It doesn't. That's why Hamas should stop trying to get civilians killed. IDF is trying to avoid killing civilians. This is a one sided conflict. IDF are clearly the good guys and Hamas are clearly the bad guys.
Ehe. Back then Judaism was Palestine's ethnic idenity. Last time I checked Hamas are Muslims.It is actually the Roman conquest of Israel that led to this conflict. They even came up with the name that the Arabs culturally appropriated in the 1960s when they invented "Palestinian" ethnic identity.
If you admit that killing 1000s of civilians doesn’t solve the problem, why do you defend such a policy?
While the IDF is not trying to kill civilians, they are much more proficient and prolific in that regard than Hamas has ever been.
And everytime you insist that Israel needs to change their tactics to protect Israelis from Islamic terrorists and their violence you are defending the use of human shields.
If you actually thought about it, instead of making these emotional rhetorical accusations, you'd avoid these straw men and see that it makes sense.
I suppose a loony might understand that psychobabble. But I do not.
I think you can do better than offer such stupid reasoning.
Nonsense.
Israel is reacting to the barbaric Hamas provocation. How Israel's reacts is Israel's responsibility.
And you think that would help? Apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
According to Wikipedia they call themselves al-Filasṭīniyyūn; Palestinian is the English version. We got the word from Latin; the Romans got it from Greek; the Greeks got it from Herodotus. From what I've read, Herodotus appears to have invented the word, starting from the various local groups' words for the Philistines, by ethnocentrically taking for granted that the "correct" spelling was the spelling of whichever preexisting Greek word the variant spellings of "Philistine" most closely resembled, which happened to be "palaistês", Greek for "wrestler".
So if you first you don't succeed, just kill a lot of people who are not the problem? That is brilliant reasoning.
Perhaps if you patiently explained your argument, I might be able to make sense of it. And that should not be difficult if you actually used logic.
Splitter!
About nine million historical events led to this conflict; the piece of toilet paper is one of them. Tensions between the immigrants and the natives were already rising when the toilet paper was signed; it's entirely likely the Jews would have declared independence even if the British government's overall pro-Arab position hadn't been temporarily interrupted by toilet paper.
According to Dr. Zoidberg, that is what the Israelis are doing.
No he didn't.
The quote (which you conveniently clipped from your response) is "So basically, they tried not killing civilians. Didn’t work. So now they’re trying this. " My description is not inaccurate.
