Northeastmonk
Gold Member
I question her intelligence. It’s like she’d party with the nazis just for climate change.
She's a puppet. An antisemite puppet.I question her intelligence. It’s like she’d party with the nazis just for climate change.
Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
These insurrectionist need to be treated likeI have this very unsettling feeling. It feels like people would build the concentration camps and gas chambers if they could. The more protests I see the more I fear that this a rally for a second holocaust.
Thats an uniformed take, you bought hamas's propaganda hook line and sinker, any terrorists in Israeli were not fortified or precisely known positions, a ground assault against a well hidden, fortified and defended position is suicide .Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
Firstly, not your friend.You could just say your heart is with the innocent victims and be done with it. No need for this wall of pretentious text, frend.
Can you really be this obtuse?Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
There's no reason why the eradication of Hamas needs to involve thousands of air strikes, though. This is my point.If hamas won't be eradicated all "peace talks" will be irrelevant, few months from now this shit will start again.
If they are eradicated their replacement will take more time to form so peace will actually be achieved (for some time...).
Firstly, not your friend.
Second, if you don't have an actual response to what I said why bother responding at all?
There's no reason why the eradication of Hamas needs to involve thousands of air strikes, though. This is my point.
Plus, we all know (since they make it clear) that the main Hamas leadership isn't even inside Gaza so what are all these air strikes for? Is it really a genius plan to drop large bombs on apartment blocks for the purposes of killing a few (even a few dozen, hell let's say 50 if you want) Hamas fighters who, by themselves in the grand scheme of things, don't matter while at the same time most likely killing dozens or even hundreds of civilians whose left behind family might then decide (for better or worse, probably worse) to join Hamas or some other organization that appears after this is over?
I want them to eradicate Hamas. Hamas is the worst thing that ever happened to the Palestinians and it's a shame that they essentially ended all democracy in Gaza after initially winning that election decades ago (and even then not by much).Plus people like you both sidesing things is exactly why they pull tactics like setting rocket Stations in boy scout centers or build bunkers under hospitals, they know a certain block of people will ignore the only reason civilians are in danger is because of them and blame isreal, every civilian casualty is on Hamas
The assumption that the IDF would use JDAMs to target widely dispersed gunmen is ridiculous. Air strikes are being used to target missile launchers, tunnels, fortified artillery positions, vehicles, militant leadership, and command centres.There's no reason why the eradication of Hamas needs to involve thousands of air strikes, though. This is my point.
Plus, we all know (since they make it clear) that the main Hamas leadership isn't even inside Gaza so what are all these air strikes for? Is it really a genius plan to drop large bombs on apartment blocks for the purposes of killing a few (even a few dozen, hell let's say 50 if you want) Hamas fighters who, by themselves in the grand scheme of things, don't matter while at the same time most likely killing dozens or even hundreds of civilians whose left behind family might then decide (for better or worse, probably worse) to join Hamas or some other organization that appears after this is over?
Bibi wants to exterminate Hamas which also means destroying every infrastructure used by the organisation that allows them to orchestrate themselves and attack from.Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
Never gonna happen. Most of the strip evacuated South already, and there are less people in the North where Israel wants to take control.There are 30K Hamas members in Gaza. The death toll is currently at 11K. I won’t be surprised that we’ll be seeing 200K dead in the strip by the end of the operation.
From earlier on this thread you are really aching to both-sideism this, but this clearly shows your point is invalid. Israel is doing all it can to prevent civilian deaths by these airstrikes so they can move in troops with minimal risk to them. Israel could have leveled Gaza by now, it could've been a parking lot if Israel wanted it. But instead, we are doing everything to minimize collateral damage. I would have leveled the place after what they've done.There's no reason why the eradication of Hamas needs to involve thousands of air strikes, though. This is my point.
