Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

africanspur said:
Just like when the West Germans doubled down on support of apartheid south Africa when even other Western countries were dropping it
Click to expand...

Seriously? This happened in cold war times back in the 80s. I'm sure you also know that the GDR supported the ANC at that time. Thus it was mainly having a common enemy, your enemy is also my enemy.

World politics are never black and white and you sometimes you have to make alliances you rather wouldn't.
 
B. Munich said:
Seriously? This happened in cold war times back in the 80s. I'm sure you also know that the GDR supported the ANC at that time. Thus it was mainly having a common enemy, your enemy is also my enemy. World politics are never black and white and you sometimes you have to make alliances you rather wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Your entire argument so far has been that Germany's politics re: Israel must be black or white!
 
Last edited:
Iker Quesadillas said:
But you don't even believe this. Your entire argument so far has been that Germany's politics re: Israel must be black or white!
Click to expand...

Again it doesn't matter what I believe, this is completely irrelevant.
Germany's relationship with Israel is of a very special kind due to the Holocaust that cost over 6 million Jewish lives.
In Germany, the support of Israel is a reason of state. Like it or not, it's just fact.

I don't think it's much different than the stance the UK, France or the US take.
 


The possibility of finding anyone who isn't complicit there is unsurprisingly low.
 
Pav1878 said:
whataboutery and selective facts.

I will deal with each of your points in turn:

1. should Israel have been established on Palestinian land? No. Should it now exist? Yes, as I don’t believe in now displacing a whole other population of people as well. A two state solution is the only realistic solution. But Israel should not continue in its current form with its current leadership, which has a genocidal agenda aimed at wiping out a whole population.

2. There was no Palestinian state before 1948: according to whom? The West? The UN? Who gets to say whether a people are a people or nation? It was under Ottoman rule and then British administration before 1948. So what? India was under British rule until 1947, does that not make India a nation?

if we are talking about who has a claim to that land, and if Zionists want to make it a biblical conversation about the land of Canaan, then we should look at what made up Canaan and who made up Canaan. It was on what we now call Palestine/Israel, Jordan and Lebanon. Therefore, the people of all those places could stake a claim to that land. It was not however, solely a Jewish land. Israeli Zionists say that they are the only real democracy and secular country in the Middle East, yet they also believe in Israel being a country only for Jews. So which is it, are you a secular democracy or a theocracy?

3. wars have happened all over the world and populations have moved. What is your point? That the Palestinians should just accept what’s happened to them? Would you? Would for example, Italy accept seizure of their land and just ‘move on?’ Of course not. They would fight, as the Palestinians are doing. It’s absurd to suggest they do anything else.

BTW 1: why would Jordan have anything to do with this conversation? Are they the mouthpiece or representation of Palestine? Stop bundling all Muslim or Arab people and countries into the same basket as if they all speak and act in unison. The fact it didn’t happen under Jordanian administration is a completely different question as to why Israel has acted the way it has and continues to do so.

BTW 2:

Do I have a problem with how Egypt have conducted themselves? Of course. They are not blameless and their submission to Israel’s wishes and the mess along the Philidelphi border is a massive problem. But last time I checked it wasn’t Egyptian bombs blowing up Palestinians and orphaning almost 20,000 children, leaving thousands more missing limbs, living in a tent in the cold and without food or water.
Click to expand...

1. With all of Israel's weapons and military power, if it realy does hold a genocidel agenda (it doesn't), that it is very bad at implemeting it. Up until the October 7th massacre Gazans civilians were allowed to come into Israel to work, despite being ruled by murderous terror groups such is the Jihad and Hamas. Despite being bombarded with ten's of thousands of rockets i nthe past 20 years since the disengagement plan, Israel did everything in it's power to avoid sending ground troops inside Gaza. Hamas knew full well the consquences of carrying out such deadly attacks, yet you seem more concerned with what Israel had done since October 7th than the simple fact that there was a ceasefire up until October 7th, We didn't want this war and this war did feck all for the palestinian population. Some power hungey, blood hungry maniacs burst through out borders to kill as many of us as possible, and they were unfortunetly very successful in that task. Show me another way to end that right now without any more human suffering and I will adopt it in a heartbit. Everything was tried in the past, any sort of palestinian autonomy ended up with thousand of dead israelis.

