Israel and Hamas fight house-to-house battles across Gaza

[Jingthing]

23 minutes ago, Trippy said:

Yes I do, next question?

 

I should add that if I ever hear just one Palestinian say Israel has a right to exist, I might change my mind.

That's a low bar. There are some. 

[Morch]

27 minutes ago, Trippy said:

Yes I do, next question?

 

I should add that if I ever hear just one Palestinian say Israel has a right to exist, I might change my mind.

 

The PA's official stance is exactly that.

Edited January 11 by Morch

[d4dang]

On 12/7/2023 at 1:39 PM, NickyLouie said:

 

As Hamas continues to use them as human shield's. 

 

Other Arab nations want nothing to do with Palestinian people after the <deleted> they pulled in Jordan and Egypt, but love pointing the finger at Israel.

 

Hopefully soon the flooding of the tunnels drowns these disgusting rats.

 

 

Edited January 11 by d4dang
grammar

[billd766]

57 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's war. Not a tea party. The target is not innocent civilians. The target is Hamas. Maybe look at Hamas to blame as they freakin' STARTED IT. 

No it is not a war, it is a mass slaughter.

 

And whilst Hamas started this part off, Israel and before them the Zionists have been at war for nearly 100 years and in the beginning back in the 1930s it was the Zionists who were the terrorists. Even before that some Jewish people attacked and destroyed a Palestinian village slaughtering 107 innocent men women and children.

 

Read up on history, it won't change your mind, which is firmly fixed on Israel always being the good guys, but you may learn something.

[Jingthing]

36 minutes ago, billd766 said:

No it is not a war, it is a mass slaughter.

 

And whilst Hamas started this part off, Israel and before them the Zionists have been at war for nearly 100 years and in the beginning back in the 1930s it was the Zionists who were the terrorists. Even before that some Jewish people attacked and destroyed a Palestinian village slaughtering 107 innocent men women and children.

 

Read up on history, it won't change your mind, which is firmly fixed on Israel always being the good guys, but you may learn something.

All you do is spout an extremist one side anti-"Zionist" narrative but if YOU actually read the history you would realize it isn't even close to being as simplistic or one side as that.

But yeah -- it won't change your mind. 

 

Again, it is a war.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

All you do is spout an extremist one side anti-"Zionist" narrative but if YOU actually read the history you would realize it isn't even close to being as simplistic or one side as that.

But yeah -- it won't change your mind. 

 

Again, it is a war.

I am glad that you mentioned anti Zionist and NOT anti Jewish or anti Israeli.

 

Here is a link that you may find interesting or not.

 

https://www.annefrank.org/en/topics/antisemitism/are-all-jews-zionists/

[ozimoron]

4 hours ago, Trippy said:

Yes I do, next question?

 

I should add that if I ever hear just one Palestinian say Israel has a right to exist, I might change my mind.

 

You might see that once a Palestine exists.

[Jingthing]

7 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I am glad that you mentioned anti Zionist and NOT anti Jewish or anti Israeli.

 

Here is a link that you may find interesting or not.

 

https://www.annefrank.org/en/topics/antisemitism/are-all-jews-zionists/

That reminds me of several clips I've seen of Palestinians done by Al Jazeera, etc. Someone says the Arabic word for Jews and the subtitle says Zionists. Who do they think they're fooling? Again, Hamas charter says Kill all Jews. Ironically many of the people Hamas murdered on October 7 were more of the peacenik pro-coexistence sort of Israelis.

Edited January 11 by Jingthing

[ozimoron]

4 hours ago, Trippy said:

Yes I do, next question?

 

I should add that if I ever hear just one Palestinian say Israel has a right to exist, I might change my mind.

 

You might see that once a Palestine exists.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

You might see that once a Palestine exists.

River to the sea Palestine means no Israel. 

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

You might see that once a Palestine exists.

 

@ozimoron

 

The Palestine Hamas envisages implies no Israel.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

River to the sea Palestine means no Israel. 

Not necessarily.

 

People change over time.

 

Take Nelson Mandela for example.

 

Hw was a terrorist or a freedom fighter (depending on whose you are looking from or at) and went on to become President of South Africa.

 

Only people with rigidly closed minds refuse to change.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

River to the sea Palestine means no Israel. 

 

Did you see the genocidal comments made by senior Israeli officials cited by South Africa in it's complaint?

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not necessarily.

 

People change over time.

 

Take Nelson Mandela for example.

 

Hw was a terrorist or a freedom fighter (depending on whose you are looking from or at) and went on to become President of South Africa.

 

Only people with rigidly closed minds refuse to change.

