Morch

Topic is about Hezbollah leader's speech - most posts nothing to do with that. Interesting.

No, that's what a misleading loaded deflection post looks like. Note that I did not deny that there are many deaths. You may wish to recall (or not) the hospital blast incident, now widely accepted as resulting from such a failed rocket. The associated death toll figure claimed by Hamas was 500. Whether or not there were 500 casualties is one matter, but more to the point - was there any acknowledgment of the cause? Or were them deaths just added to the Israel-did-it tab?

As far as I understand, if it can be demonstrated that the supply of aid/water/power/whatever is directly abused by the enemy it bears on the legal obligations to supply them, and/or overrides the 'collective punishment' label. There are other things at play to - proportionality, the availability of other sources and so on. Same thing when attacking hospitals, schools, denying freedom of movement. There are provisions for most situation. In this case, despite the sky-is-falling claims, hospitals did not go without electricity, for example. As was further detailed, there's apparently enough fuel in the Gaza Strip to run for quite a bit - with Hamas illegally holding on much of that, and illegally tapping into sources (say hospital supplies).

When did you stop beating your wife?

I agree that for many it's a black and white thing. There's also a whole lot of rhetoric, often issued by politicians and leaders, which sets the lines of 'debate' or frames relevant notions. People then repeat those snippets, slogans, truism giving them added force. A whole lot of that on these topics. It's possible to step back and analyze any aspect of this conflict. The willingness to do so with regard to a 'supported' side, less so. For example, your own commentary, relatively balanced as it may be, centers of certain things, while almost completely passing over others. And that's fine, this isn't a whole encompassing 'discussion', and there's no requirement to cover all issues, or to feel the same (or as strongly) about them. About the anti-Israel, antisemitic issues in USA campuses - I was under the impression things were dire. Recently talked to a friend at Harvard and was surprised that he said in reality it nowhere as prevalent or a thing as headlines suggest. Maybe more so in certain faculties, colleges, and universities. i found this difficult to settle with what I read, then recalled how news coverage of the war itself is sometimes like that as well. Not saying it ain't there or a non-issue, just maybe not exactly as advertised.

A few posts back you claim not to get what it's about, now you seem fully acquainted with it. Just saying.

It's great how people can watch the news, admit to not understanding what they saw, built an argument on this 'perception' and treat it as a serious point of view. What you refer to is a small splinter group of religious orthodox Jews. While centered in Jerusalem, they are anti-Zionist, and often go for provocations, such as praising Israel's enemies etc. It's not much reported because it happens quite often, and is not a main news story. That there are Jews holding different views on many things is hardly news as well. It would be more interesting when such things will be prevalent on the Palestinian side. People denying antisemitism exists, or that the term has meaning got a vested interest in such efforts. Not the first time you air such views....

You claim major powers are split in their support, and this is true. Then you go on to present it as USA' support being conditioned (probably correct), while not such element attributed to China and Russia's support of the Hamas. In effect, the USA's support is tangible, meaningful, material. China and Russia's support of the Hamas is mostly comprised of limited diplomatic action. Gaza's casualty reports are effectively controlled by Hamas. Hamas is not in the habit of breaking down such figures, giving much detail about it's own casualties (as in Hamas men, especially not of fighting age), or differentiating between those killed by misfiring Palestinian rockets and other casualties. While I'm sure the death toll is well in the thousands, treating them all as civilian casualties is a choice, not necessarily a fact-based one. Comparing USA's involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq to the current situation often leaves out a central component - that at the end of the day, there is not much direct threat to USA civilians, not many attack on American soil. Israel, on the other hand, lives next door to the threat. Maybe gives a different perspective on the threat in question. I agree that the current war (or fighting, whatever one wishes to call it) will not fundamentally change anything. It could alter some key elements on the 'tactical' level (example, threat level from Hamas's military wing curtailed), but long term it's not a game changer. True also that deaths and carnage are great motivators for further violence. Be that as it may, seems that on the 'strategic' level there's no leadership on either side capable of making a move that will create a different reality, and maybe not much enthusiasm or trust among the people on both sides as well. I don't know that there is, under current circumstances, a viable comprehensive solution out of the mess. I don't think that even now, most of the efforts or thinking associated with it are invested in long term, permanent solutions. That's the nature of things, perhaps. And yes, the World does have a fit when these things go boom, then slowly returns to 'normal' more or less - especially as this been going on for decades and no end in sight. The echo chamber thing is there (less so on parallel topics), but that's also a product of this specific topic's dynamic and style of key participants. It's kinda lame commenting on it without context. Cause and effect.

