Israel Declares War
- Thread starter ThereRoseaLamb
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I asked a question to someone, and you responded (which you're more than welcome to do) without even answering factually. Lets first agree to a timeline of events and I promise I will answer your questions.
- Hamas starts murdering innocent civilians
Hours later the same day, Oct. 7 - Israel launches airstrike, killing ~232 and wounding ~1,600 people.
[/QUOTE]Oct 13 - Israel advises Palestinians to "evacuate" their homes within 24 hours.
I initially asked if Israel gave Palestinians warning to "evacuate" prior to their 72 hours of bombings on Gaza, in which you replied "actually they gave almost a week warning.. " Clearly, you gave false information as they started their retaliatory airstrikes less than 24 hours of the Hamas murders.
You're asking:
1.) How long after the [Hamas] attack did Israel start bombing? They started airstrikes the same days (hours later).
2.) Does any other country (including the US) give ANY NOTICE BEFORE DROPPING BOMBS? Yes, the US gave Saddam and his sons 48 hours to exile themselves or the US (and their allies) would use physical force to take over Iraq. It was still a mistake, but technically, Bush did give warning prior to using offensive weapons.
3.) Did Hamas give warning before sending... rockets into Israel and hitting civilian targets? No, Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn't care for civilian life.
Your statement "Hamas (Gaza) declared war on Israel. Legally Israel does not have to give any warning..." in defense to the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians is a desperate and failed attempt at downplaying pure evil. Crimes against the most vulnerable of people (children) cannot be downplayed as "self-defense" or the fault of Hamas. Perhaps you can make the argument that Hamas "baited" Israel into obliterating their civilians... at least you would have a leg to stand on though I don't even know if that's a worthy argument to hold.
I am pro-life and refuse to deny Palestinian children as worthy of life or a child of our Heavenly Father. They have just as much right to live as the children that Hamas has murdered. If you can't say that about Palestinian children, are you genuinely pro-life?
- Hamas starts murdering innocent civilians
Hours later the same day, Oct. 7 - Israel launches airstrike, killing ~232 and wounding ~1,600 people.
[/QUOTE]Oct 13 - Israel advises Palestinians to "evacuate" their homes within 24 hours.
I initially asked if Israel gave Palestinians warning to "evacuate" prior to their 72 hours of bombings on Gaza, in which you replied "actually they gave almost a week warning.. " Clearly, you gave false information as they started their retaliatory airstrikes less than 24 hours of the Hamas murders.
You're asking:
1.) How long after the [Hamas] attack did Israel start bombing? They started airstrikes the same days (hours later).
2.) Does any other country (including the US) give ANY NOTICE BEFORE DROPPING BOMBS? Yes, the US gave Saddam and his sons 48 hours to exile themselves or the US (and their allies) would use physical force to take over Iraq. It was still a mistake, but technically, Bush did give warning prior to using offensive weapons.
3.) Did Hamas give warning before sending... rockets into Israel and hitting civilian targets? No, Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn't care for civilian life.
Your statement "Hamas (Gaza) declared war on Israel. Legally Israel does not have to give any warning..." in defense to the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians is a desperate and failed attempt at downplaying pure evil. Crimes against the most vulnerable of people (children) cannot be downplayed as "self-defense" or the fault of Hamas. Perhaps you can make the argument that Hamas "baited" Israel into obliterating their civilians... at least you would have a leg to stand on though I don't even know if that's a worthy argument to hold.
I am pro-life and refuse to deny Palestinian children as worthy of life or a child of our Heavenly Father. They have just as much right to live as the children that Hamas has murdered. If you can't say that about Palestinian children, are you genuinely pro-life?
-
1
- Show all
Once everyone realizes that it was a crime against humanity, it's too late to charge people with murder. They are all likely dead by now. But we do know Truman ordered it. Follow the chain of command. Truman to some guy, some guy to some general, ... all the way to the pilots who dropped it. All of them should have refused to carry out the order to murder innocent civilians and can't use the "I was just doing my job" defense.
