Well there have been Mogen David's in Germany before, just not this big, nor sky blue.
Berlin's Brandenburg Gate lit up in the colors of the Israeli flag on Monday, in a show of solidarity with the victims of Sunday's Jerusalem truck-ramming attack.
Israel's ambassador to Germany Avraham Nir-Feldklein welcomed the gesture, saying Israel was "moved by the gesture of the Berlin Senate and we are very grateful for the support of the German government and the people [and] for the consoling words of solidarity."
"We all see us faced with the same terror, from Nice over Berlin to Jerusalem, but together we will face evil and we will win," he was quoted in a Facebook post by the Israeli embassy.
"Today, the light of the Brandenburg Gate symbolizes the connection of our hearts," Nir-Feldklein said.
Israeli Prime Mister Benjamin Netanyahu took to Twitter to thank Germany for its show of solidarity.
"The flag of Israel on the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin," Netanyahu wrote. "Thanks, Germany, for standing with us in our common struggle against terrorism."
דגל ישראל בשער ברנדנבורג בברלין. תודה... - Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו | Facebook
The world's most beautiful flag shone out so close to Hitler's bunker
- Thread starter Lipush
- Start date
This is completely true.
Which is probably why Adolf's book is back in print and a bestseller in Germany again.
Everyone is wondering how could he do such a thing?
I have read the book several times and I still cannot understand how he could do such a thing.
Mass deportations I get. Even Trump wants to do that with illegal Mexicans.
But gas chambers for women and children I do not get.
Sounds almost Biblical with Joshua and the Israelites in the land of Canaan.
Truman funded the Israelis back in 1948 because it was the politically correct thing to do -- the Jewish vote in the USA is significant.
I would like to see you prove that statement.
In the meantime I doubt there is any validity to it, just a myth.
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
Why do you think the Islamic terrorists are such immoral cowards that they use their own women and children as meat shields?
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
At less than 2%, I disagree. "one man, one vote" means the Christian vote is significant in the United States....as many atheist liberals keep whining about. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus? Even combined, which they aren't, not so much.
Religious Landscape Study
Shusha
Gold Member
- Dec 14, 2015
- 16,269
- 3,648
- 290
Um. Not so. In the past year or so, I've only seen two regular posters suggest that. And both suggest it specifically because of terrorism and terrorist acts and the impossibility of distinguishing between those willing to leave in peace within Israel and those just waiting for the opportunity to do some more *cough cough* freedom fighting.
Its not the unwillingness to live with Arab Muslims and Christians. Its the unwillingness to live with a hostile enemy.
Now, you can argue that it is immoral to ethnically cleanse even based on the hostility of a population living amongst you. But how are you going to reconcile that with your demand that all Jewish settlements (only Jewish settlements) be emptied?
ForeverYoung436
Gold Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 6,050
- 1,228
- 245
Yes, Jews are small in numbers but we do have lobbies and some political power. Plus, we are situated in states with alot of Electoral votes.
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
Prove what statement? You doubt that the Israelis have killed more Palestinian civilians than vice - versa? Nobody doubts that. You will find that these statistics are not disputed:
8,701 — Number of Palestinians killed by Israelis since 2000.
1,138 — Number of Israelis killed by Palestinians since 2000.
8:1 — Ratio of Palestinian-Israeli deaths since 2000.
_________
1,772 — Number of Palestinian children killed by Israelis since 2000.
93 — Number of Israeli children killed by Palestinians since 2000.
19:1 — Ratio of Palestinian-Israeli child deaths since 2000.
_________
Your heroes in Hamas who create those casualties need to rethink their tactics.
Islamic terrorism carries a heavy price.
RoccoR
Gold Member
montelatici, et al,
While the math appears to be correct, the theory is wrong.
In both International Armed Conflicts (IAC) and non-International Armed Conflicts (NIAC), the civilian casualty ratio (CCR) is the ratio of civilian casualties to combatant casualties, or total casualties.
