Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

 

If Israel are stopped from destroying Hamas, then this will happen again and again. Either Hamas destroys Israel, or Israel destroys Hamas. Anyone who thinks a settlement can be reached is stupid - Hamas will 'play along' with that, while they rebuild their arms and tunnels. That is what they have done every time Israel backs off - hopefully this time they dont back off and they finish it.  

Earlier in the Thread Trouble I posted Hamas is like Cancer. the only way to cure a Cancer is to totaly remove it or it will retun again and in the end it will kill you,

Edited by BarraMarra
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
1 minute ago, BarraMarra said:

Earlier in the Thread Trouble I posted Hamas are like cancer the only way to cure a Cancer is to totaly remove it or it will retun again and in the end it will kill you,

 

Simplistic analogies are rarely a good way to analyze complex situations.

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Wasn't Putin in China not long ago? Invited by the Thai PM for a visit?

So, Putin visited China as China is not a member of the ICC and the two nations are cooperative with each other.

 

I doubt Putin would visit Thailand.

 

Anyway what part of the topic 'Israel is at war' is so hard to understand.

Edited by freeworld
Posted
4 minutes ago, freeworld said:

So, Putin visited China as China is not a member of the ICC.

 

I doubt Putin would visit Thailand.

 

Anyway what part of the topic 'Israel is at war' is so hard to understand.

 

China is a member of BRICS as per your previous post. And whether or not he'll accept it's enough of a thing that the invitation was made.

I agree it's not directly on topic, but a bit disingenuous since you're the one who brought it up.

Posted
Just now, Morch said:

 

China is a member of BRICS as per your previous post. And whether or not he'll accept it's enough of a thing that the invitation was made.

I agree it's not directly on topic, but a bit disingenuous since you're the one who brought it up.

Ok so I should have stated it as 'some' Brics countries who are or are not members of the ICC.

 

Do you have some kind of OCD?

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Love It 1
Posted
1 hour ago, freeworld said:

Putin cannot enter or visit countries who have signed and ratified the ICC treaty.

 

He recently could not enter South Africa to attend a Brics meeting and he cannot attend many international events around the world. Recently also Brazil made a statement but that was quickly backtracked...because they are signatories to the ICC.

 

Putin is Russian, they have withdrawn and do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC. Why would Russia arrest him when they do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC on Russian territory.

 

Anyway, this digresses from the current topic...Israel is at war.

 

Then the ICC is largely useless with respect to the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine conflicts, correct? I think that is all anyone has said. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, freeworld said:

Putin cannot enter or visit countries who have signed and ratified the ICC treaty.

 

He recently could not enter South Africa to attend a Brics meeting and he cannot attend many international events around the world. Recently also Brazil made a statement but that was quickly backtracked...because they are signatories to the ICC.

 

Putin is Russian, they have withdrawn and do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC. Why would Russia arrest him when they do not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC on Russian territory.

 

Anyway, this digresses from the current topic...Israel is at war.

Your in the wrong thread Freeworld the War in Ukraine-vs Russia is in another thread this is about Israel at War.

Posted
4 minutes ago, freeworld said:

Ok so I should have stated it as 'some' Brics countries who are or are not members of the ICC.

 

Do you have some kind of OCD?

Expecting people to be truthful and holding them accountable is a disorder? 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Simplistic analogies are rarely a good way to analyze complex situations.

Depends if you have Cancer Morch would you have it removed completly or leave some behind.  Would you take out the foot soldiers of Hamas but leave the head of their group hiding in qatar or is he removed too.

  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Depends if you have Cancer Morch would you have it removed completly or leave some behind.  Would you take out the foot soldiers of Hamas but leave the head of their group hiding in qatar or is he removed too.

 

Israeli citizens have lost trust in their government and IDF.

 

Netanyahu publicly blamed Israeli intelligence chiefs for failure on 7th of October 2023 and rejecting his responsibility as PM.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-sharply-criticized-for-post-blaming-intelligence-chiefs-for-oct-7-failure/

 

Israeli covenant between IDF/government and Israeli citizens since 1948 is that the security needs to be maintained through active participation of the population by military service AND the responsibility of the IDF/government.

