Jump to content

Israel


SmokeyBear1861

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

This you?

yep.  AS ARE HAMAS'S HANDS.  Which is why I sure as hell withheld reaching any conclusions about the hospital event until after the dust settled and we were looking at facts and evidence, not spin and self-serving statements.

You, however, had no problem jumping on board the narrative of one party that has demonstrably unclean hands.  That's my fucking point.  We KNOW that both Hamas and Israel have unclean hands and will issue self-serving and untrustworthy statements.....but you only apply the skepticisim standard one way.

Jesus.  Fucking forget it.  Just have your way, do your thing.  The approach of blaming Israel for fucking everything, buying everything Hamas says the instant they say it, etc., has worked out BRILLIANTLY so far.  I'm sure that it will gain all the traction any day now, and will result in hand-holding and songs of peace any fucking day now.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BeardIP said:

I guess I'm confused by your question. Hamas the terrorist organization have engaged in subhuman acts, at LEAST as recently as, oh I don't know, 10 days ago at this point?

But yes, in this age of digital disruption and disinformation, we should be cautious with what we immediately believe as factual. For sure. At a minimum we should "trust, but verify".

Is that such a crazy position to take that I get I get the Jim Carrey dismiss?

I'll ease your confusion  "we should be cautious with what we immediately believe as factual. For sure"--fully agreed.  So then there's no need to throw in 'beheading babies' is there?  The subhuman comment was Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant's assessment of Palestinians.  Just tossing it in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BeardIP said:

I guess I'm confused by your question. Hamas the terrorist organization have engaged in subhuman acts, at LEAST as recently as, oh I don't know, 10 days ago at this point?

But yes, in this age of digital disruption and disinformation, we should be cautious with what we immediately believe as factual. For sure. At a minimum we should "trust, but verify".

Is that such a crazy position to take that I get I get the Jim Carrey dismiss?

Yes.  You should be dismissed.

See, Hamas has demonstrably unclean hands and a clear track record of issuing self-serving false statements.....BUT, the palestinians have gotten a raw deal, so we should believe whatever Hamas says.

Whereas Israel also has demonstrably unclean hands and a clear track record of issuing self-serving false statements.....so we don't believe anything Israel says, at least not without objective evidence sufficient to support the statement.

The second statement makes plenty of sense.  The first is fucking insane.  But it is practiced by multiple posters on this thread.  They point to "Well, Israel lies!" as justification for them BLINDLY ACCEPTING WHAT HAMAS SAID AS THE TRUTH. The very standard they espouse, the refuse to apply.  If you want to know why this matter will never, ever, ever be solved, that's a great example.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

And what do you feel about a terrorist organization who tries to spin their own error and literal self-inflicting wound and blaming the counterparty through lies and manipulation? They are atrocity propaganda'ing in order to whip up emotions but the worst part it is by their own hand.

Read my post, and you'll see how I feel about Hamas, Mr. Kneejerk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

I'll ease your confusion  "we should be cautious with what we immediately believe as factual. For sure"--fully agreed.  So then there's no need to throw in 'beheading babies' is there?  The subhuman comment was Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant's assessment of Palestinians.  Just tossing it in there.

This is also a problem.  The fucking singleminded focus on "well, you can't prove the beheading babies thing was true!" which functions (and you goddamned well know it does) to cast doubt on the fact that Hamas committed gross crimes against humanity/exculpate Hamas in some way. It's akin to the fucking American gun defenders  latching onto "a-ha!  You said the shooter had extra clips!  THAT'S WRONG!  They're called MAGAZINES!"  Jesus tapdancing Christ, Hamas butchered civilian men, women, and children.  Using numerous means and weapons.  What the fucking fuck is wrong you fucking people?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The second statement makes plenty of sense.  The first is fucking insane.  But it is practiced by multiple posters on this thread.  They point to "Well, Israel lies!" as justification for them BLINDLY ACCEPTING WHAT HAMAS SAID AS THE TRUTH. The very standard they espouse, the refuse to apply.  If you want to know why this matter will never, ever, ever be solved, that's a great example.