On 7 October 2023, Hamas launched an incursion into Israel starting with a rocket barrage of over 5,000 missiles against Israeli targets,[142][143][144] leading to the Israel-Hamas War.I want them to eradicate Hamas. Hamas is the worst thing that ever happened to the Palestinians and it's a shame that they essentially ended all democracy in Gaza after initially winning that election decades ago (and even then not by much).
There's nothing strange about saying "Yes please destroy Hamas" but also saying "Maybe rethink how you're doing it".
Plus, I 100% agree with you that every civilian casualty is ultimately on Hamas (for either forcibly stopping people from leaving certain areas) but then where does that lead us? Do we just say Israel should blow up every single building that might house Hamas terrorists or weapons caches because "oh well it's technnnnnically not our fault anyway"? Maybe you'd say Yes. I say No.
So actually on the topic of our invasion of Iraq, we know roughly 2 years into that war, George Bush stated that around 30,000 civilians died as a result of the initial incursion and ongoing violence"The assumption that the IDF would use JDAMs to target widely dispersed gunmen is ridiculous. Air strikes are being used to target missile launchers, tunnels, fortified artillery positions, vehicles, militant leadership, and command centres.
The exact same reason that the US didn’t just roll troops into Baghdad and instead conducted thousands of air strikes over the course of three weeks before troops set foot in the city.
Israel is bombing their own civilians. There are over 240 Israelis in Gaza, more than 30 of them are children. Hamas already claimed weeks ago that more than 20 of the kidnapped Israelis have died from the bombings. It's probably not true, but you seem to believe them.Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
There are 11K dead Palestinians, not 11K dead civilians. It's similar to when people talk about the death toll in the West Bank, but for some reason, they include terrorists who have been shot while stabbing or shooting civilians. The freaking Lions' Den group is counted in the West Bank death toll. In the Oct 7th attack alone more than 1000 terrorists have died.So actually on the topic of our invasion of Iraq, we know roughly 2 years into that war, George Bush stated that around 30,000 civilians died as a result of the initial incursion and ongoing violence"
Boston Uni paper on civilian deaths during Iraq War (at the top of page 2)
In comparison, despite Biden/Kirby saying they don't believe the civilian death figures coming from Hamas (which is fair enough, Hamas has every incentive to inflate them), a government official has since suggested that the number is probably higher (than the 10,000 cited by Hamas). Plus the final UN numbers tend to be not far off what Hamas ("The Gaza Health Ministry").
So that's 30,000 civilians killed in a full scale invasion over 2 years versus 10,000 killed over roughly 2 months. Even if we say half of that 10,000 is actually Hamas terrorists, and then let's put number of "genuine" civilian deaths at 5,000, that's still quite a large amount (and much worse than Iraq so far in relative terms).
Even if we say Israel just doing what the coalition did when they invaded Iraq, the numbers still point to Israel (in the process, not deliberately) killing proportionately a lot more civilians. So based on that I'm sticking with my "maybe they could be doing it differently" stance.
You can't say they can go after Hamas while also saying they shouldn't endanger civilians. This is impossible.Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
On one side we have "Israel are terrorists, down with Israel, from the river to the sea!" etc etc etc
on the other side we have "Hamas must pay, no matter the cost (to the Palestinians, that is)"
Surely there's a middle ground along the lines of "yes obviously go after Hamas but maybe conducting thousands of airstrikes on a small piece of land where civilians have nowhere to go miiiiight be a recipe for disaster?"
The obvious reality is that the IDF cares far less about Palestinian civilians than it does about Israeli civilians. Sure they might be taking certain precautions to avoid civilian casualties, but the moment you decide "yeah let's drop a 500kg bomb on this building" you kinda lose the right to keep saying "we're taking every precaution!".
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
The solution should be political, not militar.You can't say they can go after Hamas while also saying they shouldn't endanger civilians. This is impossible.
Hamas operates out of civilian infrastructure. They use an extensive, well fortified tunnel system that runs beneath hospitals, apartment blocks, etc.
They store weapons there. Pop out at different locations to launch artillary. Have local headquarters there.
