Israel (now broader Mid East discussion) (10 Viewers)

[SamAndreas]

Of course they don't. Thy think they are righteous holy warriors.

I don't know how they think. The current usage of the term is an exonym, a term which if used does not further add to that knowledge.

What that term has come to mean through that transformation into it becoming an exonym is that the term has become a slur word employed by people who appear to be anti-muslim hardliners first and foremost.

Zealots using the term to project upon the other zealots they hate.

I consider an exonym to be a useless term in any conversation I'm a party to. It's what that word means to me, means useless in addition to it meaning that it's a word which attempts to describes people who do not describe themselves to be.

An external description which is through usage is a slur upon whom it attempts to describe.

 

[Heathen Saint]

The real flaw here is to think Western ideology is equal or equivalent to Muslim ideology.

I honestly don’t even know what you’re trying to say here. Seems like you’re putting words in my mouth. I didn’t even mention “Muslim ideology”.

How did all start? Who chanted death to ______ first?

It sure didn’t start on October 7th.

Surely you don’t seriously think that this is conflict all based upon a “chant”.

Another misdirection. Israel has bombed schools because munitions, rockets, bombs, and Hamas leaders hide there. Israel even announces they are going to bomb the place... so why is it that there are civilians still in the building? Hamas makes them stay there to martyr themselves.

I’m curious as to why you believe anything the IDF says considering their track record.

Why should I or anyone else believe them?

I’m an American citizen. I don’t subscribe to foreign national propaganda, even though it’s sadly infiltrated our government (AIPAC).

Sure, but you are taking only one side, the side of Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, Al-Qaeda...

You keep repeating this. Where have I taken the side of Hamas?

No one is taking “the side” of Hamas. Conflating Hamas with Palestinian civilians is an erroneous practice.

Citizens are dying because Hamas is using them as human shield. For the nth time, what do you expect Israel to do?

The IDF is massacring citizens of Gaza and have convinced people that there’s a justifiable reason to do so and continuing doing so.

For the “nth” time, Israel can and has attacked their position without slaughtering mass numbers of civilians.

They did so when they assassinated Haniyeh in Tehran, did they not? That’s why I asked you about the history of the IDF earlier. To act like Israel has no choice but to massacre civilians because “human shields” is ignoring what Israel has always been able to do — when they WANT to.

70% of the casualties in Gaza are women and children.

I’d love a real explanation on how that isn’t intentional.

So you want Israel to continue to tolerate the death of their civilians as long as Hamas puts their civilians between them and the Israelis... you want Israel to be civil to the people who target civilians, shoot/blow up toddlers, rape civilians, illegally capture/kidnap men off the street, drive trucks full of explosives into crowds of innocent people, execute people from being gay or women for wearing the hijab wrong, steal humanitarian aid for their troops and followers...

Nope.

But you can’t do those same things in response and worse to the people of Gaza and expect folks to take that argument seriously if you aren’t also condemning that.

I posted about IDF soldiers sniping toddlers/children in the head and chest earlier - a NYT article.

What are your thoughts on that?

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

If you are responsible for something failing, isn't it your fault if it fails?


Just Israel is not justified? What about Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran?



Why do you get so emotional?
And why are you trying so hard to defend/not find fault in Hamas?

I’m sorry you thought I was emotional.

You seem to have trouble separating people from the government that rules the land mass they inhabit.

People in Israel died because Hamas attack, and their highly technologically advanced government failed to protect them from WWI tactics. Both of those things had to happen for people in Israel to die.

The people in Israel didn’t deserve any of that.

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]

 

[livefromDC]

My feelings?


... I don't really know who's right or who's wrong, but frankly, all things considered, I think the world is a better place with Jews than Muslim zealots.

Yep. Your feelings. On full display. You're rationalizing Isreal killing civilians and demonizing the other side. My point is clear and undeniable. It doesn't need a long a rationalization. Killing civilians is wrong regardless of what side does it. NEITHER side has a just reason for doing so. You're just picking one.