Total genocide how? Number of bombs dropped on Gaza equals more or less the number of Palestinian casualties. That's not how 'genocide' is done.... If Israel had an interest in what you claim, there's be way more Palestinian casualties. Also, bear in mind that them casualty figures include Hamas men and those killed by Palestinian rockets misfiring etc.

That's a rather misleading headline. The key elements of the actual speech were that Hamas is on it's own - it was said that this is a 100% Palestinian matter not a regional one. Similarly, a great emphasis was placed on claiming Iran and Hezbollah had no previous concerning the attack, had no part in its planning, and did not know its about to happen. Similarly, there was some hot air inflating Hezbollah's current level of involvement and losses taken (in effect, many casualties suffered being Hamas men in Lebanon). The speech was more a delivery of messages to Hamas and Israel - along the lines of Hezbollah not going to dive right in, but keep current level of involvement, maybe take it up a notch or two. So long as current Israeli response in Lebanon stays the same - this will be upheld.

Saying war crimes were committed is not quite the same as legally demonstrating it. Usually quite a long process involved. Also, not by any means a rare statement - other than in your mind. The last line is delusional, alternate reality - the crux of Nasrallah's speech was that the Hamas are on their own.

And back on topic..... Nasrallah gave his much anticipated speech, and as expected, it was a let down for the Hamas: Nasrallah says Israel-Hamas war '100% Palestinian, not regional' https://www.ynetnews.com/article/byfyvyzq6 Basically he did the best he could to distance Hezbollah and Iran from any direct knowledge of the attack, any direct involvement. Even the part where he talks about Hezbollah's contribution is a cop out, claiming it to be significant and making much of the 50 odd 'martyrs' (which would be a mix of Hezbollah, Hamas and other Palestinian organizations' men). Saying it's a Palestinian thing, rather than a regional makes it pretty clear where things stand. Sure, Hezbollah will continue harassing the IDF on the north front, maybe even pick it up a notch or two. But doesn't sound like Iran green-lighted or is eager for more than that. Things could change, of course - one rocket hits this, one missile hits that and things can get out of hand. But de-facto, seems like the 'rules' for this time around have been agreed upon. Also easy to notice he stresses the negotiations angle. I think that's directed at both Israel and the Hamas. Guess tomorrow morning on Palestinian media will be the same old - 'surprised' and angry about the lack of significant support. Don't know if the Hamas leadership expected more, believed or led to believe that there would be more - but any way, they'll be doing some hard thinking tonight.

So nothing on topic from you. Gotcha. You're just doing the knight in shiny armor thing. ok.

My Dad is stronger than yours. So there.

That's one lame straw man - did any one accuse you of either? Were you even saying anything on topic?

Hmm...what level of debate would popping into a topic, contributing nothing and getting at other posters be? You're doing it wrong.

I think that this topic is over 250 pages. Most posters got a pretty good handle on who's what, which opinions are held, and so on. Other posters (self included) have been 'debating' (if you can call it that) with other posters for years on similar topics, the poster in question very much included. Don't think there's a need to reassess where he's coming from each and every time. It's also not too hard to notice were the majority of trolling, derailing and all the rest come from. Respect is earned.

You're a victim too. Sad.

Hoopoes are fun. Stinky as hell when nesting, but fun.

Well, that came off as almost sincere - then recalled your posting history and had a laugh. Thanks. There is no fallacy. You cite a source (the general), add to his words, and use this to support a point of view. I'm questioning the basis of this argument. You tried to use the General's background, title and perceived professionalism to bolster an opinion, or to lend it some extra credibility. I'm popping that bubble, and you can't deal with it.

People living in glass houses.....

How would the French general know what intel Israel possesses ? How would he know Israel does not have Hamas collaborators/agents/informants? The official Hamas website was down for a couple of days, then resurfaced on a Russian server, try there.

I think I may have called you a troll too.

Former Mossad head: Chase down Iranians involved in Oct. 7 attacks https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/former-mossad-head-chase-down-iranians-involved-in-oct-7-attacks/ar-AA1ja2qb Some comments from former Mossad chief, Cohen - interesting take on Iran's involvement, what the Israeli government is doing and should to, plus the negotiation/hostages issue.

Heya, that was on the first or second day. It was linked somewhere near the start of the topic. Production was disrupted for a few hours, and following that the relevant minister issued an order to cut the Strip's electricity supply.