 

  Errrrm, if Palestine goes from the River to the Sea , there would be no room for Israel .

If they change and would accept an Israeli state, they would have to stop using that phrase .

  Why use Nelson Mandela as an example ?

Why not use the Israel Prime minister who used to be a terrorist ?

More double standards from your side .

Nelson Mandela is a hero because he went from terrorist to P.M

Yitzhak Shamir was a terrorist ........................... .and still is 

[Bkk Brian]

Meanwhile the battles continue and the IDF is slowly eliminating Hamas

 

Hostages were held Hamas's tunnel under Khan Yunis - IDF

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on Thursday reported expansion of the operation in southern Gaza's Khan Yunis "above and below the ground" as Israeli troops clash with terrorists and destroy over 100 tunnel shafts in the area.

The IDF says to have discovered a tunnel connected to the heart of the city's civilians infrastructure where hostages had been held. Israeli military's assessment showed that millions of shekels (1 shekel equals 0.27 U.S. dollar) were invested in the tunnel.

Approximately 300 Hamas's tunnel shafts have been discovered by the troops in the area, "including the shafts leading to significant underground tunnels, tactical combat shafts and shafts used as munitions storage and combat complexes," added the IDF statement.

https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel-at-war/1704960008-hostages-were-held-hamas-s-tunnel-under-khan-yunis-idf

 

Underneath the city of📍Khan Yunis, IDF troops exposed an underground tunnel confirmed to have held Israeli hostages. 

The tunnel was connected to an extensive network beneath a civilian area. Millions of shekels are estimated to have been invested in excavating the tunnel and equipping it with air ventilation systems, electrical supply and plumbing.

 

[Morch]

14 hours ago, billd766 said:

Not necessarily.

 

People change over time.

 

Take Nelson Mandela for example.

 

Hw was a terrorist or a freedom fighter (depending on whose you are looking from or at) and went on to become President of South Africa.

 

Only people with rigidly closed minds refuse to change.

 

@billd766

 

This topic is about current affairs. Are there any signs Hamas leadership is going to do some ideological about face? I don't think so.

Your spins aside, the current ideological agenda is quite clear - both from Hamas, and the river-to-the-sea crowd.

[Morch]

14 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Did you see the genocidal comments made by senior Israeli officials cited by South Africa in it's complaint?

 

@ozimoron

 

Did you see the numerous genocidal comments made by senior Hamas officials cited on this forum and elsewhere?

[placnx]

On 1/10/2024 at 5:56 PM, billd766 said:

But it is far too late for the 2x,xxx Palestinian women and children who have already died and the thousands more who will die in the future.

 

Talks and sanctions are fine but they will do very little against an army.

 

Real honest to goodness action is now required.

I agree, and let's hope that the hearings yesterday and today at the International Court of Justice will lead within a week or two for a preliminary order for Israel to immediately cease fire. As the accusation by South Africa is genocide, it will be exceedingly awkward for the US to block a resolution in the Security Council that would seek to enforce the Court's order. Yesterday's hearing: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3 Today it will continue 4-7 PM (BKK time).

[Jingthing]

35 minutes ago, placnx said:

I agree, and let's hope that the hearings yesterday and today at the International Court of Justice will lead within a week or two for a preliminary order for Israel to immediately cease fire. As the accusation by South Africa is genocide, it will be exceedingly awkward for the US to block a resolution in the Security Council that would seek to enforce the Court's order. Yesterday's hearing: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3 Today it will continue 4-7 PM (BKK time).

The reality of what Hamas is is awkward.

Is Hamas going to release all the hostages and change their policy of Kill all Jews?

 

 

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, placnx said:

I agree, and let's hope that the hearings yesterday and today at the International Court of Justice will lead within a week or two for a preliminary order for Israel to immediately cease fire. As the accusation by South Africa is genocide, it will be exceedingly awkward for the US to block a resolution in the Security Council that would seek to enforce the Court's order. Yesterday's hearing: https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3 Today it will continue 4-7 PM (BKK time).

Fortunately, IMO, if the ruling of the the International Court of Justice supports genocide and rules against them, Israel can tell them to poke it where the sun doesn't shine and carry on regardless – – Hamas needs to be eliminated, in whatever way is possible.

[placnx]

2 hours ago, xylophone said:

Fortunately, IMO, if the ruling of the the International Court of Justice supports genocide and rules against them, Israel can tell them to poke it where the sun doesn't shine and carry on regardless – – Hamas needs to be eliminated, in whatever way is possible.

It is so ironic that the people who endured genocide are now inflicting it on others. I know that there is evidence that people who are abused by a parent may be so damaged that they do the same in turn to their children, but for a whole nation to think that revenge constituting genocide is OK is aberrant.

