Morch

Gee, the self-proclaimed law and morals expert has spoken.

Are you serious? People can have any number of reasons having that (or whatever number) in their profile names. You'll find Israelis on social media with the same. Claimed to have met Arafat, so unless he was 16 at the time, unlikely. Also implied extensive US government experience, doubt he's 37. More importantly @Walker88 is not the topic.

Some good news: IDF says captured soldier rescued from Gaza during overnight operation https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-says-captured-soldier-rescued-from-gaza-during-overnight-operation/

I think we've been over this twice on recent topics. To address your questions again - i did not excuse said action. My point was toward how representative of public attitude and support such actions and organizations were. If Palestinian terrorism was being carried out by similar organizations, rather than what Hamas is (or what Fatah was) perceptions and reactions would be different. As for Deif, I hope he will not. As said on previous exchanges - I did not and do not consider Begin (or Shamir)'s being Israel's PM to have been the best choices, to put it mildly. Perhaps there's also a time element involved - both assumed office decades after events. Terrorists sometimes become heads of state etc. That often comes after renouncing terrorism, though. With Begin, it can be safely said (IMO) that this applies, Arafat maybe partially so, and Deif isn't quite 'there' yet.

Have already done so more than once on these topics. There is no one version of Zionism. Almost all of them hostages from the kibbutzim would qualify as Zionist. Many of them were pro-peace, left wing voters. Posters on here go on about Zionism as if it's only representatives were the extreme, religious, right wing illegal settlers etc. But you already knew that. Surely after reading all them books about the other side's views and all.

Indeed. But 'precision weapon' does not necessarily imply the level of precision you pretend is required by law. They are quite accurate, enough so to pass legal bars involved. If you have issues with that, take it up with those who authored and legislated relevant rules.

I don't know. The versions of who's preventing, who's impeding, who's this and who's that are muddled - and each party seems to be accusing the other. Technically Israel cannot prevent Egypt to allow entry of supplies, not without starting a war, which I think is not on the cards. IMO, the issue is more with providing safeguards that (a) supplies will not reach Hamas and (b) prevent Hamas leaders and/or hostages being smuggled out of the Gaza Strip. There was an a report on Israeli and Palestinian (not Hamas affiliated) that there's a convoy of trucks waiting in Israel, ready to set for the southern Israeli border check point were goods normally enter the Gaza Strip. I have not seen an update nor confirmation on that (and no credible English version so far). I guess that if it was decided, and deemed sage, aid could swiftly be provided through both passes.

"Your post is gibberish." Priceless.

I based my comment on the many posts your put on here. It's easy enough to see. As for the second line - delusional, again.

Your grasp of what was actually claimed, and knowledge of what was actually shown seems lacking. You're welcome to go back up topic and educate yourself. Twist it as much as you like, the poster responded to is constantly going on about babies in reference to one side. Much less so for babies of the other. There are no 'independent agencies' that can verify death tolls at this stage. You're making things up, or misunderstand how this works.

You were claiming 'genocide', 'ethnic cleansing', 'war crimes', 'crimes against humanity'....just to mentions some. In the same way 'discarding' and rejecting other common terms not suiting your agenda. You were not, and are not, anything close to upfront and honest.

I guess you could link them reports, but expect you wouldn't. One can look at current satellite imagery of the Gaza Strip, or even wide angle news footage and consider things.

Treat him with respect? That coming from someone who tried to dishonestly hide his views when joining the topic. Treat him with respect? Why? Did he earn that? Is he showing respect to other posters? More waffle.

Specifically with regard to airstrikes, yes, I do. This was covered in the past, and the process explained. I don't think it is applied (or can be applied) anywhere near as well with regard to ground operations, though. You are not allowing for Israel having a pre-researched 'target bank', and a whole lot of relevant intelligence assets. Some of the strikes would require verification that no civilians are near to go, some do not require that much (according to international law). As far as I understand, there's a rotation of legal advisors (many would be reservists) in each squadron. It would not imply what you claim. That civilians get killed in wars does not imply they are targeted. And it does not imply mistakes do not happen. The international laws people on here love to go on about do not actually offer 100% protection to civilians under all circumstance. The high number of the casualties is as can be expected when dealing with a such an urban setting. Notice that the Hamas did not provide warning or shelter for the population. Does not offer them the protection his own men enjoy. And does not issue calls for ceasefire, or make any efforts to end the fighting. Guess that's Israel's fault as well....? Israel is said to have dropped thousands of bombs and munitions on the Gaza Strip. The casualties are too, apparently, numbering in the thousands. It would seem a bit daft to carry a 'genocide' this way. One bomb per dead Palestinian? Surely there are more efficient ways to go about it if Israel was so inclined. If Israel was out to kill civilians, the death toll would be way way higher.

No, it does not prove that. If the bombing was indiscriminate or if the IAF was targeting civilians, death toll would be higher.

What?

Not necessarily. ROE's often include provisions allowing shoot to kill if under severe enough threat. The sentiment on TVF (back when) was that shooting was too good for stone throwers in Thailand, but a big no no in Palestine. You're welcome to twist that to your little heart's content. Tell me something, little man - do you know the color of my skin? Do you know my religion? Do you know whether I know people on both sides of the fence? You don't. That doesn't stop you from posting the most outrageous things, allegations and whatever - just to score some imaginary point on an internet forum.

Your simplistic grasp of Zionism is cute.

You are aware that there are parallel topics where this could be discussed, right?

Look at the OP. Look up for numerous moderators posts on this topic. The scope of this one is limited. It's not a history class, but a current event news topics. Context is important, making it the focal point of discussion is not.

Israel certainly might have committed war crimes in this war. So far, though, it's allegations rather than facts. With regard to Hamas, the answer is far more obvious.

So basically you adopt Hamas's stance that Israel's existence is illegitimate?

Waffle. Within a day you're bound to go off on one about the importance of 'accuracy' etc. When it suits, this is an explained away non-issue though. Basically, you admit to pushing propaganda.

On this forum, though....

Create the condition how? What prevented the Palestinians from embracing peace and development rather than rejectionism and terrorism? They could have opted for that since 1947. Hamas is still on that page.