Israel is at War - General discussion (pt3)

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Rubbish, Hamas was not even around then. This tOpic is the Hamas/Israel war and his is the 5th War starting 7th Oct

 

You didn't respond to my question whether the illegal settlements were a provocation for Hamas. I assume you want to push this narrative that Hamas had no provocation for the attack?

 

That Hamas weren't in existence then is not an argument that the Nakba was not a a raison de etre for their formation. Again, a non sequitur.

 

 

Edited March 27 by ozimoron

[coolcarer]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Israel did not declare war. They said they were in a state of war. To declare war would have been to trigger the Geneva convention.

Oh……no……….. ok so it was announced……cool

 

Israel-Hamas War, war between Israel and Palestinian militants, especially Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), that began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a land, sea, and air assault on Israel from the Gaza Strip. The October 7 attack resulted in more than 1,200 deaths, primarily Israeli citizens, making it the deadliest day for Israel since its independence.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Israel-Hamas-War

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Oh……no……….. ok so it was announced……cool

 

Israel-Hamas War, war between Israel and Palestinian militants, especially Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), that began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a land, sea, and air assault on Israel from the Gaza Strip. The October 7 attack resulted in more than 1,200 deaths, primarily Israeli citizens, making it the deadliest day for Israel since its independence.

https://www.britannica.com/event/Israel-Hamas-War

 

That doesn't address the fundamental question of why this latest war started.

[coolcarer]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

That doesn't address the fundamental question of why this latest war started.

You on the merry go round again ozimoron, does it not make you dizzy?

 

"It is important to also recognise the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum. The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation," he said. 

 

 

"But the grievances of the Palestinian people cannot justify the appalling attacks by Hamas.

 

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-26/un-chief-rejects-accusations-he-justified-hamas-attacks/103023040

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, coolcarer said:

You on the merry go round again ozimoron, does it not make you dizzy?

 

"It is important to also recognise the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum. The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation," he said. 

 

 

"But the grievances of the Palestinian people cannot justify the appalling attacks by Hamas.

 

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-26/un-chief-rejects-accusations-he-justified-hamas-attacks/103023040

 

I didn't suggest that the attack was justified in any way. You swerved the question of why the war started.

[Hummin]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

That doesn't address the fundamental question of why this latest war started.

As long Israel occupying land, there will be attacks.

 

7. October gave Israel an golden ticket to occupying more. I would speculate it was an expected and wanted attack from Hamas. 

 

 

[coolcarer]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

I didn't suggest that the attack was justified in any way. You swerved the question of why the war started.

 liar, the war started because of the terrorist attack, said that many times. As the UN head said there was no justifying that attack. 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

As long Israel occupying land, there will be attacks.

 

7. October gave Israel an golden ticket to occupying more. I would speculate it was an expected and wanted attack from Hamas.

 

A previously linked article in an Israeli newspaper said exactly that. Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world. His miscalculation was the scale of the attack. His support of Hamas was designed to achieve that goal.  

[ozimoron]

Just now, coolcarer said:

 liar, the war started because of the terrorist attack, said that many times. As the UN head said there was no justifying that attack. 

 

Why do you refuse to countenance that Hamas had a motivation for the attack?

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

As long Israel occupying land, there will be attacks.

 

7. October gave Israel an golden ticket to occupying more. I would speculate it was an expected and wanted attack from Hamas. 

 

 

 

   Hamas view all the land of Israel as occupied land and that's why there will always be attacks from the Palestinians as long as Israel exists , and that is why the Palestinians have to go , go well away from Israel 

[coolcarer]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

A previously linked article in an Israeli newspaper said exactly that. Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world. His miscalculation was the scale of the attack. His support of Hamas was designed to achieve that goal.  

Conspiracy nonsense. Shameful

Edited March 27 by coolcarer

[coolcarer]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Why do you refuse to countenance that Hamas had a motivation for the attack?

There you go, trying to make excuses for the terrorist attack. There are no excuses to be made for that, motivations or not. Period

[ozimoron]

Just now, coolcarer said:

There you go, trying to make excuses for the terrorist attack. There are no excuses to be made for that, motivations or not. Period

 

Again, you are trying to deflect from the fact they had a motivation or discuss what that was and you attack me as a means to do so. I do not excuse Hamas and you know it.

[coolcarer]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

Again, you are trying to deflect from the fact they had a motivation or discuss what that was and you attack me as a means to do so. I do not excuse Hamas and you know it.

You are doing exactly that,

 

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Why do you refuse to countenance that Hamas had a motivation for the attack?

 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Conspiracy nonsense. Shameful

 

Are you denying this was alleged by an Israeli publication?

[transam]

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Why do you refuse to countenance that Hamas had a motivation for the attack?

What do you think Hamas expected after executing 1200 Israelis in cold blood, in your humble opinion......? 🤔

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

You are doing exactly that,

 

Comprehending that Hamas had a motivation is not condoning or excusing them. Stop your personal attacks.

[coolcarer]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Are you denying this was alleged by an Israeli publication?

Stop making things up.

 

First you need to provide a credible link. Saying there was one before is not a link.

 

Second they need to have some extremely convincing evidence within that link that has been accepted. I know that does not exist but you made a shameful claim. it’s now up to you to back it up.

[coolcarer]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

Comprehending that Hamas had a motivation is not condoning or excusing them. Stop your personal attacks.

Quoting your post is not a personal attack…..lol it speaks for itself

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Why do you refuse to countenance that Hamas had a motivation for the attack?

