Utopia Talk / Politics / Gaza: Vi et armis

Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 06:32:57 The inherent anti-Semitism that Europeans hold against Jews is starting to come out strongly on this board. Link to previous: http://uto...hread=92227&time=1697109968301
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 06:39:07 Ruggy Dont be silly. It is not anti-semitic to point out that forming a nation-state based on ethnic principles runs into problems when the area in question is multi-ethnical. There are only two final outcomes acceptable to international law. Annexation and normalization (1 state solution), or a two-state solution with 2 equally sovereign states. Protectorate status (or whatever you want to call it) is not a final outcome, but merely an intermediate step that demonstratably does little to resolve Israeli security concerns.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 06:42:16 "There are only two final outcomes acceptable to international law. Annexation and normalization (1 state solution), or a two-state solution with 2 equally sovereign states." Neither would eliminate the bloodlust that Muslims have for eliminating all Jews from the planet...so no, neither is a solution. "Protectorate status (or whatever you want to call it) is not a final outcome, but merely an intermediate step that demonstratably does little to resolve Israeli security concerns." Protectorate status is by far the best solution from Israel's perspective. The only problem is that Israel hasn't been nearly oppressive enough in its approach. A continued security regime harsh enough to finally convince the Palestinians to permanently relocate is what will finally end things for good here.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 06:44:39 1948, 1967, 1973, 1987–1993, 2000-2005, 2005-present. Muslims have repeatedly shown themselves for who they are. Maybe it's time to star believing them, mmmkay.
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 06:48:42 Normalization and opportunity is the only way to relieve tensions over the long term. The beatings shall continue until moral improves approach has demonstrably failed. Relocation simply moves security threats to Israel to territory Israel does not control. Never mind that ethnic cleansing is a genocidal warcrime. You are betting rather a lot on Egypt or Jordan being willing and able to police radical Palestinians more effectively than Israel can. Otherwise, you are just moving the threat starting point to a slightly different place. Do you really want a professionalization along the lines of Hezbolla? That organization is actually quite dangerous to Israeli security.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 06:53:17 "Normalization and opportunity is the only way to relieve tensions over the long term." Said with zero evidence whatsoever. Until you start acknowledging that there is a religious angle to this conflict that can't be resolved with jobs and utilities, you cannot be taken seriously here.
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 06:56:26 You are also opening the door to actual existential threats. What do you think happens with Turkish or Saudi nuclear ambitions if the Israel performs genocide? Are you convinced that Turkish or Saudi regimes will always remain as reasonable as they are today once they do have nuclear weapons?
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 06:58:40 Ruggy Radicalization has a lot to do with no prospects. Give people something to lose and they will inevitably become more moderate. Of course there is a religious angle to this. Israel was created on ethnic principles in a multi ethnic land. Problems arose.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 07:02:21 Nim: "This is a very vague statement" I do not think so in context, but let me be explicit. My MAIN objection to OBL is not his broader ideology or issues. In most cases, I would object about as much as indeed I object to other people with stupid ideologies on this board. My overriding concern and opposition OBL was the fact that he organised terrorist attacks on civilians for which there is no possible justification. "and it is the “legitimate grievances” that is the issue". Well, I happen to think that Israel's policy of occupation of the west bank and a two state solution is indeed wrong. And insofar as the US supports that, I think the US is wrong. I also think that the sanctions on Iraq were at times far too tight and resulted in unnecessary deaths and hardship. And I am not an Islamist and I do not see what Islam has to do with either of those two positions. He thought a bunch of other stuff too, but lets set that to one side - because the point I was making, and which you were seeking to negate: It is always wrong to attack civilians on the basis that you have a grievance (legitimate or otherwise) with their government. It is a crime in and of itself. Even if those were the ONLY grievances OBL had with the US govt, it would be wrong to attack the US. If you were a Native American angry at land expropriation by whites, it would be wrong to murder civilians on the basis they were part of the electorate. I think I've made my point, and illustrated, whether you think OBL is a good example or not is kinda irrelevant. The moment you accept the idea that you can legitimise attacks on civilians via their participation in the electoral process - you get to the space of the idea of "legitimate" terrorism based on the legitimacy or not of the underlying cause and that is a dangerous space because by definition if there is a conflict the parties disagree on what is a legitimate grievance. This is where moral relativism gets you Nimi. "Only if you do not pay attention to the track record." A rationalist could well look at the track record and say "they haven't been doing it enough/right". After all - all attempts at heavier than air flight failed until the first one did. Didn't make those trying it irrational. "There is some terminology confusion, but again you are having a failure of imagination if you think “wrong” and “crime” have any practical meaning if you are facing annihilation." No, I pretty much covered that already over two paragraphs in sufficient detail, you just weren't paying attention or don't want to understand. I don't propose to repeat myself. "No, Paramount, there is no comparison to the Palestinian youth criminals in Israel jails." Clearly there is, you are saying a parents desire to save their children "justifies" - in your words - actions against innocent third parties. In both cases the action undertaken by these parents is morally wrong - whether we can understand their motivation or not. "Would have collapsed in every meaningful sense in the scenarios I am thinking of." This is because you are imagining yourself as a participant in the scenario and perhaps conflating morals and ethics, which is a classic relativist problem. Lets consider it this way: from the perspective of a Martian watching earth - you might well look at a decision to initiate a full nuclear counter-value strike against the enemy that has launched at your cities as morally wrong. Murdering innocents and to no end. From the person pushing the button, yeah, moral considerations might be out of the window at this point: there will be nobody left to judge you and fuck the bastards that have committing genocide on you: they must be punished. I am consciously choosing to be immoral. Ethically, I am fine with this being national policy even if to attack civilians is deeply immoral - because I would regard the MAD / deterrence potential to avoid a nuclear war to be a moral position too. "I have heard a thousand such statements. You already have my answer." Exactly, you basically make a judgement as to what is right and wrong not against axiomatic moral principles, but based on various affinities (imagined or otherwise) of the underlying motivations. But I disagree: actions can often be distinguished and judged independent of their motivations. This relativism and inconsistency based on affinity is why you get left wing folks in the west that feel some degree of support for palestinian terrorism - they feel a false affinity to it as an expression of anti-imperialism. And of course some of it is so - far more than Islamic (e.g. Black September). But pursuing that with terrorist attacks on civilians and children is always wrong. "Yes Israel has a significant blame, like 20%." Blame isn't really something that can be put on a weighing scale like this in my view. I reject the idea of there being some sum-total or moral balance sheet where the sins of one party are a moral credit against the others sins. What Hamas has just done is 100% wrong, and 100% Hamas is to blame; and Israel has the right to destroy Hamas in retaliation and defend itself from future attacks. And indeed the intractability of the Arab/Israeli situation is in part due to the pursuit of this approach - the root cause of the current issues are the decision in 1967 was Israel feeling that because it was the victim of aggression, that "the Arabs" (actually a hotchpotch of dictators) it could justify taking its pick of the land beyond the '67 borders. What Israel has done in the West bank is 100% wrong and they are 100% to blame. What the Arab states did in attacking Israel was 100% wrong and they are 100% to blame. This isn't "both-sides" - because I'm not picking sides and saying X justifies Y and so on balance I support Z or some such equation. I support Israel in destroying Hamas. But it should do so taking real pains to avoid direct civilian casualties (e.g. simply having demanded impossible to achieve evacuations from areas is not sufficient to justify use of weapons that are indiscriminate within those areas if evacuations have not occurred); and it should not pursue collective punishments and broader reprisals against Gaza. Cutting off food and water is not the right thing to do. I support Palestinians in pursuing either a 1 or 2 state solution and believe they should be supported by the west in the peaceful pursuit of that endeavour. But I do not think it should be pursued by terrorism, ever.
