Yep. Which I'm not. Like I said, I'm not blind. Just a few days ago I agreed here with someone who said that Israel is a racist country. It is. But there's a whole new gap between that and much of the dirt thrown at it right now.
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Yep. Which I'm not. Like I said, I'm not blind. Just a few days ago I agreed here with someone who said that Israel is a racist country. It is. But there's a whole new gap between that and much of the dirt thrown at it right now.
Because we are being fired at from the homes of those poor civilians. I'm sure you're already familiar with this argument, and that you find it somewhat more convincing.
If you're not blind then try, in your head, to be this man (If I'm not wrong he lost his four children):
It's terrible. And if anyone in Israel targetting his children, or not bothering to warn them before an attack, they should sit in jail.
but Israel has and must do something to stop those rockets.
but Israel has and must do something to stop those rockets.
OK, I think there are other paths to deal with terrrorism. Even the British for all we complain about them drew the line at indiscriminate killing of the civilian population that harboured the IRA. I think killing children and claiming you have to even thought it hurts Israel (yet you haven't explained how) is quite hollow.
The British systematically knocked on doors and raided houses in Northern Ireland. It was harsh for the innocent and infringed their rights, but it was a lot more humane than indiscriminate killing.
True. But Israel isn't willing to pay the price it will take with the lives of its own soldiers. And I'm fine with it.
OK, that's fair enough. How many soldiers has Israel lost on the ground in Gaza?
What gives Israel the right to bomb Gaza and kill hundreds/thousands of innocent civilians then? Is that really going to stop these rockets that lets be honest, Israel has plenty of defence for and its pretty much a non issue for you. Why is it one rule for you, and another rule for others. What makes 1 Israeli life more than a Palestinian? So contradictory.
I'm afraid that as long as you choose to be an enemy from within you will have to settle for little gain at best.
Disingenuous.
I dont recall the IRA firing thousands of rockets at the UK, or calling for it'd total destruction.
I think you can be sure that if that were the case, the RAF would certainly have been involved.
Not sure what attacking children playing on the beach has go to do with those rockets.
Clinton could not have been clearer than that:
"In the short to medium term, Hamas can inflict terrible public relations damage on Israel by forcing it to kill Palestinian civilians to counter Hamas," he added.
Hamas had a "strategy designed to force Israel to kill their own (Palestinian) civilians so the rest of the world will condemn them," while Israel could not "look like fools" by not responding to the heavy missile attacks.
--------------
Hamas forces Israel to retaliate. Now go on with doing your bit.
There was an organised and prolonged bombing campaign both in Northern Ireland and in Britain, causing as many deaths as Hamas. There was even a bomb attack on Thatcher. So you are wrong.
I think it was something like 6 in the very limited ground operation 2006. Since then, we haven't really gone in. If we do go in seriously, It will surely be dozens.
Yes, but then you were warned for calling people beasts and the rest of the crowd here calling Israel Nazis, cancer, pigs and Gestapo (sorry if I missed other titles) wasn't.
Where has he said "I think its the right thing to do?"
Propaganda. We don't have to accept being fired at just because we've developed protective systems.
What gives Hamas the right to fire rockets at Israel? Is that really going to give them what they want?
I don't have all the answers. All I know is we can't let this thing go on and and on.
If I follow you around on a night out flicking you for several hours, and you in retaliation punch me so many times that I get brain damage, there's only one person who committed a crime. The old 'but he deserved it because he was flicking me' argument would not get you very far with the judge.
The forcing bit suggests exacly that.
6, what was the context were they conducting raids?
Neither do I. But mistakes do happen.
What? It is the truth, I was arguing with HIS analogy. Calm down. I never said you have to accept anything.
It was a previous operation to try and halt the (far shorter range) rocket fire. Started with air strikes just like now and continued with a ground operation, I suppose moving between houses and searching for launchers and tunnels.
There were actually ten dead soldiers at the end of the operation, now sure how many in the ground operation. Maybe all of them. It should also be said that Hamas terrorists rarely engaged in combat. If they did, or they do, there would be many more fatalities. Which is why we really don't want to do this.
No they wouldn't. The British learned their lesson in the 1920s.
Even the King of England came out and condemned the crown forces for using heavy handed tactics in the 1920s.
Proof that the only reason Hamas continue to fire is to kill their own people.
OK, my issue with that and the point I was making that is that maybe the preceeding air strikes set the tone for how the raids would be received. If you focussed on the aggressors only that would soon become apparent?
Quite amazing how the Iron Dome created a new line of argument here. Rockets on civilian populations are harmless. Does any of you want thousands of rockets raining on rooftops nearby? Do they have new laws of engagement, according to which battles are held using only weapons the enemy has full protection from to make things proportional?
You are off your collective biased mind. 3-4 million people in bomb-shelters is a non issue. Israelis should apologize for not dying enough.
You are off your collective biased mind. 3-4 million people in bomb-shelters is a non issue. Israelis should apologize for not dying enough.
Nobody said rockets are harmess, just that there might be better ways to combat them.
As for your last line, I think you need to take a break from the thread for a bit.
So it's actually Hamas that indirectly killed those 4 children yesterday not Israel. You guys are insane.
Apparently it wasn't even them but Syrian mercenaries ; )
Just imagine the Hamas' frustration, all this tunnel digging and smuggling of thousands of rockets and they manage to kill only one Jew. Could you please not run to your bomb shelters too fast.
If I keep dancing round you saying 'punch me then, go on', and you then punch me, it is not me that will get in trouble with the law. You can't then go crying off saying 'wah wah, he made me do it so really it's his fault'
My goodness what's with all this crap analogies ..
So it's actually Hamas that indirectly killed those 4 children yesterday not Israel. You guys are insane.
When you gonna realise that innocent Palestinian death is the only weapon Hamas have left.
OK, if that is true, is it not the saddest prediciment imaginable for an oppressed people?
The Hamas urgently needs to work on a new foreign policy which will once and for all exclude rockets and kidnappings and instead give diplomacy a chance.
Agreed.
Romans named Judea as "Palestina" because the Philistines and the Palestinians of today are an infusion of people coming from southern Arabia, but that area was constantly invaded and occupied by different people from Assyria, Babylonia, Roman, Ottoman, probably more.
Israel does not kill civilians "indiscriminately". It wouldn't serve any purpose, and in fact would be counter-productive.