What is very revealing on this thread, and whilst i have not read every post, but i have not read a single post from a defender of the Israeli position that has even mentioned the murder of innocent Palestinians!!  Its just glossed over.......you are simply deceiving yourselves.

 

The UN vote went hugely against Israel because they decided not to gloss over it.  Simple as that!

2 hours ago, carmine said:

At last you've posted something.  Ofcourse its allowed to protect its borders, thats not in question.

Then what is the problem? If the muslims in the Gaza strip, who think it's their god given right to kill all Jews and these muslims are trying to crash your border then the Jewish state has the moral obligation to send them to meet their 72 virgins....

 

 

1 minute ago, crankshaft said:

Then what is the problem? If the muslims in the Gaza strip, who think it's their god given right to kill all Jews and these muslims are trying to crash your border then the Jewish state has the moral obligation to send them to meet their 72 virgins....

 

 

And some defenders of Israel have the nerve to call people condemning the actions of the state of Israel jew haters.

18 minutes ago, carmine said:

What is very revealing on this thread, and whilst i have not read every post, but i have not read a single post from a defender of the Israeli position that has even mentioned the murder of innocent Palestinians!!  Its just glossed over.......you are simply deceiving yourselves.

 

The UN vote went hugely against Israel because they decided not to gloss over it.  Simple as that!

Innocent muslims...I think not. Israel is allowed to protect its borders.

2 hours ago, carmine said:

When are you going to discuss the Israeli actions?!!!!!  As i have already said, that is the subject matter of this thread!!!  Its about universal condemnation.  

 

Why do you think that is?  

 

What is your opinion on the murder by sniper bullet of a female medic or an invalid in a wheelchair, women and children?  Who's foot is the jackboot on now!!!

 

What is your opinion of kids being hit by sniper bullets 400m from the border fence.....hardly endangering their security is it!!!

 

So, this is the subject matter, what are your thoughts?

 

 

And what are your thoughts of Hamas putting the children and other vunerables there in the first place?

Just now, carmine said:

The Palestinians do not think it is their God given right to kill anybody.  Bar a tiny minority they are a kind peaceful and hospitable people.  I know, i've actually been to Gaza!!  Have you?

 

You post breaks of boorish anti arab propaganda spread by hard line Zionist thugs.  

Tiny minority pfffft....then why isn't hamas reigning in this tiny minority of good natured rabble rousers

24 minutes ago, crankshaft said:

Tiny minority pfffft....then why isn't hamas reigning in this tiny minority of good natured rabble rousers

Hamas is a terrorist organization.  You appear to be confusing them with the general populous.

58 minutes ago, carmine said:

What is very revealing on this thread, and whilst i have not read every post, but i have not read a single post from a defender of the Israeli position that has even mentioned the murder of innocent Palestinians!!  Its just glossed over.......you are simply deceiving yourselves.

 

The UN vote went hugely against Israel because they decided not to gloss over it.  Simple as that!

do not delude yourself, no palestinian is innocent, they know very well what they do and by following the hamas urging to confront  a wall of snipers knowing full well the outcome, it's sheer stupidity on their part,

here is an idea, let the hamas and the islamic jihad arm all those people who are urged to breach the fence, arm them with guns, plenty of ammo, RPGs shoulder launched missiles, grenade and armored vehicles and let them confront the Israelis and try to kill as many as they can, but no. the Hamas leadership send children and women to the front while they watch from afar... 

3 hours ago, carmine said:

At last you've posted something.  Ofcourse its allowed to protect its borders, that's not in question.

It should read: Israel has the right to protect its borders AT ANY COST WHATSOEVER.... no more being led to the slaughter, no more persecutions, no more being exiled out of the holy land the land of the jewish people..

10 minutes ago, carmine said:

Hamas is a terrorist organization.  You appear to be confusing them with the general populous.

Take your head out of the sand and look around....hamas and it's henchmen control gaza. I don't see any kind of rebellion from so called vast peaceful majority of muslims against hamas in Gaza. Just maybe give a thought to how much better life would be for the people in Gaza if they were not in a constant jihad against Israel.  

 

The definition of "insanity"....doing the same thing over and over again expecting shyt to change...

 

22 minutes ago, ezzra said:

It should read: Israel has the right to protect its borders AT ANY COST WHATSOEVER.... no more being led to the slaughter, no more persecutions, no more being exiled out of the holy land the land of the jewish people..

Trouble is not a single other country in the world officially recognizes the fence that Israel unilaterally built to prevent the return of 70% of Gaza's population whose families have been ethnically cleansed from Israel. Not even the USA whose ambassador Haley is hypocritically claiming Israel's self defense.

