Palestinians under attack

[Revoltingest]

Revoltingest, are you going to answer my questions and supply me with the post number where you supposedly answered them or are you going to just continue on with your charade?

Now, now....don't pretend or dwell on red herrings.
I explained why I won't offer specific solutions.
Why, you keep asking?
They'll satisfy no one committed to war & oppresion.
(That's what happened before.)
But you needn't answer my questions either.

 

[Levite]

I've made specific suggestions before, but I no longer will. It is
up to the parties involved to look past their certainty that the
other will forever be a deadly foe, & to find common ground.

So your position boils down to "I know they have committed themselves to your destruction, but try to ignore that, and hopefully it will go away."

 

[Revoltingest]

So your position boils down to "I know they have committed themselves to your destruction, but try to ignore that, and hopefully it will go away."

A mischievous restatement you have there.
I suggest trying to find negotiated ways to change their commitment.
If you presume it's impossible, then you're doomed to endless war.
How successful has the war been?
Is there peace on the horizon?
Will there ever be without a change in tactics?

 

[Levite]

A mischievous restatement you have there.
I suggest trying to find negotiated ways to change their commitment.
If you presume it's impossible, then you're doomed to endless war.
How successful has the war been?
Is there peace on the horizon?
Will there ever be without a change in tactics?

The war doesn't end and doesn't achieve anything because Israel rightly refuses to prosecute the war with maximum aggressiveness, since doing so would eliminate Hamas at the cost of too many civilian casualties; and Hamas lacks the capability to achieve military victory. So militarily, should Israel surrender and let Hamas win, or should Israel finish Hamas even though doing so would be a civilian bloodbath?

Regardless of the inefficacies of the military conflict, there has not been a lack of negotiation attempts. Hamas doesn't merely reject Israeli proposals, but those of the UN, and even those of Arab governments-- as for example, the multiple cease-fire attempts in this conflict that Israel has accepted and Hamas has rejected. At other times, various fair and reasonable proposals have been made, and Hamas has rejected them all.

The starting point of Hamas has always been that the State of Israel has no right to exist, and it must be destroyed, with all Jews living in it either killed, expelled, or condemned to second-class status under the draconian rule of Hamas. That is their starting point: if they do not change that starting point, how are negotiations supposed to proceed?

 

[CMike]

The war doesn't end and doesn't achieve anything because Israel rightly refuses to prosecute the war with maximum aggressiveness, since doing so would eliminate Hamas at the cost of too many civilian casualties; and Hamas lacks the capability to achieve military victory. So militarily, should Israel surrender and let Hamas win, or should Israel finish Hamas even though doing so would be a civilian bloodbath?

Regardless of the inefficacies of the military conflict, there has not been a lack of negotiation attempts. Hamas doesn't merely reject Israeli proposals, but those of the UN, and even those of Arab governments-- as for example, the multiple cease-fire attempts in this conflict that Israel has accepted and Hamas has rejected. At other times, various fair and reasonable proposals have been made, and Hamas has rejected them all.

The starting point of Hamas has always been that the State of Israel has no right to exist, and it must be destroyed, with all Jews living in it either killed, expelled, or condemned to second-class status under the draconian rule of Hamas. That is their starting point: if they do not change that starting point, how are negotiations supposed to proceed?

Absolutely right.

You can't negotiate with someone whom is adamant that he wants to kill you because you exist. Not only that but the person is acting trying to kill you and your entire family.

The alternative is to try and stop him before he kills you.

The conflict in the middle east has no resolution at this point. It has to be managed.

 

[Moishe3rd]

A mischievous restatement you have there.
I suggest trying to find negotiated ways to change their commitment.
If you presume it's impossible, then you're doomed to endless war.
How successful has the war been?
Is there peace on the horizon?
Will there ever be without a change in tactics?

How successful has this war been?

Well, Israel is one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world, with one of the highest standards of living, multi ethnic, multi religious with, according to a British general testifying at the UN, the most moral army in the world.
Hamas rules over an area that refuses to produce anything but death. They steal from their own people, they offer up their own people as human sacrifices, and they are the epitome of evil and corruption.

I suppose that the answer to your question would depend upon how you define success.

 

[CMike]

A mischievous restatement you have there.
I suggest trying to find negotiated ways to change their commitment.
If you presume it's impossible, then you're doomed to endless war.
How successful has the war been?
Is there peace on the horizon?
Will there ever be without a change in tactics?

Despite numerous attemps of Israel to negotiate in good faith, Hamas has declined.


Their own charter calls for the destruction of the entire state of Israel. Their leaders continuously state that position. I believe them.

Mein Kump was published before Hitler did what he did. No one believed him.