Don't be a coward.  And show me where I blindly accpeted what hamas said as the truth, all caps yelling grandpa.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is also a problem.  The fucking singleminded focus on "well, you can't prove the beheading babies thing was true!" which functions (and you goddamned well know it does) to cast doubt on the fact that Hamas committed gross crimes against humanity/exculpate Hamas in some way. It's akin to the fucking American gun defenders  latching onto "a-ha!  You said the shooter had extra clips!  THAT'S WRONG!  They're called MAGAZINES!"  Jesus tapdancing Christ, Hamas butchered civilian men, women, and children.  Using numerous means and weapons.  What the fucking fuck is wrong you fucking people?

You're off your rocker again, all caps.  The fact that the beheading babies thing was blindly accept doesn't bother you at all.  But it bothers you when I call it out.  Hamas committed atrocities.  Absolute crimes.  Not denied.  Edit:  But pointing out the contradiction of Beard stating 'we should be cautious with what we believe' while spouting twice something with not one shred of evidence (surely they must have beheaded some babies somewhere) isn't promoting terrorist propaganda.  

 

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to go back to quote one of the posts saying that anyone who believed the attack was Israeli was duped by Hamas. That's too much work.

It was a big explosion. Apparently a building had been devastated. There was a lot of that going around that was the result of Israeli military action. I and many others were not comparing sources; we were taking in news and drawing early conclusions that were certainly not unfounded. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yes.  You should be dismissed.

See, Hamas has demonstrably unclean hands and a clear track record of issuing self-serving false statements.....BUT, the palestinians have gotten a raw deal, so we should believe whatever Hamas says.

Whereas Israel also has demonstrably unclean hands and a clear track record of issuing self-serving false statements.....so we don't believe anything Israel says, at least not without objective evidence sufficient to support the statement.

The second statement makes plenty of sense.  The first is fucking insane.  But it is practiced by multiple posters on this thread.  They point to "Well, Israel lies!" as justification for them BLINDLY ACCEPTING WHAT HAMAS SAID AS THE TRUTH. The very standard they espouse, the refuse to apply.  If you want to know why this matter will never, ever, ever be solved, that's a great example.

Show me where anyone in the past few pages has cited Hamas as a source upon which they've relied. I have been careful only to rely on credible journalists and video evidence.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is also a problem.  The fucking singleminded focus on "well, you can't prove the beheading babies thing was true!" which functions (and you goddamned well know it does) to cast doubt on the fact that Hamas committed gross crimes against humanity/exculpate Hamas in some way.

This puts it even better.

 

Quote

Hamas’ barbarism doesn’t need to be exaggerated, as evidenced by the countless videos showing them gunning down unarmed and retreating people. But this specific claim created such an understandable repulsion toward the alleged crime against humanity. As some have feared, it succeeded in further dehumanizing Palestinians as a whole

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/decapitated-babies-claim-intent-dehumanization.html

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

I'll ease your confusion  "we should be cautious with what we immediately believe as factual. For sure"--fully agreed.  So then there's no need to throw in 'beheading babies' is there?  The subhuman comment was Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant's assessment of Palestinians.  Just tossing it in there.

I was specifically commenting on how the terrorist group Hamas does not have the earned credibility to be believed without a couple of independent verifications in a similar fashion of Israel and your assessment thereof. 

So instead of saying "beheaded babies" to drive home the point of disrepute, I should have used other examples. Got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

I sure as hell didn't ever blindly accept the beheading babies story - I still haven't seen anything close to proof.

But you spend 10X the energy on disputing that story than on placing culpability on Hamas.  Your take, like that of most of the apologists, is "yes, crimes were committed.  Very bad.  Let's move on so I can get to my agenda: Fuck Israel with everything capable of fucking Israel."

Nope.  We don't get to just skip the fuck over Hamas's crimes, both their crimes in the attack on civilians and on their undeniable and documented war crimes of sheltering military assets in civilian structures like schools.  The level of moral culpability on Hamas, and yes, on the people who support them, is fucking substantial, and must be dealt with.

As must Israel's ongoing crimes in the West Bank. And Likud's plan to foment further discord to give Israel the opportunity to exercise force again and again.  And the list goes on.  

Maybe what I'm sick of is the fucking narrative of "yeah, I know, to be intellectually honest, I have to say that both sides bear responsibility, but having said that, I'm going to skip right over the horrific shit by the side I support, and focus exclusively on the horrific shit by the side I want to demonize."  I'll certainly note that plenty of the "I stand with Israel crowd" does this, and it's a shitty look.  Just like it's a shitty look on the palestinian defenders when they can't help but functionally exculpate Palestinian terrorism with what amounts to "but they're oppressed, so I understand, these things happen, let's move on."

