• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

S Africa Makes Case: Israel Committing Genocide

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
As bad as the UN is, it's not the one committing
genocide in Gaza currently.
What is the UN really doing in Gaza? Sounds to me like they are trying to get them all killed and then blame it on the West, by (for decades) stocking them up to their eyeballs in guns and missiles and training little kids to fight. The article I posted doesn't say it directly, but it is close enough to infer.
Nor having spent
70+ years killing & stealing from Palestinians
& Arabs in the name of a wicked god.
Who put Israel there in the first place: the UN did. From the beginning it tried to impose a new state upon the local Arabs. From the beginning they did not want one. You want to blame a god for what the UN is doing. The UN is a group of leaders mostly from countries that have been embarrassed by the success of libertarian countries. If they help in this situation they only undermine themselves. They benefit if Israel and Gaza fail to come to terms.

So it has the higher moral ground relative
to Israel & USA.
No, it doesn't; because Israel values a human as a human regardless of religion.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
What is the UN really doing in Gaza? Sounds to me like they are trying to get them all killed and then blame it on the West, by (for decades) stocking them up to their eyeballs in guns and missiles and training little kids to fight. The article I posted doesn't say it directly, but it is close enough to infer.

UN is not giving anyone weapons. That kind of misleading claim could only come from the apartheid, israel
Who put Israel there in the first place: the UN did. From the beginning it tried to impose a new state upon the local Arabs.
Correct.......... They brought in a bunch of foreign blood into palestine and then made a state out of them.
From the beginning they did not want one. You want to blame a god for what the UN is doing. The UN is a group of leaders mostly from countries that have been embarrassed by the success of libertarian countries. If they help in this situation they only undermine themselves. They benefit if Israel and Gaza fail to come to terms.
Gaza is just a concentration camp that israel created with fencing and removing palestinians from jerusalem. There is no state GAZA, the people are all palestinians that are oppressed by the illegal occupation by israel.
No, it doesn't; because Israel values a human as a human regardless of religion.

that line must be your attempt at comedy. Ha ha..... israelis will turn on anyone that does not support them, even if they are Jewish.

Just ask the folk around here that consider the NK jews of new york as fringe simply because they do not support israel.

Israel: The Jewish State or haven for all? | USU
 

libre

In flight
Staff member
Premium Member
Its an experiment that didn't work out, not some monument to justice.
I think the UN has a lot to answer for. It's not a neutral body nor is it a useful tool for many non-aligned countries.
That said it's not league of nations level 'didn't work out' yet.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Unless they're Muslim.
Then they're animals to be gunned down.
Israel has humanity for no one but Jews.
I should take your word for this, however I knew an Israeli once in the early 1990's. He was an expat living in the USA teaching mathematics. I also had a friend whose family went to Israel to try and convert some Israelis to Jesus. They were part of a radio ministry there, putting out some Christian radio. I only heard about this years after the fact, but he said he lived in that country for a few years attending school with Jews and Muslims. So anyways the Jews there in Israel and the Arabs there would grow up together, maybe get along, maybe not so much; but they didn't kill each other. That would have been sometime in the 1980's, so in that decade I can say that this was not the case. Now those kids should be about the same age that I am. The situation with Gaza is tense, but I don't believe the people in Israel, a mixture of Jews and Muslims, is ever going to let them just be gunned down. Its not consistent with the general Israeli attitude about life and people. People have a value regardless of our religion. Even if we are annoying Christian missionaries sent there to convert people we aren't harmed. The same goes for Muslim believers. Anybody, really, is not going to be gunned down there for being different.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
Unless they're Muslim.
The muslims have an al aqsa on the spot that the fringe israelis require. So anything islam is suspect.

If christians (globally) understood the core of the problem, they would turn very quickly.
Then they're animals to be gunned down.
That's the genocidal angle and as much as the biased use the HAMAS doctrine that suggest 'wipe out israel ' kind of junk, the obtuse israelis is far worse.
Israel has humanity for no one but Jews.
Not if they are not zionist, or even against israel based on what they see as true. Many israeli and israel defenders are quite nasty about Jews against israel.
Rebel Rabbis: Anti-Zionist Jews Against Israel - YouTube




IRC appalled by attack on ambulance approaching Al Aqsa Hospital​




South Africa has made its genocide case against Israel in court. Here’s what both sides said and what happens next



I mentioned this topic on the first day.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Most of the accusations against Israel come through Hamas,
Do you deny the level of civilian deaths in Gaza and the explicit war tactics of Israel in targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure?

but even if the trial uncovers this I now know that the ICJ is going to be accused of bias in favor of western countries. Therefore it is unlikely end end to subject no matter what it decides.
This seems like bias of your own. You're unwilling to believe Israel would engage in genocide, regardless of what the evidence may suggest.

