Arctish
Centimillionaire
What's the finish line?
-
Features
Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel
- Thread starter Derec
- Start date
To denote when two or more threads have been merged
Tigers!
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 5,261
- Location
- On the wing, waiting for a kick.
- Basic Beliefs
- Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
I do not know. Sometimes on a winding, twisted path the finish may not be visible at times. Gaza at the moment is like that.
Do you agree that returning the hostages dead or alive would be a good satrt?
laughing dog
Contributor
Here’s an easy one - respecting their designated safety zones by not bombing them until they designate a different one.
Calling it a straw man doesn't make it so. You are making an assertion that things would be very different than in the past and very different than what Hamas is demanding now. But rather than providing a pixel of support you calling it a straw man. And the whole thing is an exercise in blaming Israel anyway--Hamas hasn't even provided a list of who is alive.
Your answer is a kick-the-can. Less death now, more death later. That's what happened last time, why do you think it wouldn't be this time??
Once again, you are making an assertion without any evidence (and especially a negative assertion!) and then saying it's my job to disprove what you handwaved.
I don't even think you need to say it's about popular support. Note how the Islamist governments that come to power do so by removing any competition rather than by free election.
Arctish
Centimillionaire
Of course I do. What kind of a question is that? Have you not been paying attention to any of my posts in this thread?
I am asking how people will know when Hamas has been defeated and the bombing and drone strikes can stop. Is there something you would recognize as a sign of "Mission Accomplished"? Or is there nothing that would do it?
Last edited:
It's just the standard leftist faith based approach of deciding there is a better solution and the side with the power doesn't want to work hard enough to find it. Never do we see any indication of details of what that better solution should be.
I didn't address it because it's a strawman. I don't support Netanyahu one bit. I don't like what's going on, but I recognize that it's Islam that picked this fight.
This is very much like what happens when a woman escapes a domestic violence situation, with Islam as the abuser. You keep telling the woman to be nice to her abuser so you don't get hurt.
laughing dog
Contributor
I made a logical statement about reality which unsurprisingly you do not comprehend.
A safe zone means civilians are not to be attacked. Bombing a safe zone is making the safe zone unsafe. If the civilians in a safe zone are told to move to another safe zone then it is no longer a safe zone. So IF a safe zone is bombed, the bombers are guilty of lying to those civilians.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 7,174
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Ghetto Black Male
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic Atheist
I do, but I don’t agree to Hamas playing any future role in Gaza, so even after that, they’d still have to go, in my opinion.
laughing dog
Contributor
No I am not, which is what makes it a straw man.
I said less death and destruction.Loren Pechtel said:
Which clearly means compared to now.
You say Israel can't bomb children in self defense. That means that Hamas is absolutely immune from any form of area attack, they can walk right over Israel and accomplish their goal of genocide. Despite all your protests that you don't support Hamas you are taking the position that stopping them is immoral.
It is a very hard moral problem that I consider you to have taken the wrong side of. Do we judge an action by the local outcome or by the global outcome? You are choosing the path of the local outcome. Simple test: Here's a Javelin, the time machine is going to yeet you to Braunau am Inn at midnight of April 20, 1889 but the link can't be maintained, you snap back in 30 seconds. What do you do in those 30 seconds?
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 7,174
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Ghetto Black Male
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic Atheist
The idea that refraining from bombing children means you can’t confront or defeat an enemy is not only absurd,it’s downright lazy. No one is suggesting that Hamas should get a free pass to commit atrocities. The focus is on employing military tactics that don’t involve the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, especially children.
Even the Israeli government isn’t approaching this war in the same way you, DrZoidberg, and TomC (via pathetic like button) are yapping about. Prime Minister Netanyahu himself has spoken about avoiding civilian casualties and his goal of removing Hamas to pave the way for Palestinians to return and govern themselves. Your, DrZoidbergs and TomC's rhetoric, on the other hand, is inflammatory and completely misrepresents both Israel’s stance and my own arguments.
Frankly, I have no clue what’s wrong with the three of you, but your continued misinterpretation of my rebuttals as an attack on Israel and not your ridiculous child killer rhetoric is absurd and needs to stop immediately. I’m not engaging in this ridiculous game any further, so cut the fucking shit.
laughing dog
Contributor
That is an erroneous conclusion. Drone attacks can minimize collateral damage. Moreover, until the October Hamas horrific terrorist attack, Israel was not bombing children and there was credible reason to believe Hamas could achieve its goal if eradicating Israel.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 7,174
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Ghetto Black Male
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic Atheist
Do I retain the memory of who that baby would become? Think about that question, Loren, it's important.
Arctish
Centimillionaire
Also: Butterfly Effect.
If you had the opportunity to effect a desired change without resorting to infanticide, why the f**k would you kill a baby??
Tigers!
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 5,261
- Location
- On the wing, waiting for a kick.
- Basic Beliefs
- Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
No argument there.
Tigers!
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 5,261
- Location
- On the wing, waiting for a kick.
- Basic Beliefs
- Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
I have been paying attentionto this thread. You have said that Hamas should not be a part of any Gazan future but you have never given any practical, realistic, achievable ways or means to achieve that aim. Unless there was a single post that I missed along the way.
If Hamas did no more 7/10 or launched rockets into Israel or killed Israelis then that would be an indiction.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
I think your problem is that you are inventing more pleasant fantasy scenarios. Its like you've ejected the actual context and replaced it with a nicer one
After Hamas has gone, what makes you think Palestinians after Hamas will be any more reasonable? PA has zero support from the Palestinian people. They consider it a joke
The sooner you realise that Hamas is a product of Palestinian mainstream opinions the better. Yes, they are funded by Iran. But they are still Palestinian.