4 year old child killed in Gaza bombing

[docmauser1]

Apparently I, who was never even old enough to have voted for Bush, am personally responsible for everything he did because "we" elected him.

Oh, the joys of democracy! hehe

 

[docmauser1]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

 

[Indofred]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

 

[docmauser1]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Illegal, or not, is immaterial. Enjoy the democracy!

 

[toastman]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

Do you support the suicide of American soldiers?

 

[Indofred]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

Do you support the suicide of American soldiers?

If they have attacked and murdered, as many have, I won't try to stop them.
"I was just following orders" is an old, tired excuse.

 

[Phoenall]

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Just as firing unguided rockets into civilian homes and neighborhoods is a War Crime.

Who's denying that? The problem is that this war crime somehow justifies the war crime of blowing up entire civilian neighborhoods, with the civilians still present, in the minds of some people.

Just in the minds of the uneducated are blowing up neighborhoods war crimes, Ethel.

Then you don't object to Hamas firing into Israeli neighborhoods either, right?

Only in the minds of the uneducated that can only see one side of the argument. The fact that they cease to be civilian areas once hamas puts a rocket launcher in place as detailed in the Geneva conventions. I would advise you to read them, all 4 so you get an idea of just how much hamas is in breach of them and how Israel is working well within them

I condemn both Hamas and the Israeli government equally, and I'm the one only seeing one side of the argument? I'm afraid this discussion is beyond you.

Haven't seen any condemnation of hamas in your posts, but plenty of misinformed condemnation if Israel based on LIES, BLOOD LIBELS and Jew hatred.

Outright trolling now. Boring.

WRONG and this is the cry of the beaten when they have no returning argument

Now claiming some form of mythical victory on the internet. Even more boring.

Drivel

 

[Phoenall]

Now claiming some form of mythical victory on the internet. Even more boring.

Drivel.

I see you found your mistake.

Yes thinking that you were partway to being intelligent

 

[Phoenall]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

Thanks for making my point for me

You didn't have a point other than to dismiss me because I've never been a part of "war." I've also never been part of a serial killer's murder spree, but I have no problem saying those are morally wrong.

I didn't dismiss you because you've never been in war, I dismiss you because what you say have no grounds in the real world.

Only because you want to justify killing civilians.

Only those who try and defend Palestinian terrorism see the deaths of valid military targets as killing civilians. What is your solution to the problem when the Palestinians refuse to talk unless pre conditions are met that would result in 6 million+ Jews and the destruction of Israel

 

[Phoenall]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

Thanks for making my point for me

You didn't have a point other than to dismiss me because I've never been a part of "war." I've also never been part of a serial killer's murder spree, but I have no problem saying those are morally wrong.

I didn't dismiss you because you've never been in war, I dismiss you because what you say have no grounds in the real world.

Only because you want to justify killing civilians.

II justify killing terrorists.

If the civilians are so eager to die for the terrorists, I don't see why it's my problem.

Take it one step further along in the Geneva conventions and you see that once the civilians take on an active role in defending a rocket launch pad, ammunition store, terror tunnel or military headquarters then then become active soldiers and as a consequence valid targets. There is no half way house in this they are either civilians in a war zone that should be removed by their leaders or they are terrorists. Either way their deaths are down to the actions of their leaders

 

[Lipush]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

Thanks for making my point for me

You didn't have a point other than to dismiss me because I've never been a part of "war." I've also never been part of a serial killer's murder spree, but I have no problem saying those are morally wrong.

I didn't dismiss you because you've never been in war, I dismiss you because what you say have no grounds in the real world.

Only because you want to justify killing civilians.

II justify killing terrorists.

If the civilians are so eager to die for the terrorists, I don't see why it's my problem.

Your problem is that you assume they all want to die for Hamas, when it's more likely they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Your problem is that you think their lives are worth less than yours. Your problem is that because they dislike the Israeli government's policies towards them that they maybe make the mistake of disliking all Israelis so you think they can be killed, even though you make the exact same mistake towards them. Your problem is that any justification you can make towards killing Palestinian civilians can also be used to justify killing Israeli civilians.

Yeah, they're always at the wrong place at the wrong time.

What a nonsense!

I don't think their lives are worth less than mine; I think that there is no reason to sympathize with people who call for my destruction. I refuse to kiss the hand that smacks me. "Turn the other cheek" is for fools and naive.

The difference that for me, every Israeli life matters, while their own lives don't matter to them. In the past few days you've seen them loke monkies on exstacy, dancing and celebrating their "victory" like people on druges. 2000+ dead and they celebrate.

DISGUSTING.

Israeli army chief first words were to mourn for our dead, and we had fewer in numbers. He named them, he thanked their sacrifies, he blessed their souls.

He cherished their lives. Celebrating is for evil people. They don't care about their own dead, they would have celebrated with 10,000 in the ground. While Israel endlessly mourns even when ONE of us is taken.