William Eckhardt wrote the most comprehensive examination of CCR, and is the most recognized authority on the subject:
Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of proportionality. Combatants must make sure that the harm caused to civilians or civilian property is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a legitimate military objective. This principle is meant to discern the correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act.
Whether or not these number are correct, is irrelevant. The theory in the comparison here is not valid. This is simply NOT HOW to correctly calculate the CCR; and THEN assess it to the direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a legitimate military objective. This is not done very often BUT, the last one I think, to do this was Luis Moreno-Ocampo was the Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), relative to the allegations that the Americans committed a war crime in the 2003 Iraq invasion. (Although there might be one in progress relative to the 2014 Invasion of Gaza.) To glimpse the methodology the CP Moreno-Ocampo's, the the ICC Letter of 9 FEB 06.
In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, there is the added complication that the Arab Palestinians, by their own actions, intentionally increased the number of civilian casualties by their conduct and the failure to comply with the Customary Rules of Land Warfare. This also has an impact on the evaluation in the outcome.
In closing I'll add the following excerpt:
R
While the math appears to be correct, the theory is wrong.
In both International Armed Conflicts (IAC) and non-International Armed Conflicts (NIAC), the civilian casualty ratio (CCR) is the ratio of civilian casualties to combatant casualties, or total casualties.
William Eckhardt wrote the most comprehensive examination of CCR, and is the most recognized authority on the subject:
"On the average, half of the deaths caused by war happened to civilians, only some of whom were killed by famine associated with war...The civilian percentage share of war-related deaths remained at about 50% from century to century." (p. 97) SOURCE: Open Source Encyclopedia Med Library.org
Proportionality
Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of proportionality. Combatants must make sure that the harm caused to civilians or civilian property is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a legitimate military objective. This principle is meant to discern the correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act.
(COMMENT)
Whether or not these number are correct, is irrelevant. The theory in the comparison here is not valid. This is simply NOT HOW to correctly calculate the CCR; and THEN assess it to the direct military advantage anticipated by an attack on a legitimate military objective. This is not done very often BUT, the last one I think, to do this was Luis Moreno-Ocampo was the Chief Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), relative to the allegations that the Americans committed a war crime in the 2003 Iraq invasion. (Although there might be one in progress relative to the 2014 Invasion of Gaza.) To glimpse the methodology the CP Moreno-Ocampo's, the the ICC Letter of 9 FEB 06.
In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, there is the added complication that the Arab Palestinians, by their own actions, intentionally increased the number of civilian casualties by their conduct and the failure to comply with the Customary Rules of Land Warfare. This also has an impact on the evaluation in the outcome.
In closing I'll add the following excerpt:
Israeli–Palestinian conflict
The head of the Shin Bet reported to the Israeli Cabinet that of the 810 Palestinians killed in Gaza in 2006 and 2007, 200 were civilians (a ratio of approximately 1:3). Haaretz assessed this to be an underestimation of civilian casualties. Using B’tselem‘s figures they calculated that 816 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza during the two-year period, 360 of whom were civilians.[32] 1,010 Israelis were killed between September 29, 2000 and January 1, 2005. Of these, 773 were civilians killed in Palestinian attacks, resulting in a ratio of approximately 5:1.[33]
Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza Strip
Military journalist Amos Harel wrote in Haaretz that the ratio between killed terrorists and civilians was 1:1 in 2002-2003, when half the casualties in air assaults on the Gaza Strip were innocent bystander. He attributed this to an Israeli Air Force (IAF) practice of attacking militants even when they had deliberately located themselves in densely populated areas. The ratio improved to 1:28 ratio in late 2005, meaning one civilian killed for every 28 militants. It lowered, however, to 1:10 in 2006. In 2007, the ratio was at its lowest ever, more than 1:30.[34] Figures showing an improvement from 1:1 in 2002 to 1:30 in 2008 were also cited by Jerusalem Post journalist Yaakov Katz.[26]