 

Depopulation of Israeli settlers has started in the North+South (never seen before) and villages became Military Bases to maintain security.

 

 It's still a long road to go - no oncology analogy here - to eradicate COMPLETELY Hamas and Hezbollah AND to win 100% (impossible) trust back of the Israeli population in IDF/government. 

 

I didn't implement Yemeni Houthis + Syrian Army + Iran

 

Edited by Thorgal
Posted
11 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Depends if you have Cancer Morch would you have it removed completly or leave some behind.  Would you take out the foot soldiers of Hamas but leave the head of their group hiding in qatar or is he removed too.

 

I don't think I have cancer, thanks.

 

There are currently reports on Israeli media (guess English versions will pop in a day or two) that the government is mulling over the pros and cons of reaching an agreement with Hamas along similar lines to how things were resolved vs. Fatah in Beirut in 1982. For those not familiar with details - this means Hamas military wing leadership and personnel go out of the Gaza Strip (to whichever destination that will accept them), arms left behind, hostages released, and the Gaza Strip coming under PA/International management.

 

While it may look like giving up to terrorists - it saves months if not more of fighting, civilian and military casualties, and assured (most) hostages are free. Hamas terrorist elements not present in the Gaza Strip and denied a secure base of operations. I would guess Lebanon or any other nearby country will be ruled out as a possible destination for this reason. In 1982, when the IDF surrounded Beirut, the deal was struck and Arafat & Co. went to Tunisia.

 

Now, I'm not saying it's the best solution,  and no idea if it's viable even. I'm putting this out here to demonstrate that getting caught in rhetoric is all very well - but reality often works in different ways.

  • Thanks 1
Posted

All Terrorist groups eventually are defeated including ISIS,the IRA, AL Qaeda, Hamas will be defeated but little groups will still be around but they will never carry out attacks again to the magnitude there will be no more beheadings filmed and put on the web.

Posted
3 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

All Terrorist groups eventually are defeated including ISIS,the IRA, AL Qaeda, Hamas will be defeated but little groups will still be around but they will never carry out attacks again to the magnitude there will be no more beheadings filmed and put on the web.

 

This doesn't have much to do with what I posted, though.

With regard to some terrorist organizations, especially those with political elements, a transition of sorts is obviously possible (Fatah may serve as an example, or Israel's ruling party), doesn't happen overnight or smoothly, but not unheard of.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I don't think I have cancer, thanks.

 

There are currently reports on Israeli media (guess English versions will pop in a day or two) that the government is mulling over the pros and cons of reaching an agreement with Hamas along similar lines to how things were resolved vs. Fatah in Beirut in 1982. For those not familiar with details - this means Hamas military wing leadership and personnel go out of the Gaza Strip (to whichever destination that will accept them), arms left behind, hostages released, and the Gaza Strip coming under PA/International management.

 

While it may look like giving up to terrorists - it saves months if not more of fighting, civilian and military casualties, and assured (most) hostages are free. Hamas terrorist elements not present in the Gaza Strip and denied a secure base of operations. I would guess Lebanon or any other nearby country will be ruled out as a possible destination for this reason. In 1982, when the IDF surrounded Beirut, the deal was struck and Arafat & Co. went to Tunisia.

 

Now, I'm not saying it's the best solution,  and no idea if it's viable even. I'm putting this out here to demonstrate that getting caught in rhetoric is all very well - but reality often works in different ways.

Some good points their Morch however The PLO wasn't committing atrocities like Hamas did and they should never go free they must face Judgement.

  • Haha 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I don't think I have cancer, thanks.

 

There are currently reports on Israeli media (guess English versions will pop in a day or two) that the government is mulling over the pros and cons of reaching an agreement with Hamas along similar lines to how things were resolved vs. Fatah in Beirut in 1982. For those not familiar with details - this means Hamas military wing leadership and personnel go out of the Gaza Strip (to whichever destination that will accept them), arms left behind, hostages released, and the Gaza Strip coming under PA/International management.

