and should be acknowledged that violence has been existing on both sides centuries, not 1947...the attempt of annihilating Jews didn't start with Hamas...the refusal to recognize a Jewish state came as early as the Balfour declaration....Arabs rejected the 2 state proposal...Why is there so much resilience to a Jewish state?There are plenty of massacres by Jews as well. And yes, the Jews got the upper hand in the conflict, and started instituting racist and apartheid policies. So they are being rightfully accused of being a racist and apartheid state.
Here you will find both Arab and Jewish massacres pre-Israel. A screenshot below as well.
List of killings and massacres in Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
View attachment 272780
Israel at war
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
The Israelis are taking a different approach this time. What you urge on them is the approach they took in the past, which as you acknowledge, would be advice only the insane would take.
You don't understand what a war crime is, despite the attempts of many to explain it to you. On your definition, Allied bombing of German factories, or the bombing of headquarter facilities in urban centres, were war crimes. Your rules of engagement would mean certain death to the Israelis, and that's what they are fighting to avoid. No sane Israeli commander would take your advice.
Diplomacy can only succeed with a party who wants piece, and is rational. Thus, the need to displace Hamas.
What people hate are terrorists, and that hatred is well earned. Positive change can only occur once the Hamas terrorism stops.
No. You're the one who's rambling after you were exposed for making shit up and then moving the goal posts.
You got nothing at all...such empty words...not even worthy of an ignore...keep me amused...
Sure, richatroll. Keep making shit up, then start rambling and moving goalposts when exposed.
What do you think of frank's assessment of what's going on? I know you are both, pretty much, on the same side but he claims to call out both, but he never ever will say a particular thing that Hamas did that was wrong.
He is determined to never admit that the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas was an act of terrorism.
He says both sides should be taken to the Hague. He can cite a dozen specific acts as reasons why Israel should be tried but refuses to cite any reasons why Hamas should go.
Does he actually call out both sides with his broad and sweeping, yet ambiguous statements of accusing both sides, or is he being disingenuous because he refuses to back up those those statements of why he thinks Hamas should be tried the same way he backs up why Israel should be tried?
Israel has never entered Gaza before with the mission of completely removing Hamas infrastructure and personnel. That's what needs to be done. Just like the Allies had to bomb German manufacturing and defense infrastructure and STILL the Germans did not surrender until the Allies reached Berlin, Hitler was dead, and the bombs had been dropped in Japan. Your take on the history of this conflict is just fundamentally wrong.
Yes, I've read the conventions that apply. You are simply misapplying them, and at the same time you don't seem to understand or acknowledge: a) the actual characterization of the bombings, or b) the valid military objectives of the Israelis. It is Hamas who are unnecessarily endangering civilians by using them as human shields. And you would have that immoral and illegal tactic be effective!
The Israelis are not carpet bombing Gaza. If they were, the entire Gaza strip would already be rubble. Hamas will not surrender based on any peace deal reached with PA. Hamas must be removed first. The PA has not been able to do it on their own. This is a war against Hamas, not the people of Gaza or those who would see the PA as their government.
Save your brainless and incorrect speculation for the idiots who can be convinced of it. Hamas commits terrorism. There is no difficulty in thereby defining them as a terrorist organization.
But it wasn't...the Balfour doesn't only give land to Jews (Israel) the was also Transjordan (jordan). Again the convenience of "Colonial power" who took land that doesn't belong to them....that's what Colonial powers do...Spain did it, Portugal did it, France did it and England did it...is it right? hell no... Should we start removing Jews in Israel now? because having a "democracy" where Majority would be Muslims will be the cleansing of Jews in the Middle East....let's not pretend that's not gonna happen....
Obviously they had...When they defeated the Ottoman Empire...they made the deal with both Jews & Arabs (how cunning) the promise of state...Jews accepted...Arabs didn't....that's where the conflict started...Should there be a state for the jews and arabs....there should...and now we're here...
The ICC has authority for war crimes committed either by signatories of the Rome Statute or on territory of signatories of the Rome Statute. The State of Palestine is a signatory member. The ICC has had an open investigation into Israel since last year.
Anyone indicted by the ICC is subject to arrest by law enforcement anytime they are on the territory of a signatory.
Israel hasn't been in danger of being eliminated since 1973, and it was never in danger of being eliminated by Hamas.
I don't know if you do...Israeli Covert ops don't drop their agents in hostile territories...that's not how they operate...
Why did Hamas put so many Gazans directly in harm's way?
Good of you to call them out.
I don't disagree with Colonial powers colonizing and giving away land. but if you're gonna accept things the way they have been placed 100 years ago...you can't back track to it now...Jews and Arabs have existed in the Middle east...If you won't recognize Israel, you shouldn't recognize Jordan....and what will happen?
So is it Special Ops who don't operate in hostile territory, or just Israeli Special Ops who don't? Because the Israeli part is a new addition to your claim and I'd like clarification before I reply.
How effective is the Covert ops going to be in Gaza? that's pretty much the beginning of this topic.
How was it not fair for the Arabs? They got Jordan, Gaza & West Bank....Israel got the swamps...If the Arabs, Egypt, Syria didn't attack Palestinians wouldn't have been displaced...
Last edited:
