Morch

Amnesty is a human rights organization, with vested interests and problematic ties in this scenario. It does not try cases, and the evidence collection process it applies is not necessarily conclusive or even usable. Again, you seem confused between accusations and actual 'war crimes'.

Simplistic analogies are for people who cannot deal with reality and details. I can see why you'd be for them.

Civilians were not asked to evacuate and then immediately bombed to kingdom come. As for links, it's kinda lame jumping late to the topic and demanding links for things that were discussed, linked and argued upon numerous times by now.

By yourself, for sure.

You are describing things that are not necessarily tied to each other. You'd make a terrible prosecutor, or legal representative. The bombing itself is not necessarily a 'war crime' other than in your imagination.

On a whole range of topics, you post comments such as this. Short, decisive, no doubts - as if you're an expert on whatever topic is at hand. In reality, this is your opinion, a biased one, rather than a legal analysis or fact. If it was that easy, cases against Israel would be mounting right now. This ain't happening.

Yeah, well - international proceedings don't work like that, in case you weren't aware. I did not accuse you of lying. I do think you're over the top most times, though - and often not very accurate in your comments. More (biased) opinion than fact sort of thing. I do not deny the possibility that Israel committed war crimes during this war. Given the sheer number of military operations and the urban setting, it's a reasonable assumption. But not a proven one. Much of what is claimed, by posters, politicians, protestors and so on as 'war crimes' does not actually amount to such. A whole lot of things may be wrong, ugly, deadly and whatever - but not necessarily 'war crimes'. What case? Who would try it? What evidence would be presented? You're just tossing about assumptions about legalities and posters' views, nothing more.

It was linked on these topics much earlier. And it wouldn't be the first time a representative from a dodgy country took office on such things - Saudi Arabia, Syria..

Please learn to differentiate between what politicians say, even those at the UN, and what legal representatives/officers claim. Not the same thing. Note that the ICC guy visiting Israel was more nuanced than yourself on this.

I'm not dodging anything, just not following your reasoning. The more obvious reasons for the Hamas attack would have been disrupting Saudi Arabia's intentions of normalizing relations with Israel (coming on the heels of the Abraham Accords, this would have marginalized the Palestinians further), also dropping support ratings on the domestic front, and Sinwar's position coming under question. The rest - illegal settler actions in the West Bank, things to do with Al Aqsa, and so on are fluff - it's not the sort of stuff Hamas goes to war on, normally. Used as a slogan, sure, but there's always other interests and motives. If you see the three reasons I mentioned as being a legit justification for the 7/10 attack, guess we'll have to disagree. Shelling hospitals? When did that happen? There weren't any major attacks on hospitals in the Gaza Strip by the IDF, as far as I recall. The power supply was initially cut off by Hamas, after rockets were launched at the supplying power station, cutting off came later. If you think that a country who just suffered something like a 9/11 attack would feel obligated to provide succor for the attacking side - we'll have to disagree. That without counting in the reports about Hamas hoarding fuel intended for civilian purposes. A whole lot of children did die in the Gaza Strip - certainly regrettable. I kinda doubt Hamas wasn't aware Israel would response in force, and yet chose the course of action it took. Also, despite having the facilities to protect the people of the Gaza Strip (all them miles of tunnels), there was no shelter offered, not even for the children. In fact, Hamas leadership both called on civilians to stay put and fact Israel's attacks, and commented on civilian death being necessary 'sacrifices' for the cause.

I am not required to tell you anything, stop trolling. Already answered that I read and watch many different media outlets. I have no issues condemning Netanyahu for many things - and did so even on these topics, you're lying again.

In Israel, the President is more of a ceremonial office, head of state thing. It's currently filled by a former center-left wing politician. If you meant Netanyahu, the Prime Minister - he did not order any such thing as you posted. Try and read the links you provide. There is no 'ethnic cleansing' other than in your posts.

Interesting. In your country, do they decide people are war criminals before they go to trial? Hamas actions are clear cut on this front, Israel's aren't. You might find that hard to digest, but that's how it is.

You could say a whole lot of things. You actually do. Most of them are nonsense. The above being yet another example. I'm currently watching some clips trying to figure out if it's a total waste of time giving LOTRO another go. Got this thing for dead games.

Matthews? Now here's someone that didn't look like a spy - or rather more Smiley than Bond. Didn't think much of the movie (some great photography, though), but liked the book.

What you are 'sure' of doesn't carry much weight, considering you seem unaware of major ongoing events regarding this conflict.

That got nothing much to do with what was posted earlier.

Deny is as much you want there is a difference between Hamas attack on Israel and Israel's response. As for your lack of knowledge regarding things in the Gaza Strip - if you are indeed that clueless, maybe go do some reading before posting further. The IDF has 'invaded', in force, weeks ago. No, I do not agree with your nonsense. Hamas atrocities are documented. An army attacking a terrorist organization does not necessarily imply the same thing. Whether or not war crimes were committed by Israel in this war is something that would be made clear later on. No such doubts with regard to the Hamas.

And it's still nonsense.

topic is about the Gaza Strip, Israel war against Hamas. If there are no Israeli settlers why did you reference them?

Nowhere in your post did you mention the 'restriction' applied to Israel as relevant to the Palestinians (including Hamas). You did not make a point about both sides, but focused on one of them. Your closing comment about 'Zionist faction' is nonsense. I wonder if you made it up yourself, or lifted it from some dubious website.

Civilian death and destruction are part of almost any war in carried out in urban settings. They are not universally labeled 'atrocities'. Same goes for Israel's actions. A 'few' IDF soldiers? You knowledge seems to be lacking, there IDF is in strength at the Gaza Strip, and been that way for weeks. You count of 'atrocities' seems to include only one side to this conflict.

Again, seems like your military expertise, tactical prowess and combat experience would be of great value, somewhere. What is it with adding one liner nothing comment which say nothing much?

The US cannot negotiate without Israel being willing and able. You're just posting nonsense.