According to B’Tselem, Israel counts the Hamas police force as a non-civilian when calculating the civilian casualty ratio, and states that such a definition is not compatible with the ICRC interpretation of international law.[35][36] The International Committee of the Red Cross regards persons as civilians if they do not fulfill a “continuous combat function” (for example, many police officers) and do not participate directly in hostilities.[35] Israel states that members of the Hamas police force participate in rocket attacks making them legitimate targets. Analysts state that in addition to their civilian roles such as policing traffic, Hamas police are active in counter-intelligence and fighting dissent.[36]
Professor Alan Dershowitz stated that the 2008 figure of 1:30 represents the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio in history in the setting of combating terrorism. He argued that even this figure may be misleading because not all civilians are innocent bystanders.[37] In October 2009, Dershowitz stated that the ratio for Israel’s campaign of targeted assassinations stood at 1 civilian for every 28 terrorists. He asserted that “this is the best ratio of any country in the world that is fighting asymmetrical warfare against terrorists who hide behind civilians.[38]
On its web blog, the IDF stated that the IDF’s civilian-to-terrorist death ratio is the lowest in the world.[39] It says that civilian deaths are caused by the use of human shields by Gazan militant groups, such as Hamas. There are reports that Israel also used Palestinian civilians as human shields during the First and Second Intifadas, and on at least 14 UN-documented occasions between January 2010 and March 2013 alone, with pictures showing Palestinian minors tied up to the hoods of Israeli military vehicles or in other dangerous situations to prevent any attacks against them.[40] No proof was presented to support these claims what so ever.
Most Respectfully,The head of the Shin Bet reported to the Israeli Cabinet that of the 810 Palestinians killed in Gaza in 2006 and 2007, 200 were civilians (a ratio of approximately 1:3). Haaretz assessed this to be an underestimation of civilian casualties. Using B’tselem‘s figures they calculated that 816 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza during the two-year period, 360 of whom were civilians.[32] 1,010 Israelis were killed between September 29, 2000 and January 1, 2005. Of these, 773 were civilians killed in Palestinian attacks, resulting in a ratio of approximately 5:1.[33]
Israeli airstrikes on the Gaza Strip
Military journalist Amos Harel wrote in Haaretz that the ratio between killed terrorists and civilians was 1:1 in 2002-2003, when half the casualties in air assaults on the Gaza Strip were innocent bystander. He attributed this to an Israeli Air Force (IAF) practice of attacking militants even when they had deliberately located themselves in densely populated areas. The ratio improved to 1:28 ratio in late 2005, meaning one civilian killed for every 28 militants. It lowered, however, to 1:10 in 2006. In 2007, the ratio was at its lowest ever, more than 1:30.[34] Figures showing an improvement from 1:1 in 2002 to 1:30 in 2008 were also cited by Jerusalem Post journalist Yaakov Katz.[26]
According to B’Tselem, Israel counts the Hamas police force as a non-civilian when calculating the civilian casualty ratio, and states that such a definition is not compatible with the ICRC interpretation of international law.[35][36] The International Committee of the Red Cross regards persons as civilians if they do not fulfill a “continuous combat function” (for example, many police officers) and do not participate directly in hostilities.[35] Israel states that members of the Hamas police force participate in rocket attacks making them legitimate targets. Analysts state that in addition to their civilian roles such as policing traffic, Hamas police are active in counter-intelligence and fighting dissent.[36]
Professor Alan Dershowitz stated that the 2008 figure of 1:30 represents the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio in history in the setting of combating terrorism. He argued that even this figure may be misleading because not all civilians are innocent bystanders.[37] In October 2009, Dershowitz stated that the ratio for Israel’s campaign of targeted assassinations stood at 1 civilian for every 28 terrorists. He asserted that “this is the best ratio of any country in the world that is fighting asymmetrical warfare against terrorists who hide behind civilians.[38]
On its web blog, the IDF stated that the IDF’s civilian-to-terrorist death ratio is the lowest in the world.[39] It says that civilian deaths are caused by the use of human shields by Gazan militant groups, such as Hamas. There are reports that Israel also used Palestinian civilians as human shields during the First and Second Intifadas, and on at least 14 UN-documented occasions between January 2010 and March 2013 alone, with pictures showing Palestinian minors tied up to the hoods of Israeli military vehicles or in other dangerous situations to prevent any attacks against them.[40] No proof was presented to support these claims what so ever.