If they were unaware of the crime against of humanity they were about to commit because it was classified/wasn't revealed to them, then they shouldn't be charged with murder though. They genuinely were just following orders and the crimes against humanity was unbeknownst to them.
If they were unaware of the crime against of humanity they were about to commit because it was classified/wasn't revealed to them, then they shouldn't be charged with murder though. They genuinely were just following orders and the crimes against humanity was unbeknownst to them.
-
1
- Show all
So the only person you are naming as having been a sinner was Truman. Is that fair? Was he given his day in court to defend himself? Is that how you would like to be treated?
Even now, 70+ years later we don't even know how much each person knew and who should be held accountable and who shouldn't. I'll leave this up to God.
As for saying that dropping a nuclear bomb on a civilian target is not considered self defense in a war, I have already said that. I have no problem condemning sin, but condemning people is not fair without giving them their day in court first.
I remember Jacob being shot by the police causing a riot in Wisconsin, three people were killed in that riot and tremendous amount of damage was done to the city. Did anyone apologize for spreading disinformation and hate when they accused the cops of a crime? There are consequences to spouting off these opinions like the NBA and Lebron James did. Does anyone ever hold them accountable? To me the crime of spreading the disinformation that Israel bombed a hospital and killed 500 makes you partially responsible for all the riots that took place after that. Does anyone confess and repent? No they simply say they were "innocently" sharing a "news" story. God will judge.
Even now, 70+ years later we don't even know how much each person knew and who should be held accountable and who shouldn't. I'll leave this up to God.
As for saying that dropping a nuclear bomb on a civilian target is not considered self defense in a war, I have already said that. I have no problem condemning sin, but condemning people is not fair without giving them their day in court first.
I remember Jacob being shot by the police causing a riot in Wisconsin, three people were killed in that riot and tremendous amount of damage was done to the city. Did anyone apologize for spreading disinformation and hate when they accused the cops of a crime? There are consequences to spouting off these opinions like the NBA and Lebron James did. Does anyone ever hold them accountable? To me the crime of spreading the disinformation that Israel bombed a hospital and killed 500 makes you partially responsible for all the riots that took place after that. Does anyone confess and repent? No they simply say they were "innocently" sharing a "news" story. God will judge.
-
1
- Show all
I did not know this, But they had every right to do. I am surprised they waited this long
2.) Does any other country (including the US) give ANY NOTICE BEFORE DROPPING BOMBS? Yes, the US gave Saddam and his sons 48 hours to exile themselves or the US (and their allies) would use physical force to take over Iraq. It was still a mistake, but technically, Bush did give warning prior to using offensive weapons.
3.) Did Hamas give warning before sending... rockets into Israel and hitting civilian targets? No, Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn't care for civilian life.
Your statement "Hamas (Gaza) declared war on Israel. Legally Israel does not have to give any warning..." in defense to the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians is a desperate and failed attempt at downplaying pure evil. Crimes against the most vulnerable of people (children) cannot be downplayed as "self-defense" or the fault of Hamas. Perhaps you can make the argument that Hamas "baited" Israel into obliterating their civilians... at least you would have a leg to stand on though I don't even know if that's a worthy argument to hold.
I am pro-life and refuse to deny Palestinian children as worthy of life or a child of our Heavenly Father. They have just as much right to live as the children that Hamas has murdered. If you can't say that about Palestinian children, are you genuinely pro-life?[/QUOTE]
They gave them warning the day of.. Not on the 13th. not sure where you got your info from.
The US gave the leaders of Iraq 48 hours. if Israel gave the same time period. do you think they would have listened? The answer is no. You can not compare the two..
Hamas is the government in palestine. When you attack another nation. the other nation is expected to strike back. the fact Israel gave any warning is amazing (they even drop warning bombs on a building before they hit it so people know to leave)
Israel has the legal authority to wipe gaza off the map..
Yet they do not. and they have even now precision strikes.
I am amazed at the antisemetism I am witnessing here.
2.) Does any other country (including the US) give ANY NOTICE BEFORE DROPPING BOMBS? Yes, the US gave Saddam and his sons 48 hours to exile themselves or the US (and their allies) would use physical force to take over Iraq. It was still a mistake, but technically, Bush did give warning prior to using offensive weapons.