When mad crazies say they are going to try and do things that involve your destruction, believe them that they will try.

 

[Revoltingest]

How successful has this war been?

Well, Israel is one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world kama one of the highest standards of living, multi ethnic, multi religious with, according to a British general testifying at the UN, the most moral army in the world.
Hamas rules over an area that refuses to produce anything but death. They steal from their own people, they offer up their own people as human sacrifices, and they are the epitome of evil and corruption.

And if you choose to continue to seeing them this way,
then you'll be rewarded with what you see.

I suppose that the answer to your question would depend upon how you define success.

Peaceful resolution of the conflict.

 

[CMike]

Agree with you ... and here's some example of that ...
Images from Gaza should trouble every Israeli - OpinionIsrael News - Haaretz Israeli News source

Maybe their government should make sure they are in air raid shelters and protected rather than using them as human shields to protect their weapons.

 

[Revoltingest]

Despite numerous attemps of Israel to negotiate in good faith, Hamas has declined.
Their own charter calls for the destruction of the entire state of Israel. Their leaders continuously state that position. I believe them.
Mein Kump was published before Hitler did what he did. No one believed him.
When mad crazies say they are going to try and do things that involve your destruction, believe them that they will try.

It might surprise you to learn that many people outside of the conflict
see your side as "mad crazies" for continually engaging in a cycle of
violence, & always being sanctimoniously surprised at the result.

 

[CMike]

It might surprise you to learn that many people outside of the conflict
see your side as "mad crazies" for continually engaging in a cycle of
violence, & always being sanctimoniously surprised at the result.

What I am stating are facts

1) Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel

2) Hamas officials continously call on the killing of all the jews in Israel

3) Hamas has shot over 2,000 rockets into Israel's populated cities

4) Hamas uses it's own children as human shields

5) Hamas has continuously declined any offer to negotiate, whereas Israel said they have been willing to speak real peace talks anytime, anyplace

You can't negotiate with an entity that refuses to negotiate and is continously trying to kill all the jews in the country and destroy Israel period.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I am stating are facts
1) Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel
2) Hamas officials continously call on the killing of all the jews in Israel
3) Hamas has shot over 2,000 rockets into Israel's populated cities
4) Hamas uses it's own children as human shields
5) Hamas has continuously declined any offer to negotiate, whereas Israel said they have been willing to speak real peace talks anytime, anyplace
You can't negotiate with an entity that refuses to negotiate and is continously trying to kill all the jews in the country and destroy Israel period.

Outside of a cogent argument, facts have no meaning.
You cite the ones which confirm what you already feel.
Here some other facts to add to your list:
- The cycle of violence hasn't brought peace.
- Neither side will defeat the other militarily.

If you choose to stay the course, then Israeli citizens will remain insecure,
& many Palestinians will suffer & die. This is a choice.

 

[CMike]

If we don't stay the course, Hamas will successfuly murder all the jews in Israel and the country will be destroyed.

 

[metis]

Now, now....don't pretend or dwell on red herrings.
I explained why I won't offer specific solutions.
Why, you keep asking?
They'll satisfy no one committed to war & oppresion.
(That's what happened before.)
But you needn't answer my questions either.

Could you be any more disingenuous? I knew you wouldn't answer the question because I checked back on your posts and you simply lied about claiming that you did answer my questions.

So, I will give you another chance at hopefully telling the truth:

Did you support the American response on Iraq after 9-11?

Did you support the American response on Afghanistan after 9-11?

Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack Germany and Japan during WWII?

Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack the Axis powers during WWI?

Now, if you answer yes to any of the above, then I have to accuse you of hypocrisy, because these and Israel's response to Hamas have been done with a great many casualties, and the least number of civilian casualties is what's happening in Gaza.

Care to respond?

[btw, please don't come back with "these questions don't relate", because they simply do]

 

[metis]

Outside of a cogent argument, facts have no meaning.
[CMike] cite the ones which confirm what you already feel.
Here some other facts to add to your list:
- The cycle of violence hasn't brought peace.
- Neither side will defeat the other militarily.

If [CMike] choose to stay the course, then Israeli citizens will remain insecure,
& many Palestinians will suffer & die. This is a choice.

OK, what "cycle of violence" has the U.S. been involved in? Do I really have to cite the wars we've gotten into over the last century? So, let me rephase your questions:

-has the cycle of violence the U.S. has been in brought peace?
-at times, neither side will defeat the other militarily (such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan)

So, if the U.S. is attacked militarily, what would you suggest we do, Revoltingest? Were you opposed to all American military actions whereas large numbers of people were killed?

