• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

To denote when two or more threads have been merged
A million more religious people with questionable ethics concerning violence would be a drop in the bucket. At least where I live.
It would definitely not be a drop in the bucket. You are deluding yourself.
I'm a serious conservative when it comes to immigration. Bring 'em on! Immigrants Made this Country Great in the first place. Palestinians. Mexicans. Venezuelans. Whatever!
Not all immigration is bad. This open border nonsense is not conservative - it's suicidal.
And the situation now is hardly the same as in the 18th and 19th centuries and our immigration policies should reflect that.
 
Netanyahu has a well documented history of opposing any solution that doesn't give every bit of land the Bible says was once occupied by Jews to modern day Jews, regardless of them having any actual historical links to the region. So it's no surprise he wants to force the Gazans out of Gaza and will move Jewish settlers there at the first opportunity. Is there anyone here who doubts that's Netanyahu's plan?
Remember that Israel did disengage from Gaza in 2005. Gazans had a choice. War or peace. They choose endless war, which is now coming to a head. It could have happened differently, had Gazans made a different choice.
 
Gazans would also be safer and have more access to aid in refugee facilities in Ashkelon. Heck, they'd be safer and have more access to aid right there in Gaza if Israel stopped bombing and shelling the part of the Strip where it told them to go to seek safety.
An invasion of Rafah is necessary for achieving the goal of defeating Hamas.
I agree that civilians should be protected as much as possible. Temporary sojourn in a camp in Sinai would be ideal, but barring that, Israel has proposed "humanitarian islands" in the center of the Strip. But how many of the people currently in Rafah would want to move there? Israel has strongly encouraged people to leave northern Gaza, but some 400k remained anyway.
 
That question is based on the dubioys premises that
1) it is Egypt’s responsibility to care for Gazans wishing to leave Gaza, and
Given their kinship, far more than US or EU are responsible.
As Fathi Hamad pointed out, many Palestinians have Egyptian roots, and some even have "al Masri" (aka "the Egyptian") as a last name.
 
Why must US (and Europe, Canada and Australia) be islamicized?
Why must you be an absurd parody of yourself, terrified by a minuscule minority of Muslim migrants, most of whom are self selected for their preference of Western society over the Islamic theocracies they are choosing to leave?











Please don't respond with cartoonish pictures showing a tiny subset of that tiny subset waving banners calling for Jihad; I understand that those pictures terrify you, and that you keep posting them here in a desparate attempt to spread your terror, but the rest of us recognise them for the outliers they are. You might as well post pictures of the Westboro Baptist Church nutters as evidence that Christianity is an existential threat to humanity.
 
Biden is the stereotypical career double talking politician.
True, but he is not as bad as Chuck Schumer. Oy vey!
There has been some discussion as to why Hamas exists and taggers Israel.
They exist because there is an islamofascist impulse in the Palestinian society. Same reason Islamic Jihad exists.
They target Israel because they want to conquer it and make the entire Levant into an Islamic Republic.
They also are able to continuously target Israel due to ample help from the theocratic regime in Tehran.
Israel plays the victim and Amerces have bought the propaganda.
Israel is the victim of continuous aggression by the Shiite Entity and its vassals.
Hetanyahu has been playing our politicians like a violin for years. He is an expert political manipulator. He tried to maneuver Obama into attacking Iran and Obama did not tale the bait.
Obama would have been better advised to take out Iranian nuclear weapons sites than to agree to the rotten deal that only made them stronger through sanctions relief.
Israel is not a victim. After the founding Israel clouded with the Er opens to invade Egypt.
Who is "Er" and who is he opening?
I assume you are making some sort of reference to the 1956 Suez crisis. Note that this was in the 50s, almost 70 years ago, and is much more complicated than you allude to here.
The attacks on Israel are the result of Israeli treatment of Palestinians form the start.
BS. The attacks on Israel continue no matter the treatment. In 1948, Arabs attacked Israel as soon as it was founded. In 2000, Second Intifada was started after Palestinians rejected the Israeli plan to create a Palestinian state on vast majority of the West Bank and Gaza. Israel is more than willing to negotiate for peace. The problem is that while "Land for Peace" worked with Egypt in 1978, it failed spectacularly with Palestinians that used every concession by Israel as a springboard for attacks. When Israel left Gaza in 2005, all that accomplished was that Palestinian terrorists had a basis of operations from which to attack Israel.
Seizure of land
What "seizure of land"?
and no right of return to land owned and occupied by non Jews.
The so-called "right of return" is an absolute non-starter and everyone knows that. It would be a demographic disaster for Israel - I suspect you would very much rejoice in it.
Jews were also driven out of areas controlled by Arabs. They settled in Israel and were made full citizens. Why can't the same be done by Arabs with so-called "Palestinian refugees" living in their midst?
Our Mid East foreign poly is a a moral and ethical cesspool.
Poly?
Saudi Arabia is not much different than Iran, but SA is 'our oppressive Islamic state.
There are differences well beyond the scope of this thread.
It goes back to the Cold War. We supported Chang Kai-sheks's fascist regime in Taiwan because he was anti communist.
He was far preferable to Mao.
We toppled the democrtclly elected leader of Iran because he might nationalize oil, and intaled the brutal opressive dictator Shah. An Iranin imgrant told me before that Iatrnians liked Amercans.
Your typing gets worse by the sentence.
Mossadegh was democratically elected, but he did not govern democratically. He stopped voting win the 1952 elections so he would not lose. He ruled by decree. And he was close to the Soviets.
Shah was not intaled[sic]. He had been the Shah since 1941. Your understanding of history is very superficial and boils down to "US and Israel bad, mkay".
Isrerl siezes Plaestinian land and we look the other way.
Which land concretely do you have in mind?