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 07:04:19 Like I said, Israel does not have to hand over a loaded gun. It can physically occupy Gaza until the security situation allows it to end martial law. The first step now is obviously physical occupation. Alternatively, Israel can wait for new incidents before it decides to take the first step. The wierd long distance occupation is obviously not viable.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 07:08:38 Nim: "Charter, election platform, actions. All these things must be read together." No, that is nonsense and not how democracy works. If you have an elected representative that stands under an organisation with one title on a platform promissing X,Y,Z - and that the charter referring to a different organisation is old, out dated, and that they interpret it to be consistent with X,Y,Z and will not pursue other elements of it - there is absolutely no basis to hold the electorate to account for "voting for the charter". Explicitly, they did not. The same principles apply in the west. If the Conservatives stand on a platform that says they will continue to run a public health care system; it does not matter if their constitution contains references to wanting to take a free market approach to public services and low tax. They do not have a public mandate for things that are not in their manifesto. Your approach would make a mockery of elections - conferring an electoral mandate on all sorts of things that might be contrary to what a party actually stood on. I would have to review everything a candidate had ever written or said otherwise they can - in your world - turn around and say I gave them an explicit mandate for something in those by voting for them, even if it ran explicitly contrary to what they actually promised in the platform they ran on.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 08:57:22 Seb "No, that is nonsense and not how democracy works." You have clearly lost your mind. The Hamas regime is not a democracy, and even their 2006 election program states the establishment of an Islamic state, that the antithesis of a democracy. They are an "Islamist" party with a clear Islamist agenda, from their 1988 charter to their 2006 election platform, this is undisputed. They ended democracy, they committed atrocities again Israelis also undisputed. It on according to the same reasoning that I ignore the "nazi background" of the Sweden democrats. It is not simply that Hamas said something 40 years ago, but because they CONTINUE on that same path, undeterred and incorrigible. The people who voted for them, knew exactly what they were voting for, as Hamas voters are significantly more religious. As recently as this year the majority of *Palestinians* (not Gazans) supported Hamas. The rest of your discombobulated musing and responses should be viewed in light of you not even understanding something this simple and relegated to the trash heap of UP. I thought I would give you some good faith, despite your ignorant racist attack on me earlier. I was wrong. Now fuck along you racist cunt.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 09:06:30 It is ironic though that once again the "sebs" are responsible. They were actually fooled by Hamas changing a few words, so they could get aid money, while remaining the same Islamist, jihadi organization. Fucking sebs fucking things up in Europe and then sending our tax money to Hamas so Hamas can fuck things on in Israel, then hide behind their own people and fuck things up there as well.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 09:06:46 Jergul I guess the entirety of the Middle East is suffering from a lack of "prospects" then. Ayatollahs in Iran, Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia, Hezbollah in Lebanon, various Salafist groups in Iraq, Syria, and North Africa, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, nationalists in Azerbaijan, Erdogan's neo-Ottoman bullshit in Turkey, Houthis in Yemen, anti-Copts in Egypt, and of course Hamas and the PA in the Palestinian Territories. Extremism is everywhere. Some of these countries have been made ridiculously prosperous from sitting atop oceans of oil, yet that hasn't resulted in your kumbaya fantasy of pacified post-history populations whose only passions are the World Cup and Eurovision. Economic prosperity has not reduced extremism; in many cases it has merely funded its spread.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 09:07:05 Nimatzo: You have confused yourself once more. The question isn't whether Hamas is democratic. The question is whether statements like "whose parents voted for these Animals on a charter of genocide and Islamic state" that appear to assign culpability to the Gazan population for the actions of Hamas are fair, accurate or helpful. The 2006 legislative elections, Hamas stood candidates under a new party name, and a manifesto that certainly and explicitly did not call for the end of democracy (this would be incompatible with the proposed reconciliation with the PA and PLO they stood on). You are saying voters should have looked at the Hamas charter. They did, it was an issue, and the candidates claimed it had no bearing on their platform. All in all the relationship they portrayed was more akin to the relationship between Sinn Fein and the IRA. It was a lie. I don't think it is reasonable to say that Gazans in voting for Hamas's candidates were intending to give them a public mandate for an end to democracy, genocide and a state based on fundamentalist Islam. That is, however, what you are claiming when you say that the Hamas charter overrides explicit policies in the platform the candidates stood on. I think that is simply you trying to justify your collectivist approach here.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 09:09:47 "It is ironic though that once again the "sebs" are responsible" Oh here we go again, yes Nim, every one you don't like is engaged in a vast coordinated conspiracy - everyone collectively responsible for all the bad things! You know, you sound a lot like WTB when he started calling the Swedish democrat voters Nazis because some had actually been Nazis. You were sane back then.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 09:10:19 *some Swedish Democrat candidates/activists
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 09:15:10 Jergul And let's talk about the Palestinians' supposed inalienable right to stay in their territory until the end of time. What a laughable proposition, as the Jews themselves would be the first to tell you. http://en....h_exodus_from_the_Muslim_world And it's not like they're the only genocide victims of the Muslims. How many Christian / Assyrian / Yazidi / Druze communities have we seen be literally exterminated from the face of the planet merely since the start of this century? The idea that the Palestinians should be forced to fuck off to either Jordan or Europe is not at all out of bounds for the standards of that region. Israel would suffer a decade or two of bad press over it, but then their problems would be over forever.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 09:20:55 "Syria says Israeli missiles hit Damascus, Aleppo airports October 12, 20239:04 AM EDTUpdated an hour ago DAMASCUS, Oct 12 (Reuters) - Syria said Israeli forces launched simultaneous missile attacks on the airports in its capital Damascus and the northern city of Aleppo on Thursday, damaging the runways and putting both hubs out of service. A Syrian military source cited by state news agency SANA said "bursts of missiles" hit the two airports at the same time, in what he said was a bid to distract the world's attention from Israel's war with Hamas militants in Gaza." http://www...-damascus-airports-2023-10-12/