So don't compare us to them. We're much better in that aspect at least.

They elected hamass in the first place, so now, dying for/ by hamass is a very much logical occupation, of course

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Apparently I, who was never even old enough to have voted for Bush, am personally responsible for everything he did because "we" elected him.

It seems you are, because all the people of Gaza are guilty of voting for Hamas, even the babies.

The babies of Gaza are used as human shields by Hamas. Personally, I would have prefered all of them being adopted by Israeli mothers. They would have grown to be better individuals.

 

[Phoenall]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

Thanks for making my point for me

You didn't have a point other than to dismiss me because I've never been a part of "war." I've also never been part of a serial killer's murder spree, but I have no problem saying those are morally wrong.

I didn't dismiss you because you've never been in war, I dismiss you because what you say have no grounds in the real world.

Only because you want to justify killing civilians.

II justify killing terrorists.

If the civilians are so eager to die for the terrorists, I don't see why it's my problem.

Your problem is that you assume they all want to die for Hamas, when it's more likely they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Your problem is that you think their lives are worth less than yours. Your problem is that because they dislike the Israeli government's policies towards them that they maybe make the mistake of disliking all Israelis so you think they can be killed, even though you make the exact same mistake towards them. Your problem is that any justification you can make towards killing Palestinian civilians can also be used to justify killing Israeli civilians.

They have the chance and right to move to a safe location away from the fighting at any time, the fact they refuse says that they are prepared to die for hamas. This can not be used to justify killing Israeli civilians as they will move to a safe area away from any danger. We know that the Palestinians hate the Jews because they are commanded to do so by their religion. The Israeli governments policies towards the Palestinians are simply to bring a halt to the terrorist attacks by any means possible with the least loss of life. Your problem is you are institutionally predisposed towards Jew hatred and ANTI SEMITISM so can not bring yourself to see were the problems lie. Read Pickthall's translation of the Koran and hadiths for some idea of the depth of Jew hatred there is in islam.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes and you should be proud of your accomplishments.

Horrified comes closer to the mark.

 

[toastman]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

Do you support the suicide of American soldiers?

If they have attacked and murdered, as many have, I won't try to stop them.
"I was just following orders" is an old, tired excuse.

You didn't answer my question.

You said you support IDF soldiers killing themselves because they 'murder' Palestinians.
But U.S soldiers have killed way more Iraqis and Afghanis in a way shorter time than Israel has killed Palestinians.
So, I'll ask again, do you support U.S soldiers killing themselves the same way you support IDF soldiers killing themselves?

 

[aris2chat]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

Thanks for making my point for me

You didn't have a point other than to dismiss me because I've never been a part of "war." I've also never been part of a serial killer's murder spree, but I have no problem saying those are morally wrong.

I didn't dismiss you because you've never been in war, I dismiss you because what you say have no grounds in the real world.

Only because you want to justify killing civilians.

II justify killing terrorists.

If the civilians are so eager to die for the terrorists, I don't see why it's my problem.

Your problem is that you assume they all want to die for Hamas, when it's more likely they're just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Your problem is that you think their lives are worth less than yours. Your problem is that because they dislike the Israeli government's policies towards them that they maybe make the mistake of disliking all Israelis so you think they can be killed, even though you make the exact same mistake towards them. Your problem is that any justification you can make towards killing Palestinian civilians can also be used to justify killing Israeli civilians.

Yeah, they're always at the wrong place at the wrong time.

What a nonsense!

I don't think their lives are worth less than mine; I think that there is no reason to sympathize with people who call for my destruction. I refuse to kiss the hand that smacks me. "Turn the other cheek" is for fools and naive.

The difference that for me, every Israeli life matters, while their own lives don't matter to them. In the past few days you've seen them loke monkies on exstacy, dancing and celebrating their "victory" like people on druges. 2000+ dead and they celebrate.

DISGUSTING.

Israeli army chief first words were to mourn for our dead, and we had fewer in numbers. He named them, he thanked their sacrifies, he blessed their souls.

He cherished their lives. Celebrating is for evil people. They don't care about their own dead, they would have celebrated with 10,000 in the ground. While Israel endlessly mourns even when ONE of us is taken.

So don't compare us to them. We're much better in that aspect at least.

They elected hamass in the first place, so now, dying for/ by hamass is a very much logical occupation, of course

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Apparently I, who was never even old enough to have voted for Bush, am personally responsible for everything he did because "we" elected him.

It seems you are, because all the people of Gaza are guilty of voting for Hamas, even the babies.

Hamas did not get all the vote in gaza. They fought a war and force fatah and the PLO out of gaza.

 

[Indofred]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

Do you support the suicide of American soldiers?

If they have attacked and murdered, as many have, I won't try to stop them.
"I was just following orders" is an old, tired excuse.

You didn't answer my question.