2. According to facts. All countries are based on recognized international borders as agreed upon. This is the basis of modern human law and order. Jews have lived on this land, and purchased lands on this territory legaly and willingly long before the UN resolution. You want to claim that every inch of land belonged to a certain part of the population? it's your right, but a lot of borders changed between WWI and WWII and afterwards, and you seem to be troubled only by a very particular one.

3. Palestinians should accept that a return to Haifa and Tel Aviv is not an option, and should first and first most build a governing body that isn't sponsoring nor perpetrating terror. Once that happens, the majority of Israeli's are more than open for solutions that would allow all of us the live our lives. No one knows how such a solution would look, but we all want that day to come.

BTW1 - It's a point I made to clarify that the two state solution only came about after Jordan lost the West Bank. Before that there was no call for a two state solution, but simply for the anahilation of the jewish state. And that call maybe went quite in the face of modern diplomacy but is still being taught at schools and appearing in Hamas and PA charters.

BTW2 - Your'e much less vocal about that criticism. Maybe theres a reason their border is blocked, perhaps it's because, I dont know, they are being controlled by a deranged terror group? just a thought.

Pav1878 said:
oh and BTW you do realise that Israel was not a nation before 1948 either? Palestine was more of a nation than Israel before 1948. so what point are you trying to make?
Click to expand...

Exactly, It was not, a lot of borders changed around the world post WWII and so did this one.
 
MacabbiUnited said:
1. With all of Israel's weapons and military power, if it realy does hold a genocidel agenda (it doesn't), that it is very bad at implemeting it. Up until the October 7th massacre Gazans civilians were allowed to come into Israel to work, despite being ruled by murderous terror groups such is the Jihad and Hamas. Despite being bombarded with ten's of thousands of rockets i nthe past 20 years since the disengagement plan, Israel did everything in it's power to avoid sending ground troops inside Gaza. Hamas knew full well the consquences of carrying out such deadly attacks, yet you seem more concerned with what Israel had done since October 7th than the simple fact that there was a ceasefire up until October 7th, We didn't want this war and this war did feck all for the palestinian population. Some power hungey, blood hungry maniacs burst through out borders to kill as many of us as possible, and they were unfortunetly very successful in that task. Show me another way to end that right now without any more human suffering and I will adopt it in a heartbit. Everything was tried in the past, any sort of palestinian autonomy ended up with thousand of dead israelis.
Click to expand...


I seriously don't have time to debate the rest of your points, but I can't let this stand. Are you fecking kidding me? You seriously believe all that? Wow.

Setting aside everything you wrote being biased, devoid of fact and also incredibly offensive you are also leaving out nearly every reason why Hamas were created in the first place.

Again, I do not condone or support or defend Hamas but they were created for a reason. Both sides have been wrong and neither are innocent but you can't paint Israel as the victim here.

Palestinians were allowed to come to Israel to work? Oh, how very fecking kind of Israel. A ceasefire? Yeah, right. Maybe no military involvement but thousands of Palestinians were arrested and held prisoners without charge, beaten, tortured and not released. Women raped, thousands murdered. The continual stealing of land and terrorising Palestinians in the West Bank and other Occupied Palestinian Territories, while those living in Gaza were forced to live under apartheid conditions many described as the biggest open air prison in the world and goes against the Rome Statute and Apartheid Convention.

Israel control the water supply, power supplies, internet (where available) and most food sources. They control everything that goes in and out of Gaza and impose curfews and embargos, they refuse citizenship and they force Palestinians to live under constant oppression.

But yeah, as you said... Everything was tried and the Palestinians were allowed to go to work and essentially it's all their fault.

To add, I want to point out my heart goes out to all those Israelis who suffered from Hamas attacks over the years and try to understand the fear they must feel. But two wrongs don't make a right and yet again it's the innocent people who end up suffering.
 