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I sure as hell didn't ever blindly accept the beheading babies story - I still haven't seen anything close to proof.

But you spend 10X the energy on disputing that story than on placing culpability on Hamas.  Your take, like that of most of the apologists, is "yes, crimes were committed.  Very bad.  Let's move on so I can get to my agenda: Fuck Israel with everything capable of fucking Israel."

Nope.  We don't get to just skip the fuck over Hamas's crimes, both their crimes in the attack on civilians and on their undeniable and documented war crimes of sheltering military assets in civilian structures like schools.  The level of moral culpability on Hamas, and yes, on the people who support them, is fucking substantial, and must be dealt with.

As must Israel's ongoing crimes in the West Bank. And Likud's plan to foment further discord to give Israel the opportunity to exercise force again and again.  And the list goes on.  

Maybe what I'm sick of is the fucking narrative of "yeah, I know, to be intellectually honest, I have to say that both sides bear responsibility, but having said that, I'm going to skip right over the horrific shit by the side I support, and focus exclusively on the horrific shit by the side I want to demonize."  I'll certainly note that plenty of the "I stand with Israel crowd" does this, and it's a shitty look.  Just like it's a shitty look on the palestinian defenders when they can't help but functionally exculpate Palestinian terrorism with what amounts to "but they're oppressed, so I understand, these things happen, let's move on."

This entire thing is full of shit and straw men..  Like a thousand percent brisket nuttiness on display.  I quite literally don't have the time or desire to answer it all.  Good day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

I was specifically commenting on how the terrorist group Hamas does not have the earned credibility to be believed without a couple of independent verifications in a similar fashion of Israel and your assessment thereof. 

So instead of saying "beheaded babies" to drive home the point of disrepute, I should have used other examples. Got it.

I agree with the assessment in the first paragraph.  But yes, you don't back up a statement about lack of crediblity with a rumor that has no proof.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

It is impossible when an entire side of the world doesn't acknowledge what has actually be going on for a long time.

I dunno I watched news all last night and the narrative was Israel bombed a hospital not a Hamas rocket landed in a parking lot and exploded. I heard 500 dead, when it's clearly a lot less.

I think what Israel does in the westbank and the blockade on Gaza is well covered.  I actually think calling Hamas out on its fucking lies is what doesn't happen.  Hell, this morning, CNN reported the dispute and went out of their way to say it can't be confirmed. Last night the headline was Israel bombed a hospital killing 500.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Duh.  Follow their IG, but you should only look at their posts that feature them and their friends in swimsuits around the pool having daytime margaritas.  Do I have to explain how to do EVERYTHING to y'all?

why do you think I follow them? you can take the hound dog out of the boy but you can't take the hound dog out of the girl or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I sure as hell didn't ever blindly accept the beheading babies story - I still haven't seen anything close to proof.

But you spend 10X the energy on disputing that story than on placing culpability on Hamas.  Your take, like that of most of the apologists, is "yes, crimes were committed.  Very bad.  Let's move on so I can get to my agenda: Fuck Israel with everything capable of fucking Israel."

Nope.  We don't get to just skip the fuck over Hamas's crimes, both their crimes in the attack on civilians and on their undeniable and documented war crimes of sheltering military assets in civilian structures like schools.  The level of moral culpability on Hamas, and yes, on the people who support them, is fucking substantial, and must be dealt with.

As must Israel's ongoing crimes in the West Bank. And Likud's plan to foment further discord to give Israel the opportunity to exercise force again and again.  And the list goes on.  

Maybe what I'm sick of is the fucking narrative of "yeah, I know, to be intellectually honest, I have to say that both sides bear responsibility, but having said that, I'm going to skip right over the horrific shit by the side I support, and focus exclusively on the horrific shit by the side I want to demonize."  I'll certainly note that plenty of the "I stand with Israel crowd" does this, and it's a shitty look.  Just like it's a shitty look on the palestinian defenders when they can't help but functionally exculpate Palestinian terrorism with what amounts to "but they're oppressed, so I understand, these things happen, let's move on."

 

I'm still waiting to see who has cited Hamas as a credible source and when they did it. It was a bold claim and I'm excited to see it proven in real time.