Is a hospital a building which is used exclusively for healing, or is it a building used for healing and for directing military operations and storage of weapons? Is it still a hospital? I am not going to uphold that. Putting an ER onto an aircraft carrier doesn't make it a hospital ship.
This is just an excuse and you know it. If we follow this logic, there is no such thing as a civilian target.

"Is that a family home or a missile silo? There could be weapons-grade uranium in that nursery. This refugee camp sure does look like it could be used to manufacture mustard gas."

As far as you are concerned, Israel gets to target whatever it wants as long as it says the target is somehow military. This is obviously an indefensible position. You would let a hospital filled with patients burn to the ground if Hamas stored a rifle in it and call that justified.

Note also that this logic doesn't remotely address the increased violence of Israeli settlers on the West Bank - WHERE THERE IS NO HAMAS. The Palestinian settlements there could not possibly house Hamas arms, or be confused for Hamas bases of operations, and yet the Israeli government has stepped up violence against, and seizure of, these lands from the Palestinians living there. If Israel's intent were purely military, this would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why would they step up violence in territories not controlled by Hamas that have no military structure?

Certainly the trial will allow for evidence to be brought forward, since, in this rare case the UN has taken great care to make sure and record every thing Hamas reports about Israel while supporting an uprising in Gaza both with storage of weapons training of new soldiers through its UNRAR racism schools. I cannot wait to see demonstrated in court just how cruel and foolish the UN is in spite of its golden words about itself. The trial may reveal it if the court is allowed. I hope it uncovers how so many missiles and guns have gotten into Gaza and with which UN official's authority and assistance. Wasn't it the UN that was supposed to be keeping an eye on things? Looks like somebody was and is two faced to me.
Any word whatsoever for the tens of thousands of civilian deaths in the region? Why no mention of that? Would you prefer the UN not investigate why there is an extremely disproportionately high rate of civilian death in the region?

I see, so we have a trial to determine whether Israel has intended to kill some of the people of Gaza and to call that a genocide under subsections IIA and IIB. Meanwhile everybody else already has an established intent to wipe out the Israelis, and for that we need no trial. Essentially we are credulous that Israel could under so much pressure not become psychotic, so we're going to accuse them of being psychotic.
Again, this is just excuses and finger-pointing. Israel is a wealthy, developed nation that is currently engaging in bombing a densely populated city that is completely under its control. It is making decisions that have resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Those are the decisions made by its political and military leadership who can be held to account by the explicit laws and treaties they agreed to and are now believe to be breaking.

Other people doing genocide does not justify a genocide, and frankly I think you rhetoric - which essentially does all but explicitly declare that people in this region who wish Israel ill deserve genocide as a result and deserve no recourse - is pretty morally indefensible. Especially when you apply your logic about how Israel "under so much pressure" would "become psychotic", as if this reasoning doesn't ALSO implicitly justify the actions and beliefs of groups like Hamas, who have blossomed under Israeli occupation and oppression.

I, too, would like Hamas brought to justice. But, right now, Hamas aren't the ones committing genocide. Israel is. And Hamas are not the majority victims of Israel's military strategy. Gazan civilians are. And we can do something to stop that. You'd rather we didn't, because "Miss! They did it first!".

Schoolyard logic should not be applied to nations.
 
Last edited:

Samael_Khan

Qigong / Yang Style Taijiquan / 7 Star Mantis
Do you deny the level of civilian deaths in Gaza and the explicit war tactics of Israel in targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure?


This seems like bias of your own. You're unwilling to believe Israel would engage in genocide, regardless of what the evidence may suggest.


This is just an excuse and you know it. If we follow this logic, there is no such thing as a civilian target.

"Is that a family home or a missile silo? There could be weapons-grade uranium in that nursery. This refugee camp sure does look like it could be manufacturing mustard gas."

