Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[laughing dog]

Who has done better? Anywhere, anytime? Who has even come close to as low a civilian:combatant ratio in rooting forces out of a city that has not been evacuated?

Nobody, that's who.

Like I said, skull fuck the numbers doesn't change the fact that there are still hostages and Israel hasn't come close to ending Hamas.

In other words, pay no attention to unpleasant reality. They're Jews, therefore they're wrong.

You are asking us to pay attention to the unpleasant reality that they're Jews so they are wrong? That is pretty anti-semitic, even coming from you.

 

[Arctish]

Why do you keep conflating Gazans with Hamas?

Are you unable to make the distinction between the people of Gaza and the political party ruling the Gaza Strip, or simply unwilling? I already showed you the numbers here:

https://iidb.org/threads/gaza-just-...-attack-on-israel.27714/page-150#post-1159609

And how exactly do you propose Israel deal with Hamas without hitting civilians in Gaza? I still have seen no meaningful reply to that cartoon of the Hamas fighter with a baby in their plate carrier. It's a horror you can't accept so you deny it's reality.

I have answered your question, in this thread and others. I have reiterated my answer when you failed to understand that I had done so. I have explained my answer in greater detail when you appeared to have failed to understand it. I'm done coddling you.

I am not going to pretend I think you're too dull-witted to understand what I post or too young and inexperienced to grasp the points I raise, so that I must repeat things over and over to you in simple terms. You are not stupid and you're not a child.

You can use the Search function to look up my posts containing the word 'hostage' to review what I said and actually think about it. We can have a productive conversation about rules of engagement in war if you put in the work.

Also, why do you keep placing the burden of peacemaking solely on the Palestinians? Do you honestly think Netanyahu, Smotrich, Ben Gvir, and their policies play no part in the continuing strife?

Because it's Hamas that chose the path of war. It's Hamas that won't meet Israel's non-negotiable condition for peace: release all the hostages.

Please post your link to the details of the proposal. You have a habit of making shit up, so while I don't doubt Israel is demanding the release of all hostages, I can't trust your implied assertion that that's the only sticking point.

 

[steve_bank]

The path of war was chosen when Jews in Palestine declared a state unilaterally and seized Arab land. War was inevitable and there were several Arab Israeli wars, Israeli prevailed.

The terrorism started when the Arabs coalitions failed to destroys Israel. Palestinians had no other means of fighting back. I am not agreeing with terrorism, but there are reasons why terrorism was resorted to.

One man's terrorist is another;s freedom fighter. Palestinians are fighting for thir iheir freedom.

First Intifada - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The First Intifada (Arabic: الانتفاضة الأولى, romanized: al-Intifāḍa al-’Ūlā, lit. 'The First Uprising'), also known as the First Palestinian Intifada,[4][6] was a sustained series of protests, acts of civil disobedience and riots carried out by Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and Israel.[7] It was motivated by collective Palestinian frustration over Israel's military occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as it approached a twenty-year mark, having begun in the wake of the 1967 Arab–Israeli War.[8] The uprising lasted from December 1987 until the Madrid Conference of 1991, though some date its conclusion to 1993, the year the Oslo Accords were signed.[4]

The intifada began on 9 December 1987[9] in the Jabalia refugee camp after an Israeli truck driver collided with a civilian car, killing four Palestinian workers, three of whom were from the refugee camp.[10][11] Palestinians charged that the collision was a deliberate response for the killing of an Israeli in Gaza days earlier.[12] Israel denied that the crash, which came at time of heightened tensions, was intentional or coordinated.[11] The Palestinian response was characterized by protests, civil disobedience, and violence.[13][14] There was graffiti, barricading,[15][16] and widespread throwing of stones and Molotov cocktails at the Israeli army and its infrastructure within the West Bank and Gaza Strip. These contrasted with civil efforts including general strikes, boycotts of Israeli Civil Administration institutions in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, an economic boycott consisting of refusal to work in Israeli settlements on Israeli products, refusal to pay taxes, and refusal to drive Palestinian cars with Israeli licenses.