Edited June 15, 20188 yr by dexterm

32 minutes ago, ezzra said:

It should read: Israel has the right to protect its borders AT ANY COST WHATSOEVER.... no more being led to the slaughter, no more persecutions, no more being exiled out of the holy land the land of the jewish people..

You forgot: as Israel seems fit, without any interference from others.

 

Your attitude is sad.

4 hours ago, carmine said:

Trouble is not a single other country in the world officially recognizes the fence that Israel unilaterally built to prevent the return of 70% of Gaza's population whose families have been ethnically cleansed from Israel. Not even the USA whose ambassador Haley is hypocritically claiming Israel's self defense.

Throughout history, there were many walls, fences, barriers and obstacles of all sort built to mark one territory or boundaries, many Unofficial, and many more recognised or accepted by other countries, but like it or not, they become official and accepted, you talk about a ' retune', return to where? there's nothing to return to, the same as the hundred of thousands of jews that were either driven out or run way from their homes, properties and business in several arab countries, not to mention in Europe, is anybody going to allow those people to 'return' home?....

as for you assertion of ethnic cleansing, had it really did happen, there would be NO Palestinians today....

43 minutes ago, ezzra said:

Throughout history, there were many walls, fences, barriers and obstacles of all sort built to mark one territory or boundaries, many Unofficial, and many more recognised or accepted by other countries, but like it or not, they become official and accepted, you talk about a ' retune', return to where? there's nothing to return to, the same as the hundred of thousands of jews that were either driven out or run way from their homes, properties and business in several arab countries, not to mention in Europe, is anybody going to allow those people to 'return' home?....

as for you assertion of ethnic cleansing, had it really did happen, there would be NO Palestinians today....

You agree that the current fence, unilaterally built by Israel, is unofficial although one day it may become official. You don't seem to have named another country in the world that officially recognizes it. Hmmm! In that it has been arbitrarily erected by Israel, Palestinians have a perfect right under the Geneva Convention and other international laws to cross it to return to their homeland.

 

Israel seems to have plenty of room for Jewish only migrants who have never set eyes on the place before, but no room for Palestinians who were born there. Naked racism and apartheid.

 

You appear to be a Nakba denier, simply because there are still some Palestinians left within Israel. That's a very dangerous criterion if applied to other instances of ethnic cleansing denial.

Edited June 15, 20188 yr by dexterm

 

@carmine

 

In response to your repeated bogus claims - I have addressed Israel's actions, both on this topic and previous ones. You may want to try reading instead of auto-commenting. All the more so as some of the comments on previous topics were in direct response to your own posts.

 

I guess that some posters have a hard time accepting not everyone is inclined to express himself through faux emotional dramatics. So if that's the only sort of response considered "valid", I'll have to disappoint yet again. Do note that I don't go there with regard to actions and positions taken by either side. Can't see how this helps get a better handle on things, or how it matters.

 

And to reiterate, on the off chance that you're actually not paying attention - Israel's actions dealing with the current protests were indeed heavy-handed. I'm positive that some of the cases involved were unwarranted, and could even be classed as war crimes. That this applies to all cases is doubtful.

 

Posters, especially the vehement ones, often pretend to be knowledgeable with regard to international law, war crimes and whatnot. The truth of it is that most aren't, and a whole lot of the notions people got regarding such matters aren't strongly founded when it comes to actual legalities. The legal reality often comes short of what posters claim it to be. Blame this on legalities, claim it ain't fair etc. - no argument, but that's how things are.

 

Generally speaking, shooting civilians not constituting a direct threat is a no no. Relevant questions would be what's considered a threat, and who's considered a civilian. I think that there are no easy answers there, and that the reality pertaining to many present-day conflicts outpaced the legalities, making them less relevant or easier to exploit (the same, by the way, with regard to immigration issues).

 

It might be counter-intuitive for some, but I find that the issues with casualties are more relevant with regard to those injured, rather than those killed. Of those killed, many were Hamas/Islamic Jihad operatives, either directly engaged in violence or inciting/organizing it. Relative to the level of "activity" (violent protests/direct attacks) over time, perhaps to be expected. When it comes to the wounded, though, the figures suggest a different story - IMO, more of a case there, even if these aren't as high value for the deathploitation fans.

 

Yet to see a reasoned response explaining how Israel ought to have handled the protest, in a manner that is both effective (in terms of preventing mass breach) and acceptable. General comments regarding Israel's stance in the conflict, diatribes about the conflict's roots, or formulations of conflict solutions aren't it. None of these are relevant to the the rather concrete question presented. Same goes for assertions about usage of non-lethal means, without support regarding their availability or how effective they are.