R
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
So, Israel has killed more Palestinians civilians than vice-versa. Using Alan Dershowitz as a source is hilarious, by the way. Let's see a neutral report.
"The conflict in Gaza in July and August was largely responsible for the dramatic increase in fatalities. It claimed the lives of 2,220 Gazans, of whom 1,492 were civilians, 605 militants and 123 unverified."
Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967
More than 70% of the people killed by the Jews were civilians, mostly women and children.
"The conflict in Gaza in July and August was largely responsible for the dramatic increase in fatalities. It claimed the lives of 2,220 Gazans, of whom 1,492 were civilians, 605 militants and 123 unverified."
Israel killed more Palestinians in 2014 than in any other year since 1967
More than 70% of the people killed by the Jews were civilians, mostly women and children.
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
So do Christians, business owners and everyone else. God Bless America!
Dude, even if a business is Jewish-owned with "Jewish" agenda, the odds are 98% of their workers aren't Jewish. All intelligent, non-conspiracy people know that it would be hard to push a "Jewish agenda" with so many Christian Americans carrying the load.
Same for for your "states with a lot of electoral votes". 98% non-Jewish. They aren't going to vote for something that hurts their own self-interests.
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
Now that's funny, a lot of Americans without a pot to piss in voted for Trump. LOL
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
I don't doubt it, but you argument is bullshit. In war, the losers always have the higher body count. One ******* terrorist blows up a busload of innocent people and the IDF blows up a Hamas building known to house terrorist leaders and sympathizers.
Another example is this; someone takes a shot at you and misses, are you really going to forgive them because they missed? Are you going to wait until they finally hit your or a loved one before you take them out...permanently? If you say yes, you're a liar. The fact someone tries to harm you is sufficient reason to use self-defense to neutralize them. Over 70 years, a lot of Palestinian terrorists have been neutralized.
I don't expect you to understand or accept this line of logic, but I'm guessing a lot of others will readily understand it.
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
What's really funny is how you always troll when you're getting your ass kicked. LOL
Are you an American or an Italian? Do you live in Italy? You know, one of the most fucked up nations in the EU outside of Greece? Britain wants out on their own volition, but I'm surprised Germany and the other EU nations haven't given the Italian boot the boot! They're ******* losers, right?
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
The Palestinians, Muslims and Christians are a people under military occupation. They, like those who resisted German occupation forces in Europe, are resisting military occupation. I doubt you would so gleefully rationalize the German response to the killing of a German officer and his family by the resistance in France. The Germans had a policy of killing 10 innocent people for every German killed. As an example. The Israelis are operating in a similar manner.
"MARCH 24, 1944
SS MEN MASSACRE ITALIANS NEAR ROME
Units of the SS (the elite guard of the Nazi state) shoot more than 300 Italians in the Ardeatine Caves, south of Rome, in reaction to a partisan attack on German soldiers. Ten hostages are shot for every German soldier killed. The SS blow up the caves after the massacre."
German Rule in Occupied Europe
Yet another of your failed attempts at analogy.
Divine Wind
Platinum Member
Good example proving the Nazis were assholes and the Italian were such wimps, the United States Army had to save their asses. Even now they can't run their own ******* country.
montelatici
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2014
- 18,686
- 2,133
- 280
Well, that makes a great deal of sense.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Illinois wants to track every round you via forced serialization and registration of ammo.- Started by Invisibleflash
- Replies: 2
-
Canada drops down to 25th place in world happiness rankings: report...Americans now happier than Canadians...of course they blame it on social media- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 0
-
White House seeks to circumvent Schumer on potential DHS funding deal- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 0
-
-
Irate Democrats Screaming Because Cameras Weren't At Pam Bondi Briefing
- Started by mudwhistle
- Replies: 2