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 09:22:25 I meant their 2017 charter, not 2006 election programe.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 09:34:18 "The question is whether statements like "whose parents voted for these Animals on a charter of genocide and Islamic state" that appear to assign culpability" Is that your question? Because I already answered it in the statement that started this conversation. It isn't their kids fault, but it is their parents faults. And kids unfortunately have to suffer for the shitty decisions their parents makes. It's how things work, everywhere. I said I feel sorry for them, just not as sorry as the external victims of their choices. Stop projecting your own flaws here on me e.g "relativism", "confusion". You are litterally asking for something I had stated in the first post you responded to. "and a manifesto that certainly and explicitly did not call for the end of democracy" Can you please link me their party election manifesto from 2006? Additionally, you only need explicit things, because you are not familiar with Islamist terminology. Their 2017 charter also does not mention establishing and "Islamic state", but it mentions "ummah" a dozen times. That is a not so subtly "code" for Islamic state. It's not your fault that you are not educated, but it is your fault for repeatedly talking about things you do not understand. They are an Islamist party, with a clear Islamist agenda, while Fatah took the "left wing" Palestinians, Hamas took the religious Palestinians voters. These are all undisputed and well established things. I get it seb, you woke up saturday and was reminded that Hamas existed, meanwhile I have had over 30 years of time looking at Islamists, what they say and how they behave. What makes this even more aggravating is that you then reduce what I say, me, my family and millions of secular exiles from Islamic countries' lived experience, to the petty political squabble you have with "right wingers" and their talking points. Shameful and disgusting. Do you feel solidarity with the UKIP voters seb? What about actual literal 1940's Nazis? You have the same skin color.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 09:37:13 And when the Islamist start killing you white people seb, they will not make any difference. They will not care about how you defended muslims and parroted Islamist talking points. See what I did there?
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 09:38:09 Yeah Seb's argument is ridiculous. How many Germans voted for their Nazis because of their economic programme as opposed to their avowed anti-Semitism? Regardless of *why* they voted for the Nazis, the German populace was certainly held accountable for doing so.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 10:17:08 Nimatzo: "but it is their parents faults" And my point is this is the standard justification all terrorists. If your problem with 9/11 wasn't so much the idea that killing thousands of civilians on the basis they voted for their govt and are at fault for its policies, just that the specific policies weren't objectionable, then there's something wrong with you. "Can you please link me their party election manifesto from 2006?" I can actually. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4606482.stm http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/background-resources/hamas-2006-electoral-campaign-platform/ http://www.cjpme.org/fs_012 http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/jps.2006.35.4.6 "Additionally, you only need explicit things, because you are not familiar with Islamist terminology." I see, so you feel you are free to assign individual culpability to the electorate generally for a policy taken by a govt based on the implicit policies you project onto them; and presumably that govts can claim a popular mandate for policies they claim are implicit. I don't know what you can that Nim but it isn't any form of democracy I understand. "Do you feel solidarity with the UKIP voters seb?" No and my point is precisely that it would be wrong for you to claim so even if there was a UKIP govt simply on the basis I participated in the election. Like, do you even understand the implications of what you are saying? "How many Germans voted for their Nazis because of their economic programme as opposed to their avowed anti-Semitism?" Quite a lot I expect. And we didn't hold each German individually accountable for the Nazis. We tried people individually based on their actions.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 10:18:20 Nim: "And when the Islamist start killing you white people seb, they will not make any difference." I'm much tougher on Islamists than you are. I supported intervention against them regularly when you've gone all "oh no, how can we in the West possibly understand these issues".
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 10:19:06 Seb We weren't exactly selective about which voters' homes got firebombed at Dresden.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 10:21:17 Rugian: "the German populace was certainly held accountable for doing so" Lol. In what specific ways did we, the west, pursue collective punishment against Germans generally? We did the precise opposite. For those that were not part of the NAZI party and not directly linked to crimes, we did nothing, we rebuilt West Germany as a democracy, and we showered it with aid.
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 10:23:59 Though I am all for giving Brandenburg and East Berlin to the Palestinians in a belated war reparations landswap programme.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 10:24:48 Seb We killed 1.5 to 3 million German civilians during WWII. I am not suggesting that Palestinian voters be placed on trial for voting for Hamas. I am suggesting that Israel consider them as acceptable wartime targets during their bombing and occupation campaigns.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 11:00:06 "And my point is this is the standard justification all terrorists." And I explained to you that no one should be interested in how TERRORISTS justify things. Terrorists also use bombs and bullets to fight for the cause, they also have a cause, they eat food, read books etc. there is nothing inherently wrong with any of those things. Terrorists should not be your compass for what right or wrong to do. My mind is blown that you are actually for real making this crude argument: Lenin had a moustach, therefor moustache makes you evil. Instead of explaining the logic of your argument, you use this fallacious argument that is what terrorists do. Ironically the fallacy is called Reductio ad Hitlerum. This is sadly the same level of reasoning as you needing to feel solidarity with Nazis because you have the same skin color. "I can actually." None of those are their actually 2006 manifesto. I'm asking because I have looked for it myself and can't find it. So, the things that are being said are secondary, hearsay and can not be independently verified for explicit or implicit anything, as can be done their 1988 and 2017 manifestos and perhaps most importantly, speeches, statements and actions. "so you feel you are free to assign individual culpability to the electorate generally for a policy taken by a govt based on the implicit policies you project onto them; and presumably that govts can claim a popular mandate for policies they claim are implicit." They are only implicit for you, they are not implicit, among others, for the people who voted for them. "I supported intervention against them regularly when you've gone all "oh no, how can we in the West possibly understand these issues"." LOL? You support toppling Assad you delusional liar. Wow, you are going to gas light us into "I'm tougher on islamists?" When they started executing those murderers and their whore wives you were crying seb. Waaa said, can we trust the Iraqi judicial system to be fair to wymen? You have no shame. You will say anything. And when I show you old conversations you will spew even more bullshit to try and cover your lies, by the most asinine loop holes "You use the wrong name and I am retarded and unable to think". You will literally make up new terms "Nature letter", without shame manipulate search terms etc. You heard it hear guys, Seb is tough on Islamists because he wanted to topple Assad. LOL
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 11:13:52 "In what specific ways did we, the west, pursue collective punishment against Germans generally?" So israel can implement a total blockade that lasts 6 years and firebomb all gaza population centers multiple times. Excellent. Thanks seb.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 11:15:53 But I am for real interested seb, Do you seriously think me and my family came here and then we picked up "right wing" talking points about Islam? You can think what you want about my opinions, but is that your position of how things transpired? It's sad really that you are not watching the videos I am watching coming out of Iran, you would be appalled by how many young women have picked up western "right wing talking points" as they are taking the fight verbally and sometimes physically with Islamist cunts harassing them on the streets for showing their hair.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 11:27:21 And let's not forget the 2 million German women raped during the Soviet occupation. If we can't get them out we'll breed them out. Thanks Seb!
