Morch

@thaibeachlovers Them children wouldn't be getting 'blown apart' had Hamas refrained from the 7/10 attack. Them children wouldn't be getting 'blown apart' had Hamas offered them safety and shelter in its tunnels. As for sympathy, don't think you expressed a whole lot of that for them Israeli children murdered on 7/10. Maybe try to peddle your faux moral outrage on forums where your comments and views are less known.

I joined about the same time as yourself, don't recall there ever being a time where this wasn't so. But yeah, much more of that nowadays.

Son of Israeli war cabinet minister killed in Gaza, IDF says https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/07/middleeast/israel-idf-war-cabinet-son-killed-gaza-intl/index.html Netanyahu's sons aren't anywhere near the front. The elder finished his 'exile' in Florida, where his 'contribution' was the usual crap he posts on social media (mainly conspiracy theories, incitement, and badmouthing anyone who doesn't like his dad), came home and did an emergency call center volunteer photo op. The younger still attends uni in London. Hamas leaders in Qatar moved most of their immediate families away from the strip (I think there's one kid getting medical care in Israel, from before 7/10). There were reports that families of Hamas Gaza leadership were similarly moved from the Gaza Strip in advance, before the attack.

I guess that, as usual, you're not going to provide a link for what you claim. And please, make sure it actually says what you claim before sending posters to watch something - already did that on a related past topic. I guess you missed the suicide bombings part, hidden weapons possibility and so on, which would made such a precaution reasonable. This isn't some police arresting drunks. Maybe you need to take another look at how Israelis taken hostage was treated in the Gaza Strip on 7/10.

Oh, you 'suspect'? That's nice. Uninhabitable, how? You are aware that destroyed buildings can be rebuilt, right? I doubt you're a legal expert, and regardless of any headline you might link - people evacuating rather than staying under bombardment is a better option. Hamas didn't offer this choice for them people attacked in Southern Israel on 7/10. Also, you continue to ignore Hamas's part in this, as if this just came out of the blue.

There's nothing to understand, he's just doing his usual bit of trolling.

Hamas killed 1200 Israelis in a single day. Took over 200 hostages. I don't think that 'ignoring' them would have sent the message you imagine, or have broadcasted anything but weakness. This is the ME, not the EU. How do you mean 'will not want to deal with them'? Who? Iran, Hezbollah, Turkey, Qatar? Why wouldn't they? Just the hostages issue alone would mean that they'd have to be 'dealt' with in order to negotiate. I think they would be easier to ignore after being crushed some. Maybe can't 'destroy' them fully, but hit them hard enough to make them less relevant, is.

If they are as good assassins as they were good electricians, nothing to worry about. Guy across the street is a pretty senior PEA official (runs three amphurs), should have asked him for a guy before relations soured.

If you're into nonsense comments, hyperbole and ignoring what was actually posted - that was a great response. Otherwise, not so much. People die in wars all the time. Civilians, children too. It's not often that 'genocide' is so quickly and readily cited, though. Mainly because there's a difference. Would be interesting to know how you see Hamas role as far as this unfortunate death toll is concerned.

Oh, 'you heard'. That's settled then. As for your Nakba 2 hyperbole - there is none such.

@Crossy Our 'electricians' (semi-retired absent minded father, and his textile-college graduate son) hated you. Every argument we had ended up with 'Crossy said!' (in English). Heard them muttering about it, trying to figure what it meant. The elder was actually into most 'upgrades', as he didn't do much of the hard labor. Junior wasn't appreciative of the 2.4 pole, though.

Guess it might have something to do with economic circumstances. Say, if the foreigner husband is poor, doesn't make much, health issues etc. Then the expectation would be to pull resources together. If there's more than enough, and the Mrs. income is a side-show, maybe a non-issue.

I think other tenets would just make you worry about different things. Maybe it's always like that when renting. Maybe some people always worry about something. If there are no actual problems, the people pay on time, and those staying there are reasonable enough - no reason to change anything.

What you demonstrate is that opinions change. Somehow you seem to feel that the opinions you cite (never mind blowing them out of proportion) will not.

On that...pffft. It's just a catchy slogan which ignores Hamas as a factor in this. The Gaza Strip was not always under blockade. This came about because of something. Wonder what that could be.