Second Intifada - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Second Intifada (Arabic: الانتفاضة الثانية, romanized: Al-Intifāḍa aṯ-Ṯhāniya, lit. 'The Second Uprising'; Hebrew: האינתיפאדה השנייה Ha-Intifada ha-Shniya), also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada,[11] was a major uprising by Palestinians against the Israeli occupation, characterized by a period of heightened violence in the Palestinian territories and Israel between 2000 and 2005.[11][12][13] The general triggers for the unrest are speculated to have been centered on the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit, which was expected to reach a final agreement on the Israeli–Palestinian peace process in July 2000.[14] An uptick in violent incidents started in September 2000, after Israeli politician Ariel Sharon made a provocative visit to the Temple Mount;[15][14] the visit itself was peaceful, but, as anticipated, sparked protests and riots that Israeli police put down with rubber bullets, live ammunition, and tear gas.[16] Within the first few days of the uprising, the IDF had fired one million rounds of ammunition.[17]

Anyone who is saying the criticism of Israel is based in anti semisweet is promoting the Netanyahu Israel is an innocent victim propaganda.

Europe and North America has bent over backwards to concatenate Israel and Israel has taken it too far. They jave become the oppressors.

Palestinns fighting back against occupation are labeled theorists.

 

[steve_bank]

10 years ago I would have said the US should supply arms to Israel to prevent its being over run. Not so much today.

I used to think there was a moral obligation to help a Jewish state giivne the WWII persecution.

We haven't armed Israel out of the goodness of our hearts. We have armed Israel out of a desire to avoid them being pushed to their last resort.

Are you from the USA? Support for Israel is intertwined with Christians and politics. Israel has a well funded PAC over here. Propaganda programs targeting Christians pushing 'holy land' buttons.

If we let go of Israel and it failed the region would become much more peaceful.

We fostered the curr4et escalation by looking the other way for decades over settlements and occupation of Palestinian land.

Netanyahu said explicitly Israel will do whatever it thinks best, and they have a god given right to the land. Zionism.

It has predictably expanded. Israel attacking Lebanon and assassination in Iran.

 

[Arctish]

10 years ago I would have said the US should supply arms to Israel to prevent its being over run. Not so much today.

I used to think there was a moral obligation to help a Jewish state giivne the WWII persecution.

We haven't armed Israel out of the goodness of our hearts. We have armed Israel out of a desire to avoid them being pushed to their last resort.

Are you from the USA? Support for Israel is intertwined with Christians and politics. Israel has a well funded PAC over here. Propaganda programs targeting Christians pushing 'holy land' buttons.

What Loren means is that if we don't keep supplying arms to Israel, the Israelis will use their nuclear weapons against the civilian population of Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

Apparently he believes that Jews are the most murderous bloodthirsty greedy bastards in the entire world but it's okay for him to say so because he's a Zionist. Also, that those of us who argue against indiscriminate slaughter and violations of human rights must hate Jews because we disapprove of what he thinks Israelis routinely do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I also resent your claim that I am paying “lip service” to Hamas atrocities. I have and do fully condemn them.

Yet you blame Israel for the atrocity that Hamas engineered in Gaza and we are seeing play out. The atrocity they are using to try to get the world to stop Israel.

I guess this and the stock market discussion are off-topic, but anyway ,..

I do not blame Israel for the Hamas atrocity. Where did you get that strange idea? I blame Hamas for the Hamas atrocity. And I blame Israel for the Gaza atrocity. Gaza is not Hamas.

So they are Jews and not allowed to defend themselves if attacked.

What I see is that Hamas intended devastation to Gaza, what they intended to happen did happen, I blame them. Doesn't matter that they involved another party.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Realistically, Israel did not have a choice. If their government had decided against war it would have been overthrown.

That is a delusional statement. It's not possible for Hamas to overthrow the Israeli government. Hamas has hand weapons and unguided rockets. Israel has tanks, artillery, guided missile systems, a very good missile defense system, a navy, and much more.

You're so blinded by the need to blame Israel that you're missing the point.

If the Israeli government hadn't responded forcefully to 10/7 they would have been overthrown from within--their own people unwilling to accept their inaction.

 

[laughing dog]

Realistically, Israel did not have a choice. If their government had decided against war it would have been overthrown.

That is a delusional statement. It's not possible for Hamas to overthrow the Israeli government. Hamas has hand weapons and unguided rockets. Israel has tanks, artillery, guided missile systems, a very good missile defense system, a navy, and much more.