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Thu Oct 12 11:35:48 Ok, close look this looks like an actually campaign manifesto: http://isr...6-electoral-campaign-platform/ And right there are the top it says: "The Change and reform List adopts a number of approaches to fulfill fixed aims emanating from Islamic references – namely: Islam is our Reference. Palestine is Arab and Muslim Land." LOL and this is funny, compare that with: "The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran sets forth the cultural, social, political, and economic institutions of Iranian society on the basis of Islamic principles and norms, which represent the earnest aspiration of the Islamic Ummah." So, even in their campaign the fact that they are an Islamist, andhis campaign is living in connection and context of the 1988 charter, which they only changed in 2017, and still contains the promise of the Islamic ummah for the Palestinians. You may be confused about what they are saying, but I assure you the people who voted for Hamas understand that the platform is and Islamic state.
jergul large member	Thu Oct 12 11:36:39 Well, Ghetto liquidation did happen during world war 2. That is true. But that is probably not the side of history you want to be on.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 12:49:08 Nim: Wow that is a rather selective reading. "Islam is our Reference." Christian democrats would say Christianity is their reference. It also says: "A new elections law is to be passed so as to ensure justice and fair representation of our people." "political powers are recognized and their role is to be used for the sake of establishing of civil institutions; equal opportunities for all and the principle of the right man for the right job will be applied." Etc. "Palestine is Arab and Muslim Land." How is this different from Israel being a Jewish homeland? The question here is whether Palestine means "from the river to the sea" or West Bank and Gaza. So as I said, the platform they stood on is by no means clearly and explicitly what you claimed it to be. You can't reasonably say they had a democratic mandate to pursue the opposite of this - which is what you are doing. Rugian: "We killed 1.5 to 3 million German civilians during WWII." We did, yes. But that is a rather different question. At no point did we ever suggest that it was good to specifically go after the civilian population to punish them. Even area bombing of civil populations was justified in terms of industry work force being a legitimate target. I.e. the populations DIRECT contribution to the war effort.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 13:05:59 Nim: "And I explained to you that no one should be interested in how TERRORISTS justify things." I see - so it's terrorism or supporting terrorism if it is a terrorist attacking civilians on the basis of the governments actions - but if someone who isn't a terrorist is attacking civilians on the basis of their governments actions, it isn't? That seems somewhat convenient in the sense that it has completely removed the definition of terrorism (attacking civilians to pursue political ends). "there is nothing inherently wrong with any of those things." So, you think there is nothing intrinsically wrong about hijacking a plane and flying it into a building full of people, it's just like, reading a book. The problem with Bin Laden is that he did it for bad Islamic reasons rather than good reasons, like say, Federal Overreach? I mean that's a pretty wild statement Nim. So let me re-state my point that you seem to be arguing with. It is never ok to attack civilians to punish their government or, by threat of killing civilians, seek to change its policy. "None of those are their actually 2006 manifesto." One purports to be an archived translation. "They are only implicit for you, they are not implicit, among others, for the people who voted for them." Then provide an explicit source. "LOL? You support toppling Assad" That too. "you delusional liar." Can't help you are forgetful as fuck. "When they started executing those murderers and their whore wives you were crying seb. Waaa said, can we trust the Iraqi judicial system to be fair to wymen?" Once again, Nim, guilt by association is not accepted democratic practice. "Do you seriously think me and my family came here and then we picked up "right wing" talking points about Islam?" No, I think you came here and picked up right wing talking points about immigrants, ethnic minorities, and race. Increasingly you display all the beliefs of an authoritarian, you just target different populations. "as they are taking the fight verbally and sometimes physically with Islamist cunts harassing them on the streets for showing their hair." And that's great and we support them. But if they participate in an election in which the Islamists win, you'd happily see them all bombed apparently. Their fault for voting for the theocrats, shame about their children. Sam: "So israel can implement a total blockade that lasts 6 years" They already did that. "and firebomb all gaza population centers multiple times." Sure, if you can demonstrate that the Civil population are key to Hamas's war efforts and that there is no other viable way to prevent Hamas successfully seizing control of Israel.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 13:09:39 "Sure, if you can demonstrate that the Civil population are key to Hamas's war efforts" ...Hamas' entire MO is to hide behind the civilian population and dare Israel to bomb them. The civilian population's very presence is key to Hamas' war efforts.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 14:00:08 Rugian: I mean sure, if you want to argue that you are a legitimate target because you are an American and America gone done warcrimes somewhere to someone (which it has) by all means.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 14:49:54 The american military does not hide behind its civilians they way hamas does.
Rugian Member	Thu Oct 12 14:52:57 Seb is confused on this subject because the UK has adopted Hamas-style defense systems, like putting missile systems atop residential apartment buildings. Sorry Seb, but those residences are legitimate military targets for anyone who is at war with the UK, just as civilian buildings occupied by Hamas are legitimate targets for Israel.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 15:33:04 Sam: Pentagon is is in the middle of the city as is your commander in chief etc. etc. Rugian: "like putting missile systems atop residential apartment buildings." I think the only time we have done that was during peace time in the London Olympics for the obvious purpose of protecting against any airborne terrorist attack against the civilian target of the Olympic compound.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 16:05:19 The pentagon is 1 of about 10,000 military targets, is the closest one to civilians, and is still about 5 orders of magnitude further away than hamas hiding spots. You daft moron.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 16:06:36 I see london jewish schools are closing btw. Imagine having to live in fear in london because seb imported so many terrorists.
