Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Those rockets never crossed a border into Israel.Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.Note the insistence that those being attacked by Muslim animals do not have a right to retaliate or defend themselves. This is textbook Islamist mentality that can be seen in groups like ISIS and Hamas.I thought I responded to the first one I pointed out in my first post in a very fair way.
He pointed out that Israel is creating a reality where they can cut off food, medical supplies, and other necessities. I agree. They can. But they don't. Instead, they ensure that the needs of the Gazan people are met. Israel actually does that BETTER than Hamas does.
So the question on the table is: Is there a BETTER way to conduct a conflict or respond to acts of belligerent violence against one's citizens? What is the objective mark we are trying to hit here, with respect to a response to acts of violence?
Note the insistence here again that 'Israel' defends itself against 'acts of violence?' To even pose such absurdity it becomes necessary to truncate the history of the conflict, the theft of colonial Palestine and the appalling military occupation and its gruesome concomitants...this is textbook Hasbara and this repulsive individual is lifting each response straight from detailed propaganda-software...the signatures are unmistakable!
You need to understand that the rockets fired by Hamas and the other Islamic terrorist franchises are attacks aimed at Israel. I’m not sure how you missed that.
He is correct as Israel has still refused to demarcate her borders.Those rockets never crossed a border into Israel.Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.Note the insistence that those being attacked by Muslim animals do not have a right to retaliate or defend themselves. This is textbook Islamist mentality that can be seen in groups like ISIS and Hamas.Note the insistence here again that 'Israel' defends itself against 'acts of violence?' To even pose such absurdity it becomes necessary to truncate the history of the conflict, the theft of colonial Palestine and the appalling military occupation and its gruesome concomitants...this is textbook Hasbara and this repulsive individual is lifting each response straight from detailed propaganda-software...the signatures are unmistakable!
You need to understand that the rockets fired by Hamas and the other Islamic terrorist franchises are attacks aimed at Israel. I’m not sure how you missed that.
Bullshit.
Please stop being so gullible. Palestinian children die. They get their heads blown off, they get their houses bombed. Let's try for a touch of reality, but that picture was unnecessary.It's also Pallywood fake news.
An occupying power cannot claim self defense against an occupied people.The OP title claims to differentiate between war and murder, with the implication being the former is legally and morally permissible while the latter is not. What distinguishes the justification of killing people in the former and the condemnation of the latter?
And who's fault is it that Palestinians shoot missiles from schools, hosptals, and apartment buildings? By the way the term "children" is also fake fake Pallywood news, most of the so called dead children are actually 15 to 28 year old Hamas fighters.He is correct as Israel has still refused to demarcate her borders.Those rockets never crossed a border into Israel.Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.Note the insistence that those being attacked by Muslim animals do not have a right to retaliate or defend themselves. This is textbook Islamist mentality that can be seen in groups like ISIS and Hamas.
You need to understand that the rockets fired by Hamas and the other Islamic terrorist franchises are attacks aimed at Israel. I’m not sure how you missed that.
Bullshit.
Please stop being so gullible. Palestinian children die. They get their heads blown off, they get their houses bombed. Let's try for a touch of reality, but that picture was unnecessary.It's also Pallywood fake news.
He is correct as Israel has still refused to demarcate her borders.Those rockets never crossed a border into Israel.Israel always has to "defend itself" from the people it is attacking.Note the insistence that those being attacked by Muslim animals do not have a right to retaliate or defend themselves. This is textbook Islamist mentality that can be seen in groups like ISIS and Hamas.
You need to understand that the rockets fired by Hamas and the other Islamic terrorist franchises are attacks aimed at Israel. I’m not sure how you missed that.
Bullshit.
Please stop being so gullible. Palestinian children die. They get their heads blown off, they get their houses bombed. Let's try for a touch of reality, but that picture was unnecessary.It's also Pallywood fake news.
Pretty much.An occupying power cannot claim self defense against an occupied people.The OP title claims to differentiate between war and murder, with the implication being the former is legally and morally permissible while the latter is not. What distinguishes the justification of killing people in the former and the condemnation of the latter?
The objective criteria, then, is that all actions by the occupier are considered murder and all actions by the occupied are considered justified defense. Have I got that right?
Ridiculously false. Some perhaps, most converted to Christianity a few centuries after Christ and then later to Islam. Then, they appear after another conversion, this time to Judaism in what is now Turkey and southern Russia before spreading across Europe. These people only immigrated to the ME in the last century.The Jewish people, collectively, have been there for millennia.
I said that she never demarcated her borders. It's true. And building a wall around your prisoners is not an international border. Look at what the UN mandate actually gave the zionists and look at the map today. Compare the two and check back. Thanks for any further respectful discussion.They don't have a border with the Gaza strip?
You are an idiot!
https://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/gaza_strip_may_2005.jpg
![]()
Look at what the UN mandate actually gave the zionists
It's also Pallywood fake news.Ventura77
Please delete that photo and place a link if you must with a warning. That's just fucked up.
![]()
I said that she never demarcated her borders. It's true. And building a wall around your prisoners is not an international border. Look at what the UN mandate actually gave the zionists and look at the map today. Compare the two and check back. Thanks for any further respectful discussion.They don't have a border with the Gaza strip?
You are an idiot!
https://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/gaza_strip_may_2005.jpg
![]()
Look at what the UN mandate actually gave the zionists
America in 1776
![]()
Sorry about that, Indians.
native Americans were being ethnically-cleansed Jewish-owned slave-ships were hauling African Slaves into the fledgling colonies to work the lands that had been taken from the native tribes...
There you go! I knew you could blame Jews if you really tried hard enough. I'm kvelling for you.
Ventura77
Please delete that photo and place a link if you must with a warning. That's just fucked up.
Pretty much.An occupying power cannot claim self defense against an occupied people.The OP title claims to differentiate between war and murder, with the implication being the former is legally and morally permissible while the latter is not. What distinguishes the justification of killing people in the former and the condemnation of the latter?
The objective criteria, then, is that all actions by the occupier are considered murder and all actions by the occupied are considered justified defense. Have I got that right?
Well, except for the fact that they are not occupied!