• 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
You don't seem to recognize it when Muslims do it any more than Barbos recognizes it when Russians do it.
Tom
Hamas has no ability to commit ethnic cleansing against the Israelis.
If you keep protecting them from being hit for committing massacres you are giving them the ability to commit ethnic cleansing.
 
I wonder if beliefs like the following could explain Israel's comfort with killing children?

Rav Yosef says: Come and hear a resolution from a mishna (Nidda 44b): A girl who is three years and one day old whose father arranged her betrothal is betrothed with intercourse, as the legal status of intercourse with her is that of full-fledged intercourse. And in a case where the childless husband of a girl who is three years and one day old dies, if his brother, the yavam, engages in intercourse with her, he acquires her as his wife; and if she is married, a man other than her husband is liable for engaging in intercourse with her due to the prohibition of intercourse with a married woman. - Sanhedrin 55B
This bizarre level of anti -Jewish bias is probably why I come across as more staunchly Zionist, in this thread, than I really am.
Tom
Citing rabbinical ideas is anti-Jewish? Ok….
Well your very first sentence is incredibly bigoted. Then you cite some bizzare quote “rabbinal idea” to describe how all Jews think? Most Jews I know are atheist. But do you think it would be fair to describe Americans as people who get their values from Leviticus?
My Jewish friends would disagree with you. Many have said out loud that its Ok to kill children if Hamas hides behind them. They clearly have found a comfort level. Certainly, there are others who think as I do that Israel should be smart enough to figure out how to stop Hamas without killing children. It's an ethics thing....
It's not that it's "ok", it's that it's a regrettable necessity.

If you refuse to kill children in Gaza you let Hamas massacre the Jews.

While this is obviously a cartoon what should Israel do if faced with the depicted situation? Because this is just a simplified version of what's actually happening.
Hamas Combat Vest.jpg
 
You don't seem to recognize it when Muslims do it any more than Barbos recognizes it when Russians do it.
Tom
Hamas has no ability to commit ethnic cleansing against the Israelis.
If you keep protecting them from being hit for committing massacres you are giving them the ability to commit ethnic cleansing.

Zipr wasn't "protecting" Hamas from being hit for committing massacres. He was merely pointing out that they don't have the capability--the military capacity--to carry out ethnic cleansing. Israel does have that kind of capability, and Zionists arguably used it to commit ethnic cleansing when they implemented Plan Dalit. I believe that the leadership of Hamas would be happy to commit ethnic cleansing against Israeli Jews, if they commanded enough military power to carry it off. Efforts by Israeli leaders to move Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip and into Egyptian Gaza are literally ethnic cleansing efforts. Israel's gradual takeover of the West Bank could be interpreted as slow motion ethnic cleansing--so-called salami tactics.
 
...
My Jewish friends would disagree with you. Many have said out loud that its Ok to kill children if Hamas hides behind them. They clearly have found a comfort level. Certainly, there are others who think as I do that Israel should be smart enough to figure out how to stop Hamas without killing children. It's an ethics thing....
It's not that it's "ok", it's that it's a regrettable necessity.

If you refuse to kill children in Gaza you let Hamas massacre the Jews.

While this is obviously a cartoon what should Israel do if faced with the depicted situation? Because this is just a simplified version of what's actually happening.
View attachment 46135

No, not a simplified version. An extremely distorted version designed to provoke an emotional reaction. Hamas militants are not strapping babies to their body armor, and Israel is not faced with shooting babies. Instead, Israel bombs neighborhoods in which it knows innocent civilians live on the pretense that this will somehow lead to the destruction of legitimate Hamas military targets. Those children contain women, children, the sick, and the elderly. Everyone knows that. The people firing artillery, dropping bombs, and launching missiles at those neighborhoods never see the innocent people they kill. They are just following orders--a time-tested justification for atrocities committed in times of war. What they are doing is not a necessity. It is an expediency combined with depraved indifference to the lives of innocent civilians who might be in or near the targets that they think might be legitimate military targets. Refusing to kill children in those neighborhoods at this time would not let Hamas "massacre the Jews", and you know it. Hamas is largely broken and on the defensive now. Israel has a greater responsibility to safeguard the lives of Palestinian non-combatants, who require food, water, shelter, and a safe place to stay out of the fighting.
 
Citing rabbinical ideas is anti-Jewish? Ok….
When the post starts with:
I wonder if beliefs like the following could explain Israel's comfort with killing children?
Then yeah, your post is viciously anti-jewish.
Tom
Or, just ethically anti-infanticide.
What?
Who is making choices that result in dead babies in Gaza?
Tom
Israel is. They shoot the bullets and drop the bombs. Their inability to find ways to attack actual Hamas members without killing children demonstrates either gross incompetence or an abject lack of empathy for children. How many actual Hamas terrorists have been killed? How many dead children per Hamas terrorist is acceptable to you?
Standard leftist faith based error detected.

Automatically assuming there must be a good solution and therefore a bad outcome is the fault of the side with more power failing to find said solution.

If there's a better answer why has nobody suggested it? Plenty of ways they could put it out there.
 
You don't seem to recognize it when Muslims do it any more than Barbos recognizes it when Russians do it.
Tom
Hamas has no ability to commit ethnic cleansing against the Israelis.
No they don't.
That would take a much bigger part of the Muslim community.
Then why do you continue to claim Hamas is committing ethnic cleansing?
Hamas is attempting to commit ethnic cleansing. The fact that they aren't very successful at it doesn't change that.
 