Because.

You say it is likely. You do not demonstrate how and why. Your comments are wishful thinking, not rational analysis, nor fact based. These sort of comments appear on these topics each and every time related matters are discussed - not much real traction or effect in the real world. As pointed out, most of what this does is strengthen right-wing elements in Israel. There is no two-state solution without the Palestinians being ready and willing to commit. That you refer to Israel alone is preposterous.

If your crystal ball says so.... In the real world, there are no indications this is in the cards. And, of course, it's not like the Palestinians are absolved of any accountability - even if you tend not to refer to them in your posts. A peace process, let alone a peace agreements requires two parties.

No, thanks. I'm in the wait-and-see club. Given precedent, they might shelve the whole thing, delay it indefinitely, or change various elements. At the very least, we'll (hopefully) get more details on how things stand and what they mean, sometime next year. Tried to ask Bangkok Bank and immigration about this - they don't really know either. An acquaintance tried to question RD - no real answer.

I don't think anyone seriously argues otherwise. There is no getting around this. Wars in densely populated urban setting carry a whole lot of civilian deaths. There were no such casualty lists on 6/10. The issue is more one of intent. Israel does not specifically target civilians. Hamas does.

I think there is a difference between the Israeli government policy in the West Bank (which does represent the agenda and interests of extreme elements), and it's current policy in the Gaza Strip vs. Hamas. IMO, with regard to the latter - pretty much any Israeli government would act the same. Some support for this could be seen by Centrist opposition leaders joining the government (and more importantly, the war cabinet) as an temporary, ad-hoc, wartime emergency measure. I agree that the actions of the IDF in the Gaza Strip may seem 'extreme'. Not that they represent an extremist ideology. Considering the trigger for Israel's offensive, it could have been way worse than that. And while the casualty figures and visuals are what they are - if things are considered in a more level headed manner, and compared to other instances, some perspective may emerge. The IDF's estimate (from last week, if not mistaken) was that about 5000 of the casualties were Hamas men. If so, it would place the civilian to combatant casualty ratios at about 2:1. This is pretty similar to figures from previous major operation in the Gaza Strip. Could be wrong, but don't think that comparable operations by other armies were very different, or much better, in this regard. Wars aren't pretty. You say that the death toll is not necessary to achieve Israel's goals - would you care to explain the alternatives as you see them?

Indiscriminate how? If it was indiscriminate, what was the point of telling civilians to evacuate? Of giving them time to do so? Also, indiscriminate would see much higher casualty figures - the current ones represent about one sortie/bomb per casualty. That doesn't sound much like kill-as-much-as-you-can. Wars in dense urban settings are like that. As for 'the children' - People tend to complain about Israel, not so much about Hamas placing their civilians (and 'the children') in harm's way, denying them safety and shelter, or referring to them as 'necessary sacrifices'. There is no 'genocide'.

It is not, actually. The thing with rockets is that they are tracked, and so the launch area could be pointed at pretty accurately. So if Israel would have made totally bogus claims regarding this, it wouldn't be long before they were called out. Also, what would be the point ? If Israel wanted to turn the Gaza Strip into a parking lot and kill most civilians, it could technically do that - and it would have been less time consuming and taken less resources than the current fighting does. Israel doesn't gain a whole lot from civilian deaths and destruction in the Gaza Strip.

International waters. If locals are worried about that, maybe they should re-think challenging Israel over matters that do not really concern them much. As far as I'm aware so far it's mostly one-sided traffic as far as missiles etc. are concerned.

What I know is that such attacks were carried out more than once earlier this year - and before the 7/10 attack. There is no argument that things in the West Bank heated up since the current government was formed, or that the 7/10 attack and IDF operations in the Gaza Strip contribute to that as well. But lumping Israel's actions there as being 'part of the current offensive' is incorrect. As said earlier (and I think mentioned on past topics) - there are disagreements between the IDF/Minister of Defense/new Centrist adds to the war cabinet and right-wing settler-representative ministers/settlers. The former would like for things not to get out of control, as it would divert IDF attention and resources from the Gaza Strip. The latter are into using every opportunity they get to push their main agenda. Netanyahu is being his usual weak, indecisive self (dependent on the former for general public approval, de but also dependent on the latter for political support) - and here we are.