And we wonder why people in the Mid East conspire to harm us.
They'd still conspire to harm us. Switzerland is famously neutral and there are still Islamist attacks there.
Stabber in Switzerland affiliated with Islamic State, Swiss Police say

And yet some people think the West should be taking in even more Muslim immigrants. What a sick joke!
 
Why must you be an absurd parody of yourself, terrified by a minuscule minority of Muslim migrants,
They are not a "minuscule" minority any more, especially not in Europe. And they are rapidly growing due both to suicidal immigration policies and to their hyperfecundity.

Even in US they are taking over cities like Dearborn and Hamtramck. And Dearborn is a hotbed of radical Islamism.
Welcome to Dearborn, America’s Jihad Capital
Muslims are also trying to exert influence over the Democratic Party, especially in Michigan and Minnesota where Muslim population is numerous.
most of whom are self selected for their preference of Western society over the Islamic theocracies they are choosing to leave?
No, most of them come to the West for the money. They still keep their views. That's why there have been so many pro-Hezbollah demonstrations in places like London.
GettyImages-487378042.jpg

That's why protests in favor of the 10/7 massacre were breaking out in US cities like NYC.
7f73d110-66e3-11ee-b7ef-8eb63eb593b9
 
Even beside the fact that many of its employees are Hamas
This is the first time I've ever heard less than 0.5% being described as "many".
Israeli intel shows 10% of UNRWA workers in Gaza have ties to terror groups — report

You have not commented about the other part - the peculiar fact that UNRWA is there for a single ethnic group to which it applies a very different definition of "refugee" than UNHCR applies to every other group of people in the world.

Do you think UNRWA should be dissolved and that UNHCR should take over? Why or why not?
 
Why must you be an absurd parody of yourself, terrified by a minuscule minority of Muslim migrants,
They are not a "minuscule" minority any more, especially not in Europe. And they are rapidly growing due both to suicidal immigration policies and to their hyperfecundity.

Even in US they are taking over cities like Dearborn and Hamtramck. And Dearborn is a hotbed of radical Islamism.
Welcome to Dearborn, America’s Jihad Capital
Muslims are also trying to exert influence over the Democratic Party, especially in Michigan and Minnesota where Muslim population is numerous.
most of whom are self selected for their preference of Western society over the Islamic theocracies they are choosing to leave?
No, most of them come to the West for the money. They still keep their views. That's why there have been so many pro-Hezbollah demonstrations in places like London.
GettyImages-487378042.jpg

That's why protests in favor of the 10/7 massacre were breaking out in US cities like NYC.
7f73d110-66e3-11ee-b7ef-8eb63eb593b9
Well, I picked it. :rolleyesa:

Please don't respond with cartoonish pictures showing a tiny subset of that tiny subset waving banners calling for Jihad; I understand that those pictures terrify you, and that you keep posting them here in a desparate attempt to spread your terror, but the rest of us recognise them for the outliers they are. You might as well post pictures of the Westboro Baptist Church nutters as evidence that Christianity is an existential threat to humanity.
 
Netanyahu has a well documented history of opposing any solution that doesn't give every bit of land the Bible says was once occupied by Jews to modern day Jews, regardless of them having any actual historical links to the region. So it's no surprise he wants to force the Gazans out of Gaza and will move Jewish settlers there at the first opportunity. Is there anyone here who doubts that's Netanyahu's plan?
Remember that Israel did disengage from Gaza in 2005. Gazans had a choice. War or peace. They choose endless war, which is now coming to a head. It could have happened differently, had Gazans made a different choice.
Israel removed Israeli citizens from illegal settlements in Gaza. It continued to assert authority over Gazan territorial waters and resources, to limit the water and electrical service, to open or close the only means Gazans had to export their products whenever it suited the Israelis (thereby controlling the Gazan economy), to put Gazans 'on a diet' as they euphemistically called limiting the importation of purchased and donated food (leading to chronic malnutrition in Gazan children), and to bomb, shell, shoot, and target Gazans via drone strikes at will.