MacabbiUnited said:
1. With all of Israel's weapons and military power, if it realy does hold a genocidel agenda (it doesn't), that it is very bad at implemeting it. Up until the October 7th massacre Gazans civilians were allowed to come into Israel to work, despite being ruled by murderous terror groups such is the Jihad and Hamas. Despite being bombarded with ten's of thousands of rockets i nthe past 20 years since the disengagement plan, Israel did everything in it's power to avoid sending ground troops inside Gaza. Hamas knew full well the consquences of carrying out such deadly attacks, yet you seem more concerned with what Israel had done since October 7th than the simple fact that there was a ceasefire up until October 7th, We didn't want this war and this war did feck all for the palestinian population. Some power hungey, blood hungry maniacs burst through out borders to kill as many of us as possible, and they were unfortunetly very successful in that task. Show me another way to end that right now without any more human suffering and I will adopt it in a heartbit. Everything was tried in the past, any sort of palestinian autonomy ended up with thousand of dead israelis.

2. According to facts. All countries are based on recognized international borders as agreed upon. This is the basis of modern human law and order. Jews have lived on this land, and purchased lands on this territory legaly and willingly long before the UN resolution. You want to claim that every inch of land belonged to a certain part of the population? it's your right, but a lot of borders changed between WWI and WWII and afterwards, and you seem to be troubled only by a very particular one.

3. Palestinians should accept that a return to Haifa and Tel Aviv is not an option, and should first and first most build a governing body that isn't sponsoring nor perpetrating terror. Once that happens, the majority of Israeli's are more than open for solutions that would allow all of us the live our lives. No one knows how such a solution would look, but we all want that day to come.

BTW1 - It's a point I made to clarify that the two state solution only came about after Jordan lost the West Bank. Before that there was no call for a two state solution, but simply for the anahilation of the jewish state. And that call maybe went quite in the face of modern diplomacy but is still being taught at schools and appearing in Hamas and PA charters.

BTW2 - Your'e much less vocal about that criticism. Maybe theres a reason their border is blocked, perhaps it's because, I dont know, they are being controlled by a deranged terror group? just a thought.



Exactly, It was not, a lot of borders changed around the world post WWII and so did this one.
Click to expand...

1. Genocide is defined by the 1948 Genocide Act as any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.’

Israel know full well that if they were to kill every single Palestinian in one go they would not garner international support. That is why it has been a systematic process over a period of time.

It is also ironic that the genocide convention was introduced to prevent horrible things like the a holocaust happening again, yet the Jews of Israel have committed the same atrocities against another people. The Jews should know better.

2. My point is that there is no single people who can claim that land. It has been occupied by many. Therefore, it is wrong to suggest that land is solely for the Jews.

3. A return to Haifa and Tel Aviv may be unrealistic. But similarly they should not be pushed off the land they do have either, which what Israel are trying to do. The language used by Israeli politicians has been nothing short of genocidal. To eliminate, starve, dehumanise and displace all Palestinians from their land, in order to take the gas supplies off the coast of Gaza no doubt and move settlers in to the Gaza Strip.

You want to talk about governing bodies who perpetrate terror? Have a look at your own for it has committed the most heinous acts of the last 100 years. The Palestinians could ask you the same question. Come back to the negotiating table when you don’t have racist, far right, extremists in charge such as Ben Gvir and Smotrich , who was part of a proscribed terrorist organisation before becoming a policitician. The Irgun who killed thousands of Palestinians in 1948 were also a terrorist organisation. So your whole country is built on terrorism. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

BTW 1: you do realise what is being taught in Israeli schools? Teaching children to hate Arabs and want to kill them. Teaching your next generation to think fo Palestinians as lesser humans or not human at all. No wonder your IDF soldiers have committed such war crimes when they see Palestinians as less than human.

BTW 2: the border is controlled by Israel. So yes I agree, it is being controlled by a deranged terror group.
 
glazed said:
I don't buy that Israel is committing genocide. If they are then they are really bad at it. Hamas OTOH have it written into their charter.
I do buy that Israel is pursuing ethnic cleansing in Gaza though.
Click to expand...

What you buy and not buy is irrelevant, what we see with our own eyes is more relevant, the Bosnian genocide was far less in number than the Gaza one, yet was clearly considered genocide. Another thing, check the Likud charter, its the same as Hamas, except Hamas changed their to look more moderate, but not the Likud.
 
Giggsyking said:
So answer here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the US has declared Hamas a terrorist organization, and have been helping Israel to wipe them out, so any strategic asset of the US is a far game to be attacked by Hamas. Especially, if in that place are some of the chief strategists of US who are telling Israel how to effectively wipe out Hamas.