 

My view is that there was no "good" way to handle the situation. Too "soft" an approach could have realistically led to a mass breach of the border fence. If anyone imagines such a scenario wouldn't have resulted in even more casualties, they got no business posting on this topics. Could the application of the "hard" approach been better? Quite possibly (again, perhaps more so with regard to injuries, rather than deaths). But then some posters seem to disregard the fact that Israel's main priority is protecting Israel and Israelis, rather than the Palestinians. Running the risk of a mass breach (which would have resulted in more casualties) was probably not a great option either.

 

Whether posters like to acknowledge it or not, there is no way to absolve Hamas of responsibility. It doesn't make Israel blameless. It means that the one-dimensional narratives don't hold. And while some may be loath to accept this, such is life. A leadership entrusted with the well-being of its people does not knowingly encourage them to go in harm way - not when it's obviously futile and self-serving. Quite telling many of the posters adamantly refusing to acknowledge the point, go on about the very same when it comes up in different situation.

 

Finally, your "criticism" would be a tad more credible if you'd bother directing it  toward other posters refusing to discuss anything bearing negatively on the Palestinian side  - that you do not do so gives up the game.

 

 

@dexterm

 

Making misleading claims regarding statements and sources is nothing new when it comes to your posts. So no surprises when referencing an article, without directly linking it, and relying on two propaganda outlets to provide an "objective' commentary, painting things in a way "supportive" of your agenda.

 

About as honest as can be expected, I guess.

 

 

 

 

 

 

9 hours ago, carmine said:

What is very revealing on this thread, and whilst i have not read every post, but i have not read a single post from a defender of the Israeli position that has even mentioned the murder of innocent Palestinians!!  Its just glossed over.......you are simply deceiving yourselves.

 

The UN vote went hugely against Israel because they decided not to gloss over it.  Simple as that!

 

What is revealing is that you rush to make a general comment, while not bothering to read the topic. Apparently no issues with posters "supporting" the Palestinians disregarding Hamas complicity. Nothing new there.

 

The UN vote went against Israel, in pretty much the same way votes in the UNGA go. If you think that doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with bloc voting or influence games - guess we'll have to disagree.

 

Those applying a wee closer look will note that prior to this vote, there was a majority for including a specific denouncement of Hamas as well. Guess ignoring that would be your way of glossing over things. Same goes for comments by many Western ambassadors on this score.

7 hours ago, dexterm said:

Trouble is not a single other country in the world officially recognizes the fence that Israel unilaterally built to prevent the return of 70% of Gaza's population whose families have been ethnically cleansed from Israel. Not even the USA whose ambassador Haley is hypocritically claiming Israel's self defense.

 

Your nonsense is irrelevant. Whether or not countries "officially" recognize Israel's borders doesn't matter in the least. In realty (granted, an alien concept for some) - all parties involved are aware where the border is, and de-facto accept it. The current de-facto border, whether "officially" recognized or not, is pretty much where it would be anyway - the differences, if they exist, are minimal.

 

Some (those not invested in an extreme, one-sided narrative) would say that the border fence is in place to prevent Hamas attacks. Not a valid consideration as far as your agenda goes, but that word again- reality. As pointed out, there is no unconditional right of return, and there is no obligation to allow such.

 

And there's nothing "hypocritical" about claiming self-defense. Unless you wish to imply that the Palestinians have no aggressive intentions - now, that would indeed be "hypocritical", never mind a blatant lie.

@dexterm

 

The Palestinians do not have such a "perfect right" as you falsely claim. The so-called "right of return" was conditional on it being made with peaceful intentions, and accepting the sovereignty of Israel.

 

Israel is entitled to determine its immigration policies as it sees fit. Most countries do. That you do not approve means less than little. Whether you like to accept it or not , countries are not obligated to fulfill your political fantasies.

 

This topic isn't about irrelevant assertions about Israel's borders being "officially" recognized, misleading agenda-driven versions of supposed rights, or your views regarding Israeli immigration practices.

How unusual.

 

A thread on Israeli genocide and not a single post by Morch defending them.

Edited June 15, 20188 yr by JimmyJ

42 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

How unusual.

 

A thread on Israeli genocide and not a single post by Morch defending them.

Genocide? Save that word for when it's actually apt. The way you're using it is pure 100 percent flame-tasy. 

Edited June 15, 20188 yr by Jingthing

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Genocide? Save that word for when it's actually apt. The way you're using it is pure 100 percent flame-tasy. 

 

Don't feed the **spade**.

An inflammatory post has been removed.  Please drop the Nazi rhetoric.   

 

UN became irrelevant the same time their security council got Russia and China into it.

Ah, so only the good 'ol US and allies (vassal states) are allowed.