have had Israel do in response to October 7? Three things:
Find a middle ground. There has to be options between doing nothing against Hamas and bombing and starving a civilian population that already had very little.
Full investigation into how Bibi and his right-wing government turned a blind eye to Hamas to where they could launch a major incursion into Israel.
Long term political solution. The status quo cannot continue forever as its a never ending recruitment tool for terrorists.
|
|
|
Post by vosa on May 9, 2024 16:07:20 GMT -5
OK, let me ask you this. What would you have had Israel do in response to October 7? Three things: Find a middle ground. There has to be options between doing nothing against Hamas and bombing and starving a civilian population that already had very little. Full investigation into how Bibi and his right-wing government turned a blind eye to Hamas to where they could launch a major incursion into Israel. Long term political solution. The status quo cannot continue forever as its a never ending recruitment tool for terrorists. And what is that middle ground? What are those options? It's easy for you to spew out superficial generalities from the comfort of your home in the US. but in Israel & Gaza the middle ground and the options need to be spelled out in detail. Care to give that a try? Obviously Mossad and other intelligence agencies around the world failed miserably in predicting the Hamas attack. If it hasn't already happened I suspect some heads will roll in Jerusalem. The long term political solution aka the two state solution is probably the answer. That's talked about a lot by a lot of parties but I have seen very little in the way of detail regarding what that two state solution would look like.
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on May 10, 2024 8:21:16 GMT -5
Ivan, he won't be satisfied until you say killing 35K people, half of them women and children, was the correct course of action.
For people like him and RJ, the mass slaughter of people who never threw a rock at an Israeli is the appropriate response to 10/7.
|
|