Israel - Palestine Conflict. Mod note in OP - updated 1st August

wes · 30-07-2014 11:39PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

If today Hamas laid down their arms what would be the result?

Peace, no?

You mean like they were before the most recent violence, when they were actively stopping other groups launching rocket attacks, and in return were still under siege by Israel. Seriously, the fact don't support your assertion at all.

Manic Moran · 30-07-2014 11:40PM

Joshua J wrote: »

Bolded the important bits. Convenient for the DOD that killing has little to no effect on soldiers. It's the training I guess. But civilian

Oddly, correct.

The main book on the subject is by a Professor Grossman, the book's called "On Killing". I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions at the end of the book, but he goes on to discuss the various training requirements from the psychological aspect.

And why wouldn't the DoD be the sponsor of an investigation as to why soldiers are killing themselves? Who would you expect, the Sisters of Mary?

Have you had your head in the sand? Pretty much everyone condemned Russia for the land grab. It did expose some startling hypocrisy by the US, condemning Russia, while giving Israel a free pass.

Not that the condemnation has made a damned bit of difference. I refer back to my earlier statement about doing something concrete as opposed to symbolic.

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:40PM

wes wrote: »

No evidence of Human Shields being used:

So uh, where is it "Hamas" launch their rockets from? & store their munitions?

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:41PM

wes wrote: »

You mean like they were before the most recent violence, when they were actively stopping other groups launching rocket attacks, and in return were still under siege by Israel. Seriously, the fact don't support your assertion at all.

Hmmm so if they were "under siege" before this recent conflict what is it called now?

wes · 30-07-2014 11:42PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

So uh, where is it "Hamas" launch their rockets from? & store their munitions?

You need to back up your claims, not me.

I backed up claims, that no evidence of Human Shields being used has been found.

wes · 30-07-2014 11:43PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

Hmmm so if they were "under siege" before this recent conflict what is it called now?

So you deny that there was siege? Going to deny that the Earth is round for your encore?

Tuisceanch · 30-07-2014 11:43PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I think you're getting off topic now. :O)

Yes it's difficult to answer my question isn't it? Never mind let's just pretend that wasn't a topic being discussed if it makes you feel happy.

kumate_champ07 · 30-07-2014 11:44PM

is there video footage of Hamas using human shields, even photos? some evidence would be nice

Tuisceanch · 30-07-2014 11:46PM

wes wrote: »

N

Again, with that ridiculous term, that exists solely to justify the murder of civilians.

I'll think you'll find he's decided it's off topic. He seems to think himself quite the intellectual dandy.

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:47PM

wes wrote: »

You need to back up your claims, not me.

I backed up claims, that no evidence of Human Shields being used has been found.

Let me see...I dont have a treasure trove of internet links/propaganda which folks believe and post to "back up" their so called statements.

How about this though (bit of the old common sense);

For ever civilian Israel kills they might as well recruit another 4 Hamas fighters, why would they intentionally do that? I mean realistically,...do they want to continue wasting their resources on this conflict? Realistically now...not in never never land...

Also, again with the killing of civilians, obviously the phrase "war crimes" would come into Israels thought process? would they actively target civilians, knowing it would bring them lower and lower in the rest of the world (UN) etc...ending up in a trial at the Hague? Why would they risk that?

You know common sense right? It;s not found on any of them video's you see online.

Tail Docker · 30-07-2014 11:48PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I saw someone describe this conflict quite perfectly the other day.

"If one side laid down their arms and dismantled their defenses there would be peace. (Gaza/Hamas)

If the other side laid down their arms and dismantled their defenses they would be destroyed (civilians included). (Israel)"

Now we are going to get the comments regarding collateral damage/loss of civilian life due to Israel's bombings etc.

First point to make: in a country less than the size of England's Isle Of White; With a population of 1.8million are you honestly telling me, "the people" these civilians who are unfortunately collateral damage don't know who the Hamas operatives are?

What's more, what is this 1.8million strong population doing about stopping rocket attacks being launched from their apartment blocks, their streets, their gardens towards Israel, bearing in mind if Israel didn't have the famous "iron dome" the vast majority of those rocket attacks would result in Israeli civilians being maimed and killed.

Second point to make: Yes I can somewhat agree with the fact that Israel took land that was disputed by many claims saying who it belongs to. So the correct course of action from a "humanitarian" point of view, (as so many ave now taken because of civilian loss of life, during this latest conflict) where is the sense in launching all those rockets, which I think, if we are being honest with each other and ourselves we can agree have no realistic guidance system.

Seriously guys, look what Russia did with Crimea. Where is the outrage from people about that? What because it's not "holy" land it should be treated with ls contempt than what Israel did in that region? Maybe it;s because civilian casualties are mounting up (in Crimea) people are less concerned? They are mounting up elsewhere in Ukraine, some form Ukrainian army shells, and others form Russians artillery shelling.