Seb Member	Thu Oct 12 16:37:22 Sam: There is nowhere in Gaza that is that far away from civilians - on account of the blockade and annexation of most of the territory other than incredibly densely populated built up areas. The obligation is always to avoid civilian casualties as far as possible, and ensure that if civilians are at risk then it is for proportionate military need.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 22:02:25 "on account of the blockade and annexation of most of the territory" Which happened because they were terrorists 50 years ago. Like theres a reason israel took their land and all the other muslim nations dont want them either.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 22:07:04 Northern half of gaza told to evacuate. Rumors that israeli airspace will close in a day or 2. The tanks are going in I think.
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 22:09:40 Fairfax county schools has an actual hamas member in charge. http://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1712639236388602230?s=20
Sam Adams Member	Thu Oct 12 23:47:08 http://x.com/ClownWorld_/status/1712552000309834005?s=20 Two women in London removing posters of those missing in Israel. Sebs migrants in action again.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 01:22:34 Sam: I remind you, half of Gaza's population are children. If you are cool with bombing and starving children because of something that happened 50 years ago that's not much different from beheading them. Israel has responsibilities to avoid endangering civilian lives. Asking for an impossible evacuation that the transport, water and food distribution infrastructure can't support, while also blockading water and food supplies isn't feasible. It's just a polite way of ordering the death of many of those people. Half of which, again, are children.
jergul large member	Fri Oct 13 02:39:31 Faux Formalism is always funny. Does it really boil down to Hamas forgetting to tell everyone to evacuate Israel being the cause of all bad things that followed? Repriocity is a useful tool in illustrating ludicrous positions.
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 04:29:55 "Israel has responsibilities to avoid endangering civilian lives." You don't seem to understand that it's that type of thinking that creates these situations. Hostages are taken for a reason. Bad guys surround themselves with human shields, even their own loved ones, for a reason. That reason is you. Instead of tying your brain into knots over ethical conundrums, you need to understand life in more simple terms. If someone wants to harm you or yours, they've got to go.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 04:38:42 Murder: So you'd drop a nuke on a city to get Timothy McVeigh? The idea you will deter hostage taking by maximising civilian deaths is ludicrous Don't be a fucking idiot Murder. You are just engaging in self-indulgent machismo. Proportionality doesn't mean you can't go after hostage takers. Everyone understands there will be collateral damage and civilian deaths involved in destroying Hamas. I am saying there's a legal obligation to avoid as far as possible endangering lives. When they are, it needs to be shown to be necessary and proportionate. Giving civilians an impossible deadline to undertake an evacuation where on historical precedent about 20% would die from the evacuation while you are taking military unnecessary steps (like cutting off water and food) to make that evacuation impossible doesn't count as having discharged that responsibility.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 05:31:05 "ISRAEL TELLS 1.1 MILLION CIVILIANS TO EVACUATE NORTHERN GAZA" http://www...acuation-order-81d2947?mod=mhp !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 05:55:43 Seb - Here you go. Hamas is officially at fault for every Palestinian killed from here on out. "Hamas calls on people to stay home and ignore Israeli evacuation orders Hamas has called on Palestinians to stay in their homes after Israel issued sweeping evacuation orders in Gaza. The Hamas authority for refugee affairs on Friday called on residents of the north of the territory to “remain steadfast in your homes and to stand firm in the face of this disgusting psychological war waged by the occupation”, AP reports. Israel has ordered the evacuation of northern Gaza, including Gaza City, home to hundreds of thousands of people. Palestinians would only be able to flee south within Gaza as Israel has completely sealed off the territory. The UN says that 400,000 Palestinians have already been displaced." http://www...palestine-evacuations-military
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 06:13:53 "So you'd drop a nuke on a city to get Timothy McVeigh?" Which city?
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 06:23:29 "The idea you will deter hostage taking by maximising civilian deaths is ludicrous" You deter hostage taking by not allowing it to affect your actions. "Proportionality doesn't mean you can't go after hostage takers." Proportionality is another set of chains invented by the enemy within to sabotage western civilization. The goal is literally to keep the weaker enemy in the fight. Not proportionality ... ratio. "Giving civilians an impossible deadline to undertake an evacuation where on historical precedent about 20% would die from the evacuation while you are taking military unnecessary steps (like cutting off water and food) to make that evacuation impossible doesn't count as having discharged that responsibility." They wouldn't be in this situation if they didn't allow Hamas to run riot. I know you like to think of them as innocent, but they are complicit.
Paramount Member	Fri Oct 13 06:26:24 A video from 2018, but it’s still beautiful to watch. Palestinian freedom fighters beheads Israeli toddlers: http://x.com/angelo4justice3/status/1712721192753459243
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 06:31:46 Paramount I hope you enjoyed your little dalliance with these terrorists while it lasted. Palestinian Gaza is about to fade out of existence.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 06:36:15 Today is history. Today will be remembered. Years from now the young will ask with wonder about this day. Today is history and you are part of it. Fourteen hundred years ago, when elsewhere they were footing the blame for the Justinianic Plague, Umar the Great - so called - told the Arabs they could come to Gaza. They came. They trundled their belongings into the city. They settled. They took hold. They prospered in business, science, education, the arts. They came with nothing. And they flourished. For fourteen centuries there has been a Arab Gaza. By this evening those fourteen centuries will be a rumor. They never happened. Today is history. - Some based madlad
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 06:49:45 The US will stop them well short of that. Palestinian Gaza will still be there. > 99% of the population of Gaza will still be there. The fact that they still roof knock is a pretty clear indication that they know they can't just slaughter people.
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 06:51:38 To clarify, > 99% will survive the military operations. The shitty living conditions will kill quite a few more.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 06:53:16 Rugian: "Hamas is officially at fault for every Palestinian killed from here on out." No it's not. Whatever Hamas says, it isn't physically possible to move 1.1m people in the time frame asked. It would require four times more buses than exist in NY city. Gaza has fuck all transport infrastructure and fuel is embargoed. Israel isn't providing a cease fire. There's nowhere to house them. There's no food and water for them, and Israel is blocking food, water and humanitarian aid. So convenient as it is to pretend these statements exculpate Israel of act responsibility towards civilians, they clearly do not.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 06:54:02 Murder: A US city with a population of 2m, half of which are children.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 06:55:27 "You deter hostage taking by not allowing it to affect your actions" So when criminals take hostages, you'd just drop a bomb on the hostage and criminals and make no effort to try and avoid killing the hostages?
