Israel Declares War

[Smoke]

Hamas probably laughs that we call their civilians "human shields" though. They are probably asking themselves, "Do these idiots really think human bodies can shield us from airstrikes?! Hahahaha!"

It should be well established that Israel is going to bomb them along with the "human shields". It is NOT a detterent for Israel whatsoever. This just fuels Hamas' propaganda though. Why else have millions of people around the world protested and demonstrated after seeing the true victims of this conflict (Israeli and Palestinian civilians)? This is a clear win for Hamas by baiting Israel to act similar to them. Israel is just more efficient and less barbaric in killing civilians while they "target" Hamas.

 

[Smoke]

I don't suppose that Israelis would harbor Hamas within their community?

That wasn't the point. It was a hypothetical scenario/question from a page or two ago.

 

[HeIsHere]

Wait, what?

How are they indiscriminate?

Israel drops leaflets. Gives knock-knocks and secures safe passageways for those who need to evacuate from the North of Gaza to the South. Hamas shot civilians trying to flee the North when humanitarian corridors were opened. Women, Men and children. Israel had to roll in with tanks, clear out Hamas, and secure the road so civilians could flee!

Explain how Israel is indiscriminate?

Israel’s military said that, at one point, troops came under Hamas fire when trying to open the road temporarily for civilians. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu echoed the army’s claims in an interview with ABC News broadcast late Monday.
“We are fighting an enemy that is particularly brutal. They are using their civilians as human shields, and while we are asking the Palestinian civilian population to leave the war zone, they are preventing them at gunpoint,” Netanyahu said.

The claims could not be verified independently.

AP news

 

[Smoke]

I would have hoped that comprehension would be better... since the post quoted clearly states that it is ridiculous to think that the children dying in Gaza are collateral damage or that they are human shields. If they are not human shields then no war crime is committed. Unfortunately they ARE being used as human shields despite our self-proclaimed expert disagreeing.

I will be honest and say I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. I really do try to understand people's points though. I'm not sure who disagrees Palestinian civilians are being used as human shields. It's clear that they are but it doesn't deter or change anything. Israel will still bomb Gaza regardless of the amount of civilians they kill in their pursuit of "targeting" Hamas.

I also don't know if you're referring to me as the "expert" or someone else. I just have a belief/opinion. I am prone to error and not afraid to admit as much. I'm no expert.

 

[Magenta]

I will be honest and say I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. I really do try to understand people's points though. I'm not sure who disagrees Palestinian civilians are being used as human shields. It's clear that they are but it doesn't deter or change anything. Israel will still bomb Gaza regardless of the amount of civilians they kill in their pursuit of "targeting" Hamas.

I also don't know if you're referring to me as the "expert" or someone else. I just have a belief/opinion. I am prone to error and not afraid to admit as much. I'm no expert.

Who did I quote saying children are not being used as human shields?

They have proclaimed themself an expert again and again, and said no discussion will be fruitful with another unless
blah blah blah basically you have to have read as much as they have where they have and formed the same opinions.

You have never sat in a library and read primary sources so your opinion is uninformed and not useful for a fruitful discussion.

All you can do dismiss because you have no deep knowledge with which to even rebut my comment.

Like I stated a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

 

[Mem]

That wasn't the point. It was a hypothetical scenario/question from a page or two ago.

The question had to do with limiting casualties, and I see one side is more 'indiscriminate' about the 'limitlessness' of the totality. If Israelis are undoubtedly less willing to harbor Hamas, the initial impetus for conflict, than it would seem that the Palestinians apart from whether they are compelled by a desire to or from terror of. Who would rather starve rather than feed the entity? Even if unwillingly, it will feed by any means it can to fuel its vigorous appetite.

Hamas probably laughs that we call their civilians "human shields" though. They are probably asking themselves, "Do these idiots really think human bodies can shield us from airstrikes?! Hahahaha!"

It should be well established that Israel is going to bomb them along with the "human shields". It is NOT a detterent for Israel whatsoever. This just fuels Hamas' propaganda though. Why else have millions of people around the world protested and demonstrated after seeing the true victims of this conflict (Israeli and Palestinian civilians)? This is a clear win for Hamas by baiting Israel to act similar to them. Israel is just more efficient and less barbaric in killing civilians while they "target" Hamas.