As you acknowledge, this is a longstanding feud that you don't even fully understand. Both sides have been performing atrocities against each other for ages. It doesn't justify the continued massacre of civilians by either side. That's it, or should be, but you're going to rationalize killing innocent people because these civilians are less worthy than these civilians.

 

[DaveXA]

Yep. Your feelings. On full display. You're rationalizing Isreal killing civilians and demonizing the other side. My point is clear and undeniable. It doesn't need a long a rationalization. Killing civilians is wrong regardless of what side does it. NEITHER side has a just reason for doing so. You're just picking one.

As you acknowledge, this is a longstanding feud that you don't even fully understand. Both sides have been performing atrocities against each other for ages. It doesn't justify the continued massacre of civilians by either side. That's it, or should be, but you're going to rationalize killing innocent people because these civilians are less worthy than these civilians.

What do you propose Israel do though? And simply not killing civilians isn't a valid answer. How do they respond to the massacre and subsequent hostages?

And fwiw, I've stated many times that Israel, and more specifically, Bibi's response has been well past proportional. I'm disappointed that they had to literally raze Gaza to the ground as a response. I think that wasn't necessary, but their intent has been known for a while now. They want to completely destroy Hamas, and making Gaza inhabitable at least for some time seems to be a part of that strategy.

That said, I'm not sure where the line would be drawn in terms of retaliation. They can't be expected to not respond, so how much is enough?

 

[SystemShock]

Yep. Your feelings.

No matter how many times you say it, no. It's pragmatism.

There was a time when the area we now know as Iraq was the cradle of civilization, where arts and science flourished. Once Islam took over, it just died.

Jews have never rammed trucks full of explosives into crowds or schools without provocation or against a military target, kidnapped and murdered athletes in sporting events, killed cartoonists for drawing a cartoon, blown/highjacked civilian planes, flown planes into buildings, massacre other Jews for not being the same type of Jew (at least not in modern times), killed gay people for being gay (modern times), killed women for not properly wearing a piece of cloth on their hair, beaten up women for not obeying (modern times), deny women schooling after the age of 8, strapped explosives around the waists of women and children and command them to run into buildings, chanted death to America, used women and children as human shields... that's just on top of my head.

You're rationalizing Isreal killing civilians and demonizing the other side.

I am doing no such a thing. Like Sam Kinison said, I don't condone it, but I understand it.

Demonizing the other side? Well, let's just say I don't think kindly of cowards who shield themselves with women and children for their own sake. Plus all the things I listed above.

My point is clear and undeniable.

If you think so.

It doesn't need a long a rationalization. Killing civilians is wrong regardless of what side does it. NEITHER side has a just reason for doing so. You're just picking one.

I never said killing civilians is not wrong or righteous. But like it or not, civilians die in wars (especially if they are used as human shields for propaganda photo-ops by the coward terrorist religious zealots), and in this particular conflict, I think the world is a better place with Jews than radical Muslims.

As you acknowledge, this is a longstanding feud that you don't even fully understand.

I do understand the conflict.

Both sides have been performing atrocities against each other for ages. It doesn't justify the continued massacre of civilians by either side. That's it, or should be, but you're going to rationalize killing innocent people because these civilians are less worthy than these civilians.

I am not justifying anything. And again, I am not rationalizing civilian deaths; as I said, in a war, like it or not, civilians are going to die, and in this particular war, I think that one side is better than the other for human civilization; at least as of these times.

 

[livefromDC]

What do you propose Israel do though? And simply not killing civilians isn't a valid answer. How do they respond to the massacre and subsequent hostages?

And fwiw, I've stated many times that Israel, and more specifically, Bibi's response has been well past proportional. I'm disappointed that they had to literally raze Gaza to the ground as a response. I think that wasn't necessary, but their intent has been known for a while now. They want to completely destroy Hamas, and making Gaza inhabitable at least for some time seems to be a part of that strategy.

That said, I'm not sure where the line would be drawn in terms of retaliation. They can't be expected to not respond, so how much is enough?

Dave, you answered your own question. I agree totally here. Bibi's response has been well past proportional. I'm also disappointed that they literally razed Gaza.