Maybe we would have had more time to dissect Hamas's crimes if we didn't have to focus on the bigger story of crimes against humanity being committed by a nation state, with the full backing of the most powerful economies on the planet, over the past several days.

There's no debating that what Hamas did was atrocious, and where there's nothing to debate, there's little to discuss. Why would anyone be outraged that a more controversial topic generates more robust discussion?

I hold Israel to a higher standard because it claims to have the moral high ground and it has the resources to be held to a higher standard. There is no excuse for war crimes. Ever. That's what we've been discussing for the past few days. Nobody can seriously confuse our focus on these current events for a tolerance of the terrorism that has precipitated them. We're all adults here, and surely we can understand the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

This entire thing is full of shit and straw men..  Like a thousand percent brisket nuttiness on display.  I quite literally don't have the time or desire to answer it all.  Good day.

Yeah, I guess I just didn't see the pro-Palestinian, put functionally all blame, responsibility, and burden on Israel narratives all over this site and the world in general these past few days (much of it before the Israeli civilian bodies were even cold).  Nope, that just didn't happen.

Fucking gaslighting.  Fuck that shit.  Own your position.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, troph said:

I dunno I watched news all last night and the narrative was Israel bombed a hospital not a Hamas rocket landed in a parking lot and exploded. I heard 500 dead, when it's clearly a lot less.

I think what Israel does in the westbank and the blockade on Gaza is well covered.  I actually think calling Hamas out on its fucking lies is what doesn't happen.  Hell, this morning, CNN reported the dispute and went out of their way to say it can't be confirmed. Last night the headline was Israel bombed a hospital killing 500.

Sorry troph, meant on the larger scale, not the hospital thing.  The bigger picture of colonialism, occupation, apartheid, e.t.c.   Start with Amnesty International

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chainsaw said:

 

I'm still waiting to see who has cited Hamas as a credible source and when they did it. It was a bold claim and I'm excited to see it proven in real time.

Maybe we would have had more time to dissect Hamas's crimes if we didn't have to focus on the bigger story of crimes against humanity being committed by a nation state, with the full backing of the most powerful economies on the planet, over the past several days.

There's no debating that what Hamas did was atrocious, and where there's nothing to debate, there's little to discuss. Why would anyone be outraged that a more controversial topic generates more robust discussion?

I hold Israel to a higher standard because it claims to have the moral high ground and it has the resources to be held to a higher standard. There is no excuse for war crimes. Ever. That's what we've been discussing for the past few days. Nobody can seriously confuse our focus on these current events for a tolerance of the terrorism that has precipitated them. We're all adults here, and surely we can understand the difference.

Yet the burden is solely on Israel to come to the table and concede....well, as I've seen posted around here.....everything.

Sorry.  I just believe that a good-faith negotiation and discussion is impossible to have.  We can't even have it here, thousands of miles away.  It's got to be a million times more impossible there in the levant.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

13 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

Sorry troph, meant on the larger scale, not the hospital thing.  The bigger picture of colonialism, occupation, apartheid, e.t.c.   Start with Amnesty International

I respect your position, though I do think that those components are well covered - as well covered as they can be in the way our media functions - meaning you can find that with credible news outlets just not cable networks.  and we may disagree but I think the media response right now is slanted to the Palestinians for this war as evidenced by the handling of the hospital blast.

I'm also not sure your background, but this seems personal possibly maybe I'm wrong - but it's certainly personal for others and most likely some on this board. My only approach here is to seek consistency, fairness and understanding. There are 4 parties here - terrorists, far-right leaning government, Palestinian people and Israelis. I think the terrorists need to be obliterated from the Earth, the far-right leaning government needs to be ousted from power and the people on both sides need to have a chance for peace. I do not support killing civilians, I do not support apartheid or oppression. I also don't like and frankly am driven bonkers by the failure of anyone to see how all of these decisions are in a loop that hasn't stopped for over 100 years. I'm not saying it's right, but I am saying there is no solution that starts with "this side needs to blah blah blah" and the only solution requires both sides to stop. 

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

What's wrong with that?

for starters it won't work, for seconds it will only embolden terrorists. see my post above that any solution requiring one side to do something and leaving out the other will fail before it begins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, troph said:

for starters it won't work, for seconds it will only embolden terrorists. see my post above that any solution requiring one side to do something and leaving out the other will fail before it begins.