That's not disengagement. That's control through violence and coercion.

Also, as I pointed out earlier, only about 150,000 of the people living in Gaza voted for Hamas. And as others have pointed out, more than half of the people living in Gaza today are children. It is beyond stupid to say that children chose war decades before they were even born.
 
Last edited:
That question is based on the dubioys premises that
1) it is Egypt’s responsibility to care for Gazans wishing to leave Gaza, and
Given their kinship, far more than US or EU are responsible.
As Fathi Hamad pointed out, many Palestinians have Egyptian roots, and some even have "al Masri" (aka "the Egyptian") as a last name.
If a Gazan really wanted to go to Michigan, I wouldn't object. But I can't help but assume that the vast majority would rather be somewhere close by, Muslim, without the language and cultural barriers in Christendom. Egypt would seem ideal.
Tom
 
Obama would have been better advised to take out Iranian nuclear weapons sites than to agree to the rotten deal that only made them stronger through sanctions relief.
You're very pro war.
 
Fewer Gazans would suffer or die in just about any civilized area on Earth. So what again was your point?
That Gazan civilians would be far better off in a safer place than Gaza.
Egypt won't allow that.
That's my point.
Tom
Why specify Egypt? Egypt is not tge only safer place than Gaza.
Because someone else up thread did.
They singled out Egypt from Iran, UN, and a bunch of other people I specified in my post.

Egypt is not the only safe place. The Muslim world is quite large and Muslim Gazans have a lot more choices than Zionists did back in the day. Zionists had one, and it wasn't particularly safe until they fought for a homeland.
And won.
Tom
Why only the “Muslim world”?
 
How about the US then? They could easily gain refugee status.
Last thing we need! Why can't their fellow Arab states take them in? Why must US (and Europe, Canada and Australia) be islamicized?
Why not let civilians in Gaza who wish to leave to go where they want to go?

As to what “we” need, we certainly don’t “ need” more smug selfish proto-nationalists.
 
Why not let civilians in Gaza who wish to leave to go where they want to go?
I would be totally about that.
Algeria, Michigan, Egypt, anywhere but Israel.

What I would rather see is rescuing Gazans from violent Islamic terrorists. If that were accomplished I expect that Zionists and Palestinians could get along just fine, peace and prosperity for all!
But I don't think it's going to happen. And if it did it would take a generation or two to reach the goal. Nobody seems interested in furthering that goal enough to get rid of Hamas.
The second best option is destroying the military installations in Gaza. Ugly, but more feasible than hoping that Islamicist terrorism will just go away.
Tom
 
I really wonder what those supporting Israel’s current actions in Gaza think those actions will accomplish. I do know that at the beginning of the Israeli offensive, one of their generals said the goal would be to transform the entirety of Gaza into a “tent city.” I believe their defense minister said something to the effect that what Israel would unleash would have an impact on Gazans that would last “for generations.”

These are not the words, nor is the current offensive the actions, of a nation seeking to root out Hamas terrorists. It is the words and acts of collective punishment, of state-sponsored terrorism, of ethnic cleansing and genocide. Since Israel does not (overtly, at least of now) propose to kill or deport every last person living in Gaza, what is the end game here? At what point does Israel say, “we have extinguished Hamas, now we can go home?” They can never say this because it is not possible to do this, and the reason it’s not possible is because even if you could reliably identify and kill each and every membrer of Hamas, you have just made, for each Hamas member killed, with your words and actions, ten or 50 or 100 more recruits for Hamas, or a successor to Hamas, in the future. Does Israel think that after this is over, the remaining people of Gaza are going to thank Israel for slaughtering tens of thousands of them, including so many of their children? Thank Israel for laying waste to their land, destroying their homes and buildings, impoverishing and starving them? Are they going to say, “Oh, now we see the light, Israel was right!” Of course the effect will be precisely the opposite. And what makes all of this all the more galling and disgusting is that Palestine is perfectly correct in saying that Israel stole their land to begin with.
 
I really wonder what those supporting Israel’s current actions in Gaza think those actions will accomplish.
Ending the ability of Islamic terrorists to launch invasions of Israel, from Gaza, for a while.
Maybe permanently, although it will take a generation or so to tell. Might require a re-application if Gazans prefer to keep violent terrorists in power in Gaza. Maybe they'll choose peace and prosperity, but it's been years and it's not happened yet.
Tom
 
Back
Top Bottom