3.) Did Hamas give warning before sending... rockets into Israel and hitting civilian targets? No, Hamas is a terrorist group that doesn't care for civilian life.
Your statement "Hamas (Gaza) declared war on Israel. Legally Israel does not have to give any warning..." in defense to the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of innocent Palestinian civilians is a desperate and failed attempt at downplaying pure evil. Crimes against the most vulnerable of people (children) cannot be downplayed as "self-defense" or the fault of Hamas. Perhaps you can make the argument that Hamas "baited" Israel into obliterating their civilians... at least you would have a leg to stand on though I don't even know if that's a worthy argument to hold.
I am pro-life and refuse to deny Palestinian children as worthy of life or a child of our Heavenly Father. They have just as much right to live as the children that Hamas has murdered. If you can't say that about Palestinian children, are you genuinely pro-life?[/QUOTE]
They gave them warning the day of.. Not on the 13th. not sure where you got your info from.
The US gave the leaders of Iraq 48 hours. if Israel gave the same time period. do you think they would have listened? The answer is no. You can not compare the two..
Hamas is the government in palestine. When you attack another nation. the other nation is expected to strike back. the fact Israel gave any warning is amazing (they even drop warning bombs on a building before they hit it so people know to leave)
Israel has the legal authority to wipe gaza off the map..
Yet they do not. and they have even now precision strikes.
I am amazed at the antisemetism I am witnessing here.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
If I murdered hundreds of thousands of people, I suppose it would be in my personal best interest to wait until I am dead to charge me so I could live my life even though I took the life of countless others. I wouldn't mind, I'd be dead. However, ideally, we charge these people before they die. In case you're unaware, people don't typically get charged with murder if they are dead. Silly question really.
Yup, which is why I never said any names. For me, the main focal point is to acknowledge it is murder to obliterate innocent civilians. However, many people here seem to think it's only murder depending on which side you're on. If you're American and you murder Japanese civilians, then it's not murder. If you're Hamas and you obliterate innocent Israel civilians, then it's murder. If you're Israel and you obliterate Palestinian civilians then it's not murder; it's self-defense.
If you have more than a reasonable doubt, it's okay to call the person a murderer. Once again, telling a person they are a sinner isn't judging if we believe God has given His children commandments to live by.
Let me ask you a non-rhetorical question if for the sake of this discussion, using the atomic bombs on Japan was murder/crimes against humanity: Do you have a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered the use of nuclear weapons on Japan?
Perhaps it would be difficult to know who knew what and when they knew it, as for Truman, would you say that's fairly safe to say we have MORE than a reasonable doubt that he ordered it? And if know he ordered it and we are assuming it's a given that using the bombs was murder, would you still feel woke about not calling him a murderer?
Once again, you're trying to mix up misinformation and contested information with information that can be verified or where there is beyond a reasonable doubt. Not everything is considered contested.
Yup, which is why I never said any names. For me, the main focal point is to acknowledge it is murder to obliterate innocent civilians. However, many people here seem to think it's only murder depending on which side you're on. If you're American and you murder Japanese civilians, then it's not murder. If you're Hamas and you obliterate innocent Israel civilians, then it's murder. If you're Israel and you obliterate Palestinian civilians then it's not murder; it's self-defense.
If you have more than a reasonable doubt, it's okay to call the person a murderer. Once again, telling a person they are a sinner isn't judging if we believe God has given His children commandments to live by.
Let me ask you a non-rhetorical question if for the sake of this discussion, using the atomic bombs on Japan was murder/crimes against humanity: Do you have a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered the use of nuclear weapons on Japan?
Perhaps it would be difficult to know who knew what and when they knew it, as for Truman, would you say that's fairly safe to say we have MORE than a reasonable doubt that he ordered it? And if know he ordered it and we are assuming it's a given that using the bombs was murder, would you still feel woke about not calling him a murderer?
Once again, you're trying to mix up misinformation and contested information with information that can be verified or where there is beyond a reasonable doubt. Not everything is considered contested.
