Israel at war

xmontrealer

Well-known member
May 23, 2005
10,043
7,424
113
Does anybody really believe that if Israel had no fuel due to being under attack, and the Israel hospitals generators were running out of fuel, but the IDF had substantial fuel reserves, that the IDF would withhold that fuel from the hospitals?

Inconceivable.

But not for Hamas. How do they live with themselves and justify their twisted sense of morality? How can they see what is going in in their own hospitals and not provide fuel for the generators?

That is why they can never be trusted if they are the "elected" government of the Palestinians in any 2-state solution.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,419
4,628
113
It sounds a lot like genocide you are advocating but it can not be genocide because you are a progressive so let's call it Butlercide.
People reap what they sow. The Palestinians don't want peace and to make a better life for their kids. This is the result.

This displacement isn't any different than the migrants crisis started in Syria. Or continued from Libya. Its a part of the world we live in. They aren't any better than the Tamil Tigers. Guess where they are now.
 

Not getting younger

Well-known member
Jun 29, 2022
4,555
2,458
113
No I don't think so. I think that is the point of the protest, to point out or create awareness about anything they feel is anti-Palestinian, or racist, especially amongst a specific community that is expected to be so. What they should not do however, is to engage in violence or as you say intimidatory behaviour. Peacefully, holding a protest and attempting to send a message is fine. Also those areas are not 100% Jewish anyway. All kinds of people live there.
So if a bunch of say Truckers who might contain a few extremist or haters organized a rally. You’d have nothing to say, and no concerns
.

If a bunch of Khalistan supporters intentionally planned a route through Brampton to protest the killing of Nijar rather than Queens Park you wouldn’t say squat or have concerns?

I call BS on both.
 
Last edited:

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
Why do you think him and his ilk are all desperately posting propaganda worldwide. They know this time they are about to lose more land permanently. And that most of the world doesn't give a shit its going to happen.
They overplayed their hand.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
Um, I 100% support Israel but the endgame is going to be the removal of most Palestinians. It may take 50 years but its going to happen, with a small amount assimilating.
Hard to say for sure. 50 years is a lot of administrations and policies.

Having said that, Hamas' attacks only make Israeli's resolve to survive stronger.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
The one note samba.
As valid and accurate a point as always.

As long as you keep hiding from admitting reality. I'll keep playing the note so people can keep seeing your cowardice.

Here's another one for you:

How do you think this plays out such that Hamas and Gazans are ahead of the game?
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
This is your paradise.
This is what Hamas and you knew would happen when they attacked on Oct. 7. Yet you still supported it. This is the paradise that you approved of.

Unless of course you condemn the Oct. 7 attack as an act of terrorism.

That picture is YOUR paradise frank. You are the one promoting the genocide of Gazans/Palestinians.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
I have repeatedly said both sides need to be taken to the Hague for targeting civilians.
Correct, you keep saying that.

More accurately one could say that:

frank repeatedly continues to deny that Oct. 7 was a terrorist attack and refuses to condemn the violence inflicted on Israeli civilians.
 
Last edited:

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,447
9,986
113
Toronto
Does anybody really believe that if Israel had no fuel due to being under attack, and the Israel hospitals generators were running out of fuel, but the IDF had substantial fuel reserves, that the IDF would withhold that fuel from the hospitals?

Inconceivable.

But not for Hamas. How do they live with themselves and justify their twisted sense of morality? How can they see what is going in in their own hospitals and not provide fuel for the generators?
Hopefully enough of the Gazan people will come to realize the perpetrators of the suffering they are going through is none other than Hamas. It would be nice to see a civilian uprising. Hopefully Israel keeps dropping leaflets to inform the Gazans of the truth behind their plight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xmontrealer

DinkleMouse

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2022
1,435
1,760
113
Correct me if I am wrong, Ihaven't read the "rules of war" in a while but if a combatant uses a civilian structure or hospital, etc. for a military prupose it can be designated as an acceptable target.
IIRC Ukraine got accused of this when they put anti tank weponry near a hospital (or something like that) and Russia hit the hospital with artillery and was admonished of this because Ukraine had made the area into a military site.
I will look it up later, I'm late for a dinner.
It's not that simple. There is no "but they started it" doctrine in the rules of war.

There are 3 considerations: proportional proportionality analysis (yes, it's a reductive name, take it up with the lawyers), non-reciprocity, self-defense. These come from the 2 primary statutes: the Geneva Conventions governing the treatment of victims and the Hague Conventions governing the conduct of armed forces. The armed forces in question, be they Israel or Hamas, do not need to ratify for the Conventions to apply; they are universal.

1. Doctrine of Non-Reciprocity

It is unlawful to attack any protected (i.e. protected under the Geneva convention - schools, hospitals, etc) target merely out of revenge or lust for battle.

2. Self-Defense

Attacks against a protected target in response to an active and ongoing threat which is clear and present, even if the attack is pre-emptive, are lawful.

3. Proportional Proportionality Analysis

Any action with defined military objectives where the savings of lives and materiel as a result of said action exceed the loss of life and materiel are lawful (note that for something like a hospital one must consider ongoing losses caused by the loss of life-saving personnel and equipment).
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,419
4,628
113
I know this will be too complicated for the trained seals.

View attachment 270057
The so called civilian support outside of Gaza is tiny. And a bunch of useful idiots at best and anti semites at worst.

For the Palis wars have failed, infatas have failed, terror has failed, BDS has failed, appeals to the UN have failed. Even appeals now to fellow Muslims fail except for those who would use them for their own ends, and discard them when convenient.

We need a betting pool now for how many miles of land the new border will be in.
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
76,141
86,606
113
The so called civilian support outside of Gaza is tiny. And a bunch of useful idiots at best and anti semites at worst.

For the Palis wars have failed, infatas have failed, terror has failed, BDS has failed, appeals to the UN have failed. Even appeals now to fellow Muslims fail except for those who would use them for their own ends, and discard them when convenient.

We need a betting pool now for how many miles of land the new border will be in.
Civilian support for the Gazans and Palestinians in the West is clearly massive. But most of it is performative. University students going to rallies and carrying signs, etc. It's not effective unless those people can gain control of major Western governments.

 
Last edited:
Toronto Escorts