How that would help Hamas is another matter of course, but I do not think they have ever been great at strategic thinking.
 
MacabbiUnited said:
1. With all of Israel's weapons and military power, if it realy does hold a genocidel agenda (it doesn't).
Click to expand...

Oh but it does, The politicians in Israel say it openly, the civilians call for it and the military intentionally targets innocent, punish aid workers. The only thing restraining them is that they still need the West. Without the West Israel would be gone in a few years.
 
B. Munich said:
Again it doesn't matter what I believe, this is completely irrelevant.
Germany's relationship with Israel is of a very special kind due to the Holocaust that cost over 6 million Jewish lives.
In Germany, the support of Israel is a reason of state. Like it or not, it's just fact.

I don't think it's much different than the stance the UK, France or the US take.
Click to expand...
You live in a democracy. it matters what you think. You started from a position of "don't insult Germany so quickly" to a "Alas, we have no choice but to support Israel unconditionally, but also surely the people involved know better than you and I, despite history telling us otherwise all the time. we also had to support south African apartheid because reasons."

Have a fecking word with yourself on how much of your morals you really want to sacrifice on the altar of fatalistic patriotism.
 
Quoted from the other thread cause I think it is more suitable for here:

Kaos said:
That's precisely my point. A (fair) resolution to the Palestinian situation weakens Iran's moral and power leverage, and is a path that benefits everyone (except the Mullahs and Israeli supremacists).
Click to expand...

What does a fair solution (that does not involve removing Jews from Israel) look for Palestinians that they a) are ready to accept and b) Israel is ready to accept? Cause it get mentioned many times, but no one explains what is that solution.

Ehud Barak gave as a fair solution as it can be in 2000. He pretty much accepted every demand that Palestinians/Araft had and was ready to sign it, only for Arafat in the last hour to decide to not sign the deal and not proposing a counter-deal. That directly caused Barak to lose power and for an extremist (Ariel Sharon) to gain power.

Now, since 2000 the situation in terrain has changed quite a bit, and the balance of power between Israel and Palestine has massively shifted even more in favour of the former, with Palestinians being divided into 2 camps that essentially fight each other and have separate governments etc. I think anyone knows that whatever deal Israel might give won't be as good as that in 2000, and Palestinians didn't even accept that one.
 
Revan said:
Quoted from the other thread cause I think it is more suitable for here:



What does a fair solution (that does not involve removing Jews from Israel) look for Palestinians that they a) are ready to accept and b) Israel is ready to accept? Cause it get mentioned many times, but no one explains what is that solution.

Ehud Barak gave as a fair solution as it can be in 2000. He pretty much accepted every demand that Palestinians/Araft had and was ready to sign it, only for Arafat in the last hour to decide to not sign the deal and not proposing a counter-deal. That directly caused Barak to lose power and for an extremist (Ariel Sharon) to gain power.

Now, since 2000 the situation in terrain has changed quite a bit, and the balance of power between Israel and Palestine has massively shifted even more in favour of the former, with Palestinians being divided into 2 camps that essentially fight each other and have separate governments etc. I think anyone knows that whatever deal Israel might give won't be as good as that in 2000, and Palestinians didn't even accept that one.
Click to expand...
NO.
 
Revan said:
Quoted from the other thread cause I think it is more suitable for here:



What does a fair solution (that does not involve removing Jews from Israel) look for Palestinians that they a) are ready to accept and b) Israel is ready to accept? Cause it get mentioned many times, but no one explains what is that solution.

Ehud Barak gave as a fair solution as it can be in 2000. He pretty much accepted every demand that Palestinians/Araft had and was ready to sign it, only for Arafat in the last hour to decide to not sign the deal and not proposing a counter-deal. That directly caused Barak to lose power and for an extremist (Ariel Sharon) to gain power.

Now, since 2000 the situation in terrain has changed quite a bit, and the balance of power between Israel and Palestine has massively shifted even more in favour of the former, with Palestinians being divided into 2 camps that essentially fight each other and have separate governments etc. I think anyone knows that whatever deal Israel might give won't be as good as that in 2000, and Palestinians didn't even accept that one.
Click to expand...

Again with the 2000 deal lie. FFS, how many times will have to read it.