You're so blinded by the need to blame Israel that you're missing the point.

If the Israeli government hadn't responded forcefully to 10/7 they would have been overthrown from within--their own people unwilling to accept their inaction.

Wow, you are basically saying the Israel's response is solely a political not strategic choice.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I also resent your claim that I am paying “lip service” to Hamas atrocities. I have and do fully condemn them.

Yet you blame Israel for the atrocity that Hamas engineered in Gaza and we are seeing play out. The atrocity they are using to try to get the world to stop Israel.

We don’t often agree but yes. I’ll go one further: I think that was the plan anyway: to incite anti-Semitic and anti-Israel passions world wide to the point of wiping out Jews and Israel altogether, world wide, which is the stated goal and purpose of Hamas.

Minor disagreement--I think it's merely one piece of a much larger plan.

. Hamas attacked Israel in order to provoke the type of response they got. They are unwilling to honor a cease fire and indeed, they will continue to refuse peace until Israel no longer exists and until the world finishes what Hitler tried to do.

Exactly. Note the corollary--that Israel's only possible protection is overwhelming force.

Neither Israel nor Hamas nor Gaza nor the world at large is blameless in all of this.

Other than being Jews how do you blame Israel for this? Yes, Israel has done some less than proper actions--but that's what tends to happen when proper behavior is punished.

I don’t think religion or culture has a damn thing to do with it. There are plenty of Arab and Muslim countries which could easily make themselves home to fellow Muslims, if they were interested in preserving their Palestinian brothers’ and sisters’ ( but let’s face it: they only care about the males) right to live and practice their shared faith. Why don’t they?

It's never been about them, it's always been about honor and supremacy.

Israel is a subjugated group that escaped their oppression. It's the same as domestic violence--when the victim resists the violence gets worse.

Because having Israel as the common enemy allows them to ignore their internal problems within their own borders and indeed, the problems with their neighbors. Yes, there is saber ratting towards the west, largely but not entirely for the same reasons.

Definitely agree.

But THE biggest reason is money. Who profits? Who profits more when there is conflict?

It is not the average citizen in any of these countries or anywhere in the world.

Making and keeping the population angry and afraid helps keep in power and keeps money flowing towards whoever people think can control or stop the violence and destruction better. It’s true whether we are talking about Gaza or Israel or Ukraine or Russia or Turkey or Mexico or the Mideast or anywhere in the world. It’s not just the arms industry.

This explains the behavior of people like the leaders of Hamas. It doesn't explain why Iran is backing the conflict. That's about power, not money.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

War is hell. Too bad Israel is not battling an actual army. They alone are the bringers of war’s hell to innocent people.

Waddles and quacks. Just because they don't follow Geneva rules doesn't make them immune to being shot at.

As to “collateral damage,” it is beyond disgusting. That was Pentagon-ese to misdirect people’s attention from the huge civilian death toll that Bush/Cheney’s Iraq debacle would entail. Human beings. are not collateral fucking damage.

War is always hell. And note that Saddam almost certainly killed more of his people than we did.

Incidentally, the Bush/Cheney crowd were the same awful people who came up with the term “climate change” to distract people from human-caused global warming — and I’ve no doubt Cheney knew of oil company studies, dating at least to the 1960s, which confirmed humans were causing climate change. Those studies were suppressed, just like the cigarette industry suppressed their own discovery of the cigarette-cancer link in the 1930s. The irony is that “climate change” really is the more accurate term, though not for reasons that the Bush/Cheney cabal were hoping to make stick.

"Climate change" is actually a proper term. The thing is it's not just a uniform warming, but an increase in variability and other such effects. The severe winters we have sometimes been experiencing are actually due to warming, but if you simply call it warming people reject it because it didn't get warmer. (The severe winters are arctic air not staying in the arctic.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In other words, pay no attention to unpleasant reality. They're Jews, therefore they're wrong.

You misspelled "they're killing innocent people needlessly while failing to attain their stated objectives".
Leads one to suspect that their actual objectives are not as stated. Alternately, there's Einstein's definition of insanity...

You continue to assume there's some magical perfect path.