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 06:57:41 "They wouldn't be in this situation if they didn't allow Hamas to run riot." Israel wouldn't be in this position if they didn't deliberately engineer Hamas dominance over the Gaza strip to weaken the secular PA. Doesn't make them culpable or strip Israelis of the right to security and self defence or exculpate Hamas.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 06:58:51 Seb Its literally an hour-long walk to get out of the killzone. To claim that Palestinians lack the ability to leave Gaza City is laughable.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:03:53 Rugian: 1m people on an hour long walk, 500,000 children, with whatever they can carry, in 30 degree effective heat. What do they do when they get there, given they'll leave all the food and water and shelter behind? They just going to sit in the street and die of thirst - given that food and water have been cut off? Everyone knows that's not a feasible evacuation. Pathetic to be in denial about these obvious facts.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 07:05:06 Seb That sounds like a Palestinian problem. Shouldn't have voted for the 21st century version of Nazis in 2005. Oh well.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:06:40 That's before you get to issues like elderly, or those in hospital. And it's also being done while Israel continues to bomb. So densely crowded streets full of children while Israel's dropping bombs on them. It's not a viable plan.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:09:09 "That sounds like a Palestinian problem" That sounds like an Israeli problem morally and in law. "Shouldn't have voted for the 21st century version of Nazis in 2005. Oh well." Half the population weren't even born then, three quarters didn't even have the vote. And again, the entire moral basis for Hamas's attacks on Israel civilians is "shouldn't have voted for Likud". You are just validating that approach.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:12:55 I will keep having this same conversation every 15-18 years. "They shouldn't have" - most of them didn't, they weren't alive, because their life expectancy sucks, because the *same* Israeli politicians keep imposing horrible conditions for 50 odd years and it doesn't fucking work. You just get multiple generations of 20 somethings that have only ever known Israeli oppression and decide that violence is the only answer the Israelis will ever understand.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 07:17:08 Seb If you can demonstrate that those 18 and unders are secular liberals who are eager to cast off the yoke of Hamas and permanently denounce anti-Semitism, I'm all ears. Until then, they're simply terrorists in waiting, just like their parents before them and their parents' parents before them. Fruit from the poisoned tree is rotten. As far as I'm concerned, morality and legal niceties flew out the window on October 7. The atrocities committed that day mean that we should have zero, zero sympathy for whatever happens to Gaza now.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:35:29 Rugian: "If you can demonstrate that those 18 and unders are secular liberals" Do you agree also think that any Israeli that can't or hasn't provided proof to you that they are a secular liberal and not a Palestinian murdering settler (they exist) are legitimate military targets for Palestinians?
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Fri Oct 13 07:38:21 Seb ”Christian democrats would say Christianity is their reference.” There is no Christian equivalent to an Islamic State (conceptually or physically), or sharia, or Hamas. So, your hypothetical is lacking a lot of information, that we have surrounding Hamas and Islam. Their charters, their speeches, their actions, their ancestry with the Muslim brotherhood, what the Quran and Hadiths say, the founding of the Islamic state concept by Muhammed, the tradition and legal praxis of Sharia and the various implementation of these concepts over the centuries etc. and so on. So, no. Yes, we can butcher things out of context and fabricate limping hypotheticals like this and literally read in anything into whatever we want and equate anything with anything. And when you start doing this, I have come to understand it as a last resort tactic. You attempt to make the topic completely incoherent and disconnected from physical reality in some epic form of gas lighting, so the person you are arguing with is bamboozled and starts questioning reality. I bet this works great for you with the people you have in your real-life bubble. They think you are so smart. Hamas is a jihadi organization with Islam and sharia as their political platform. There is nothing to discuss and your relativizing just confirms that you were projecting earlier. “but if someone who isn't a terrorist is attacking civilians on the basis of their governments actions, it isn't?” It’s irrelevant if it is a government or a non-state organization or an individual person who is attacking civilians. Amazing how you are evading the relevant parts to fumble around with all these irrelevant questions. “So, you think there is nothing intrinsically wrong about hijacking a plane and flying it into a building full of people, it's just like, reading a book.” The fact that you are still asking, after me giving you examples of situations where most people think it is justified to kidnap and kill innocent children, it’s your problem. I don’t think you asking more stupid questions and me providing more answers and examples, will help. “It is never ok to attack civilians to punish their government or, by threat of killing civilians, seek to change its policy.” Let me restate my answer: yes, it is ok in some circumstances. Just none that are relevant to Israel-Palestine conflict. If you are not willing to do that, ok, we have established a bedrock difference. I find your principle of death before killing innocent people, no matter what the circumstance or costs, immoral. I sincerely hope you are lying. You are liability to your family, community and nation. God have mercy on you and may he never test you. “That too.” “Can't help you are forgetful as fuck.” Intervention against Assad is not congruent with “I am tough on Islamists”. It was a vague statement of your opinion about yourself, which simply does not correlate with how you have behaved and the allergy you have towards absorbing facts about Islam, or how you are trying to cotton wrap Hamas ideology: those poor Palestinians had no idea what they were voting for. Had you said, Palestinians felt desperate and like they had no choice, that would still be wrong, but not retarded like arguing that their Islamist platform was/is not obvious. This is not, being tough on Islamism, this is not even knowing what it is in the first place or correctly being able to identify it. “Once again, Nim, guilt by association is not accepted democratic practice.” It was guilt as established by a judiciary. I’m pretty sure that is an accepted democratic practice. “No, I think you came here and picked up right wing talking points about immigrants, ethnic minorities, and race.” Nice attempt of shifting the goal posts from Islam to race and ethnic minority, bro. But you are doubling down? Your thesis is that me and my family had nothing to say about Islam, we came here, we picked up right wing talking points and then applied them on Islam? lol :) nice way to short circuit your argument into even less parsimonious bullshit. Anyway, even within the extended goal posts, your outlook is parochial. Ethnic dynamic was a thing in the middle east, when your ancestors were cavemen, and their greatest achievement was that they had managed to erect a couple of stones in a ring. Are you aware that “European right wing talking points” are ubiquitous in Iran, towards the problems emergent in the *millions* of Afghani, Iraqi and Lebanese refugees in Iran? A similar “replacement” narrative: secular Iranians are driven out of Iran, and replaced by religious Shias from surrounding regions. Here is a wild idea, what if certain social issues are older than modern European political discourse and universal in human societies? Crazy, but hear me out. What if they are dynamics inherent to human behavior? What if you are just trying to patronize me and diminish my opinions, because you are a racist and don't have real arguments, but a feeling that I must be wrong? Your woke brand of white supremacy is equally disgusting as the right wing brand, FYI. “Increasingly you display all the beliefs of an authoritarian” “And that's great and we support them.” That is a lie, you are busy calling critics of Islam as “Islamophobes peddling right wing talking points". “you'd happily see them all bombed apparently.” You only say this because you understand how badly this conversation has gone for you. For me to be deeper in the moral abyss you, with your woke racism, I need to be "happy" about civilians getting killed. It’s the kind of moral logic that makes sense if you are Hamas or Seb. “Their fault for voting for the theocrats, shame about their children.” Yes, the things happening in Iran, the naivety of the Iranian people during the revolution, it’s their fault. It is their fault that they even go to the voting booths, it is their fault for voting for “reformists”, knowing how the system works. Yes, it is their fault, shame about the generations that came after them, suffering their stupidity. Costly lessons have been learned. Anyway, enough of this bullshit.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:38:48 "The atrocities committed that day mean that we should have zero, zero sympathy for whatever happens to Gaza now." And all the way back to 1948 and before "X strips Y and all who follow after of their rights" and this is why we are still here, 70 years later, with people inflicting atrocity after atrocity on each other. When you going to admit your approach has failed Rugian? How many more people need to die because you don't like the idea of peace?
