Israeli forces kill dozens of Palestinians in Gaza 'massacre'

[Shad]

If it's true, more than one source will be saying it.

Truth does not require multiple sources. Another arbitrary standard created so you can dismiss something.

Hamas official: 50 of the 62 Gazans killed in border violence were our members

Oh, please. The Israeli government doesn't even believe that as they grab up more and more Palestinian land to build illegal settlements.

Did I say this was Israeli's stance? Nope. However it is a fair criticism of Israeli in that the government values land over peace.

Cite the law being violated.

 

[Shad]

I did not harp. One mention of an ignorant error is not "harping". You have nothing so you have to attack even your own mistakes, now that is hilarious.

I have plenty to attack. Your double-standard, your moral grandstanding, your attack on spelling as if that has anything to do with morality or the subject at hand. It was nothing but an ad hominem.

So now it's an ignorant error? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Show your evidence

And yes, since I do not justify the murder of people that are at best guilty of very minor "crimes" my morals are clearly far superior to yours.

I never justified that. Try again son.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Truth does not require multiple sources. Another arbitrary standard created so you can dismiss something.

Hamas official: 50 of the 62 Gazans killed in border violence were our members

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-official-50-of-the-people-killed-in-gaza-riots-were-members/
Well, Hamas is a political party so it's like being a Republican or Democrat. That doesn't justify firing on civilians.

Did I say this was Israeli's stance? Nope. However it is a fair criticism of Israeli in that the government values land over peace.

Cite the law being violated.

From Wikipedia:

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law, because the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits countries from moving population into territories occupied in a war.[1][2][3][4][5] Israel maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have plenty to attack. Your double-standard, your moral grandstanding, your attack on spelling as if that has anything to do with morality or the subject at hand. It was nothing but an ad hominem.

So now it's an ignorant error? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Show your evidence

Still shooting blanks. When you have something besides false accusations perhaps I will respond.

I never justified that. Try again son.

Sure you did. You are now trying to justify the deaths with the claim that they were members of Hamas.

It must suck to be wrong all of the time.

 

[icehorse]

The blame always falls upon those that are doing the actual killing. Perhaps you could work on your morals a bit.

So the soldiers defending their countries against Hitler should be blamed?

 

[icehorse]

Well, Hamas is a political party so it's like being a Republican or Democrat. That doesn't justify firing on civilians.

Hamas is a terrorist organization.

 

[Shad]

Well, Hamas is a political party so it's like being a Republican or Democrat. That doesn't justify firing on civilians.

Nope it a terrorist organization playing at politics. When the GOP or Dems have a militant wing attacking people let me know.

From Wikipedia:

The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal under international law, because the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits countries from moving population into territories occupied in a war.[1][2][3][4][5] Israel maintains that they are consistent with international law[6] because it does not agree that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the territories occupied in the 1967 Six-Day War.[7] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention does apply.[8][9]

The war of Independence was prior to the Article thus not applicable. Jordan's annexation was illegal according to the same courts thus is not occupied territory. This previous ruling makes the current one invalid.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Hamas is a terrorist organization.

And Saudi Arabia is a brutal terrorist state we are cozy with so don't try that card with me. We are fine with terrorists and murderous dictators as long as they do our bidding.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Nope it a terrorist organization playing at politics. When the GOP or Dems have a militant wing attacking people let me know.




The war of Independence was prior to the Article thus not applicable. Jordan's annexation was illegal according to the same courts thus is not occupied territory. This previous ruling makes the current one invalid.

You go to tell that to the UN and all the organizations that are tasked with upholding international law, then, since you know better. Have fun.

 

[Shad]

And Saudi Arabia is a brutal terrorist state we are cozy with so don't try that card with me. We are fine with terrorists and murderous dictators as long as they do our bidding.

We? You mean government. If it was my choice KSA would be more isolated than Iran has been in the last decade or so.

You go to tell that to the UN and all the organizations that are tasked with upholding international law, then, since you know better. Have fun.

Tasked with upholding the law? Hilarious. The UN's history is rife with it's failure in upholding and enforcing international law. The security council has members which have repeatedly vetoed actions against their own nation and it's allies; USSR, China and the USA. The UN is a paper tiger and is treat as such by nations with real power.

 

[icehorse]

And Saudi Arabia is a brutal terrorist state we are cozy with so don't try that card with me. We are fine with terrorists and murderous dictators as long as they do our bidding.

I agree with your assessment of SA and I agree with the frequent hypocrisy of the US's foreign policy.

The question is whether YOU are fine with terrorists. I think both SA and Hamas are despicable.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We? You mean government. If it was my choice KSA would be more isolated than Iran has been in the last decade or so.



Tasked with upholding the law? Hilarious. The UN's history is rife with it's failure in upholding and enforcing international law. The security council has members which have repeatedly vetoed actions against their own nation and it's allies; USSR, China and the USA. The UN is a paper tiger and is treat as such by nations with real power.

It's not only the UN. But whatever. We're not going to get anywhere with this. Which is why I wasn't replying to this thread in the first place.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So the soldiers defending their countries against Hitler should be blamed?

Non sequitur.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I agree with your assessment of SA and I agree with the frequent hypocrisy of the US's foreign policy.

The question is whether YOU are fine with terrorists. I think both SA and Hamas are despicable.

No, I don't support terrorism. I can understand desperation, though. I think SA, Hamas and the Israeli government are despicable.

 

[Shad]

Still shooting blanks. When you have something besides false accusations perhaps I will respond.

Dismissed as the assertion it is.

Sure you did. You are now trying to justify the deaths with the claim that they were members of Hamas.

Nope. I merely threw some shade on the massacre narrative when a number of those killed were Hamas militants. This changes the narrative from of purely civilian protest hence the idea that everyone killed/injured is not some protester with a flag.

It must suck to be wrong all of the time.

Wrong about what exactly? Another assertions dismissed as one... Try again son. Let see some evidence rather than whatever your mind created.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Dismissed as the assertion it is.



Nope. I merely threw some shade on the massacre narrative when a number of those killed were Hamas militants. This changes the narrative from of purely civilian protest hence the idea that everyone killed/injured is not some protester with a flag.




Wrong about what exactly? Another assertions dismissed as one... Try again son. Let see some evidence rather than whatever your mind created.

Still shooting blanks.

Try again.

 

[Shad]

It's not only the UN. But whatever. We're not going to get anywhere with this. Which is why I wasn't replying to this thread in the first place.

The Red Cross and High Court are authorized by the UN. The rest are opinions, individual nations and organizations besides those that are obviously part of the UN by name.

 

[Shad]

Still shooting blanks.

Try again.

It was your claim, support it. All I did was deny your claim.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The Red Cross and High Court are authorized by the UN. The rest are opinions, individual nations and organizations besides those that are obviously part of the UN by name.

I still am not going to agree with the argument over some guy on a forum over international consensus and experts. Get real.

 

[YmirGF]

You go to tell that to the UN and all the organizations that are tasked with upholding international law, then, since you know better. Have fun.

It's not as if the UN has made any real progress on this ruling.