 

[WDSmart]

49 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

54 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

No, that's a link showing the continuing stealing of Palestinian land in the West Bank, which is what I said in my previous post. It is representative of actions that are why the Oct 7 terrorist attack occurred.

Here is a link telling why Hamas says it attacked Israel on Oct 7.
"Hamas has said it was motivated to launch the attack essentially as the culmination of long-building anger over Israeli policy, including recent outbreaks of violence at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, but more generally over the treatment of Palestinians and the expansion of Israeli settlements." 
Why did Hamas attack Israel, and why now? - CBS News

Expand  

Wrong again. Israel declared war with Hamas due to the terrorist attack. Now your claim on 5e war, where is the link?

I don't understand. I've posted links on both the continuing attempts to steal Palestinian land in the West Bank and a statement from Hamas as to why they carried out the Oct 7 attack.

Just what is it that you want me to post a link on?

Edited March 27 by WDSmart

[Jingthing]

24 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Are you denying this was alleged by an Israeli publication?

I'll answer that.

I don't know but if so that it was an Israeli publication doesn't give it any special credibility whatsoever. Israel is a democracy with free speech and free press and you'll find the full range of opinions, information, and misinformation in the press of any such country Israel included.

This is yet another sad example of a perverted pattern with obsessive Israel demonizers.

They place special value when Israel demonizing messages come from Jews, Israelis or otherwise.

Of course one of their greatest heros is the notorious self hating Jew Finkelstein (perfectly named)

It's like they're trying to sell the big lie that if a Jew or an Israeli says something negative about Jews or Isreal, that PROVES it.

No it does not.

Try harder.

Edited March 27 by Jingthing

[Hummin]

38 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

A previously linked article in an Israeli newspaper said exactly that. Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world. His miscalculation was the scale of the attack. His support of Hamas was designed to achieve that goal.  

I have also stated it before, and also posted a link + my personal opinion for then being sileced with conspiracy theories. There will be no healthy debate if we can not speak about whats really going on, and not only the terrorist attack 7. October and forward. 

 

Previous history shows how fragile boarder and who is in the control of the area, and it will change again in future. When, we do not know yet

 

 

[WDSmart]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I'll answer that.

I don't know but if so that it was an Israeli publication doesn't give it any special credibility whatsoever. Israel is a democracy with free speech and free press and you'll find the full range of opinions, information, and misinformation in the press of any such country Israel included.

This is yet another sad example of a perverted pattern with obsessive Israel demonizers.

They place special value when Israel demonizing messages come from Jews, Israelis or otherwise.

Of course one of their greatest heros is the notorious self hating Jew Finkelstein (perfectly named)

It's like they're trying to sell the big lie that if a Jew or an Israeli says something negative about Jews or Isreal, that PROVES it.

No it does not.

Try harder.

I don't know anything about the specifics of all this, but I believe Israeli publications tend to support Israeli positions just as Arab publications tend to support Palestinian positions. That's the same everywhere, although there are always some publications from any country that always challenge the general narrative and even propose alternate explanations, some of which are just speculation.

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Stop making things up.

 

First you need to provide a credible link. Saying there was one before is not a link.

 

Second they need to have some extremely convincing evidence within that link that has been accepted. I know that does not exist but you made a shameful claim. it’s now up to you to back it up.

 

I told you it was previously linked. Why do you think I know that?

 

One thing is clear: The concept of indirectly strengthening Hamas — while tolerating sporadic attacks and minor military operations every few years — went up in smoke Saturday.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/

 

But officials believed that only a limited attack would take place, according to the report.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/live-updates-day-10-latest-050822620.html

 

 

[coolcarer]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I told you it was previously linked. Why do you think I know that?

 

One thing is clear: The concept of indirectly strengthening Hamas — while tolerating sporadic attacks and minor military operations every few years — went up in smoke Saturday.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/

 

But officials believed that only a limited attack would take place, according to the report.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/live-updates-day-10-latest-050822620.html

 

 

You made a shameful conspiracy claim that you cannot back up despite your ducking and weaving.

 

your claim:

Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

You made a shameful conspiracy claim that you cannot back up despite your ducking and weaving.

 

your claim:

Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world.

 

It was described as a "policy" of tolerating the attacks. Why then did Netanyahu continue to allow financial support for Hamas? It was part of the calculus. It's also clear that Israel was warned prior to the attack that such an attack might occur and indeed was imminent but they ignored it.

 

 

Edited March 27 by ozimoron

[Jingthing]

18 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I don't know anything about the specifics of all this, but I believe Israeli publications tend to support Israeli positions just as Arab publications tend to support Palestinian positions. That's the same everywhere, although there are always some publications from any country that always challenge the general narrative and even propose alternate explanations, some of which are just speculation.

There is the full range. Your point is a meaningless diversion. 

[coolcarer]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

It was described as a "policy" of tolerating the attacks. Why then did Netanyahu continue to allow financial support for Hamas? It was part of the calculus.

 

Liar, you have no link for that claim

 

Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world.

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Liar, you have no link for that claim

 

Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world.

 

It is an inescapable conclusion from the fact that there was a policy of tolerating the attacks and believing that they would be limited in nature while continuing to facilitate financial support.

 

It's worth noting that Shin Bet opposed that support.

 

edit: no further replies from me today, I have work to do.

Edited March 27 by ozimoron

[coolcarer]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

It is an inescapable conclusion from the fact that there was a policy of tolerating the attacks and believing that they would be limited in nature while continuing to facilitate financial support.

Forum rules. A claim made by you needs a link

 

Netanyahu wanted Hamas to attack so that he could justify a crackdown and further anti Hamas sentiment in the wider world.