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 07:42:19 I mean it's crazy, Rugian wants to interview newborns about secular liberalism before he decides whether they should be shot or bombed. Like the only issue with Hamas is they didn't ask the babies they beheaded a questionnaire first?
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 07:47:15 Seb When are *you* going to admit that your approach has failed? Your proposed solution is for Israel to essentially capitulate to all Palestinian demands for statehood and pray that they simply decide to stop hating Jews. Well I'm sorry, but that just demonstrates that you're wearing a huge pair of blinders on this issue. Some conflicts are existential in nature and can only be resolved with an existential solution. This is one of those conflicts. I don't see you crying over all of the Jewish communities in Muslim countries that had to be disestablished in the immediate aftermath of 1948, or the millions of Hindus and Muslims that had to flee their homes when India and Pakistan were granted independence because they were on the wrong side of the border. The solution here is the same as it was for those situations. Palestinians need to find new homes in a Muslim-majority country and cede thr West Bank and Gaza to Israel. Anything short of that and this conflict continues forever.
Hrothgar Member	Fri Oct 13 08:00:37 Side note, Israel's greatest weakness is its utter predictability in response to terrorism. From the moment the scale of the attack became apparent, it was bloody obvious that Israel would respond with some massive level of destruction in Gaza - likely never seen before levels of destruction. And outside the philosophical debate of whether that is write or wrong or merited, it is completely predictable. Everyone knows exactly what they will do in response, and what will happen in Gaza. And guess who benefits from that? Enemies of Israel. They prepare their propaganda. Put in place the media pieces needed to elicit angry responses from the western puppets Iran/Hamas have attached their strings to. And in the end Israel will have less global support than it did before the predictable mass violence response. Hamas will lose some low-level barely adult/teenage stupid male extremist bullet fodder, yet still be fully intact.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 08:08:23 Hrothgar would have Israel play Michael Jackson's "We Are The World" and embark on an "Hug a Palestinian Today" campaign instead. No one is arguing that it wouldn't be better if Israel didn't have to use overwhelming force against an implacable enemy. But the fact is that it does need to.
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 08:14:57 "Hrothgar would have Israel play Michael Jackson's "We Are The World" ..." Michael Jackson & Lionel Ritchie's "We Are the World".
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 08:15:27 Richie*
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 08:15:30 My error.
Paramount Member	Fri Oct 13 08:23:28 ” No one is arguing that it wouldn't be better if Israel didn't have to use overwhelming force against an implacable enemy. But the fact is that it does need to.” No, it doesn’t need to. The settlers can move back to Eastern Europe and the US where they originate from, and the fascist state of Israel can end the illegal military occupation, pay reparations, and then go to jail or be hanged for their genocidal crimes.
murder Member	Fri Oct 13 08:27:36 Don't go sending them here.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 08:32:24 Paramount "The settlers can move back to Eastern Europe" Why, so you psychopaths can Holocaust them again? http://com...File:Holocaustdeathtoll%25.png There's a reason why the Jews need a dedicated Jewish state in the first place. Europe is one election away from electing someone like you who would happily gas every Jew he can find.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 08:35:41 I just have to say it. I find it so disgusting that any of you Europeans think that you deserve a say on this matter. You slaughtered millions of Jews in living memory, yet think that you are qualified to criticize Israel, the only Jewish state in the entire world, for protecting its citizens against those that would want to murder them. Fuck all of you, seriously.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 11:13:19 Rugian: "When are *you* going to admit that your approach has failed?" Nobody has ever seriously attempted a fair peace for the Palestinians with a normalised state. "Some conflicts are existential in nature and can only be resolved with an existential solution." Ah yes, Rugian with his hard on for genocide. "I don't see you crying over all of the Jewish communities in Muslim countries that had to be disestablished" Are any of those people's descendants still living under permanent occupation and blockade? "Palestinians need to find new homes in a Muslim-majority country and cede thr West Bank and Gaza to Israel." "need to find new homes in a Muslim-majority country" I see, and why exactly would any other country accept a big wave of refugees. Are you offering to host them? Is America going to pay for the compensation? "Europe is one election away from electing someone like you who would happily gas every Jew he can find." It was your buddies at Charlottesville walking around with flaming torches, shields with NAZI symbols on shouting "Jews will not replace us" as I recall.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 11:14:59 I mean we all know which side you would have been on in 1930's Europe Rugian.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Oct 13 11:15:14 "Hamas will lose some low-level barely adult/teenage stupid male extremist bullet fodder, yet still be fully intact." Lolwut
Sam Adams Member	Fri Oct 13 11:22:11 "Nobody has ever seriously attempted a fair peace for the Palestinians with a normalised state." Lolwut. Naive libs are hilariously retarded.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Oct 13 11:27:40 Speaking of naive retarded libs. An al jazeera crew of journalists set up an observation point on the hezbollah-israel border in a spot where skirmishes were occuring and where observation points are routinely targeted. Can you guess what happens next? I mean imagine the retardation to set up identically to a military outpost on the front line and think you are somehow special because your shirt says "press"(which no one can read). 1 dead 1 crippled.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 11:33:11 "Nobody has ever seriously attempted a fair peace for the Palestinians with a normalised state." Correct, because this is IMPOSSIBLE! What would such a "normalized" state look like in your mind? What moderate Palestinians would likely make up the new leadership? What is the plan for denazification of the Palestinian people? How would the Palestinian youth be lured away from militant Islam and anti-Semitism? What reliable security measures would an independent Palestine give to Israel? Will terrorism against Israel stop? Will Jews be able to freely live and worship in Palestine without fear of reprisal or violence? How will Palestinians be convinced to give up RoR claims? How exactly will Palestine function as a multicultural and multi-party liberal democratic state? You have answers for none of these because they are impossible to answer. *All* of these are prerequisites for an independent Palestinian state, and the Palestinians have given *zero* indications that they can or will abide by any of them. For fuck's sake Seb. You're so stuck in the mindset of British decolonization, where you could just say "fuck it, we're leaving this territory forever, enjoy independence guys." Israel can't do that, because the territory in question here is right on their borders and filled with people who want all Jews dead. So no, they're not going to give these fuckers independence and pray everything works out in the end.