What, then, would be a good contingency plan for this persistent problem?

 

[Ted01]

Hamas probably laughs that we call their civilians "human shields" though. They are probably asking themselves, "Do these idiots really think human bodies can shield us from airstrikes?! Hahahaha!"

It should be well established that Israel is going to bomb them along with the "human shields". It is NOT a detterent for Israel whatsoever. This just fuels Hamas' propaganda though. Why else have millions of people around the world protested and demonstrated after seeing the true victims of this conflict (Israeli and Palestinian civilians)? This is a clear win for Hamas by baiting Israel to act similar to them. Israel is just more efficient and less barbaric in killing civilians while they "target" Hamas.

I don't think that it's the mindset of Hamas, et. al, that civilians will shield them from any physical attack. Rather, it's more of a psychological maneuver that hopes to elicit reactions not unlike your own... an outcry from peoples of other nations that all attacks should cease because of the possibility of civilian casualties.

 

[Elshya]

Israel’s military said that, at one point, troops came under Hamas fire when trying to open the road temporarily for civilians. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu echoed the army’s claims in an interview with ABC News broadcast late Monday.
“We are fighting an enemy that is particularly brutal. They are using their civilians as human shields, and while we are asking the Palestinian civilian population to leave the war zone, they are preventing them at gunpoint,” Netanyahu said.

The claims could not be verified independently.

AP news

Watch Amir's video that I posted. It clearly shows the aftermath of what Hamas did while civilians were trying to flee and Israel having to secure the humanitarian corridor so the people could pass without being murdered. I think it's been more than verified.

 

[Smoke]

I don't think that it's the mindset of Hamas, et. al, that civilians will shield them from any physical attack. Rather, it's more of a psychological maneuver that hopes to elicit reactions not unlike your own... an outcry from peoples of other nations that all attacks should cease because of the possibility of civilian casualties.

Agreed, Hamas attempts to create sympathy for themselves knowing Israel will still blow the children up in their pursuit of being targeted.

The reality of it is that people aren't sympathizing with Hamas... They want them eradicated from the earth. They feel sick about all the civilians getting blown up though. They wish for a more discriminate way to eradicate Hamas.

A disingenuous attack on people who protest is to make them look like "Hamas supporters". It isn't true and it isn't fair. Either people are lazy in their analysis or they genuinely think protestors want Hamas to destroy Israel.

 

[Ted01]

Agree, it's an attempt to create sympathy for them knowing Israel will still blow the children up in their pursuit of "targeting" Hamas.

The reality of it is that people aren't sympathizing with Hamas... They want them eradicated from the earth. They feel sick about all the civilians getting blown up though. They wish for a more discriminate way to eradicate Hamas.

A disingenuous attack on people who protest is to make them look like "Hamas supporters". It isn't true and it isn't fair. Either people are lazy in their analysis or they genuinely think people want Hamas to destroy Israel.

Well, we've been over this before.

Israel will continue to target legitimate, military, Hamas targets... as prescribed by International Law.
Israel has long since warned civilians in the Gaza Strip to leave the areas that they are targeting... and continue to give advanced warnings. Also, the citizens have been aware of the lawless practices (war crimes) of Hamas, They know that they are both in harm's way as well the risks that they take, by choice, when they stay put.

I also don't think that, in general terms, people are attacking peaceful demonstrators (demonstrators for cease-fire)... I have heard reports that demonstrations that were not peaceful and openly "pro Hamas" and "anti Israel" did experience "push back" by folks on the other side of issue.

While I hate to use this word because it sounds pretentious, have you ever considered that you tend to use "histrionics" in your presentation?

 

[Smoke]

Well, we've been over this before.

Israel will continue to target legitimate, military, Hamas targets... as prescribed by International Law.
Israel has long since warned civilians in the Gaza Strip to leave the areas that they are targeting... and continue to give advanced warnings. Also, the citizens have been aware of the lawless practices (war crimes) of Hamas, They know that they are both in harm's way as well the risks that they take, by choice, when they stay put.