I think it;s very easy for people to watch videos of dead children etc and suddenyl stand up for one side in any conflict, however just remember to be realistic about conflicts and war;

The first casualty is always truth.

Man, you said a mouthful right there. Probably a mouthful of burger..

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:48PM

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Yes it's difficult to answer my question isn't it? Never mind let's just pretend that wasn't a topic being discussed if it makes you feel happy.

I'm discussing what is actually going on, you;re trying to discuss my own personal perception of a non-specific word use.

That's off topic.

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:50PM

wes wrote: »

So you deny that there was siege? Going to deny that the Earth is round for your encore?

I;d like to know how you would define a Siege.

JJayoo · 30-07-2014 11:52PM

Fcuking America parties, terrified that by going against Israel in any way they will lose the support of the Jewish community in the states for further elections. Israel can pretty much do anything without repercussion.

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:53PM

I don't condone the killing of civilians. However I can see why, if your enemy is firing form positions in highly populated areas, you firing back may cause civilian casualties.

Or are Israel supposed to ring the civilians tell them to evac and when they do and Israels enemy slip out like civilians with those who are genuinely evacuating and start firing form another area..

same again?

Because thats common sense, no?

If that isnt using human shields I dont know what is.

Tuisceanch · 30-07-2014 11:54PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I'm discussing what is actually going on, you;re trying to discuss my own personal perception of a non-specific word use.

That's off topic.

You're discussing what you imagine is going on and are unable to use the words human being when describing the victims. That's quite an insight into your mentality. I only offered you a more humanistic way of expressing your view point even thought I don't support tour assertions. But you knew that and just wanted to deflect attention from the uncomfortable truth that you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the Palestinians as fellow human beings. So don't be a smarty pants as you haven't got the wit to pull it off.

wes · 30-07-2014 11:55PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

Let me see...I dont have a treasure trove of internet links/propaganda which folks believe and post to "back up" their so called statements.

Care to prove that my sources are propaganda. Come one explain how a report from the independent.co.uk is propaganda.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

How about this though (bit of the old common sense);

Now, now, what you clearly mean is nonsense you can't provide any evidence for.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

For ever civilian Israel kills they might as well recruit another 4 Hamas fighters, why would they intentionally do that?

The same reason Hamas fires rockets, is that sometimes there are stupid people who end up in charge, and do things that go against there own best interests. See the most recent invasion of Iraq as a example.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I mean realistically,...do they want to continue wasting their resources on this conflict? Realistically now...not in never never land...

Realistically, we have multiple examples of civilians being deliberately killed. Read the thread, plenty of examples.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

Also, again with the killing of civilians, obviously the phrase "war crimes" would come into Israels thought process? would they actively target civilians, knowing it would bring them lower and lower in the rest of the world (UN) etc...ending up in a trial at the Hague? Why would they risk that?

There is 0 risk due to the US UNSC veto. Also, the only people who end up at war crimes trials are former Eastern European and African dictators, and not US allies who will be protected.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

You know common sense right? It;s not found on any of them video's you see online.

Denial of reality isn't common sense. Common sense is looking at the available evidence and coming to conclusion, and not just claiming you are right on the basis of "common sense", when what your spouting is a complete mockery of the term common sense.

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:57PM

Tuisceanch wrote: »

You're discussing what you imagine is going on and are unable to use the words human being when describing the victims. That's quite an insight into your mentality. I only offered you a more humanistic way of expressing your view point even thought I don't support tour assertions. But you knew that and just wanted to deflect attention from the uncomfortable truth that you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the Palestinians as fellow human beings. So don't be a smarty pants as you haven't got the wit to pull it off.

They can be Palestinians or any other type of faith, when civilians are hit by military in a conflict the general term is "collateral damage".

I think sir, it is you who are putting too much emphasis on who these people are. Human being or Palestinians, which comes first?

wes · 30-07-2014 11:58PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I;d like to know how you would define a Siege.

Why would I answer your question, when you haven't done the courtesy of answering mine? So, again denying the existence of a siege on Gaza. So, what next that birds are really aliens spying on us?

Contributor 2013 · 30-07-2014 11:58PM

Realistically, we have multiple examples of civilians being deliberately killed. Read the thread, plenty of examples.

[/QUOTE]

Is that even what I meant? lol, this is jokes.

wes · 30-07-2014 11:59PM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

Is that even what I meant? lol, this is jokes.

Your making even less sense now.......

Contributor 2013 · 31-07-2014 12:01AM

wes wrote: »

Denial of reality isn't common sense. Common sense is looking at the available evidence and coming to conclusion, and not just claiming you are right on the basis of "common sense", when what your spouting is a complete mockery of the term common sense.

So you see a few videos online and you read a few articles and automatically you are the perveyor of fact in a conflict going on, i would argue longer than you have been born.

Regardless of that, here is how it stands today.

If Hamas lays down their arms, civilian casualties (on their side at least) would before 0 from here on wards.