 

It has been observed by so many expert people that Hamas cannot be eliminated, one has to ask what is the real reason that Netanyahu et al are pursuing this campaign.

 

Israel is taking this case quite seriously. Otherwise they would have ignored the proceeding entirely. Instead they have appointed Aharon Barak, a former Israeli Supreme Court judge, to sit on the bench with the 15 regular judges of the ICJ. You can see the presentation of Israel's defense today.

[Purdey]

On 1/10/2024 at 5:51 PM, billd766 said:

Can you explain how and why they failed?

The U.N., or UNO, was formed after World War 2 “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”, to protect world peace, not from world wars, but all wars. There have been 478 wars in the 76 years between the UN formation and May 2021, so it has failed in its raison d'être. A new war has started somewhere in the world on average every two months.

I would put the blame for its failure overall on the structure chosen by the winners of WWII, who must have felt they knew how to prevent war (having been unable to prevent the war just concluded). There were 54 founding members, with 193 today, and the allies structured it so that five countries only, the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, China and France, have permanent seats on the security council and worse, have veto power over all decisions made by the other represented countries. Hardly a democratic institution. Roughly 49 per cent of the vetoes have been cast by the USSR and thereafter the Russian Federation (let’s just call it Russia for simplicity), 29 per cent by the United States, 10 per cent by the United Kingdom, and six per cent each by China and France. The fact that the USA and Russia have vetoed decisions that an overwhelming number have supported is telling. You may have noticed that the US has vetoed any vote against Israel throughout its existence. So much for respect for the U.N. and its members.

Next, the running of the U.N. is racially biased, with the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Spain, by the U.N.’s own calculations, overrepresented, meaning they have more employees per capita than other countries in the world.  6.75 percent of the entire U.N. workforce is American. 

UNICEF was founded in 1946. Since then, the UNICEF director has always been a white American. It has had eight Executive Directors since 1946. All eight were citizens of the United States, and all were white. UNICEF has begun giving occasional lip service to quality but continues to focus on enrollment – which is the only sphere in which it can claim to have achieved anything. Only U.S.A. citizens get the top spot at the World Bank, only Europeans at the International Monetary Fund. Carving up the most lucrative bodies is not even questioned.

Preventing conflicts requires closing development gaps, shrinking inequality and bringing hope to people around the globe, or so senior UN officials told the Security Council in 2021. However, a lot of doubt about its success has arisen. One example: A UNESCO study claimed that mobile phones increase literacy. Actually, the study showed no such thing. It didn't look at what increases literacy. Nokia paid for the study.
 

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, placnx said:

It is so ironic that the people who endured genocide are now inflicting it on others. I know that there is evidence that people who are abused by a parent may be so damaged that they do the same in turn to their children, but for a whole nation to think that revenge constituting genocide is OK is aberrant.

 

It has been observed by so many expert people that Hamas cannot be eliminated, one has to ask what is the real reason that Netanyahu et al are pursuing this campaign.

 

Israel is taking this case quite seriously. Otherwise they would have ignored the proceeding entirely. Instead they have appointed Aharon Barak, a former Israeli Supreme Court judge, to sit on the bench with the 15 regular judges of the ICJ. You can see the presentation of Israel's defense today.

 

What 'genocide'?

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, placnx said:

It is so ironic that the people who endured genocide are now inflicting it on others. I know that there is evidence that people who are abused by a parent may be so damaged that they do the same in turn to their children, but for a whole nation to think that revenge constituting genocide is OK is aberrant.

 

It has been observed by so many expert people that Hamas cannot be eliminated, one has to ask what is the real reason that Netanyahu et al are pursuing this campaign.

 

Israel is taking this case quite seriously. Otherwise they would have ignored the proceeding entirely. Instead they have appointed Aharon Barak, a former Israeli Supreme Court judge, to sit on the bench with the 15 regular judges of the ICJ. You can see the presentation of Israel's defense today.

I call B.S.

Israel does have the technical capability to commit genocide.

But the Palestinian Arab population has skyrocketed over time.

Indeed even 20 percent of Israeli citizens are Arabs (and polls of them say they would much rather stay Israeli citizens). 

So the Israelis are really crap at genocide (curious when they obviously have so many other talents) if they intend that, which they don't.

I find your rhetoric Jew hating -- conflating the policies of the Israeli state to Nazis meets the definition of that.

Shame on you.

Edited January 12 by Jingthing

[placnx]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The reality of what Hamas is is awkward.

Is Hamas going to release all the hostages and change their policy of Kill all Jews?

