Morch

Let's drop these silly, over-simplistic analogies, for starters.

Are there any reports of Houthis planning to carry out attacks in the USA? Any reports of Houthis trying to cross the border? Any Houthi terrorist infrastructure within the USA? You know....anything indicating this is a credible threat/concern?

Imagine dealing with facts and reality rather than with imaginary scenarios leaving out all them details you're either ignoring or ignorant of? My comment was not about the fact that Israel is being condemned, that's understandable and often merited. It was about the disproportional 'attention' Israel's sins get relative to the global picture. Israel could no 'remove the settlers' as easily as you carelessly describe, for a host of reasons. Topic is not about that, and it's a way too long list. But I think you are aware that it's not quite as straightforward as you present. There are, in fact, less bombs dropped on the Gaza Strip for a while now. And that's exactly because there are more ground troops operating in a smaller area, and that area packed with civilians. The war now is different than in was a few weeks back in the northern part of the Strip. There are more Israeli casualties now, and somewhat less civilians killed. That change was announced about a month back, and is slowly materializing. Sending soldiers to fight in tunnels is not a very smart move - I don't think that's seriously expected in the wholesale manner you seem to suggest. There are reports linked in these topics about locals describing Israel's blowing of tunnels as being very accurate. Again, that's another things that changes with time, and the zone in which battles are fought. Hamas murdered them people. Mostly civilians. Israel does not target civilians. That difference. As for the disparity - let's try again: When Hamas deals with Israel for hostage/prisoner swap, Hamas routinely asks for a very high ratio in it's favor. That does not seem to raise much objections from wannabe 'pro-palestinian' posters on here. If Hamas places a higher value on Israeli lives, what is the whining about? Also, Hamas actually welcomes civilian deaths on its side - these are translated into PR points, and later on, financial ones. The cries from some on here totally disregard that. Parity in casualties, by itself, is not the purpose of war. Hamas knew what he was getting the people of Gaza into. They didn't care. They still don't. Nothing was done to prevent this, mitigate this, or stop this. Somehow in your world, it's all about Israel.

So do you have any single post of mine saying something in favor of open borders, regardless of being at war?

You keep making up scenarios and treat them as reality. That's not a very honest way to debate. You also ignore that international law actually allows that, under given circumstances. Yes, collateral damage is a thing. You want to disparage it, fine - but it's a legal concept, term and it carries meaning which does not necessarily echo your agenda. It relates to real life situations, whereas you busy your mind with imaginary ones. Same goes for the 'animals' bit. You take a statement, or even several statements appearing in media - and make them into a general all encompassing claim. Hamas rhetoric on Israel, Israelis and Jews is far worse, by the way. Also covered on these topic - and obviously ignored by such posters as yourself. The Israelis 'invaded' the Gaza Strip after the Hamas 7/10 attack. There are recent links on these topics of clips showing Gazans protesting against Hamas. Not everyone is as caught in Hamas narrative as you, apparently.

As said, you're trolling. Not very good at it, but still.

@ozimoron And it's still not what this topic is about. This topic is about Hamas's nonsense manifesto, which no one other than Hamas fanboys takes seriously.

You accuse me of 'Islamophobia', and of supporting murder of children, and then whine about comments regarding you copy/pasting stuff from the net? Try harder, little troll.

Yawn. You commented on a topic dealing with the provisional decision of the ICJ. You responded to a post dealing with the outcome. You deflect. No, making claims on the internet is not being 'guilty of the same', that's just you with the trademark hyperbole nonsense. Hamas is a Palestinian organization, it's members are Palestinians. It's supporters are Palestinians as well. You and others try hard to make into some entity which got nothing to do with the Palestinians. Try harder. As for 'not separating' Hamas from the Palestinians - tell that to Hamas. Hamas does not apply this separation when it comes to casualty figures. Hamas does not apply this when staging it's men among civilians. South Africa did not 'win' the case, that's just you pushing an false narrative. Israel did not 'lose' - it was even a better outcome than realistically expected.

@ozimoron More pointless argumentative nonsense.

Got to love 'new' members jumping right in to world news political topics, almost continuing past exchanges with others. Welcome to the forum, 'rookie'.

You've been provided with a link to the discussion mentioned, you keep on about it regardless.

I thought you might actually pay attention for once. What does SA got to do with this? Also, it wasn't me who posted about SA to begin with. There was a link to the topic provided some posts above, which you have already seen and ignored. Try harder.

I think we will. Them days of covering everything are gone. That's saved for the rich and well connected. I don't suppose this teachers are either. Social media does bring some change, sometimes for the better.

So you do not reconsider anything, refuse to absorb and assimilate 'new' information, but expect others to do so. Gotcha. Already pointed out there's a specific topic dealing with the provisional ruling, and a link was provided above.

SA is South Africa. I'm sure you'll come up with your new idiosyncratic term at some point. There is a specific topic dealing with the ICJ's provisional ruling, there is no need to discuss it on any related topic separately.

Considering your own warped views, I doubt that you're one to recommend anything on 'viewpoints', or complain about other's lack of knowledge. Somehow, you expect others to change their views, but at the same time take pride in your own views being unchanged. And that's despite them odd 'opinions' of yours being addressed, taken apart, and demonstrated as nonsense. Fancy that.

@ozimoron It's 'proof' that there's another topic specifically dealing with this. Got to love how you need to stupidly argue about everything.

@thaibeachlovers Because prior to this the USA wasn't the Houthies enemy? Also, always weird how explain you own statements to yourself - like, didn't the Houthies just made themselves an enemy of the USA? Can't they expect more attacks? And yeah, I think it's clear by now you're into appeasement of Houthis, Russians, Hezbollah, Iran, etc.

@ozimoron Apparently that's you making up stuff. It's Hamas that does not distinguish between it's own men and civilians, as evident from the casualty lists they allow to be released. That would be the same Hamas that claims all Israeli men of fighting age are 'combatants' and therefore legit targets.

@ozimoron That would be you cherry picking, and misrepresenting how things are on the ground. You do this across multiple topics and posts on this score. Sad.

https://aseannow.com/topic/1311404-queers-for-palestine-is-apparently-a-thing/

Your home country does not share your warped views. Nor does it share your obsession with misguided use of terms. Unless mistaken there was an almost unanimous vote regarding funding and support a short while ago? But don't let that get in the way of your delusional ramblings.

Mil usually takes my side when called upon to opine....There are some unexpected positive sides to old-fashioned Chinese upbringing.

Hamas did so intentionally. Israel does not. I get it that some of you try hard to ignore this fact, or to treat it as immaterial, but it's a fact. Again - all them dead Palestinians were alive on 6/10. Who was responsible for things changing a day later? Which leadership said their death were a necessary sacrifice for the cause? Which group denied them the safety it offers it's own men? One wrong doesn't make another wrong right. Dealing almost exclusively with one sides' wrongs, though - and ignoring who instigated things, that's a choice.