Their intent HAS been known for awhile. They want to completely destroy Hamas and, I'll add, "restore" that land as Isreal. Palestinians aren't going to be welcomed back to Gaza. I know you hope they will, but we both know it's not happening.

How much is enough? The same I would expect or hope for from a US response in another country, a response that doesn't raze civilian targets, like hospitals and schools. That doesn't meant Isreal can't respond at all does it? They can't respond without targeting children and the sick?

 

[livefromDC]

No matter how many times you say it, no. It's pragmatism.

There was a time when the area we now know as Iraq was the cradle of civilization, where arts and science flourished. Once Islam took over, it just died.

Jews have never rammed trucks full of explosives into crowds or schools without provocation or against a military target, kidnapped and murdered athletes in sporting events, killed cartoonists for drawing a cartoon, blown/highjacked civilian planes, flown planes into buildings, massacre other Jews for not being the same type of Jew (at least not in modern times), killed gay people for being gay (modern times), killed women for not properly wearing a piece of cloth on their hair, beaten up women for not obeying (modern times), deny women schooling after the age of 8, strapped explosives around the waists of women and children and command them to run into buildings, chanted death to America, used women and children as human shields... that's just on top of my head.


I am doing no such a thing. Like Sam Kinison said, I don't condone it, but I understand it.

Demonizing the other side? Well, let's just say I don't think kindly of cowards who shield themselves with women and children for their own sake. Plus all the things I listed above.


If you think so.


I never said killing civilians is not wrong or righteous. But like it or not, civilians die in wars (especially if they are used as human shields for propaganda photo-ops by the coward terrorist religious zealots), and in this particular conflict, I think the world is a better place with Jews than radical Muslims.


I do understand the conflict.


I am not justifying anything. And again, I am not rationalizing civilian deaths; as I said, in a war, like it or not, civilians are going to die, and in this particular war, I think that one side is better than the other for human civilization; at least as of these times.

You keep saying, "look how bad the ugly Muslims are! Look how the Muslims have killed indiscriminately! Here...see my examples!"

That's a rationalization for one side when both sides are culpable. You said civilians are going to die in war. Yes, true. But I'd ask that you evaluate your own responses. Your response is always, "look at what the Muslims have done though". They're not alone in their disregard for civilians on the opposing side.

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

What do you propose Israel do though? And simply not killing civilians isn't a valid answer. How do they respond to the massacre and subsequent hostages?

And fwiw, I've stated many times that Israel, and more specifically, Bibi's response has been well past proportional. I'm disappointed that they had to literally raze Gaza to the ground as a response. I think that wasn't necessary, but their intent has been known for a while now. They want to completely destroy Hamas, and making Gaza inhabitable at least for some time seems to be a part of that strategy.

That said, I'm not sure where the line would be drawn in terms of retaliation. They can't be expected to not respond, so how much is enough?

Getting the hostages back was not high on the Israeli states priority list.

That is clear from how many hostages were killed by Israel.

 

[baarbogast]

Talk about escalation

 

[baarbogast]

 

[SamAndreas]

Getting the hostages back was not high on the Israeli states priority list.

That is clear from how many hostages were killed by Israel.

Nor should rescuing hostages be high on their priority list, wonderful if they can be rescued, but unless wonderful can be realized they should be considered among the already dead.

Even if Israelis do accidently kill a hostage in the heat of battle, say during a rescue attempt, that's case of it being on the back of Hamas for their death. No matter who actually shot the gun that killed them, it was Hamas who killed them, they took them hostage in the first place.

That Hamas took hostages in the first place seems to be overlooked in your post. I regard people who take hostages as being bad terrorists.

And now I will point out that their habit of shielding behind their own people is another sign that Hamas are bad terrorists. In effect they are taking their own people as hostages.

Bad people take hostages.

 

[SamAndreas]

I think I figured out the problem with this. The word "Army" appears in that report, that word doesn't have the same meaning as the word "Navy." Fix that one problem and I think the other issues they have would go away.