The extensive bombing is necessary. Of course you don't have another solution, because there isn't one.
Comparing it to the raid in Israel territory is ridiculous. These were men with limited weapons, operating in the open. Airstrikes were not necessary.
Also, remember that the number of civilian casualties comes from Hamas.
How many of the casualties are actually their fighters? How many of the casualties were the result of Hamas? For example, we already know the parking lot explosion at a hospital a couple weeks ago was caused by a misfired rocket from the Hamas side. The 500 or so casualties they claim is included in that 10,000 plus number.
That went out the window after Hamas lauched a brigade size invasion to murder as many people as possible before having to retreat with hundreds of hostages.The solution should be political, not militar.
7th time's the charm right?The solution should be political, not militar.
There cannot be a political solution with neo-ISIS. Political solution requires political entities to be invovled and Hamas is not a government but a raid bandit camp, that builds tunnels under civilian infrastructure, launches rockets behind civilian backs, using them a shields. I do find it hilarious how people are defending Hamas, yet Hamas is not different from ISIS. And ISIS still had civilians in their lands and all the same things, but only with palestinians it is somehow different.The solution should be political, not militar.
I don't think there is such a thing as UK media anymoreThere cannot be a political solution with neo-ISIS. Political solution requires political entities to be invovled and Hamas is not a government but a raid bandit camp, that builds tunnels under civilian infrastructure, launches rockets behind civilian backs, using them a shields. I do find it hilarious how people are defending Hamas, yet Hamas is not different from ISIS. And ISIS still had civilians in their lands and all the same things, but only with palestinians it is somehow different.
I still believe that UK is behind all this media outrage in regards of Israel. UK media was the first one to sound the alarm regarding hospital bombings after all. And their protests in London are the biggest ones too.
Wall of shit
Israel is not an extremist camp. It's actually the normal moral place to be, as you can see by any protest or person arguing for it online. Compared to the brain rot and antisemitism and Jew hatered of the other.Seems like we're getting baited into joining one of two extreme camps.
I totally agree and it's appalling to watch women gleefully use violence like this.Not to push into a gender war, but I thought this was an interesting statistic which reflects my experience of... a lot of Pro Palestine protesters that I've seen on media - college kids, people tearing down the posters or whatnot are women. (coming from this study of differences between male & female in college majors)
In any logical sense, I just can't seem to understand why women would push for a regime that proudly denounce women's rights and all.
Only have to ask one question to prove this: was the Israeli air force conducting thousands of air strikes inside Israel while Hamas terrorists were still at large? No. They weren't. They sent mainly infantry to take on those Hamas terrorists because they probably knew using airstrikes would lead to.... wait for it... "collateral damage".
Not saying I have a solution. That's for the IDF to work out. Just saying they obviously aren't "taking every precaution" inside Gaza because we can see exactly what "taking every precaution" actually looks like by examining their response to the attack inside Israel.
They’ve been planning his for years and people have been silenced, cancelled, and labeled as Nazis for trying to sound the alarm.
They’ve been planning his for years and people have been silenced, cancelled, and labeled as Nazis for trying to sound the alarm.
They never went away. They just went into hiding and became billionaires to pour money into groups that fund education and mostly peaceful protests.It's disgusting that we fought so hard to beat the Nazi's, only to see the same politics rise again, not even a century later.
Braverman has had chances to make her "hardline" policies work, but in the past she has been behind loopy headline chasing plans that didn't work, and recently she showed the lack of respect and authority she commands when her demands about protests were simply just ignored. In terms of the BBC and their headlines, the BBC is a huge organisation, with many departments that don't interact or get along, often with very junior or biased staff being allowed to do things they really shouldn't. They are not really under control of some shadowy agenda.I still believe that UK is behind all this media outrage in regards of Israel. UK media was the first one to sound the alarm regarding hospital bombings after all. And their protests in London are the biggest ones too.
Time for a new avatar, disqualified.