What made you determine such from his speech? Even Fox News is praising it over here.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Why lie like this, what are you trying to achieve?
Fair. Should retaliate by paragliding in and gunning down innocent people and burning families alive. Much better.
Whan Hamas hides behind civilian infrastructure (which is well documented for years now), how do you target Hamas and guarantee no civilian casualties? It's basically saying that Israel is hamstrung becaues of Hamas' decision to use human shields.
Hamas is labeled and treated as a terrorist organization, they receive zero protection.
Show me. In the most blatant and explicit way
My point is that you dont need to spell it out in imparting racist views let alone textbook
Meh he's just an old senile fool towing the usual bipartisan line regarding Israel. His sentiments haven't been a surprise at the least.
Only time a President in recent history actually dissented from the default Israeli absolution/appeasement stance was when Obama in one of his final acts decided to abstain on a UNSC resolution condemning Israeli settlements. Unprecedented but he was on his way out anyway.
There is a massive difference between guaranteeing no civilian casualties and targetting civilian infrastructures while also stating that no gazan civilian is innocent.
Are you expecting them to courteously and conveniently line up in an open field somewhere, where they all hold a giant bullseye? Hamas are native to Gaza - you know the open air prison where no one is essentially allowed to leave or enter. Where are you expecting them to be?
Indeed. And an even bigger difference specifically targeting innocent civilians up close and personal, no?
You know the last election was in 2006, right?
When half the population of Gaza was either not yet born or too young to vote...
Not around schools and hospitals and mosques? Seems like there's plenty of other options.
Israel funded Hamas to be a disruptive force in Palestine politics. Definite shades of the Taliban and the US in the 80s.
Yeah, because the elected Hamas did away with the democracy that put them in power. Hamas is why those kids have no vote.
It's not really a distinction, palestinians are killed fairly regularly in the West Bank by settlers with the support of IDF or by IDF itself up close and personal.
Also you are not more righteous because you used long distance weapons.
Last edited:
I'm just incredibly sad for the civilians. Can't get past feeling like they are trapped between two evils in hamas and the israeli government.
Are you talking about IDF or Hamas? So confusing.
Well, that backfired awfully quick then... https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hamas
"Yassin established Hamas as the Brotherhood’s political arm in Gaza in December 1987, following the outbreak of the first intifada, a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. At the time, Hamas’s purpose was to counter Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), another organization whose commitment to violently resisting Israel threatened to draw Palestinians’ support away from the Brotherhood. In 1988, Hamas published its charter, calling for the destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic society in historic Palestine."
Doesn't sound like much of a divergence if he abstained from condemnation of Israel, though Israelis have come to expect to be backed no matter what breaches/attrocities they commit I'm not surprised it was viewed that way.
Not really. One is lobbing bombs and hasn't sent any individuals into the other's territory to kill with guns and other close range means. The other did. There's a difference between collateral damage and intentionally attacking innocents face to face. Doesn't make either death any less tragic, but it speaks to the state of mind of the perpetrator, which is always relevant when determining liability (legally, at least - hence the difference between premeditated murder and manslaughter, for example).
You're right, they are hateful cockroaches.
Israel didn't 'let them in' by the way. They were just the ones who didn't run away in 48.
I agree with you on that but I feel that, and please correct me if I'm wrong, what you and many fail here to understand is how asymmetric warfare goes . Especially in colonial wars (no matter what people say, it actually is one).
This is not two regular armies facing each other on a conventional battlefield, each one having a somewhat reasonable hope of winning the battle. No one's not going to make it easy for an opponent that utterly overpowers them, just based on moral grounds. It never happened. Ever. The Hamas isn't banking on a win in the conventional military sense. They hit you as hard as they can and then just leave you stuck between a rock and a hard place. Go in too soft and you appear as weak, which won't go unnoticed. Go in too hard and you're a monster, the world and relatives of the victims will remember that. That's without even mentioning your own casualties that you have to justify back home. There's no middle ground, it's a battle of opinions, the one that matters, especially today. It's not pretty, it's not moral and of course, the civilian population is the first to suffer, but that's what you get in a situation like this. Every single time.
There's no military solution to this conflict and will never be. You can't win this way unless you're ready to either eradicate the Palestinians or mass deport them. You can retaliate and deploy the flamethrower to get rid of the current mosquitoes bothering you, others will take their place. You can win but you'll never have peace.
Last edited:
The fact that Israel's body count is at least 10 times Hamas' is the greatest crime. I've heard of an eye for an eye but with Israel it's a life for an eye.
How convenient that the time Israel most needs evidence to prove “it wasn’t them”, as the world began to wake up and smell the coffee and condemn their genocidal atrocities, they’re able to capture crystal clear audio confessions and neatly worded documents that ties it all together like the end of an episode of Scooby Doo.
Investigation done and dusted, with the conclusion that they aren’t the bad guys when the dust hasn’t even settled on the hundreds of dead bodies.
And those Hamas terrorists would’ve gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for those meddling Israelis.
Biden with his unwavering support for the real terrorists is also unsurprising.
Investigation done and dusted, with the conclusion that they aren’t the bad guys when the dust hasn’t even settled on the hundreds of dead bodies.
And those Hamas terrorists would’ve gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for those meddling Israelis.
Biden with his unwavering support for the real terrorists is also unsurprising.
Last edited:
Like I said, I think we have incredibly different definitions of relative peace.
Most slaves weren't being attacked most days either, as long as they knew their place, shut up and did what they were told.
How convenient that the time Israel most needs evidence to prove “it wasn’t them”, as the world began to wake up and smell the coffee and condemn their genocidal atrocities, they’re able to capture crystal clear audio confessions and neatly worded documents that ties it all together like the end of an episode of Scooby Doo.
And those Hamas terrorists would’ve gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for those meddling Israelis.
Biden with his unwavering support for the real terrorists is also unsurprising.
Hamas aren't exactly fictitious terrorists.
Stretching the term collateral damage to absolute breaking point here.
posted so I get quoted by Pogue
Maybe the
Until then, both sides will do what they actually can.
I know. Hence me bringing it up, since I think you need to square that with your post saying: "despite being elected representatives of a group of people that you would say deserve their own state"
Lobbing bombs to murder civilians = good
Upclose and person murder civilians = bad
Comedy gold right there. The fact that we are even comparing IDF to a savage terrorist group says it all.
Yes but it's the Israeli bombs with the political backing of The US, UK and the EU that is killing them currently.
They are, but to lay the blame solely on them as the IDF (who are terrorists themselves) have done is facetious.
Seems you've missed the entire point. IDF isn't trying to kill civilians. As I said above, it's about intent, state of mind. Does murder = manslaughter?
It's kind of hard not to kill civilians when the military targets are embedded in civilian infrastructure to maximize civilian casualties to engender support. And see, it's working.
Yes. The west certainly is playing a horrific part.
Yeah, I also think that it's the most plausible explanation.
Will also just note that the actual hospital is the buildings with the solar panels in the background. Whatever hit, hit the parking lot area.
Good. But. Does he need a speaker in the house to do that?