Popular Post ozimoron Posted February 25 Popular Post Share Posted February 25 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said: Haven't you been following this story ? Israel dropped leaflets on the area , sent civilians text messages and publicly announced the areas that were about to be bombed , all asking civilians to leave the area And then bombed the areas they told them to go to. That said, it doesn't absolve Israel from a war crime if they went ahead and bombed them after telling them to leave. Edited February 25 by ozimoron 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeranam Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 2 hours ago, ozimoron said: Complete rubbish. After years oif the holocaust, Germans are very contrite and are now among Israel's best friends. Same goes for Japan. The problem occurs when the extreme right wing gain control of a country. Yitzhak Rabin signed a peace treaty with the Palestinians, how did that work out for him? I fully agree with you. The idea that the actions of a few individuals or groups can overshadow the efforts of an entire nation or people is indeed unfair and often inaccurate. The notion that Germans and Japanese people remain deeply contrite for the atrocities committed during World War II is evident in their efforts to reconcile, apologize, and forge friendships with nations like Israel. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeranam Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 48 minutes ago, xtrnuno41 said: You are contradicting yourself. You write about right wing, so there is a left wing, center, left center, right center and so on. there you go, groups and what they do ? Fight for being the biggest and there for more power and indoctrination. German friends with Israel? Again a group. Israel's friends group. Wouldnt it be nice if the whole middle east would be "friends"? Yha, but will never happen. Humans, groups, fighting. And if we woudnt have religion in first place, it already would have saved us a lot of problems You call it rubbish, I call it a fact. You overlook the nuances of international relations and the capacity for individuals to transcend group identities for the greater good. While conflicts persist, the potential for cooperation and understanding remains. And, the dismissal of religion as a source of conflict oversimplifies the complexities of human history and culture. While religion has been a factor in many conflicts, it's not the sole cause, and its role in fostering community, morality, and identity should not be discounted. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neeranam Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 9 minutes ago, ozimoron said: And then bombed the areas they told them to go to. That said, it doesn't absolve Israel from a war crime if they went ahead and bombed them after telling them to leave. He overlooks the intricacies of warfare and the ethical dilemmas surrounding civilian protection in conflict zones. Yes, Israel has utilized methods such as dropping leaflets and sending text messages to warn civilians of impending airstrikes, these actions do not absolve Israel of its responsibility to minimize civilian casualties or address the underlying issues contributing to the conflict. Simply notifying civilians does not automatically ensure their safety or justify the extensive collateral damage witnessed in many military operations. The efficacy of such warnings is also contingent upon various factors, including the ability of civilians to safely evacuate, access to shelters, and the intensity of the conflict. He fails to acknowledge the disproportionate impact of military actions on civilian populations, particularly in densely populated areas like Gaza. Even with advance warnings, many civilians may have limited means to escape the violence or seek refuge, leaving them vulnerable to harm. The emphasis on Israel's warning efforts sidesteps crucial questions about the proportionality and necessity of its military actions, as well as the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It's essential to scrutinize the underlying motives and consequences of military operations, rather than merely highlighting superficial gestures of warning. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Carter icp Posted February 25 Share Posted February 25 5 minutes ago, Neeranam said: Don't feed the trolls. Their argument is silly. It's like me saying to you I am going to set your house on fire and claim the land as mine. If you don't leave it's your fault. The point is that the IDF wanting to eliminate the Hamas terrorists who committed atrocities on Oct 7 th , the terrorists were located in populated areas and the IDF asked the civilians to leave that area , so that the IDF could fight with Hamas . Hamas didn't seem to want to fight Israeli men with guns , although they were brave attacking dead Israeli woman when they were bought back from Israel on Oct 7 h 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ozimoron Posted February 25 Popular Post Share Posted February 25 1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said: The point is that the IDF wanting to eliminate the Hamas terrorists who committed atrocities on Oct 7 th , the terrorists were located in populated areas and the IDF asked the civilians to leave that area , so that the IDF could fight with Hamas . Hamas didn't seem to want to fight Israeli men with guns , although they were brave attacking dead Israeli woman when they were bought back from Israel on Oct 7 h None of which justifies war crimes against civilians. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 12 hours ago, Bkk Brian said: Everybody wants a ceasefire, the only people who do not are Hamas. They refused the last ceasefire deal for hostage/poisoner exchange and the world is now waiting for them to say yes to the latest. Do you really expect a full ceasefire with Hamas still holding hostages. Never going to happen and against what all international bodies say about the hostage release including ICJ and the Security Council I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. And how would they ever be able to get that if they didn't have hostages to bargain with? I say trade the hostages for a permanent ceasefire, one that is enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force, like the UN. Then, start negotiating a two-state solution, even if those negotiations are led by their allies who want an end to this conflict - if that is at all possible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 20 minutes ago, WDSmart said: I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. And how would they ever be able to get that if they didn't have hostages to bargain with? I say trade the hostages for a permanent ceasefire, one that is enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force, like the