Both sides should made concessions. Is that a bad thing? Seems pretty standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m happy to call Hamas subhuman baby killers, because they are. It may be difficult to put all the heads back on all the right bodies but they did go on a murderous, baby-killing, head chopping rampage against Israel. Unlike “Israel bombed this hospital and killed 500 people,” the statement “Hamas poured across the border to murder families and babies and cut heads off” is absolutely true. 
 

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/horror-israeli-authorities-show-footage-hamas-atrocities-reporters-notebook/story?id=104015431

Quote

Editor's note: This reporting contains extremely graphic descriptions.

"You won't see rape, there's no rape in this video... We won't show you beheaded babies," a senior Israeli officer said to a small group of journalists, saying such images existed but would not be shown.

 

Spoiler

The journalists were the first to watch a screening of an hour-long reel cobbled together from Hamas helmet cam, mobile phone video, surveillance video, dashboard camera video and victims' livestreams.

It was part of the Israeli military's effort to document and call attention to the Oct. 7 atrocities, when the militant group Hamaslaunched an unprecedented attack on Israel from air, land and sea. More than 1,400 people have died and 3,400 others have been injured in Israel, authorities said. In Gaza, at least 2,750 people have been killed in retaliatory strikes from Israel, and thousands more injured, according to the Palestinian Health Authority.

Journalists were not allowed to record or use the video presented, and our phones were deposited outside the room.

Spoiler

The video started slowly. Hamas fighters are seen on the back of a pickup, with RPGs spiking out in every direction. You can sense their excitement. The video shows several groups cut through the fence and wave a pickup truck through.

Then it shows three separate angles of motorists in Israel being flagged down, then gunned down -- the AK-47s puffing smoke -- on the road outside the Kfar Aza and Be'eri kibbutzim. Bodies are yanked out of cars.

Spoiler

Then a pair of attackers in Be'eri is shown. For several minutes, we watch as they amble around the kibbutz. They poke into one house and you can hear someone's alarm going off. It's 8 a.m. You can hear them breathing heavily. The one wearing the body camera has a high, soft-spoken voice that seems to belie his mission.

At a playground, he wonders in Arabic, "Where are the kids?" The duo set fire to one house, shoot an encroaching dog, and shoot another old man through a darkened screen. They are parsimonious with their ammunition, and chillingly unhurried as they pick through the tidy vegetable gardens and open the latches of wooden fences.

Quote

Then the video gets grisly. Other militants are busy mashing a dying man's face with their boots. Another pair screams "Allahu akbar" as they use a garden hoe to try to decapitate another man.

In another house, a gunman sticks the muzzle of his rifle into a room inhabited by a family. It's a mash of colors. In one, a terrorist is standing on an Israeli man's chest and shoots him point-blank in the face.

Quote

Then, the scenes of bloodied bedrooms start to blur. The rooms and the gore are the same -- it's how the bodies are arrayed in death that's different. There are so many children. Some are jam-packed together in a slippery mass of human flesh. Huge blood stains streak the tiles.

So many of the bodies are burnt. It was unclear if this was because they were set fire to or if it was from the grenade blasts. Other videos show Israeli first responders trying to put out the still-smoldering skeletal remains of victims -- with water bottles, as if watering a parched plant.

Quote

Outside, soldiers are decapitated. Otherwise, the bodies seem untouched. The heads were not in the images.

 

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I sure as hell didn't ever blindly accept the beheading babies story - I still haven't seen anything close to proof.

But you spend 10X the energy on disputing that story than on placing culpability on Hamas.  Your take, like that of most of the apologists, is "yes, crimes were committed.  Very bad.  Let's move on so I can get to my agenda: Fuck Israel with everything capable of fucking Israel."

Nope.  We don't get to just skip the fuck over Hamas's crimes, both their crimes in the attack on civilians and on their undeniable and documented war crimes of sheltering military assets in civilian structures like schools.  The level of moral culpability on Hamas, and yes, on the people who support them, is fucking substantial, and must be dealt with.

As must Israel's ongoing crimes in the West Bank. And Likud's plan to foment further discord to give Israel the opportunity to exercise force again and again.  And the list goes on.  

