Hawaiian

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's just as well it was the israelis that killed them. If the Palestinians had killed 3 unarmed israelis under a white flag they would likely have destroyed half of the remaining undestroyed Gaza by now.

Apparently it's only OK to kill unarmed civilians if it's israelis doing it.

 

I wonder how the israeli apologists are going to cover for soldiers that deliberately killed 3 unarmed men under a white flag. Expect more but but but stories anytime soon.

What happened to the three shot hostages is similar to friendly fire.  Tragically, it happens.  Avoidable?  Maybe.  Depends on the circumstances.  My neighbor, a Vietnam veteran, told me how he was fired upon when his chopper went down.  He was caught in the crossfire when air rescuers came to his rescue.  Fortunately he was not hit and lived to tell me about it. 

28 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

A/ If israel is actually able to be destroyed by a few fighters armed with rifles and RPGs, Israel doesn't have a hope of survival anyway. Who has all the tanks, who has all the artillery, who has the airforce, who has the huge trained reserve, who has the gunboats, who has the guided missiles and the air defenses, who has the absolute support of the most powerful country in the world? If you don't know, it's not Palestine.

 

B/ it's not possible to destroy Hamas unless you kill every man woman and child in Palestine and all those Palestinians outside Palestine as well.

By now there is probably within the beating heart of every Palestinian an unquenchable desire for revenge against israel, and that will be passed down generation to generation. Kill every Hamas fighter and they will be replaced. The name may change, but the desire will be the same- revenge on israel. The whirlwind is coming.

 

Some things are unforgivable and will never be forgotten.

What a bunch of double talk.  It's no secret Israel is well equipped as you state.  To throw all of that at Hamas would result in complete annihilation of everyone and everything in Gaza including all the women and children many are screaming about, including you.  Already there are accusations of genocide.

No, it is not necessary to kill every Palestinian in the world to destroy Hamas.  That's not hyperbole, more like complete BS.

Seems like you never read my post about Hamas losing support from Gazans.

When the Allies defeated Japan in WWII, the Japanese population had great fears of retribution from the occupying forces.

To their surprise, what was left of the Imperial Army leaders were tried and convicted as war criminals.  The emperor was allowed to remain on his throne, albeit, stripped of his power.  General Douglas MacArthur gave strict orders to the troops that the Japanese were to be treated respectfully with harsh punishment

for any offenders.  The U.S. even imported food to supplement the meager food supply.

Seven years later, the occupation formerly ended.  Japan was now a democratic, demilitarized state on its way to become an economic power and a staunch ally of the U.S.

Given the chance there is hope for the Palestinians.  But first, they need to denounce Hamas and work with Israel and her allies in order to move forward. 

The hate you mention may remain in one form or another, but cannot be enacted if the Palestinians want to move forward.  Only people with your negative mentality will stop any meaningful progress.

32 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think they need to temper their ambitions of what a successful outcome might look like.

 

Do they even know themselves, or are they just making it up as they go along? We know what happens when they don't get it right, as the Americans found out in Iraq, and they lost more troops after the "victory" than during the war.

IMO the israelis thought they could drive them into Egypt never to return, but Sisi put the kibosh on that plan, and quite sensibly too. He knows what will happen if there is a huge refugee camp right next to the israeli border.

 

I think I know what they want to do now, given their actions to destroy water sources and deny food and medicine, but I'm not going to say on here what that is.

 

Whatever they thought they could do, will be negated by the willing volunteers for the resistance from most of the survivors of Gaza.

Israel will be in perpetual war for generations- is that what they really want?

Like it says in the Bible, sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

The support in Gaza for Hamas is beginning to erode.  Maybe pro-Israeli propaganda, but I have recently seen videos of Gazans complaining about Hamas, some even going as far as claiming Hamas has destroyed Gaza.  One video showed a very successful Palestinian business in the West Bank who attributed his success to working with Israel and not fighting them.  In fact, he even has a second home in Israel proper.  Are these people traitors to Hamas?

Depends which side you are on.

If Hamas had used all of their foreign aid for improving the water and sewer systems and other infrastructure instead of pouring millions into constructing the tunnel system there might not be such widespread of hate of Israel.  A hungry population is a dangerous population. It might have given Israel more of an incentive to put more effort into creating a two-state solution.

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think they need to temper their ambitions of what a successful outcome might look like.

 

Do they even know themselves, or are they just making it up as they go along? We know what happens when they don't get it right, as the Americans found out in Iraq, and they lost more troops after the "victory" than during the war.

IMO the israelis thought they could drive them into Egypt never to return, but Sisi put the kibosh on that plan, and quite sensibly too. He knows what will happen if there is a huge refugee camp right next to the israeli border.

 

I think I know what they want to do now, given their actions to destroy water sources and deny food and medicine, but I'm not going to say on here what that is.