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 11:36:30 Nim: You appear to be getting confused again. We know and agree what Hamas is. What you are trying to do is establish direct culpability of the electorate for Hamas based on false claims of what they voted for. We have copies of their platforms, speeches etc. It is perfectly clear Hamas lied. But it is a similar lie (the same lie they make) that they have a popular mandate for their policies. Contemporaneous polling showed that about two thirds of Palestian voters wanted peace and would accept recognition of Israel (and Hamas, just after the elections, was forced to accept that they would hold a referendum on that if a peace deal was tabled, despite their opposition to a two state solution). "It’s irrelevant if it is a government or a non-state organization or an individual person who is attacking civilians." That wasn't the question. You are evading because you know you overreached. "The fact that you are still asking," You are forcing me to, simply because you continue to reject the basic premise that attacking civilians as a means to try and cause a government to change policy IS the definition of terrorism; which is why trying to justify violence against civilians on the basis of their participation in an election 17 years ago which was won by Hanas (which, I remind you, half of the gazan population was not alive to vote in, and a further 25% were not old enough to vote in) is fundamentally wrong. "yes, it is ok in some circumstances." Ok, which circumstances do you advocate murdering civillians? " I find your principle of death before killing innocent people" Learn to read Nim the condition was: "to punish their government or, by threat of killing civilians, seek to change its policy". If you can contrive a situation where you kill civilians in order to save yourself, that clearly isn't "to punish their government or seek it to change its policy". "or how you are trying to cotton wrap Hamas ideology:" I'm not - I have said that Hamas needs to be destroyed, that its ideology is abhorent, and I will support Israel doing that in so far as they keep their means of doing so proportionate and aim to minimise civilian casualties. What you are trying to do is make the case that anyone who voted for a Change and Reform list candidate in 2006 (which at most, can be only around 25%-30% of the population of the strip today) was voting for genocide and so fair dibs for being killed now. "It was guilt as established by a judiciary." I'm unfamiliar with the case you are referring to, but you just described the people killed as "their whore wives" rather than anyone convicted in their own right. If they themselves were convicted of terrorism then you should describe them as such. I’m pretty sure that is an accepted democratic practice. "Your thesis is that me and my family had nothing to say about Islam, we came here, we picked up right wing talking points and then applied them on Islam?" You seem to be conflating different things. I said I think you have picked up right wing talking points on immigration. Which is ironic given apparently you were an illegal immigrant, so you say. "what if certain social issues are older than modern European political discourse" I mean, if you want to live with bronze age values, why did you bother coming to Europe in the first place? I thought your whole thing is that immigrants should abandon their primitive cultures and embrace modernity. Yet here you are espousing us to adopt Iranian theocrats solutions to immigration and cultural conformity. "That is a lie, you are busy calling critics of Islam as “Islamophobes peddling right wing talking points"." If you were merely critiquing Islam, rather than trying to bucket everyone who is Muslim into a box that says "dangerous, send back home" then I wouldn't have a problem. "It’s the kind of moral logic that makes sense if you are Hamas or Seb." This entire conversation happened because you cannot bring yourself to accept that the population of gaza shouldn't be held in any way responsible or culpable for the actions of Hamas. "Yes, the things happening in Iran, the naivety of the Iranian people during the revolution, it’s their fault." Nim, I really don't think you understand the fundamental basis of European values and human rights.
Seb Member	Fri Oct 13 11:39:09 Rugian: "Correct, because this is IMPOSSIBLE!" No, it's perfectly possible, nobody has ever seriously tried is the issue. It's been done in many other places, including Muslim/Christian tensions. The principle issue is Israel is going to need to accept it can't have control over the natural resources of the west bank, and will need to remove its colonies on the west bank; which it should not have built in the first place.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 11:39:13 "Ah yes, Rugian with his hard on for genocide." More like a hard on for realism. You ought to try it. "Are any of those people's descendants still living under permanent occupation and blockade?" No, because the communities those people lived in were forced into extinction. Duh. Thanks for proving my point! A model lesson for how to deal with Palestine. The only way to stop permanent occupation and blockade is to force everyone to move to another country. "I see, and why exactly would any other country accept a big wave of refugees. Are you offering to host them? Is America going to pay for the compensation?" I mean, are you seriously arguing that they're lacking for options? http://www.../comments/pa3j5t/muslim_world/ But if anyone should host them, its Europe. As payment for the whole Holocaust thing. "It was your buddies at Charlottesville walking around with flaming torches, shields with NAZI symbols on shouting "Jews will not replace us" as I recall." 100 random yahoos don't govern American policy, unlike the anti-Semites who govern Europe's.
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 11:40:31 Seb Good of you to straight up ignore all of the practical issues with creating such a state. For a self-proclaimed expert on global affairs, you seem to base a lot of your policies in the realm of fantasy unicorns.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Oct 13 11:55:54 "No one has attempted to live peacefully with nazis. Give peace a chance" -seb, 1940. While brits with brains were planning total blockades and designing firebombs for heavy bombers.
Sam Adams Member	Fri Oct 13 11:56:41 Seems like the IDF is going in tonight. Over the top, boys!
Rugian Member	Fri Oct 13 11:58:51 LEEEEEEEROY JENKINS
	show deleted posts