Maybe what I'm sick of is the fucking narrative of "yeah, I know, to be intellectually honest, I have to say that both sides bear responsibility, but having said that, I'm going to skip right over the horrific shit by the side I support, and focus exclusively on the horrific shit by the side I want to demonize."  I'll certainly note that plenty of the "I stand with Israel crowd" does this, and it's a shitty look.  Just like it's a shitty look on the palestinian defenders when they can't help but functionally exculpate Palestinian terrorism with what amounts to "but they're oppressed, so I understand, these things happen, let's move on."

You're doing the exact same thing in reverse. This whole thread is

image.thumb.png.bb254503a6d3c5f95139fa08e136ee35.png

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Both sides should made concessions. Is that a bad thing? Seems pretty standard.

Can't concede with terrorists. They have to be eliminated first. That may seem like a convenient position to you but it's pretty much a universal truth.

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

This right here. Given the fact IDF had already shelled the oncology floors of the very same hospital, the available video of the impact at the time the news broke, the available video of airstrikes to the vicinity after the hospital impact, and the shifting explanations coming from IDF, the most likely explanation at that time was that the cause of the explosion was that it was an airstrike. With the benefit of daylight, we can see there's no JDAM crater and that the impact site was thankfully away from the building, although the death toll is still likely to be substantial.

When you have unclean hands, as Israel does, you also have no credibility. I'm hoping we get some independent, credible analysis of where the projectile came from and who launched it. I can't simply take Israel's word that it was who they claim it was.

What about the US DOD?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Nope.  We don't get to just skip the fuck over Hamas's crimes, both their crimes in the attack on civilians and on their undeniable and documented war crimes of sheltering military assets in civilian structures like schools.  The level of moral culpability on Hamas, and yes, on the people who support them, is fucking substantial, and must be dealt with.

As must Israel's ongoing crimes in the West Bank. And Likud's plan to foment further discord to give Israel the opportunity to exercise force again and again.  And the list goes on.  

I'll certainly note that plenty of the "I stand with Israel crowd" does this, and it's a shitty look.  Just like it's a shitty look on the palestinian defenders when they can't help but functionally exculpate Palestinian terrorism with what amounts to "but they're oppressed, so I understand, these things happen, let's move on."

bearsrepeating.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, troph said:

Can't concede with terrorists. They have to be eliminated first. That may seem like a convenient position to you but it's pretty much a universal truth.

Less than 2% of the people being bombed are terrorists. You can't just dismiss the legitimate positions of 2.2 million people because a tiny fraction of them, who have held on to power undemocratically (with Israel's support of late, by the way) and who barely won by 29k votes in 2006 after campaigning on fighting corruption, made a rogue decision to commit an act of terror.

Israel is in the driver's seat here. By refusing to consider peace, they are prolonging the deadly conflict.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Less than 2% of the people being bombed are terrorists. You can't just dismiss the legitimate positions of 2.2 million people because a tiny fraction of them, who have held on to power undemocratically (with Israel's support of late, by the way) and who barely won by 29k votes in 2006 after campaigning on fighting corruption, made a rogue decision to commit an act of terror.

Israel is in the driver's seat here. By refusing to consider peace, they are prolonging the deadly conflict.

I’m not dismissing anything.  Terrorists - even more so these terrorists - can’t be at the table to negotiate, they can’t have power and they can’t have military capability they have to be gone. Unfortunately these terrorists are wedged in the middle and until they are gone it’s unrealistic to ask Israel to take the first step to stop. Terrorists gotta go, first. 
 

You clearly think the only roadblock to peace is Israel laying down arms and oppression and that as soon as Israel takes a reconciliation approach it will happen but that’s simply untrue.

Edited by troph
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Israel is an apartheid state that was built on terrorism and uses terrorism against civilians every day. And given that the power asymmetry strongly is in their favor, maybe they should be the ones that gotta go, first. Somebody just fucking go, for christ sake. America should apply extreme pressure on Israel or just stop sending them weapons and money. 

Edited by Anastasis
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

This right here. Given the fact IDF had already shelled the oncology floors of the very same hospital, the available video of the impact at the time the news broke, the available video of airstrikes to the vicinity after the hospital impact, and the shifting explanations coming from IDF, the most likely explanation at that time was that the cause of the explosion was that it was an airstrike. With the benefit of daylight, we can see there's no JDAM crater and that the impact site was thankfully away from the building, although the death toll is still likely to be substantial.