As far as your are concerned, Israel gets to target whatever it wants as long as it says the target is somehow military. This is obviously an indefensible position. You would let a hospital filled with patients burn to the ground if Hamas stored a rifle in it and call that justified.


Any word whatsoever for the tens of thousands of civilian deaths in the region?


Again, this is just excuses and finger-pointing. Israel is a wealthy, developed nation that is currently engaging in bombing a densely populated city that is completely under its control. It is making decisions that have resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Those are the decisions made by its political and military leadership who can be held to account by the explicit laws and treaties they agreed to and are now believe to be breaking.

Other people doing genocide does not justify a genocide, and frankly I think you rhetoric - which essentially does all but explicitly declare that people in this region who wish Israel ill deserve genocide as a result and deserve no recourse - is pretty morally indefensible.

I, too, would like Hamas brought to justice. But, right now, Hamas aren't the ones committing genocide. Israel is. And Hamas are not the majority victims of Israel's military strategy. Gazan civilians are. And we can do something to stop that. You'd rather we didn't, because "Miss! They did it first!".

Schoolyard logic should not be applied to nations.
I don't think morality has anything to do with why people defends israels stance. That is why they dismiss the killing of Palestinians and are so inconsistence with their stances. I understand why the jews side with israel considering their history, but everybody else have a more sinister undertone to their support of israel. That is why these people are so difficult to talk to, we are arguing morality and morality doesnt cross their mind.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Do you deny the level of civilian deaths in Gaza and the explicit war tactics of Israel in targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure?
Ad hominem mixed with assumptions. Is it an argument or a personal attack?
This seems like bias of your own. You're unwilling to believe Israel would engage in genocide, regardless of what the evidence may suggest.
More ad hominem that I am biased, that I am unwilling to discourse, brainwashed.
This is just an excuse and you know it. If we follow this logic, there is no such thing as a civilian target.
Reasoning is dismissed as excuses.

We aren't running for governor. Tone it down, please.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Ad hominem mixed with assumptions. Is it an argument or a personal attack?
It's very obviously neither. It's a question.

More ad hominem that I am biased, that I am unwilling to discourse, brainwashed.
Also not an ad hominem. To suggest someone may be biased is not an ad hominem attack.

Will people please, please, PLEASE look up the actual definition of "ad hominem" before throwing the phrase around on this forum? It's unbelievable how often people evoke this without any understanding of what it actually means...

Reasoning is dismissed as excuses.
Not dismissed, explained to be excuses. Like I said, you reasoning would justify literally any level of violence against any target. It's based on the a priori assumption that any target can (and, in some cases, should) be considered a valid military target.

The argument you made is EXPLICITLY a means of excusing attacking non-military targets. It's literally what an excuse means.

We aren't running for governor. Tone it down, please.
Respond to the arguments instead of making fatuous remarks.

Y'know, I was really expecting a far more thoughtful response than this to the arguments I made. This post is... just bizarre. It doesn't even address a single argument, its accuses me repeatedly of committing a fallacy that I clearly don't, it doesn't seem to understand what questions are or how they work...

This is a bizarre response to what I wrote, on so many levels. Try harder.

For your benefit, here is the post again, with all the arguments you failed to address (or even acknowledge) in bold:

Do you deny the level of civilian deaths in Gaza and the explicit war tactics of Israel in targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure?


This seems like bias of your own. You're unwilling to believe Israel would engage in genocide, regardless of what the evidence may suggest.


This is just an excuse and you know it. If we follow this logic, there is no such thing as a civilian target.

"Is that a family home or a missile silo? There could be weapons-grade uranium in that nursery. This refugee camp sure does look like it could be used to manufacture mustard gas."

As far as you are concerned, Israel gets to target whatever it wants as long as it says the target is somehow military. This is obviously an indefensible position. You would let a hospital filled with patients burn to the ground if Hamas stored a rifle in it and call that justified.

Note also that this logic doesn't remotely address the increased violence of Israeli settlers on the West Bank - WHERE THERE IS NO HAMAS. The Palestinian settlements there could not possibly house Hamas arms, or be confused for Hamas bases of operations, and yet the Israeli government has stepped up violence against, and seizure of, these lands from the Palestinians living there. If Israel's intent were purely military, this would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why would they step up violence in territories not controlled by Hamas that have no military structure?


