Morch

Maybe they see your views as closer to theirs. I don't recall you ever expressing much issues with posters fully invested in the Palestinian side's narrative the way you do with opponents.

I get it you don't do links, but even that one liner is about collecting evidence, rather than matters being decided.

You made a blanket claim that no war crimes were committed by Israel. Since there's no clear information yet on all actions etc. hard to see how you can support this. Given the sheer scope of operations, it's probable that there were at least some violations, at the very least. I'm not invested in the claim Israel did commit war crimes, for the very same reason.

Wow, a single line quote, daring 8 years back without a source? Now that's what I call a winning argument, not to mention the in-depth insight on display. Enjoy: To Bar Ilan and back: Benjamin Netanyahu’s changing views on a Palestinian state https://www.timesofisrael.com/to-bar-ilan-and-back-benjamin-netanyahus-changing-views-on-a-palestinian-state/ Netanyahu's election slogan in 2008 was about dismantling Hamas rule in Gaza. Not only this never happened, or attempted, Netanyahu even facilitated the transfer of Qatari funds to the Gaza Strip. He says a whole lot of things. Kinda like Trump.

But you have no issues with the opposite leveled the other way around. Have been at it, in the past, quite often, actually.

The first one is not a fact. The second is.

Hamas could stop this immediately - release hostages, surrender. Hamas could protect them children - they do not allow them the safety of their tunnels. You don't seem to have much of an issue with them sacrificing their own children.

As far as I understand, that's one way of putting things - other reports suggest Arab representatives refused to discuss Gaza's future so long as the fighting goes on (linked elsewhere).

Egypt–Israel peace treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt–Israel_peace_treaty Oslo Accords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords Israel–Jordan peace treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel–Jordan_peace_treaty Arab Peace Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative Abraham Accords https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Accords

Of course they should. There there. Fighting in densely populated urban settings is not war crime. Civilians getting killed in war - not necessarily a war crime. Poster announcing 'war crimes' - not good enough.

In your mind. In your posts. But then, you've already demonstrated and accepted you don't know a whole lot about what's going on.

What billions are sent to Israel every year?

I don't normally make predictions of the future You practically make such on almost every post.....

Posts a rant, says 'at a loss for words'....

Your question was 'how can you react' to such things. You shoot them down. It's not like it's the first glider attack Israel faced. It's not that they couldn't have been handled. It's that they weren't.

In short, you tried to add some meaning that wasn't there. Hence, twist. Spare me your nonsense.

The IDF Took Away Weapons From Gaza Border Communities in Recent Years, and Armed West Bank Settlers in the Thousands https://www.msn.com/he-il/news/other/the-idf-took-away-weapons-from-gaza-border-communities-in-recent-years-and-armed-west-bank-settlers-in-the-thousands/ar-AA1izMEp

No need. What he does here is take something that did happen, but add a little twist with 'confiscate'. There was a move to limit the availability of weapons, as security needs were seen as sufficient, and other concerns involved (weapon theft, for example).

Oh, but you do recall it was discussed, then? Good. There was plenty of information linked, presented and commented on. Sorry if doesn't match your conspiracy theory nonsense.

Your definition of 'facts' is questionable.

There were literally hundreds of posts made. You wish to claim you just randomly picked mine? Started one them same bogus arguments you always seem to do? Sure.... Or what...out of all them posts this was the most pertinent? Who are you trying to kid?

This was discussed much earlier in the topic, and in detail. You've even participated in part of that. Now you come back with you insinuations, and pretense this wasn't discussed. Get under your bridge.

How do you mean? Do you somehow imagine these are unstoppable?

You conveniently forgot to mention thousands of rockets, mortars, anti-tank missiles. But anyway, there is no requirement for fighting forces to be of equal strength (that's often not the case), and of course, plenty of good reasons why Hamas cannot buy advanced arms or hold on to them even if it could get them. This have to do with being a terrorist organization. Other than in your posts, the IDF is not out to kill all Palestinians. You keep bringing this bit of hyperbole quite often. Palestinian demographics tell a different story.

Clearly you're determined to twist everything said to fit your not-much-on-topic nonsense. I made a general comment, yes - I was also commenting directly on Amnesty. Not too complicated. It's one of your 'things', pretending it's the first time we talk about issues. Notice how you don't have much to say on topic? Not here, not on other parallel topics? It's always the same play - pick some detail, not even a major one, blow things out of proportions, insist on arguing over minute details, claiming things posters don't say or intend to, and treating any odd link you fish from the net as gospel.