When you have unclean hands, as Israel does, you also have no credibility. I'm hoping we get some independent, credible analysis of where the projectile came from and who launched it. I can't simply take Israel's word that it was who they claim it was.

 

5 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

And the NSC Spox also confirms it:

I can predict with near 100 percent certainty that the discourse will shift from “of course it was Israel” to “the U.S. and Israel are just as unreliable as Hamas, despite the vast delta in evidence.” And then to “it doesn’t matter who actually bombed it because Israel is responsible for everything ultimately.” 

It will likely happen on this thread. 

LOL, we are exactly at the midway point closing in on the home destination. 
 

Also, there has never been a time that one version or the other was more likely true. It’s always been a 1 or 0 each direction from the moment it happened, this isn’t Schroediner’s Explosion where both Israel and Hamas did it until you turn on Al Jazeera. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

You can, however, change the policies that breed terrorism.

I agree. And it’s also justifiable to eliminate terrorists militarily first then retreat on shitty oppressive policies. That’s what happens when terrorists do terrorist things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, troph said:

And it’s also justifiable to eliminate terrorists militarily first then retreat on shitty oppressive policies.

Yeah, that second part...don't hold your breath. Turn the strip to glass and the shit in the WB is only going to get worse. And we will turn a blind eye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

Apparently a building had been devastated.

1 hour ago, Tonesky said:

Except that it wasn’t.

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

English, motherfucker. Look up apparently. Apply to the context of what I wrote about it being an initial reaction.

Then go jump up your own ass.

Except that it wasn't.  The only "evidence" of such "devastation" was from Hamas, which you blindly accepted as accurate.  Your reaction was less based on the initial available information, than on your bias.  I own my bias favoring Israel (while detesting Netanyahu, and acknowledging the contribution of government policy and so called settlers).  Maybe you should own your bias favoring Hamas and terrorism.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

Except that it wasn't.  The only "evidence" of such "devastation" was from Hamas, which you blindly accepted as accurate.  Your reaction was less based on the initial available information, than on your bias.  I own my bias favoring Israel (while detesting Netanyahu, and acknowledging the contribution of government policy and so called settlers).  Maybe you should own your bias favoring Hamas and terrorism.   

spacer.png

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, troph said:

I’m not dismissing anything.  Terrorists - even more so these terrorists - can’t be at the table to negotiate, they can’t have power and they can’t have military capability they have to be gone. Unfortunately these terrorists are wedged in the middle and until they are gone it’s unrealistic to ask Israel to take the first step to stop. Terrorists gotta go, first. 
 

You clearly think the only roadblock to peace is Israel laying down arms and oppression and that as soon as Israel takes a reconciliation approach it will happen but that’s simply untrue.

Is shooting journalists in the head, building settlements, etc necessary for Israel to fight terrorism or maybe could they stop doing those things and still fight it?  Do they get free pass on all their actions because they are fighting terrorists?

 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, troph said:

it’s also justifiable to eliminate terrorists militarily

 

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

It really depends how you go about doing that. And if the goal is peace, the how is even more important.

Not trying to be a dick.  Maybe there is an obvious example I am unable to recall.  Please share historical successful examples of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chainsaw said:

It really depends how you go about doing that. And if the goal is peace, the how is even more important.

Tell us how Israel should go about doing it then?  

I mean, lets say you live in San Diego and if there was a Mexican terrorist group that came across the border from Tijuana and murdered 1400 woman and children from the US and took a few hundred hostages to boot back across the border into Mexico what would the US do?  If the terrorists went back to densely populated Tijuana and surrounded themselves with civilians would our government say, “eh too bad but we can’t do anything so let’s do nothing and see if they do it again.”  I’m pretty sure the citizens of this country would also be screaming for retribution and the dismantling of said Mexican terrorist group.  Maybe the Mexican terrorists believe California should still be theirs and the US stole the land from them and nothing will matter until all US citizens in CA are dead or move out  (We could do this for TX instead of CA also).

 

Brisket, nothing against Mexicans just using it as an example.  I guess I could do the same fake scenario with Canada technically. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am convinced that some of the lawyers here make real fucking hay in front of juries by rolling out acontextual analogies that in the end effectively misrepresent and strain complex realities. But if it works I guess it works. Just don't expect that none of us see through it. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...