As for the definition of insanity (I haven't previously heard that attributed to Einstein) you're the one trying to apply it. History shows that Israel isn't attacked as much when they are forceful with the terrorists, they get attacked more when they try to be peaceful. Yet you keep expecting them to be peaceful. Israel knows they can't truly remove the terrorists, but the more they remove the longer it will be before they're attacked again. And things like controlling a corridor between Gaza and Egypt will reduce the flow of weapons. There was rampant smuggling under that border.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Zackly. “Exemplary fashion” doesn’t include killing 10x civilians per combatant.
Fucking Bibi is a war (and other) criminal and Israel will be paying s huge price for coddling him for years or decades to come.

Check your memory. 10x is the typical ratio. Gaza looks like about 1.4x by raw numbers 1.1x excluding the known bad data.

What is you unbiased source for this claim?

Quit it with the derailing. We have discussed this previously.

Asking for a source is not a derail. Refusing to give a source is bad form. I asked because I have not seen any source that puts the ratio that low. Please produce the source for your claim. Otherwise your continued refusal suggests you pulled the numbers right out your ass.

Asking for a source is not a derail. Asking for a source for something that a source has already been provided is.

Look at the Hamas claimed death count. Look at the Israel claimed combatant kill count. That gets you the 1.4x.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

4,000 of the hospital records are a combination of clearly falsified data and real people who died before the war.

You examined them? All I'm asking for is where did you learn these amazing things.

I already provided a link about it. I'm not the one that examined it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Oh, and what about this Israeli minister, Loren? Starving two millions Gazans isn’t genocide? And he came right out and admitted that the only reason they aren’t doing just that is because the world won’t let them. So they are conducting a slower genocide instead, using bombs and bullets against innocent and defenseless civilians, a huge number of them children.

Siege is a valid tactic in war.

If you want to see actual genocide:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/09/09/sudan-darfur-kutum-massacre-rsf/

But it's Iran behind it so the world press basically ignores it.

Or, it's 73 lives lost vs >40,000... but hey.. sand niggers, y'know?

73 in one incident.

https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/ethnic-killings-one-sudan-city-left-up-15000-dead-un-report-2024-01-19/

15,000 in one city in one year. And things have gotten a lot worse recently.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why do you keep conflating Gazans with Hamas?

Are you unable to make the distinction between the people of Gaza and the political party ruling the Gaza Strip, or simply unwilling? I already showed you the numbers here:

https://iidb.org/threads/gaza-just-...-attack-on-israel.27714/page-150#post-1159609

And how exactly do you propose Israel deal with Hamas without hitting civilians in Gaza? I still have seen no meaningful reply to that cartoon of the Hamas fighter with a baby in their plate carrier. It's a horror you can't accept so you deny it's reality.

I have answered your question, in this thread and others. I have reiterated my answer when you failed to understand that I had done so. I have explained my answer in greater detail when you appeared to have failed to understand it. I'm done coddling you.

Your answer amounts to magic, not a realistic answer.

I am not going to pretend I think you're too dull-witted to understand what I post or too young and inexperienced to grasp the points I raise, so that I must repeat things over and over to you in simple terms. You are not stupid and you're not a child.

You can use the Search function to look up my posts containing the word 'hostage' to review what I said and actually think about it. We can have a productive conversation about rules of engagement in war if you put in the work.

We don't have a productive conversation because you handwave away the issue.

Also, why do you keep placing the burden of peacemaking solely on the Palestinians? Do you honestly think Netanyahu, Smotrich, Ben Gvir, and their policies play no part in the continuing strife?

Because it's Hamas that chose the path of war. It's Hamas that won't meet Israel's non-negotiable condition for peace: release all the hostages.

Please post your link to the details of the proposal. You have a habit of making shit up, so while I don't doubt Israel is demanding the release of all hostages, I can't trust your implied assertion that that's the only sticking point.

What proposal? I said Israel's non-negotiable condition: return of all hostages. When has Hamas ever agreed to anything that contained that? Hamas has agreed to talk about it in exchange for a cease fire, they have not agreed to actually do it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The path of war was chosen when Jews in Palestine declared a state unilaterally and seized Arab land. War was inevitable and there were several Arab Israeli wars, Israeli prevailed.

The terrorism started when the Arabs coalitions failed to destroys Israel. Palestinians had no other means of fighting back. I am not agreeing with terrorism, but there are reasons why terrorism was resorted to.