You said you support IDF soldiers killing themselves because they 'murder' Palestinians.
But U.S soldiers have killed way more Iraqis and Afghanis in a way shorter time than Israel has killed Palestinians.
So, I'll ask again, do you support U.S soldiers killing themselves the same way you support IDF soldiers killing themselves?

I've made my answer bold, and coloured it red so semi illiterate idiots can pick it out easily.

 

[toastman]

America elected G wubbleyou Bush - did they vote to have thousands of Americans killed in illegal wars?

Drivel.

There were lots of coffins - were they empty?

Do you support the suicide of American soldiers?

If they have attacked and murdered, as many have, I won't try to stop them.
"I was just following orders" is an old, tired excuse.

You didn't answer my question.

You said you support IDF soldiers killing themselves because they 'murder' Palestinians.
But U.S soldiers have killed way more Iraqis and Afghanis in a way shorter time than Israel has killed Palestinians.
So, I'll ask again, do you support U.S soldiers killing themselves the same way you support IDF soldiers killing themselves?

I've made my answer bold, and coloured it red so semi illiterate idiots can pick it out easily.

Speaking of semi illiterate , you still can't properly response to my question. Of course, I already knew that you wouldn't be able to properly answer the simple question.
Let me make it more simple for weak minded people: the answer to my question is either YES or NO.

 

[rhodescholar]

The only way for Israel to get rid of Hamas, which would be a good thing, would be to marginalize Hamas among Palestinian civilians. Blowing up neighborhoods, apartment buildings, and schools is just going to send Palestinians back into the arms of Hamas, but if the Israeli government could come in and edge Hamas out by providing support to Palestinian civilians the way Hamas does, and far more effectively and on a greater scale than Hamas could, then Palestinians would eventually come around and reject Hamas for the violent terrorists that they are. It would also involve stopping settlements and ending the blockade, I'm sure, but what form it would ultimately take I couldn't say.

So basically, you have no rational suggestions, no thoughts on how to implement any kind of policy, and can only toss out meaningless platitudes like "ending the occupation". How many years have you been involved with attacking israel that have led you to such a comprehensive grasp of the situation?

 

[rhodescholar]

And yet you don't see the problem? Why is Hamas attacking you, in fact, why is Hamas in power at all?

Because, like hezbollah, they are a foreign implant, a cancerous tumor that originally came under the guise of providing humanitarian support, then used arms to take over and crush dissent. Iran followed this recipe in lebanon, israel (w/hamas), and then iraq in 2003/4/5 with the shia militias there.

The reason is that Palestinians see the Israeli government as an aggressor. It doesn't matter if you disagree, it's a fact that that's how they feel, so they elect a group that helps them in many ways, claims to care about them, and is willing to "fight back" against Israel.

The arab muslims, mostly outside of the levant, have been waging a terrorist war against israel since 1948, hamas is merely the latest incarnation of the fedayeen groups used by external arab powers with which to strike israel.

The problem is it's a never-ending cycle: Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, etc... Both sides get to blame the other.

I actually agree that israel conducted this latest flare-up improperly, it should have entered gaza and assassinated every hamas leader and fighter it could find, focusing primarily of liquidating the entire leadership in shifa hospital, and the foreign terrorists leaders like meshaal. Israel should have also fired long-range ICBMs at iranian military bases and infrastructure to inform iran that it was no longer getting a free pass, and future attacks by its proxy armies were going to cause significant blowback.

Interesting how so much of the leftwing scum attacking the US for its prior support of al qaeda, and claiming it "deserved" 9/11 as "blowback" for doing so, seemingly remains so very quiet when discussing the far greater blowback iran deserves for the wars it foments across the mideast using many more terrorist groups.

There are only two ways to stop it that I can see. The first way is completely wiping out the Palestinians in an actual genocidal purge, which I don't think you or much of anybody else is advocating, and would ultimately lead to other issues as I think Israel would then find itself fending off other Muslim countries.

Genocide no, but a mass expulsion is a possibility; india did it, azerbiadjian did it, and so have many others. It seems that mass deporting muslim populations is becoming a rather common practice...

Israel changing the way they're perceived by Palestinian civilians, however, would leave Hamas marginalized and with no base of support.

Putting endless pressure on one side accomplishes nothing, it ties one side's hands and gives the other a free ride to continued attacking. You really want to solve this conflict? Remove the government of iran from power, and warn Qatar and other malignant arab governments that further support of terrorist proxies like this will lead to their liquidation. It would stop this conflict in about 10 minutes after khamieni and the rest of the iranian vermin were hanged.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So basically, you have no rational suggestions, no thoughts on how to implement any kind of policy, and can only toss out meaningless platitudes like "ending the occupation". How many years have you been involved with attacking israel that have led you to such a comprehensive grasp of the situation?

"You disagree with me, you must hate Israel."

Boring.