Is that right or wrong?

wes · 31-07-2014 12:04AM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

So you see a few videos online and you read a few articles and automatically you are the perveyor of fact in a conflict going on, i would argue longer than you have been born.

My age is irrelevant, and your dismissal of facts just shows how nonsensical your position is. BTW, you have yet to provide any facts to back up your claims, odd that.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

Regardless of that, here is how it stands today.

No, your version of events has no basis in this reality or any other, excepting the one between your ears.

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

If Hamas lays down their arms, civilian casualties (on their side at least) would before 0 from here on wards.

Is that right or wrong?

Its completely wrong, as we see from the West Bank, where settlements expand, and the IDF still murder Palestinians on a regular basis.

Still amazing, that you claims to be right, in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Get back to me, when you can prove a single thing you claim, until then everything you say should be dismissed for the nonsense that it is.

Tuisceanch · 31-07-2014 12:05AM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

They can be Palestinians or any other type of faith, when civilians are hit by military in a conflict the general term is "collateral damage".

Palestinians is not a faith system. I presume that must be a typo. Collateral Damage whether it's a standardised military term or not doesn't mean you have to use it. You do have that choice surely?

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I think sir, it is you who are putting too much emphasis on who these people are. Human being or Palestinians, which comes first?

Well that,I'm sorry to say just sounds both nonsensical and a tad crazy.Perhaps another typo?

31-07-2014 12:07AM

Their ^^^^ contributions are giving me a headache.

G'night all. Here's hoping that we dont all wake up to more heartbreaking news.

eeepaulo · 31-07-2014 12:10AM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I don't condone the killing of civilians. However I .........

That is exactly what you do with every word you post on here

RustyNut · 31-07-2014 01:43AM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

I don't condone the killing of civilians. However I can see why, if your enemy is firing form positions in highly populated areas, you firing back may cause civilian casualties.

Or are Israel supposed to ring the civilians tell them to evac and when they do and Israels enemy slip out like civilians with those who are genuinely evacuating and start firing form another area..

same again?

Because thats common sense, no?

If that isnt using human shields I dont know what is.

This sort of thing might be.

pedro1234 · 31-07-2014 02:06AM

The comparison between Netanyahu and Hitler is entirely valid. Like Hitler, Netanyahu treats his perceived enemies as something less than human that need to be exterminated. He is also a genocidal ethnic cleanser.

Israel has one of the most well equipped armies in the world and it is using all its might to crush a defenseless people that Israel has penned into the largest concentration camp the world has ever seen.

Rockets that are totally ineffectual, and in any event, the people of Gaza are living under an illegal military occupation so they have a right to defend themselves. When you compare the death tolls of both "countries", it isn't war or self defense, its a massacre, plain and simple.

The vast majority of Israelis are of European descent, from the Caucasus, they have no ties whatsoever to Palestine. And even if they did they have the same right to that land as the Irish do to northern Spain, which is to say they have none.

Netanyahu has point blank refused to allow the Palestinians their own state, the best he offered them was apartheid South Africa style Bantustans where Israel would still control them militarily.

Israel was founded on Zionsim and is therefore an illegitimate state.

Hamas do not represent Palestinian society, the Palestinians voted with guns to their heads. That is not democracy.

Israel and Hamas are as bad as each other and need to be stopped, but the fact remains that Hamas were created out of a defensive need. The Zionists have been the aggressors since before the illegal land steal in 1948, which established the Israeli state. I detail this in detail here: lawsonmulvihill.com/2014/07/24/oped-the-palestinian-conflict

Attempting to focus on Hamas is missing the point completely. This issue goes back before the creation of Hamas, and even before the creation of Israel. Israel are conveniently using Hamas as an excuse to commit genocide.

If Hamas downed weapons in the morning, Israel would not stop - they would not want to give Hamas a chance at regrouping and rebuilding. Israel will not stop until the Palestinians are wiped out and the land is theirs. These are not the actions of a state which is defending itself. These are the actions of a state which is extending its borders and stealing land; an aggressor.

The "OMG ROCKETS" defense is extremely weak and quite frankly, an uneducated opinion with regards to this conflict. You should actually try educating yourself before speaking that weak minded position. There are plenty of books on the subject. Read them before embarrassing yourself in the future. Stop regurgitating one liners from the US Media.

NotASheeple · 31-07-2014 02:12AM

Contributor 2013 wrote: »

when civilians are hit by military in a conflict the general term is "collateral damage".

No, collateral damage is the default apologist term.

Ardillaun · 31-07-2014 02:30AM

No matter how appalling the situation, there are always people who give hope for a better future:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-gaza-11-members-of-a-palestinian-family-are-killed-in-a-single-strike/2014/07/30/fd56590a-1831-11e4-9e3b-7f2f110c6265_story.html

Israel - Palestine Conflict. **Mod note in OP - updated 1st August**

Comments

Israel - Palestine Conflict. Mod note in OP - updated 1st August