Morch

Hamas is interested in more than that.

Warned me? I posted on that pretty much since the start. The only thing that's notable is how long it took for it to be a thing, and how (relatively) it's still not a critical factor. Your post is an extension of your otherwise expressed views regarding Israel, so unsurprising by itself. You do not deal with facts, but with selective choice of, and a biased interpretation. More like marking the goal, then finding the path. As for all them definition and word games people on here are fond of playing - pffft. As for what you may have 'expected, the feeling is mutual.

Glad you liked it. I'd share some about being consistent, but maybe people are still digesting so not a good idea. As for deflection - nope. Simply unwilling to give some post and posters more free exposure. I have no issued addressing most posts - as you've no doubt noticed.

So, any credible sources to support what you posted until now? Or just the same dodgy ones?

You can try and minimize things as much as you like, same goes for denying and ignoring information - while providing little to support your nonsense. It would not have been an invasion in the sense that you portray, but could have easily enough been the same - civilian killed, taken hostage, terrorists taking over villages etc. on a much larger scale. I don't think anyone said much about conquering all of Israel. That's your lame twist.

At least we agree on some things....

This isn't America. In the context of this forum, I doubt this happened to you much, if at all. A whole lot of criticism leveled at Israel is justified. I don't think each and every comment or poster engaging in such faces what you claim.

Whereas your credible sources are....?

Hamas envisioned deeper attacks, aiming to provoke an Israeli war https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/hamas-envisioned-deeper-attacks-aiming-to-provoke-an-israeli-war/ar-AA1jNTdw Similar analysis appeared on many articles, some were linked in the original topic. Kinda doubt you have much insight into Hamas planning and strategy.

What's sad is how you cling to headlines without bothering to much with content, context.

And here are a couple of articles about propaganda, visuals and AI (I think some of the images were even posted on these topics earlier): Social media is awash in misinformation about Israel-Gaza war, but Musk’s X is the most egregious https://apnews.com/article/social-media-gaza-israel-hamas-misinformation-cb5192215d0f89d8a413606d0ec73cf4 Fake babies, real horror: Deepfakes from the Gaza war increase fears about AI’s power to mislead https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-hamas-israel-misinformation-ai-gaza-a1bb303b637ffbbb9cbc3aa1e000db47

Jesse Jackson, is that you?!

I choose which posts to reply to. Some, which are obviously way over the top, aimed at derailing topics or sickening - I don't bother with. No point in giving your rubbish extra exposure. I'm not overly impressed by your nonsense above - all the more so when you contradict yourself so obviously.

Would be a shame if they were to shelve the thing after all them posts made. But kinda funny too. I like funny.

@billd766 Rich coming from someone who's posts are often as one-sided as it comes.

Go away, troll.

When I was young, my dad and his friend would take us kids, and the dogs, for a long walk to the local dump. They had this DIY/recycling hobby thing going. We never liked it all that much, plus the dogs would go ape<deleted> over stuff there, and we'd have to run after them. Point being is that I'm done sifting through rubbish, thank you very much. By the way, nice to see that semi-balanced mask falling off. Easier to deal with people when they aren't hiding their views.

Mike, I think it's a bit too late to try for the 'not anti-Israel' bit, not with me. Good memory, and you've posted pretty much the same for years now. That's ok - a whole lot not to like, I agree. But no need to pretend otherwise. As for your standard issue faux complaint - notice how it's almost always you who brings it up? Being anti-Israel is a legitimate political position. Ignoring facts, relying on false narratives and using alternative versions of history - not so much.And frankly, not too impressed with all that 'genocide' talk. There is no 'genocide' other than if someone was bent on demeaning the word, or taking pleasure playing with definitions.

Enough to look at the list of people interviews on his website - all the usual suspects. Another giveaway would be the fashion choice... Not to mention that the gas/oil thing is nonsense.

Perhaps if your take on history and related events wouldn't be so biased, you wouldn't make such comments. I am not implying Israel was always for peace, or anything like that. But to present it in the one-sided manner offered above is ridiculous, and misleading. It is not like the Palestinian side is ready and willing, and Israel playing the rejectionist bit. It certainly doesn't even apply to Hamas which is not interested in peace, a two-state solution and such. I get it that your stance is anti-Israel, enough posts read over the years - but do try to keep it real.

Your word games are getting dafter by the post.

So you see Palestinian rejectionism as beneficial to their cause? Do tell how that worked out for them. Disregarding Hamas fantasies about eradicating Israel and having it all, what Palestinian could realistically negotiate for nowadays is less than what they would have got under the Partition plan.

That you posted or qualified something doesn't make it correct, factual or true. As usual you try for a contrived reading of my post, suited to fit your argument.

Just your nonsense on loop. Nobody uses 'Hebrews' nowadays much. Zionists are not necessarily radical, militant or even a group.

No I got your words just fine. just not how they apply. Maybe you think that issues should be considered from one angle only, or that there's always just one party responsible for things, I dunno.