 

While it may look like giving up to terrorists - it saves months if not more of fighting, civilian and military casualties, and assured (most) hostages are free. Hamas terrorist elements not present in the Gaza Strip and denied a secure base of operations. I would guess Lebanon or any other nearby country will be ruled out as a possible destination for this reason. In 1982, when the IDF surrounded Beirut, the deal was struck and Arafat & Co. went to Tunisia.

 

Now, I'm not saying it's the best solution,  and no idea if it's viable even. I'm putting this out here to demonstrate that getting caught in rhetoric is all very well - but reality often works in different ways.

 

Good comment, and although you say it may not be the best solution, from the viewpoint of minimising the death toll on both sides, I haven’t heard a better one.

 

Viability a different matter; I think the homicidal maniacs of Hamas will want to martyr themselves to the last man, and given the inhuman barbarity of the 7th October, the IDF might well be willing to oblige, which doesn’t bode well for the hostages I’m afraid to say.

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, riclag said:

Oct 7 a day that will live in Infamy !

Isis / Nazi tactics used against Innocent  civilians of the world in Israel !

Hamas and their supporters have 

backed a Roaring lion into a corner!

They say history repeats itself!

The jew hatred  has reared its sadistic 

barbaric head …

 

Recently I watched a Israeli officer speak to a large force of soldiers before going into Gaza!

He summoned up the spirits of the Dead Warsaw Ghetto victims and other victims of jew slaughter!

 

Imop! Never Again, Is non negotiable!

 

Needs moar exclamation marks.

 

IMO, the over use of Holocaust references in relation to this is a disgrace.

Israel was surprised, yes, and civilians murdered, yes - but Israelis fought and ultimately, within a couple of days repelled the attack.

Conjuring lambs-to-the-slaughter references is spitting on the faces and graves of those who fought.

 

And, of course, all this hysteria doesn't have anything to do with the actual threat.

Hamas cannot destroy Israel. There is no second Holocaust.

 

All this 'non negotiable' babble, when there are negotiations being held - kinda amusing.

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Some good points their Morch however The PLO wasn't committing atrocities like Hamas did and they should never go free they must face Judgement.

 

There's that (the atrocities part), but as for 'should-never', that's were reality comes into play. We don't always get what we want.

Edited by Morch
Posted
7 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Good comment, and although you say it may not be the best solution, from the viewpoint of minimising the death toll on both sides, I haven’t heard a better one.

 

Viability a different matter; I think the homicidal maniacs of Hamas will want to martyr themselves to the last man, and given the inhuman barbarity of the 7th October, the IDF might well be willing to oblige, which doesn’t bode well for the hostages I’m afraid to say.

 

 

I'm sure Hamas leadership wouldn't mind the sacrifice of more Palestinians, they practically said it's demanded. But with regard to their own safety and well-being, things are a bit different.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted

Just watching Sky News there reporting it is disturbing that Civilian casualties are rising and is a concern. Maybe they should report why there are high casualties or do they prefer not to admit its because Hamas have command centers set up in Civilian neighborhoods?

Posted
6 minutes ago, riclag said:

Oct 7 a day that will live in Infamy !

Isis / Nazi tactics used against Innocent  civilians of the world in Israel !

Hamas and their supporters have 

backed a Roaring lion into a corner!

They say history repeats itself!

The jew hatred  has reared its sadistic 

barbaric head …

 

Recently I watched a Israeli officer speak to a large force of soldiers before going into Gaza.

 

He summoned up the spirits of the Dead Warsaw Ghetto victims and other victims of jew slaughter!

 

Imop! Never Again, Is non negotiable!

A lot of understandable emotion there.

 

I don't agree with your comments.

 

The actual details of why, and how, Hamas managed to do - as successfully as they did - are hidden for now. The PM of Israel has another battle to deal with. He was under fire, as we know, for trying the put parliament above so-called impartial judges. His one positive, was that he was keeping Israel safe. That disappeared on the 7th.

 

Is Israel a 'roaring lion'? Without the US's actual support, and the west's general support, that is a doubt; at least for me. 300,000 new recruits at the ready. Once they start dying; who knows!

 

Is there appetite for an expanded middle east war? What could be achieved? It's in America's interest to keep things stable; but with them in control. A war with Iran would send the price of a barrel of oil rocketing. Perhaps the west might not even get any oil. This uncertainty, is maybe the thing that will keep a lid on any escalation.