One man's terrorist is another;s freedom fighter. Palestinians are fighting for thir iheir freedom.

It's generally easy to tell terrorists from freedom fighters. Look at their targets.

And note that large scale terrorism is always due to outside support. The size of the wrong doesn't matter, the size of the check makes all the difference.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Who has done better? Anywhere, anytime? Who has even come close to as low a civilian:combatant ratio in rooting forces out of a city that has not been evacuated?

Nobody, that's who.

Like I said, skull fuck the numbers doesn't change the fact that there are still hostages and Israel hasn't come close to ending Hamas.

In other words, pay no attention to unpleasant reality.

Are you talking to yourself there? You sound like barbos in the Ukraine thread. No long-term progress is exactly what was intended.

They're Jews, therefore they're wrong.

Anti-Semitism baiting is a bullshit tactic.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

10 years ago I would have said the US should supply arms to Israel to prevent its being over run. Not so much today.

I used to think there was a moral obligation to help a Jewish state giivne the WWII persecution.

We haven't armed Israel out of the goodness of our hearts. We have armed Israel out of a desire to avoid them being pushed to their last resort.

Are you from the USA? Support for Israel is intertwined with Christians and politics. Israel has a well funded PAC over here. Propaganda programs targeting Christians pushing 'holy land' buttons.

If we let go of Israel and it failed the region would become much more peaceful.

The peace of death.

Do you not understand the situation? You let Israel get genocided and they'll take much of the Middle East with them. Nuclear diplomacy 101: You do not back a nuclear power into a corner with no way out. Unfortunately, the Islamists don't pay attention to this--just look at what's happening with Pakistan/Inda: the terrorists keep trying to egg on war between two nuclear powers.

We fostered the curr4et escalation by looking the other way for decades over settlements and occupation of Palestinian land.

Do you not realize they consider all of Israel occupied? This isn't about the West Bank, it's about destroying Israel and genociding the Jews who dared rebel.

Netanyahu said explicitly Israel will do whatever it thinks best, and they have a god given right to the land. Zionism.

It has predictably expanded. Israel attacking Lebanon and assassination in Iran.

It's all part of the same war. Until you understand that it's really a war between Iran and Israel you won't understand what's happening. Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthi etc--they're all part of the same army. And have no you not noticed the Hezbollah attacks in Israel?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

10 years ago I would have said the US should supply arms to Israel to prevent its being over run. Not so much today.

I used to think there was a moral obligation to help a Jewish state giivne the WWII persecution.

We haven't armed Israel out of the goodness of our hearts. We have armed Israel out of a desire to avoid them being pushed to their last resort.

Are you from the USA? Support for Israel is intertwined with Christians and politics. Israel has a well funded PAC over here. Propaganda programs targeting Christians pushing 'holy land' buttons.

What Loren means is that if we don't keep supplying arms to Israel, the Israelis will use their nuclear weapons against the civilian population of Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

Apparently he believes that Jews are the most murderous bloodthirsty greedy bastards in the entire world but it's okay for him to say so because he's a Zionist. Also, that those of us who argue against indiscriminate slaughter and violations of human rights must hate Jews because we disapprove of what he thinks Israelis routinely do.

You don't get it. You're basically calling for the Jews to sit there and accept death without fighting back.

And it wouldn't be against the civilian populations of those countries. It would be against the governments--especially Iran. Missile #1 would certainly be on Tehran.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Realistically, Israel did not have a choice. If their government had decided against war it would have been overthrown.

That is a delusional statement. It's not possible for Hamas to overthrow the Israeli government. Hamas has hand weapons and unguided rockets. Israel has tanks, artillery, guided missile systems, a very good missile defense system, a navy, and much more.

You're so blinded by the need to blame Israel that you're missing the point.

If the Israeli government hadn't responded forcefully to 10/7 they would have been overthrown from within--their own people unwilling to accept their inaction.

You use the word "forcefully" instead of "effectively". You are stating that action was justified because of its own sake. Israel had every right to respond to the atrocity Hamas unleashed in October. The question is, what actions would have made the most difference. Questioning what will be the most effective is not the same thing as saying self-defense isn't allowed. Currently Netanyahu is no where near his goal, though his goal(s) are still a bit uncertain. 11 months of this. 11 months of breeding thousands of new Hamas recruits.