Any word whatsoever for the tens of thousands of civilian deaths in the region? Why no mention of that? Would you prefer the UN not investigate why there is an extremely disproportionately high rate of civilian death in the region?


Again, this is just excuses and finger-pointing. Israel is a wealthy, developed nation that is currently engaging in bombing a densely populated city that is completely under its control. It is making decisions that have resulted in tens of thousands of civilian deaths. Those are the decisions made by its political and military leadership who can be held to account by the explicit laws and treaties they agreed to and are now believe to be breaking.

Other people doing genocide does not justify a genocide, and frankly I think you rhetoric - which essentially does all but explicitly declare that people in this region who wish Israel ill deserve genocide as a result and deserve no recourse - is pretty morally indefensible. Especially when you apply your logic about how Israel "under so much pressure" would "become psychotic", as if this reasoning doesn't ALSO implicitly justify the actions and beliefs of groups like Hamas, who have blossomed under Israeli occupation and oppression.

I, too, would like Hamas brought to justice. But, right now, Hamas aren't the ones committing genocide. Israel is. And Hamas are not the majority victims of Israel's military strategy. Gazan civilians are. And we can do something to stop that. You'd rather we didn't, because "Miss! They did it first!".

Schoolyard logic should not be applied to nations.
 
Last edited:

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
I don't think morality has anything to do with why people defends israels stance. That is why they dismiss the killing of Palestinians and are so inconsistence with their stances. I understand why the jews side with israel considering their history, but everybody else have a more sinister undertone to their support of israel. That is why these people are so difficult to talk to, we are arguing morality and morality doesnt cross their mind.
I am beginning to see the same type of person that votes for trump as the type that do not care what happens to palestinians.
 

Samael_Khan

Qigong / Yang Style Taijiquan / 7 Star Mantis
I am beginning to see the same type of person that votes for trump as the type that do not care what happens to palestinians.
Yes. The ideology is consistent. It also aligns with people who are generally antagonistic towards addressing lgbtq, race and class issues and push this manufactured culture war nonsense.
 

Bthoth

Well-Known Member
Yes. The ideology is consistent. It also aligns with people who are generally antagonistic towards addressing lgbtq, race and class issues and push this manufactured culture war nonsense.
The obtuse want and expect people to take a side but lack the depth to self reflect and make solid choices.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Its a waste of my time. If you actually had something worth discussing you wouldn't lower yourself like that.
Lower myself to... asking you questions?

It seems pretty obvious to anyone reading this who has something worth discussing. I made actual arguments. You responded to a couple of sentences with erroneous allegations, misapplications of fallacies and just plain hand-waving.

I really expected more from you. What is it about this subject in particular that makes you unable to effectively debate or engage when challenged?
 

Samael_Khan

Qigong / Yang Style Taijiquan / 7 Star Mantis
The obtuse want and expect people to take a side but lack the depth to self reflect and make solid choices.
Because the layman at the top are ruled by fear of these groups which is manufactured by the marketing of the right. The propogandists dont really care about any of those issues because those issues are just their tools to maintain the status quo.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I am beginning to see the same type of person that votes for trump as the type that do not care what happens to palestinians.
It's a strong parallel of thought that I've posted about too.
Blind devotion to a tribe, or to a cult leader, tis all the same.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Unless they're Muslim.
Then they're animals to be gunned down.
Israel has humanity for no one but Jews.
According to what I hear Netanyahu's coalition has some actual Jewish supremists in it according to an interview with Omer Bartov (a historian born in Israel). That interview was published five days ago in Ben Loury Clips in ytube. These are some people who do want to take all the land, so that corroborates some of what you've been claiming. They are a far right group, and he says that they represent less than 15% of voters but have gotten into power because of Netanyahu's desperate attempt to retain his position. He's allegedly afraid he'll be thrown into prison if he steps down.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
According to what I hear Netanyahu's coalition has some actual Jewish supremists in it according to an interview with Omer Bartov (a historian born in Israel). That interview was published five days ago in Ben Loury Clips in ytube. These are some people who do want to take all the land, so that corroborates some of what you've been claiming. They are a far right group, and he says that they represent less than 15% of voters but have gotten into power because of Netanyahu's desperate attempt to retain his position. He's allegedly afraid he'll be thrown into prison if he steps down.
Claims of intent to take the land came out
after I discerned actions to take it. The fringe
groups corroborating this are merely the ones
who openly speak of it.
 
Top