-
1
- Show all
No, I think we have sufficient evidence to charge Truman with a Crime and let him try and defend himself in court. I am not worried about him being dead because the real trial we all need to worry about is the one where we stand before God. That is the only thing we have been told to fear.
However, to be fair, if he was tried by a jury of his peers in America he would have been found innocent. No way after WW2 ended you would get a unanimous conviction of him with an American jury.
As to the second part of this question if he was acquitted of murder by a jury of his peers I think it is slander to call him a murderer. Again, let the Lord sort this out.
However, to be fair, if he was tried by a jury of his peers in America he would have been found innocent. No way after WW2 ended you would get a unanimous conviction of him with an American jury.
As to the second part of this question if he was acquitted of murder by a jury of his peers I think it is slander to call him a murderer. Again, let the Lord sort this out.
-
1
- Show all
I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you rephrase please? As for the timeline I posted, which date is not correct?
I'm not sure what one has to do with the other. You asked a random question and I answered it. I probably shouldn't have as it is of no relevance.
Now you're asking if the Palestinians would have listened if Israel gave them 48 hours instead of 24... some of them would. This is factually true. I showed a video of Palestinians leaving their homes with their families after their city and neighbors were obliterated after Israel advised them to leave. I can't give you a percentage of who stayed and who "evacuated", but you're wrong again in assuming the Palestinians wouldn't listen.
I understand that you think if two countries are at war, each state is permitted to obliterate civilians. However, I clearly disagree. Most people view murdering civilians as a crime against humanity but you are free to think it's morally acceptable.
I'm not sure what one has to do with the other. You asked a random question and I answered it. I probably shouldn't have as it is of no relevance.
Now you're asking if the Palestinians would have listened if Israel gave them 48 hours instead of 24... some of them would. This is factually true. I showed a video of Palestinians leaving their homes with their families after their city and neighbors were obliterated after Israel advised them to leave. I can't give you a percentage of who stayed and who "evacuated", but you're wrong again in assuming the Palestinians wouldn't listen.
I understand that you think if two countries are at war, each state is permitted to obliterate civilians. However, I clearly disagree. Most people view murdering civilians as a crime against humanity but you are free to think it's morally acceptable.
-
1
- Show all
No, I asked if Hamas would have listened.
You mentioned the leaders of Iraq. The us did not warn the people of Iraq, it warned the leaders.
1. Civilians are always a casualty of war.
2. Hamas uses civilians as human shields
3. Can you name 1 war in which civilians did nto die? Even when japan attacked pearl harbor. many civilians died..Just like when the US bombed Japanese cities in retaliation. Many civilians died.
You mentioned the leaders of Iraq. The us did not warn the people of Iraq, it warned the leaders.
1. Civilians are always a casualty of war.
2. Hamas uses civilians as human shields
3. Can you name 1 war in which civilians did nto die? Even when japan attacked pearl harbor. many civilians died..Just like when the US bombed Japanese cities in retaliation. Many civilians died.
You realize you skated around my question? lol
I asked if there is a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered the use of the nuclear weapons... NOT if he is guilty of murder. We already established that the use of nuclear weapons was to be considered murder, remember? You'll get my point once you reread it again.
Once we use your given, and we acknowledge that Truman did in fact order it's use, then he has to be charged with murder. The jury already decided the act was murder, they just don't know who did the murder (ordered it). So if we have a beyond a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered it, then we must convict. Understand? lol
I asked if there is a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered the use of the nuclear weapons... NOT if he is guilty of murder. We already established that the use of nuclear weapons was to be considered murder, remember? You'll get my point once you reread it again.
Once we use your given, and we acknowledge that Truman did in fact order it's use, then he has to be charged with murder. The jury already decided the act was murder, they just don't know who did the murder (ordered it). So if we have a beyond a reasonable doubt that Truman ordered it, then we must convict. Understand? lol
-
1
- Show all
That is misleading. The civilians who died were on a military base working for the US military. They may not have been enlisted but not fair to call them "civilians" without noting that for the most part they were working for the military (true a few kids were killed but again family members of people who were either in the military or working with the military on the base and chose to do so out of free will.
-
1
- Show all