UN. Then, start negotiating a two-state solution, even if those negotiations are led by their allies who want an end to this conflict - if that is at all possible. I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. I know............... ++ much more than that they want. They can have that however if they really want. Release all hostages and surrender. Edited February 26 by Bkk Brian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 17 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said: I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. I know............... ++ much more than that they want. They can have that however if they really want. Release all hostages and surrender. If that could be arranged, I'd be all for it. Of course, that depends on what you mean by "surrender." If by "surrender," you mean a promise to cease all militant activities now and in the future, then yes. If "surrender" means all those who the IDF believes to be Hamas militants are to be arrested and held as prisoners, then no, I wouldn't be for that. And, of course, I'd expect there also would be a condition that negotiations would start on a two-state solution. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 10 minutes ago, WDSmart said: If that could be arranged, I'd be all for it. Of course, that depends on what you mean by "surrender." If by "surrender," you mean a promise to cease all militant activities now and in the future, then yes. If "surrender" means all those who the IDF believes to be Hamas militants are to be arrested and held as prisoners, then no, I wouldn't be for that. And, of course, I'd expect there also would be a condition that negotiations would start on a two-state solution. You need to get your phrases correct They were involved in vile terrorist activities not militant. You are such an apologist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post WDSmart Posted February 26 Popular Post Share Posted February 26 30 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said: You need to get your phrases correct They were involved in vile terrorist activities not militant. You are such an apologist You, too, need to amend your phraseology. I'm not an "apologist"; I'm a "bilateralist." 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 minutes ago, Neeranam said: A lot more than that, sadly. I've no idea how that guy can have the nerve to defend this Genocide on a public forum. He's a unilateralist, pure and simple... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Just now, ozimoron said: A person claims to see both sides and you attack him. How is not not a major problem? Rubbish, I pointed out facts, if the poster wants to discuss he can discuss with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seajae Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 17 hours ago, WDSmart said: I have not been to either Palestine or Israel and certainly wouldn't want to go there now. I have no "first-hand knowledge" of any of this conflict. All my knowledge has been accumulated by reading history books and reports on current events. This is the basis for all the opinions I express here on AseanNow and elsewhere. then you would know that Israel claim to the land predates Palestine by 1000 years but dont let the truth get in the way of your "opinion", anyone that reads & understands history knows the truth of the matter but then again some ignore the truth to push their own biased BS to suit their agenda 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wobblybob Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 41 minutes ago, WDSmart said: You, too, need to amend your phraseology. I'm not an "apologist"; I'm a "bilateralist." You are an apologist, you may believe you are not, but it is very evident that you are along with some others on this topic. I find your latest thoughtless reply in trading hostages for a ceasefire in very, very poor taste, they are not pawns to be moved around a board until Hamas gets its way.....disgusting! 2 hours ago, WDSmart said: I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. And how would they ever be able to get that if they didn't have hostages to bargain with? I say trade the hostages for a permanent ceasefire, one that is enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force, like the UN. Then, start negotiating a two-state solution, even if those negotiations are led by their allies who want an end to this conflict - if that is at all possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ozimoron Posted February 26 Popular Post Share Posted February 26 11 minutes ago, seajae said: then you would know that Israel claim to the land predates Palestine by 1000 years but dont let the truth get in the way of your "opinion", anyone that reads & understands history knows the truth of the matter but then again some ignore the truth to push their own biased BS to suit their agenda Read some history, it does not. At no time did any one religion have an exclusive claim to the land. The ethnic and religious groups were intermingled and poorly defined. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimmer Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Multiple off topic bickering / personal attacks and name calling posts also replies have been removed 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 (edited) 21 minutes ago, seajae said: then you would know that Israel claim to the land predates Palestine by 1000 years but dont let the truth get in the way of your "opinion", anyone that reads & understands history knows the truth of the matter but then again some ignore the truth to push their own biased BS to suit their agenda Israel's claim to the land began when they arrived in Caanan, somewhere before 1000 BCE, 3,000 years ago. When they arrived in a series of bloody wars, they took the land from the native people living there, the Canaanites, who are the forefathers of the current-day Palestinians. The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) (jewishvirtuallibrary.org) So, the "truth of the matter," if you believe the Torah or Old Testament1 is the people who are now called "Palestinians" were natives of that land before the Jews, now called "Israelites," came and took it from them. There have been fighting and wars there ever since. So, Oct 7 is just one (small) chapter in the entire story of this horrific dispute over what each side considers their "god-given" land. So, don't push your biased SJ on me! 1 I don't believe the accounts in the Bible, Torah, Quoran, or any book claimed to be written by or "revealed" by some "diety." But, I cite this above because I know the Jews and the Muslims do believe what is written there. Edited February 26 by WDSmart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said: Rape, murder, torture and hostage taking on a mass scale carried out on 7th oct is not a militant activity and anyone that tries to say it was is a Hamas apologist. "Militant" is defined by the online Oxford Language Dictionary as: "favouring confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause" I think that is appropriate to use in this case, and in the case of the IDF. I think the term you'd most object to would be just a neutral one, like "soldier." I did not use that term to describe the armed forces of Hamas. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 12 minutes ago, Wobblybob said: You are an apologist, you may believe you are not, but it is very evident that you are along with some others on this topic. I find your latest thoughtless reply in trading hostages for a ceasefire in very, very poor taste, they are not pawns to be moved around a board until Hamas gets its way.....disgusting! That's what "hostage" means according to the online Oxford Language Dictionary: Quote "a person seized or held as security for the fulfilment of a condition" A neutral term would be "prisoner." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 13 minutes ago, WDSmart said: "Militant" is defined by the online Oxford Language Dictionary as: "favouring confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause" I think that is appropriate to use in this case, and in the case of the IDF. I think the term you'd most object to would be just a neutral one, like "soldier." I did not use that term to describe the armed forces of Hamas. Dream on 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wobblybob Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 55 minutes ago, WDSmart said: That's what "hostage" means according to the online Oxford Language Dictionary: A neutral term would be "prisoner." Your definitions are vulgar, they are hostages and are being abused for the satisfaction of these satanic criminals, the ones you seem quite happy to call "freedom fighters". Disgusting posting! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 2 minutes ago, Wobblybob said: Your definitions are vulgar, they are hostages and are being abused for the satisfaction of these satanic criminals, the ones you seem quite happy to call "freedom fighters". Disgusting posting! The Israeli hostages are being held by the Hamas militants to be used as bargaining chips. The indiscriminate bombing and barbaric invasion of Gaza by the Zionist-led IDF militants is also now a bargaining chip. I have predicted and expect these two chips to be exchanged, with conditions, in a release/return and a ceasefire agreement. I hope all the hostages are released unharmed, and the ceasefire will be permanent and enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force. And, yes, this whole episode is disgusting, but it's what's happening, and I hope it ends, or at least quiets down some, soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wobblybob Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Just now, WDSmart said: The Israeli hostages are being held by the Hamas militants to be used as bargaining chips. The indiscriminate bombing and barbaric invasion of Gaza by the Zionist-led IDF militants is also now a bargaining chip. I have predicted and expect these two chips to be exchanged, with conditions, in a release/return and a ceasefire agreement. I hope all the hostages are released unharmed, and the ceasefire will be permanent and enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force. And, yes, this whole episode is disgusting, but it's what's happening, and I hope it ends, or at least quiets down some, soon. "I have predicted" Who are you to predict anything except a poster that has more excuses for these vile monsters than John Prescott has had hot dinners. Does your delusion really make you think that you are Henry Kissinger or the like. The ceasefire will not be permanent as Hamas has no intention of stop killing Israelis and that is my "prediction". You do not negotiate with terrorists...you kill them! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 On 2/24/2024 at 4:30 PM, retarius said: The US will never 'change sides' whatever the ICJ says. AIPAC have death grip on the throats of the American legislature and many members as dual Israeli/Americans. With the politics being so close, neither side can afford to lose seats when AIPAC slams them for voting to dump Israel. More anti-Semitic nonsense from you. AIPAC is strongly aligned with the Republican party. White Evangelicals form the core of the Republican party and they are the most uncritical supporters of Israel. They far outnumber Jewish Americans who actually vote mostly Democratic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 1 hour ago, Wobblybob said: "I have predicted" Who are you to predict anything except a poster that has more excuses for these vile monsters than John Prescott has had hot dinners. Does your delusion really make you think that you are Henry Kissinger or the like. The ceasefire will not be permanent as Hamas has no intention of stop killing Israelis and that is my "prediction". You do not negotiate with terrorists...you kill them! You must have forgotten about my "crystal ball." I predict many things, and most of them come true. Just watch and see. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post transam Posted February 26 Popular Post Share Posted February 26 2 hours ago, WDSmart said: That's what "hostage" means according to the online Oxford Language Dictionary: A neutral term would be "prisoner." What a sad comment, but expected from a terrorist supporter.🤨 Prisoners are caught and/or convicted, the innocent who are abducted are hostages. 😒 1 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transam Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 10 minutes ago, WDSmart said: You must have forgotten about my "crystal ball." I predict many things, and most of them come true. Just watch and see. What does it show about you............? Probably......................... 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDSmart Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 4 minutes ago, transam said: 15 minutes ago, WDSmart said: You must have forgotten about my "crystal ball." I predict many things, and most of them come true. Just watch and see. What does it show about you............? Probably......................... It shows this... US says ‘understanding’ reached at Gaza hostage talks but negotiations continue | CNN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkk Brian Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 7 minutes ago, WDSmart said: It shows this... US says ‘understanding’ reached at Gaza hostage talks but negotiations continue | CNN Shows what exactly? Did you also predict the topic on that? https://aseannow.com/topic/1320768-progress-made-in-hostage-talks-after-us-presents-new-proposal-sources-say/#comment-18718862 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now