I also don't think that, in general terms, people are attacking peaceful demonstrators (demonstrators for cease-fire)... I have heard reports that demonstrations that were not peaceful and openly "pro Hamas" and "anti Israel" did experience "push back" by folks on the other side of issue.

While I hate to use this word because it sounds pretentious, have you ever considered that you tend to use "histrionics" in your presentation?

It's a circular argument at this point.

As for the histrionics, do you have any examples of this? Is making the factual statement that Israel blows up more children than Hamas terrorists an example? I like to point out, factually, what is happening so there isn't any confusion as to what I'm objecting to. Unless you were thinking of something else?

 

[tobewholeagain]

I think the attrition rate for Hamas leadership has been very high. Which is why hostages and negotiation is on the table on the part of Hamas..

Yes, the attrition rate of murdered men, woman and children has been high and if bobo gets his way he will have his goon squad murder them all.

But I do not think Israel is going to play ball. I think they are going to try and wipe out these guys once and for all. If that is even possible.

Yes, murder all the men, woman and children.
After all the IDF used its sniper teams to murder Palestinian children so this is nothing new for cold blooded killers.

 

[ZNP]

That list seems very accurate about Hamas. I will go a step further and say I would rather be under Israeli rule than Hamas rule. Very easy to state this. Perhaps my point isn't coming across as clearly as I am hoping. Pointing out terroristic things Hamas does, DOES NOT MEAN that Israel isn't also committing war crimes.

If you trust Maxwell, ask him if he believes it's an international war crime to settle on occupied land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

I have no problem with an international war crime, however any representative from a Islamic Nation, or Israel, or a Christian nation should recuse themselves. I would also reject any nation hoping to control the Middle East should recuse themselves. I would also eliminate any nation that can be coerced or blackmailed by one of these protagonists.

Once you have eliminated all those I suppose you are left with Japan.

Would Israel and the Palestinians want to have their future determined by a Japanese court?

 

[Ted01]

It's a circular argument at this point.

As for the histrionics, do you have any examples of this? Is making the factual statement that Israel blows up more children than Hamas terrorists an example? I like to point out, factually, what is happening so there isn't any confusion as to what I'm objecting to. Unless you were thinking of something else?

Well, I guess that it's enough that you don't see it in yourself... was just wondering and I hope it didn't offend.

A small example, since you asked... it seems to me that you constantly/consistently refer to the IDF actions as blowing up civilians, while I guess that it's technically accurate, that isn't (imho) their goal at all... and it comes across (to me, anyway) as overly emotional and designed to elicit guilt in whomever you're responding to.

We all get the innocents are dying. Personally, I see it as tragic... I think that most others do too. But it saturates virtually every posting of yours. I just don't know how it can be avoided... and I, somewhat have Anabaptist leanings on the subject. Nevertheless, when wars are fought people, innocent people, die... been that way since the beginning.

But the histrionics seems to come into play when after we have explained our position, you continue on as if we haven't heard you or understood you. And keep saying, Innocents are being killed... ruthlessly.
We don't see it as ruthless.

Does any of that make sense?

 

[Nehemiah6]

Pointing out terroristic things Hamas does, DOES NOT MEAN that Israel isn't also committing war crimes.

The BIG difference is this. Israel has not committed itself to Jihad and ongoing terrorism worldwide. But the Islamists are focused on this and nothing else, and have been for a very long time. We are looking at DEMONS parading as human. So now do you get the difference, or will you continue with your nonsensical comparisons?

TERRORRISM IS ASYMMETRICAL WAR CRIMES. JIHAD IS MUSLIM WAR AGAINST INFIDELS.

 

[Smoke]

I have no problem with an international war crime, however any representative from a Islamic Nation, or Israel, or a Christian nation should recuse themselves. I would also reject any nation hoping to control the Middle East should recuse themselves. I would also eliminate any nation that can be coerced or blackmailed by one of these protagonists.

Once you have eliminated all those I suppose you are left with Japan.

Would Israel and the Palestinians want to have their future determined by a Japanese court?