 

[Revoltingest]

OK, what "cycle of violence" has the U.S. been involved in? Do I really have to cite the wars we've gotten into over the last century? So, let me rephase your questions:
-has the cycle of violence the U.S. has been in brought peace?
-at times, neither side will defeat the other militarily (such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan)
So, if the U.S. is attacked militarily, what would you suggest we do, Revoltingest? Were you opposed to all American military actions whereas large numbers of people were killed?

Geeze....I hope you aren't looking to me for justification of Americastanian foreign adventurism.
I've often decried its ineptitude, cost, carnage, evil, & unanticipated adverse consequences.
(You might've had me on <ignore> when I made those posts.) Anyway, cycles of violence are
generally bad for everyone.

 

[metis]

Geeze....I hope you aren't looking to me for justification of Americastanian foreign adventurism.
I've often decried its ineptitude, cost, carnage, evil, & unanticipated adverse consequences.
(You might've had me on <ignore> when I made those posts.) Anyway, cycles of violence are
generally bad for everyone.

Once again, I notice that you simply have walked around the questions I asked without offering a single answer, so let me re-ask them and hopefully you will answer each of them specifically:

Did you support the American response on Iraq after 9-11?

Did you support the American response on Afghanistan after 9-11?

Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack Germany and Japan during WWII?

Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack the Axis powers during WWI?

 

[Revoltingest]

Could you be any more disingenuous? I knew you wouldn't answer the question because I checked back on your posts and you simply lied about claiming that you did answer my questions.

Before you accuse someone of lying, you should carefully read their posts.
I addressed the question you refer to, but I just didn't answer it the way you wanted.
(I declined, & explained why. Solutions are for the parties involved to determine...not us outsiders.)
Now don't you feel foolish for your over-reaction & incivility?

So, I will give you another chance at hopefully telling the truth:
Did you support the American response on Iraq after 9-11?
Did you support the American response on Afghanistan after 9-11?
Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack Germany and Japan during WWII?
Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack the Axis powers during WWI?

This is a little disingenuous, since you never asked me those questions before.
And I did answer some of your questions in a direct way which should satisfy you.
But to the above....
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.

Now, if you answer yes to any of the above, then I have to accuse you of hypocrisy, because these and Israel's response to Hamas have been done with a great many casualties, and the least number of civilian casualties is what's happening in Gaza.
Care to respond?
[btw, please don't come back with "these questions don't relate", because they simply do]

You really need to get a grip on your anger, & try to understand rather than bicker.
What I'm failing to clearly convey is this:
No matter how impossible & threatening Israel finds the Palestinians (& Muslims),
endless conflict should be avoided, & the current course of over-kill does not work.
A way must be found to turn enemies into allies.

 

[Revoltingest]

Once again, I notice that you simply have walked around the questions I asked without offering a single answer, so let me re-ask them and hopefully you will answer each of them specifically:
Did you support the American response on Iraq after 9-11?
Did you support the American response on Afghanistan after 9-11?
Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack Germany and Japan during WWII?
Do you believe that the U.S. had a right to attack the Axis powers during WWI?

Criminy, guy....I just answered these exact questions in another post of yours.
But again.
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.

 

[metis]

Before you accuse someone of lying, you should carefully read their posts.
I addressed the question you refer to, but I just didn't answer it the way you wanted.
(I declined, & explained why. Solutions are for the parties involved to determine...not us outsiders.)
Now don't you feel foolish for your over-reaction & incivility?

I asked you twice to tell me the post number whereas you supposedly gave an answer and you didn't reply but when on to something else. And you talking about "incivility"? You gotta be kidding.

This is a little disingenuous, since you never asked me those questions before.
And I did answer some of your questions in a direct way which should satisfy you.
But to the above....
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.

Sorry, but you did not answer these questions in any direct manner, but I appreciate the fact that you finally did this time. However, your final two answers tells me that you feel that the U.S. has the right to defend itself but apparently you don't believe Israel doesn't have that same right. That is nothing but sheer hypocrisy, Revoltingest.

You really need to get a grip on your anger, & try to understand rather than bicker.
What I'm failing to clearly convey is this:
No matter how impossible & threatening Israel finds the Palestinians (& Muslims),
endless conflict should be avoided, & the current course of over-kill does not work.
A way must be found to turn enemies into allies.

And I asked you before to essentially answer the last item above and you have failed to do so. Exactly how "A way must be found to turn enemies into allies"? What do you propose? What if one group (Hamas in this case) makes it abundantly clear that for both political and religious reasons that they want Israel gone and Jews can be killed anywhere they may live? Ever read their charter? Ever listen to what their leaders have been continuously saying? Ever study the motivation of Hamas put in their own words?

As I asked you before and you never answered: what if your neighbor was attempting to kill you and your family, what would you do, especially if you can't move? Please try and answer it this time, will you.