 

The Israelis have a lot of sad human history. Many of them are descendants of those who died in WW11. But the people of Palestine are also proud. When they see their land being occupied by others they too have emotions.

 

Better to take the land and split it into two. A two state solution is, IMO, a non-starter. Too late for that. Although I doubt if either party really wanted it.

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, owl sees all said:

A lot of understandable emotion there.

 

I don't agree with your comments.

 

The actual details of why, and how, Hamas managed to do - as successfully as they did - are hidden for now. The PM of Israel has another battle to deal with. He was under fire, as we know, for trying the put parliament above so-called impartial judges. His one positive, was that he was keeping Israel safe. That disappeared on the 7th.

 

Is Israel a 'roaring lion'? Without the US's actual support, and the west's general support, that is a doubt; at least for me. 300,000 new recruits at the ready. Once they start dying; who knows!

 

Is there appetite for an expanded middle east war? What could be achieved? It's in America's interest to keep things stable; but with them in control. A war with Iran would send the price of a barrel of oil rocketing. Perhaps the west might not even get any oil. This uncertainty, is maybe the thing that will keep a lid on any escalation.

 

The Israelis have a lot of sad human history. Many of them are descendants of those who died in WW11. But the people of Palestine are also proud. When they see their land being occupied by others they too have emotions.

 

Better to take the land and split it into two. A two state solution is, IMO, a non-starter. Too late for that. Although I doubt if either party really wanted it.

 

 

The details of how and why Hamas managed to surprise Israel are not 'hidden' - that's you insinuating some conspiracy or ignoring many published facts regarding this.

 

There are no 300,000 'new' recruits, Israel got a reserve duty system. Some have already died. More will, that's not news.

 

Scaremongering about regional war, when so far no real signs of is what some posters are about. Maybe consider that, at least for now, efforts to limit things are successful.

 

Your last line is, unsurprisingly, clear as mud.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I'm sure Hamas leadership wouldn't mind the sacrifice of more Palestinians, they practically said it's demanded. But with regard to their own safety and well-being, things are a bit different.

 

Indeed, the Penthouse suites in Doha are understandably not a priority at the present time, and I am sure Ismail Haniyeh and his fawning underlings will soon move from there; however, they are on borrowed time, there will eventually be no hiding place.

  • Like 2
Posted

I always thought Al Jazeera was a decent TV Station but we now know their support is for Hamas. All items this morning is just propaganda. According to them over 100 were killed at Jabalia, and reporters from Al Jazeera were killed and injured in the Jabalia refugee camp. Strange there staying there. and surprise surprise Gaza's one and only Cancer hospital has run out of fuel that their hospital uses in their generators, They are also reporting concerns for the safety of their reporters inside Gaza, simple asnswer to this concern is to remove them out of harm's way.

Posted
3 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

I always thought Al Jazeera was a decent TV Station but we now know their support is for Hamas. All items this morning is just propaganda. According to them over 100 were killed at Jabalia, and reporters from Al Jazeera were killed and injured in the Jabalia refugee camp. Strange there staying there. and surprise surprise Gaza's one and only Cancer hospital has run out of fuel that their hospital uses in their generators, They are also reporting concerns for the safety of their reporters inside Gaza, simple asnswer to this concern is to remove them out of harm's way.

 

Give AJ Arabic version a shot, it will make the English edition seem much  more reasonable.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Indeed, the Penthouse suites in Doha are understandably not a priority at the present time, and I am sure Ismail Haniyeh and his fawning underlings will soon move from there; however, they are on borrowed time, there will eventually be no hiding place.

Qatar is happy and looking after the Leader of Hamas and allowing him to issue their toxic ideology to spread around the World. What does this say about Qatar?

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

Your in the wrong thread Freeworld the War in Ukraine-vs Russia is in another thread this is about Israel at War.

Actually it was not me who started discussing putin and Russia and recognised that the topic was going off track.

 

I'm well aware it is the thread about Israel is at war topic, it has been stated by me a few times previously.

Edited by freeworld
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...