Sounds fair to me. Many might be scared leaving it to Japan to make a determination because of what the US did to them during WWII. However, if they feel it was isolated and discriminate in their bombing of Gaza, I would be really shocked.

 

[cv5]

Just because it's easier to blame the victims of a crime or crimes does not make it right. When judging, God does what is right, rather than what is easy. Those who profess to follow Him should judge likewise.

Ask yourself weather the Gazans know perfectly well that there are hundreds of miles of tunnels within that tiny postage stamp of that area they reside in (they exist for the sole purpose of safely harboring Hamas, from where they can launch attacks).

Then yourself if you would continue today to live in such an area as that, with full knowledge of the nefarious activities going on underground there.

Regardless of the sentiments or political affiliation any sane individual would leave ASAP. Pack your bags vamoose out of Dodge to save yourself and your family.

Lingering in the crossfire is irrational and insane. And quite frankly irresponsible and blameworthy. Dying as a human shield for Hamas is just plain stupid.

 

[Cameron143]

Sounds fair to me. Many might be scared leaving it to Japan to make a determination because of what the US did to them during WWII. However, if they feel it was isolated and discriminate in their bombing of Gaza, I would be really shocked.

If it's a military tribunal, I'd be surprised if they didn't get medals.

 

[Smoke]

Well, I guess that it's enough that you don't see it in yourself... was just wondering and I hope it didn't offend.

A small example, since you asked... it seems to me that you constantly/consistently refer to the IDF actions as blowing up civilians, while I guess that it's technically accurate, that isn't (imho) their goal at all... and it comes across (to me, anyway) as overly emotional and designed to elicit guilt in whomever you're responding to.

We all get the innocents are dying. Personally, I see it as tragic... I think that most others do too. But it saturates virtually every posting of yours. I just don't know how it can be avoided... and I, somewhat have Anabaptist leanings on the subject. Nevertheless, when wars are fought people, innocent people, die... been that way since the beginning.

But the histrionics seems to come into play when after we have explained our position, you continue on as if we haven't heard you or understood you. And keep saying, Innocents are being killed... ruthlessly.
We don't see it as ruthless.

Does any of that make sense?

I understand what you're saying. I repeat it to continue hammering the point. Some might say it's an "emotional" tactic, but it's really a factual statement (which you admit to). I don't think we should just say "Oh well, collateral damage." I'm not able to dismiss human life as easily as others.

As for the part in bold, you acknowledge that Israel is in fact doing what I keep repeating (thank you for that btw)... but proceed to say it isn't their goal (in your opinion). I didn't think it was their goal initially either but I'm becoming more convinced that it is their goal based off of video evidence from people in Gaza. However, I won't make this argument. The argument I will make is that you can't say Israel isn't targeting Palestinian civilians (most of which being children) if you KNOW you're going to end up killing more of them than actual Hamas terrorists via airstrikes.

A page or two back, I shared a video of a report posing the question if Israel would adopt the same strategy if Hamas was hiding within Israel (bombing homes/buildings they suspect Hamas was in or near). Penned (who I respect btw) said Captain Obvious would know that Israel wouldn't target their own people to get to Hamas. This question extracts the truth without the person even being aware of it. Israel ISN'T targeting Palestinian civilians when they target Hamas in Gazas, but Israel would be targeting "their own people" if they adopt the say strategy if Hamas was hiding inside Israel.

It's a double-standard. There is no way to reconcile Israel not targeting civilians when you admit it would be targeting Israelis to do the same thing inside Israel. It's an inconvenient truth that Israel's goal is to target Hamas even if it means killing more Palestinian civilians (most of which are children). I don't think it's an example of using histrionics.

People are trying to respond to me about Hamas, but I already agree with them about that. It has nothing to do with what I'm objecting to because we mutually agree Hamas are terrorists and should be eradicated.

 

[Smoke]

If it's a military tribunal, I'd be surprised if they didn't get medals.

Unless I'm mistaken, I think Japan, today, is more anti-war and more pro-self defense. I would love to know their opinion on blowing up more civilian children than actual Hamas terrorists constitutes "self-defense". I know some here make that case... I adamantly disagree.