Ooooh, goodie! We're going to play "mystery conspirators."Oh I know I'm not the only one here who sees your questions as being vague.
That's the best response you deserve for that sort of remark.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ooooh, goodie! We're going to play "mystery conspirators."Oh I know I'm not the only one here who sees your questions as being vague.
And I find a bit offensive that one might feel the need to do so.I find it a bit offensive that you would even ask.
What Hamas has and is doing does not justify the war crimes of the IDF.
Well that's the best answer you are going to get for that sort of response.Ooooh, goodie! We're going to play "mystery conspirators."
That's the best response you deserve for that sort of remark.
Oh, really.Your way too vague with your question. That's why I didn't answer it.
What the IDF has been doing does not justify your silence with respect to Hamas -- qui tacet consentire videtur.
That's the go-to tactic of their ilk toOk, so to make you feel better, every time I point out another war crime by the IDF I will add the disclaimer *Hamas is also bad*
![]()
Same reason mine don't. He doesn't like the question.Oh, really.
How does it lack specificity?
No kidding.Same reason mine don't. He doesn't like the question.
It lacks the past time in other threads that you participated in in which I showed the legality of proceeding in attacking a valid military target that in the process, going through a human shield isn't always a crime in order to take out the mission's target.Oh, really.
How does it lack specificity?
Nope. The response don't warrant any answer until it gets more specific.Same reason mine don't. He doesn't like the question.
To use the "human shield" argument to justifyIt lacks the past time in other threads that you participated in in which I showed the legality of proceeding in attacking a valid military target that in the process, going through a human shield isn't always a crime in order to take out the mission's target.
Perhaps so we know what to expect you could point to the first time.Ok, so to make you feel better, every time I point out another war crime by the IDF I will add the disclaimer *Hamas is also bad*
![]()
When you denounce Hamas, do you alwaysPerhaps so we know what to expect you could point to the first time.
Your attitude would be very different if the natives were doing it to us.Just Israel's justification for defending itself. Civilians are not protected if they are used as human shields by the enemy.
If this was strictly a civilian attack with no military targets whatsoever among them, I would agree with you that killing civilians would be a war crime.
Right which is what Israel is doing.Your attitude would be very different if the natives were doing it to us.
Defending themselves against Hamas isn't destroying food and blocking aid to Gaza. It isn't telling civilians where to.go to be safe and then bombing it. It isn't killing aid workers. It is isn't killing 39,000 (and still counting) in a doomed to fail crusade of vengeance over 1200 who were killed.Right which is what Israel is doing.
Defending itself against a group whose very own charter states that its goal is to completely eliminate Israel.
This is where I disagree. Where is Hamas loosing?I am still offended by Hamas, which seems incapable of realizing that they're on the losing end of this conflict and turning their efforts towards finding a way towards accepting that Israel isn't going away, and how to live with that reality.
I didn't say they're losing, I said they're on the losing end. The actual loss is in the future. Israel is much, much stronger than Gaza or Hamas -- and they have, for better or worse, the backing of the United States. Do you think that little strip of land and a couple of million people can win against that?This is where I disagree. Where is Hamas loosing?