Also asking for a fair solution that doesnt remove jews while palestinians are bring removed as we speak. But you dont even mention it. Speaking of fairness on compromises
 
Revan said:
What is the fair solution for you then? 'Jews leaving from where they came from?' Nope, it ain't gonna happen.
Click to expand...
There's a sea of options in between the "fair" deal in 2000 (with no right of return for Palestinian refugees and Israel giving the Palestinians arrid land as compensation for the fertile and resource rich land they had stolen) and "all Jews must leave Israel."
 
Halftrack said:
There's a sea of options in between the "fair" deal in 2000 (with no right of return for Palestinian refugees and Israel giving the Palestinians arrid land as compensation for the fertile and resource rich land they had stolen) and "all Jews must leave Israel."
Click to expand...
They had the right to return to the independent Palestine, just not to Israel (except 100-150k or so).
 
Halftrack said:
There's a sea of options in between the "fair" deal in 2000 (with no right of return for Palestinian refugees and Israel giving the Palestinians arrid land as compensation for the fertile and resource rich land they had stolen) and "all Jews must leave Israel."
Click to expand...

Has this position ever been argued by anyone notable including the extreme elements against Israel and the ones who don't believe it should exist as a state?
 
B. Munich said:
Can you elaborate why Germany is accused of genocide? What is Germany doing differently than the UK or US?
Never heard of that except for the Holocaust of course.
Click to expand...
It's because after the US, Germany is biggest supplier of arms to Israel.
 
Revan said:
Quoted from the other thread cause I think it is more suitable for here:

What does a fair solution (that does not involve removing Jews from Israel) look for Palestinians that they a) are ready to accept and b) Israel is ready to accept? Cause it get mentioned many times, but no one explains what is that solution.

Ehud Barak gave as a fair solution as it can be in 2000. He pretty much accepted every demand that Palestinians/Araft had and was ready to sign it, only for Arafat in the last hour to decide to not sign the deal and not proposing a counter-deal. That directly caused Barak to lose power and for an extremist (Ariel Sharon) to gain power.

Now, since 2000 the situation in terrain has changed quite a bit, and the balance of power between Israel and Palestine has massively shifted even more in favour of the former, with Palestinians being divided into 2 camps that essentially fight each other and have separate governments etc. I think anyone knows that whatever deal Israel might give won't be as good as that in 2000, and Palestinians didn't even accept that one.
Click to expand...
One that's in line with what the international community consensus is - in line with the 1967 borders, ending the occupation and illegal settlement colonisation of the west bank and East Jerusalem and for Israel to finally declare its borders. Its hardly an egregious claim. This whole idea that Barak offered the Palestinian's a 'fair' deal in 2000 is a contentious one at best, especially when you take in the quite frankly ridiculous stipulations that would heavily fragment Palestinian territory into a series of loosely connected Bantustans, deprive the Palestinians of any form of trade, transportation and security autonomy. Israeli former foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami went on record to say he himself would have rejected the deal had he been a Palestinian.

Revan said:
They had the right to return to the independent Palestine, just not to Israel (except 100-150k or so).
Click to expand...

An independent Palestine the Israelis are adamant on not coming to fruition. On what planet is it palatable for any Jewish person on this planet to be able to claim Israeli citizenship and a home despite having no traceable link to the land, whereas an ethnically cleansed Palestinian with tangible claim to the land (deeds and all) isn't given the same courtesy. There's something fundamentally and morally wrong with that status quo.
 
Kaos said:
One that's in line with what the international community consensus is - in line with the 1967 borders, ending the occupation and illegal settlement colonisation of the west bank and East Jerusalem and for Israel to finally declare its borders. Its hardly an egregious claim. This whole idea that Barak offered the Palestinian's a 'fair' deal in 2000 is a contentious one at best, especially when you take in the quite frankly ridiculous stipulations that would heavily fragment Palestinian territory into a series of loosely connected Bantustans, deprive the Palestinians of any form of trade, transportation and security autonomy. Israeli former foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami went on record to say he himself would have rejected the deal had he been a Palestinian.
Click to expand...

Oh, it is not what Palestinians wanted, but it went damn close to what you are describing. 100% of territory of Gaza, and 90% of the West Bank, parts of East Jerusalem, custodians of Al Aksa (including having the flag there), and of course, that would mean Israel defining the border.

