It is. Reminds me of all the Insurgents in Iraq and Afghan who can't fight the The US Military without hiding and using cowardly tactics.
What makes conventional warfare superior to guerrilla warfare, especially when one party to a conflict is a non-state actor? Your suggestion is ridiculous.
It's cowardly to use Insurgency instead of a Conventional Warfare.
That's one of the silliest and most ignorant things I've read. Were the colonists who defeated and expelled the British in 1776 "cowards"? How about the Jews who participated in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising?
The Reason Israel has killed Civilians is because Hamas and any other Opposing force in Palestine use Schools and Hospitals as cover.. don't get me started with the Kidnapping or children and using them as shields..
Israel kills civilians because it uses force indiscriminately. Claims of "human shields" are lies propagated by Israel and its unthinking supporters; the veracity of these allegations cannot be confirmed outside of Zionist propaganda sources. Even if we were to assume that you were correct -- which you aren't -- does the presence of a few militants in the vicinity of a hospital justify destroying that hospital and everyone inside of it?
It's true, because they know Israel is a Superior Force in the Middle East, capable of taking out 4 countries at once in 7 days.
That's not a particularly impressive feat when you've got the most powerful country in the world on a leash.
You don't? Then what about all those Innocent Jews getting killed and are sacred of leaving their homes because of Qassam rockets?
What about them? I haven't expressed support for indiscriminate rocket fire because, unlike Zionists, I oppose it regardless of its source. The death of any civilian is tragic, but let's put things into perspective. Qassam rockets killed 28 Israelis over eight years. In response, Israel killed over 700 Palestinian civilians over a period of three weeks.
Don't even lie to yourself.. You don't want any Jewish Presence in the middle east..
Don't be a presumptuous ass. I don't care who lives where as long as they don't oppress others. Your recourse to lying about my beliefs only underscores the weakness of your own arguments.
you still haven't said anything about all those Jews eradicated from their homes when they were living in peace in Arab Nations.
I wasn't asked. Of course I oppose expelling people simply because of their religious identity. I realize that consistent opposition to oppression must be a concept unfamiliar to most Zionists, but it really isn't so complicated.
Hamas and any other Muslim who hates the Jews don't want peace. They Want Israel gone.. Forever.. If Israel gave back all the land they would still throw Qassam Rockets over... This isn't about Palestine or Settlers, it's about Jewish Presence.. and you know it.
Certain individuals may harbor enmity for Jews in general, but I'm not one of them. Neither is Khalid Mish'al, the leader of Hamas:
Our message to the Israelis is this: we do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture. Jews have lived in the Muslim world for 13 centuries in peace and harmony; they are in our religion "the people of the book" who have a covenant from God and His Messenger Muhammad (peace be upon him) to be respected and protected. Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us - our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people.
Don't make me laugh.
Churchill granted a Palestinian Homeland.. which is now Jordan.
Churchill also promised a Jewish Land. Which is now Israel.
In 1948 the UN divided 20% that was left of the mandate into two parts.
One for the Arabs, one for the Jews.. 60% of the New Jewish land was Desert.
Funded by the UN with Billions of the US and Israel Dollars for economic development the Arabs could have done the same.. Instead their money went to their leaders Swiss Bank accounts and for funding ethnic Hatred and Terrorism.
If the Arabs had been willing to accept an arrangement in which they were given 90% of the Original Palestine mandate there would be no middle eastern conflict.
But they didn't..
The problem here is twofold. First of all, you are under the mistaken impression that foreign nations, like Britain, have the right to dictate the affairs of people living thousands of miles away. The people living in the region of Palestine had the exclusive right to determine for themselves what kind of government they would have. Secondly, you make it seem as if being forced to give away
any portion of land to recently-arrived immigrants is acceptable, which is not true at all. If Mexicans crossed the border in huge numbers and settled in the Southwestern US, would you be okay with ceding ten percent of the territory of the US to those immigrants?
The Creation of Israel meant for the first time in 2,000 years Jews had their own state to protect them.
This occurred at the expense of the people who had already been living in what would become "Israel." That is completely unacceptable. If the Jews wanted a homeland where they could establish self-rule under Jewish law, it should have been carved out of German territory. It is ridiculous to expect the Palestinians to give up their territory because of an atrocity committed on a separate continent.
But 1/6 of 1% of the Middle East was too much for the Arabs.
Don't you understand? Establishing an oppressive government anywhere is unacceptable, regardless of the amount of territory controlled by that government.
Jewish supremacy? no. Jews in General.
I oppose the former.
Well sure sounds like you guys would get along perfectly..
I'll excuse your ignorance of divisions within Islam.
That's certainly what you seem to be implying. Jewish suffering does not justify Palestinian suffering.