Hamas is engaged in the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
Huh? Have they not already basically done that?

They've made a bunch of choices that has resulted in a terrible, untenable, situation for millions of people.

Iran and Qatar and people like that funded it. But it did happen.

That's the reality, whether it suits your narrative or not. Gazans are in a desperate way and it's because Muslim terrorists chose death and destruction. Israel is responding to the choices made by Muslims.
The more destitute the people the less money is required to dominate the economy. And the more domination of the economy the easier it is to make people into cannon fodder.

ETA ~Let me put this terms that most of y'all will understand.
Why are people like Trump and MTG busy destroying the US? Because it's advantageous for them, personally, right at the moment.~
Except it's even more so. Trump et al don't seek the destruction of the US, they just don't care about externalized costs. The terrorists specifically seek the destruction of the economy where they are.
 
Are you saying that there is no ethnic cleansing going on?
I've heard current events described as "genocide", what's with that?

Bottom line though remains, Gazans are suffering horribly because of choices made by Muslims.
Tom
Huh?

Ethnic cleansing is genocide targeted at a specific ethnic group. (Although I have also seen the term applied when the distinction is religious.) Showing genocide (which isn't happening) doesn't show ethnic cleansing.
 
That's fair. I am tired of being told that whatever Israel does in the name of "security" is okay.
Since nobody has better answers I don't feel that criticism is appropriate. It's always the faith-based belief that there must be a better answer--the lack of anyone suggesting one should be recognized as significant.
 
That's fair. I am tired of being told that whatever Israel does in the name of "security" is okay.
Since nobody has better answers I don't feel that criticism is appropriate. It's always the faith-based belief that there must be a better answer--the lack of anyone suggesting one should be recognized as significant.
Who gets to decide which answer is the better one?

Yitzhak Rabin believed a Two State solution that would ensure Israel's continuation as a Jewish State for the Jewish people was a better answer than a One State solution in which non-Jews could conceivably become a majority, or a Rogue State that would be a pariah among nations.

Benjamin Netanyahu believes a Jewish State encompassing all of Eretz Israel, with non-Jews having been expelled or confined to ghettos and internment centers, is better.

One of the posters here believes "Gaza should be dealt with as Carthage was dealt with by Rome"; he thinks genocide and the enslavement of survivors is better than either Rabin's or Netanyahu's vision.

You apparently think using nuclear weapons to murder millions in Amman and Damascus is better than allowing non-Jewish refugees to return to their former places of residence inside Israel because it's too dangerous for Jews to live among non-Jews, especially as a potential minority in a century or two, unless it's in the West Bank as an actual minority today, in which case it's perfectly fine.

The people currently active in Jewish Voice for Peace think it's better to dismantle institutional power that discriminates on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, or any of the other characteristics bigots use to justify injustice, and replace it with a more egalitarian system of organization that respects and defends human rights.

Just because you like your 'better' better, doesn't mean someone else's 'better' isn't better than yours.
 
Last edited:
One of the posters here believes "Gaza should be dealt with as Carthage was dealt with by Rome"; he thinks genocide and the enslavement of survivors is better than either Rabin's or Netanyahu's vision.
I mean, it was not really meant seriously. On the other hand, you have an area that would not live peacefully with its neighbor and continues to attack it incessantly.

I have said it before - the 2005 disengagement from Gaza was a test run for a future Palestinian state. And Palestinians failed miserably. Instead of living in peace and building up their society, they commenced to shoot rockets at Israel.

I do think a two state solution is the ideal long-term outcome. However, it requires a Palestinian population that wants to live side by side with Israel and does not seek the first opportunity to try to eradicate it.
 
"Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo. Don't call it genocide." has joined "Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo. Don't call us racists." it seems.
In vast majority cases, both have just become a term of verbal abuse.

It was implied by your presumption that *every* Gazan is a legitimate target.
No, just that we should not assume that twit is correct to call them civilians.
Trying to shift the burden of proof.
The twit made a positive claim that the four were civilian as well as youth. The burden of proof is on him and on everyone who repeats his claims.
I do not know if they are civilians or combatants. I have not made claims. I am just saying that we should not assume that they are civilians just because somebody on the Internet said they were.
Empty assertion.
Why?
Cry me a river about Hamas.
They are the ones responsible for this whole mess.
What would you consider unbiased?
Not siding with terrorists.
Provoked, yes. But Israel could have done other things, like support the Palestinian Authority, crack down on West Bank settlers,
How would either be an adequate response to the attack led by Hamas (other groups joined in) in which >1000 Israelis were murdered and hundreds kidnappend? Do you not think any military action was warranted?
and offer any Gazan who rejects Hamas a chance to live in the State of Israel.
Completely unrealistic. Besides, it would make Palestinian territories even more supportive of Hamas.
I agree. They should be cellmates with leaders of Israel charged with war crimes.
False equivalence, but at least you agree that Hamas leaders should be prosecuted. Rashida Tlaib and her Ilk do not.
 
It's indicative of the IDF tactic to kill anything that moves in an IDF declared war zone.
No, it is not. It is indicative of the dangers of urban warfare. And besides, that ratio is not that far off US friendly fire deaths.
 
Back
Top Bottom