Knowing the balance of power, it was as fair as it can get. It is also something that Palestinians will unfortunately never get, cause any possible future deal (if it ever happens, at this stage, it most likely won't), is gonna be far worse than that.

The main reasons Arafat did not accept the deal were not cause of land. It was for a) Israel (rightly so) insisted that the deal must be a final deal, which didn't satisfy Arafat's grand illusion of the entire historical Palestine being in control of Arabs, 2) the right of return, see below:

Kaos said:
An independent Palestine the Israelis are adamant on not coming to fruition. On what planet is it palatable for any Jewish person on this planet to be able to claim Israeli citizenship and a home despite having no traceable link to the land, whereas an ethnically cleansed Palestinian with tangible claim to the land (deeds and all) isn't given the same courtesy. There's something fundamentally and morally wrong with that status quo.
Click to expand...

Wars have consequences. While unfair, it is the truth. The modern borders of most states are a consequence of some war that sometime happened. when someone got someone else's land. Pretty much all the Palestinians who demand the right of return, have not been born there. For the vast majority, their parents have not been born there. It is a bit like Germans demanding the right of return in Konigsberg. Or Albanians to Southern Serbia. Or Albanians to Greece. Or Greeks to Albania. Or Greeks to Turkey. Or Turks to Greece. Or Hungarians to Serbia. Or Arabs/Indians to Zanzibar. I can go on for another hour but I guess you probably get my point.

You can demand it all you want, but in the geopolitical reality, there is no chance whatsoever that it will happen.

So Israel, decided that all Jews can return to Israel. A newly created Palestine could have similarly decided that all Palestinians have the right to return to Palestine. But of course, not to Israel.
 
Pretty insane that a massacre as heinous and seemingly deliberate as the one at Al-Shifa is getting swept under the carpet as just another fact of war. The dehumanisation of the Palestinians and mental gymnastics to accommodate Israel's image and justifications for these crimes really is at a surreal level. It really does make you question what the threshold is for when the usual apologists decide enough is enough. Though thankfully for the Israelis it appears Iran's retaliatory strikes to the embassy bombing has taken front and centre in the narrative, disguising the aftermath of this as well as the settler massacres in the west bank.
 
Have they stopped counting the dead? People are being killed every day and we've been listening to 30-32k killed for what it seems weeks now.
 
maniak said:
Have they stopped counting the dead? People are being killed every day and we've been listening to 30-32k killed for what it seems weeks now.
Click to expand...

They hit officially 30k by the end of february, so 50 days ago. 100 a day being conservative would be 35k + 10k unaccounted (?). And +70k injured
I assume that when everything is done, 75k-100k deads and will see the displaced. It will depend on what is going on in rafah
 
B. Munich said:
Seriously? This happened in cold war times back in the 80s. I'm sure you also know that the GDR supported the ANC at that time. Thus it was mainly having a common enemy, your enemy is also my enemy.

World politics are never black and white and you sometimes you have to make alliances you rather wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Who gives a damm when it happened? Your main point was I should accept what the German government are saying because they clearly have people more intelligent and well informed than us making decisions. I gave you multiple examples of deplorable outlooks by western governments and asked you whether I should have just accepted it back then?

Ah yep the white South Africans are subjugating people of my skin colour on my continent. The Germans have told me it's OK though and are still supporting the whites. And they're still supporting the whites even after the UK and USA have finally opened their eyes.

Idiotic me should have told myself at the time that this obvious injustice was OK. Because the white man in Germany has people more intelligent than myself making the decisions. Thank God for that.

I asked you if you'd read the comments of the person you called a terrorist. You have not. You're basing your decision on a call to authority. I asked you if Ehud Barak had been banned from Germany for saying similar. You haven't bothered to answer.

You then tell me Germany must know what they're doing and have the fecking gall to tell me, a Black African, that supporting the apartheid whites was just politics, immediately after telling me I've got to trust the authority of the Germans and even after I said their support carried on even beyond the support of the rest of the West.

How patronising.
 
maniak said:
Have they stopped counting the dead? People are being killed every day and we've been listening to 30-32k killed for what it seems weeks now.
Click to expand...

It's around 34k now, the missing could be anything from 8k-13k. You have thousands under the rubble and every few days mass graves are discovered. The latter group consists mostly of people who have been summarily executed and buried by the IOF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.