 

Whatever they thought they could do, will be negated by the willing volunteers for the resistance from most of the survivors of Gaza.

Israel will be in perpetual war for generations- is that what they really want?

Like it says in the Bible, sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

Big difference here.  America wasn't fighting for their survival.  Israel is.  This is why Israel is determined to destroy Hamas.  Have you noticed that Egypt and Jordan are keeping a low profile.  Even Saudi Arabia has only complained in a low key fashion.  Turkey, on the other hand, has moved from a secular government to a religion oriented one.  It's Erdogan's strategy to remain in power.  Turkey, not long ago, was quite pro-West and pro-Israel.  Autocratic Erdogan has reversed that.

As long as the mullahs control Iran there will be turmoil in the Middle East.  Eventually, they will lose their grip on the country and much of funding of terrorists in the region will dry up.  When that happens, the who Middle East will benefit, including Israel.  That day cannot come too soon.

25 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

For starters one doesn't drop dirty great bombs that destroy an entire building to kill one Hamas fighter, and one does NOT carry out collective punishment which is probably illegal and a crime under every law or statute ever written dealing with it.

 

The best way to deal with such is to prevent it happening in the first place, for which one would need to go back to 1967 and do things differently. As that is impossible, IMO all israelis have to look forward to for the very long future is fear of the enemy that is just waiting for any opportunity to kill them in revenge for what they have done in the past 30 or so years, what they are doing now, and what they will do in the future.

 

They should always remember that no matter how many Palestinians they kill now, millions live outside Palestine where israel can't touch them, and for every Palestinian child they kill, a dozen more want to take revenge for them.

Never forget, never forgive.

The line from Pete Seegers "Where Have All the Flowers Gone"  always reminds me "When will they ever learn."

The back and forth argument about the amount of children being killed and war crimes involving children is really nonsensical from my point of view.  All of these deaths are tragic, young and old, Jew or Palestinian, but difficult to avoid when guns and bullets are used to settle grudges and disputes.

For you nitpickers, "guns and bullets" is an expression that means a whole lot more.

31 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

They appear to have an aim to knock out Hamas as much as possible which is understandable. I think they need to temper their ambitions of what a successful outcome might look like - and prioritise minimising casualties by attributing more worth to the lives of the non combatants - the pictures of broad devastation and the loss of life looks more and more out of proportion with the losses suffered on the Israeli side. In terms of the specific tactics to achieve this I 'll leave that to those who know more about such things. 

Good to see that you acknowledge the lack of experience. I too, have no workable answer.  The out of proportion loss of life is something the Israelis are well aware of.  From a military standpoint this is to be expected since 99% of the action is taking place on "enemy" soil.  From a political standpoint this is bad publicity.

2 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I tend to limit my comments to the barbarity of the Hamas attacks and whether the response has been reasonable.

 I appreciated hearing a summary of some key points from his point of view that included some broader context - Bill Maher has made some similar points.

The list pointed out that this wouldn't have happened but for the Hamas barbaric attacks but acknowledged that criticism of the subsequent response is not unjustified.

Fair point that the language of describing critics as 'stupid' or of simply inflaming the situation by using the word genocide could be seen as belittling or attempting to diminish the overall arguments that Israel has gone too far in response.  I tend to concur with the sentiment though that Israel are not deliberately killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group - so genocide is not the correct term for what it is worth. 

Not calling it genocide, in my opinion, does not understate the importance of the final point - that the response has been too indiscriminate and the killing of civilians clearly unacceptable. Justifications such as that they have tunnels, and use their people as shields, surely does not give Israel carte blanche to kill somewhat indiscriminately and blame Hamas for the outcome. 

So, exactly what do you propose the Israelis do differently?  As far as I know there is no fool proof way to stop Hamas without innocent lives being lost.  Israel is in a damned if they do and damned if they don't situation.

On 12/14/2023 at 7:42 PM, Hanaguma said:

Encroach? Hardly. Israel was invaded constantly. They took territory to stay safe. You forget that five countries invaded Israel in 1948 and tried to wage a war of genocide? Of course the losers lost territory. That is the way of the world. Lose a war, lose land. Germany lost a lot of land after WW2, but you dont see ex residents of Prussia sitting around complaining. 

      You don't hear of shelling coming from the Golan Heights anymore.  Hmmm, I wonder why?

36 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Thank you. I'm sure @thaibeachlovers will soon come up with some complaint about this escalating things, or why wasn't the entire Israeli navy deployed, or something.

Some people are never happy unless they are making waves.  Besides, you and I know,  Israel has a Mediterranean coastline to defend.

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

How do you know they are not?

 

Besides, it's almost standard for Israel not to be officially involved in such things, as it causes political troubles for potential Arab participants.

 

And no, this is about the Houthis taking international maritime trade hostage.