 

 

I just followed the Glick video for around the first 10 minutes when she started stating something that does not accord with the South African position stated in the ICJ. South Africa gave an historical recap which goes back to 1948, but that was to recount the genocide committed by Zionist commandos in 1947-8. They otherwise take 1967 as the point at which Israel occupied the the land now at issue, which could form the territory of a Palestinian state.

 

The well-known journalist Gideon Levy will be on BBC World News again at 17:30 (HardTalk). In this he advocates stopping the war at giving Hamas what they ask, i.e. all Palestinian prisoners including the prominent political ones, I assume Marwan Barghouti, in exchange for all Israeli hostages.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, placnx said:

I just followed the Glick video for around the first 10 minutes when she started stating something that does not accord with the South African position stated in the ICJ. South Africa gave an historical recap which goes back to 1948, but that was to recount the genocide committed by Zionist commandos in 1947-8. They otherwise take 1967 as the point at which Israel occupied the the land now at issue, which could form the territory of a Palestinian state.

 

The well-known journalist Gideon Levy will be on BBC World News again at 17:30 (HardTalk). In this he advocates stopping the war at giving Hamas what they ask, i.e. all Palestinian prisoners including the prominent political ones, I assume Marwan Barghouti, in exchange for all Israeli hostages.

 

Commandos, no less. Got to love them comments.

As for Gideon Levy - he's both an anti-Zionist, and an attention seeking troll. Considering he's fringe, I'm not sure what your big point is about citing his views.

[placnx]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@billd766

 

This topic is about current affairs. Are there any signs Hamas leadership is going to do some ideological about face? I don't think so.

Your spins aside, the current ideological agenda is quite clear - both from Hamas, and the river-to-the-sea crowd.

My understanding of "river to the sea" is that protesters are evoking a one-state solution where all the people enjoy equal rights, not the case now, not even in Israel proper. On the other hand, the Ben Gvir people have in mind "river to the sea" with all Palestinians removed.

[placnx]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Commandos, no less. Got to love them comments.

As for Gideon Levy - he's both an anti-Zionist, and an attention seeking troll. Considering he's fringe, I'm not sure what your big point is about citing his views.

I was responding to Jingthing 

 

28 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I call B.S.

Israel does have the technical capability to commit genocide.

But the Palestinian Arab population has skyrocketed over time.

Indeed even 20 percent of Israeli citizens are Arabs (and polls of them say they would much rather stay Israeli citizens). 

So the Israelis are really crap at genocide (curious when they obviously have so many other talents) if they intend that, which they don't.

I find your rhetoric Jew hating -- conflating the policies of the Israeli state to Nazis meets the definition of that.

Shame on you.

Israel and Glick are claiming that a genocidal act was committed on 7 October, so where do you get the idea that Israel is incapable when it dropped more bombs in such a short time frame, no doubt more than ever per sq km, than ever in the post WW2 era? This is not to mention cutting off water, food, medicine, fuel, and destroying public infrastructure and dwellings on a vast scale, and over 20000 civilian deaths.

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, placnx said:

My understanding of "river to the sea" is that protesters are evoking a one-state solution where all the people enjoy equal rights, not the case now, not even in Israel proper. On the other hand, the Ben Gvir people have in mind "river to the sea" with all Palestinians removed.

 

That would be you spewing dishonest comments, again. The Hamas version, and what many Palestinians are into is exactly what's advertised - a Palestine without Israel. That you try and claim all protestors are of one view is nonsense, as you can neither support this or prove it. As for what you term 'Ben Gvir people' - I'm not aware that they actually use the phrase, regardless of their ideology. What I am sure of, is that if you bother to cite one side's extremists, but totally disregard and minimize the other side's guys - your not being honest.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, placnx said:

I was responding to Jingthing 

 

Israel and Glick are claiming that a genocidal act was committed on 7 October, so where do you get the idea that Israel is incapable when it dropped more bombs in such a short time frame, no doubt more than ever per sq km, than ever in the post WW2 era? This is not to mention cutting off water, food, medicine, fuel, and destroying public infrastructure and dwellings on a vast scale, and over 20000 civilian deaths.

 

More nonsense out of you, as usual.

 

Where did I claim 'Israel is incapable'? Do you bother reading posts before replying? Do you understand who said what?

 

If anything, the other way around - Israel could definitely genocide the Palestinians, if it chose to do so. The fact that the Palestinians are very much about hints that there is no such 'genocide'.

 

As for 'over 20000 civilian deaths' - that would be you embracing Hamas propaganda. The figure includes Hamas men killed, and they are not 'civilians'.

Edited January 12 by Morch