 

 

Israeli warship deployed to the Red Sea.

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/12/israel-sends-new-advanced-saar-6-warship-to-red-sea/

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

A few days ago I read they had a sub there.  Not sure if anything else has been added.  From my navy experience I would say they working together with the U.S. forces there.  U.S. carriers never operate without an accompanying sub and other surface vessels.  I was stationed on a radar picket destroyer and we often pulled plane guard duty.

If things really heat up the most likely scenario is a joint task force will be formed with allied ships.

To remove any ambiguity, the U.S. carrier has its own sub escort and the Israelis are most likely doing recon.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why is the israeli navy not going to join in, or are they? after all, this is about them and their attacks on Gaza.

A few days ago I read they had a sub there.  Not sure if anything else has been added.  From my navy experience I would say they working together with the U.S. forces there.  U.S. carriers never operate without an accompanying sub and other surface vessels.  I was stationed on a radar picket destroyer and we often pulled plane guard duty.

If things really heat up the most likely scenario is a joint task force will be formed with allied ships.

On 12/11/2023 at 5:21 PM, Morch said:

 

A few more ships hit until things will be addressed, unless there's some major disaster involved.

Also, it's almost Christmas and New Year's Eve - many diplomatic efforts will be put on halt until beginning/mid January.

Since you posted this things have really escalated.  More commercial vessels have been fired upon with several being hit.

The second and fifth ranked shipping companies, Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd, have halted further shipping through the Red Sea/Suez Canal.  This not only affects Israel, but also a host of countries relying on this route. 

The U.S. and at least three of her allies are patrolling the area with more countries planning to get involved.  This is serious, folks.

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Then why on Earth did you claim that the impeachment was a fishing trip if you had no clue?

Nothing like a scrap between a Kiwi and an Ozzie.

Evidently, you didn't get the message or completely misunderstood it.  Seems like a sly way to deflect.

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

 

Found a link for you.

 

NB the israeli port call. Any vessel having any contact with israel is under threat.

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/cruise-missile-yemen-strikes-tanker-ship-us-officials-2023-12-12/

 

The Iran-aligned group attacked the tanker, the STRINDA, because it was delivering crude oil to an Israeli terminal and after its crew ignored all warnings, Houthi military spokesperson Yehia Sarea said in a statement.

 

But the tanker's owner, Norway's Mowinckel Chemical Tankers, said the vessel was headed to Italy with a cargo of biofuel feedstock, not crude oil. But it did acknowledge a tentative Israeli port call scheduled for January, details it had not offered in the immediate hours after the attack in the Red Sea.

"Upon the recommendation of our security advisors, it was decided to withhold this information until the vessel and her crew were in safe waters," the company said in a statement.

 

 

 

You said "Why would anyone volunteer to be a messenger of false news?". Would you care to retract that accusation, or are you going to claim Reuters is "a messenger of false news"?

 

Why would I.   Read the news release again.  Reuters says the Houthis claim the Strinda was transporting crude oil to an Israeli terminal, but Strinda's Norwegian owner says the cargo is biofuel feedstock, not crude oil, heading to Italy.

If the ships owner is caught falsifying information they could void their insurance coverage, so I would tend to believe them and not a bunch of terrorists.

As for the possibility of a Israeli stopover after offloading it's cargo in Italy, that seems to be off the table for now.  Maybe the Norwegians should contact you for advice. LOL

who

28 minutes ago, Presnock said:

When I left high school in '64, joined the military in June, then Gulf of Tonkin, so instead of computers which

I didn't have an idea what they were, the military decided I would be a Vietnamese Linguist and I spent most of 3 years 

in that area including 2 within VN 66-69.  When the country called, I went without a complaint.  Would do it again if I

thought it would make a difference and that the military wouldn't be ignored by the politicians, most of them have

never been anywhere near combat nor do they plan to do it themselves.  Other high ranking politicians let their children

join the military but keep them away from the bad areas.

When I first reported aboard ship in 1958 my intent was to be a cook.  The operations officer had other ideas.  He had me assigned to the radio shack.  At first I wasn't happy, but he asked me to try for another month.  When the ops officer spoke with me 30 days later, I told him I would stay and promised not to disappoint him.  And I didn't.  I took the advancement exam for 3rd class radioman petty officer along with the other 4 guys in our radio gang who were graduates of the Navy's class A radioman school. With only on the job training I passed with the rest of them. 

Long story, short.  I retired after 23 years of service.

Personally, I feel that the U.S. should have compulsory military service of at least two years or some other worthwhile public service.  I never regretted my time in the military.  I believe it helps to build character and opens the door to many opportunities.

There are educational programs that helps those with limited financial resources.  The military has some of the finest schools in the country.

35 minutes ago, sirineou said:

It's the only safe place from the cops?

(if you cant beat them , join them)

Funny, but quite apropos.