The Gaza situation

[Nuclear]

Well, some great ways to avoid civilian casualties would be to avoid firing missiles at UN shelters and schools.

So yes, being an outsider you're blind to what it's actually like.

Or perhaps I'm emotionally detached and don't have anything of my own at stake to cause a bias in my opinion, and additionally I'm not subjected to local government propaganda.

I suggest dropping the whole " YOU HAVE NO IDEA, OUTSIDER!!1" line, since it can be spun around like I just did. And anyway, it's a fallacy called ad hominem. You attack my location instead of my arguments.

Also related:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/moun...s-gaza-health-workers-israeli-army-2014-08-07

An immediate investigation is needed into mounting evidence that the Israel Defense Forces launched apparently deliberate attacks against hospitals and health professionals in Gaza, which have left six medics dead, said Amnesty International as it released disturbing testimonies from doctors, nurses, and ambulance personnel working in the area.

Yeah, so that'd be a war crime.

 

[sethmachine]

Or perhaps I'm emotionally detached and don't have anything of my own at stake to cause a bias in my opinion, and additionally I'm not subjected to local government propaganda.

The reality is it doesn't matter what your opinions are. They are just uneducated opinions. Learning the history of the conflict: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli–Palestinian_conflict

Then learn about counter terrorism operations in densely populated areas. Then tell us how the Israelis should go about their campaign to neutralize the rocket attacks.

I suggest dropping the whole " YOU HAVE NO IDEA, OUTSIDER!!1" line, since it can be spun around like I just did. And anyway, it's a fallacy called ad hominem. You attack my location instead of my arguments.

The thing is you don't have any arguments because you didn't make any. You just wrote down your opinion on the matter.

I don't buy that at all. He is only more influenced by local government propaganda, he doesn't necessarily have any more real information than us unless he is a researched or a journalist. Living somewhere doesn't instantly make anyone an expert on events happening nearby, but it can make them more biased about them.

The fact is there's a huge difference when you are living in a country constantly attacked by terrorists and extremist groups surrounded by hostile neighbors, most of whom do not recognize your country's right to exist.

It is a lot easier to be detached if your country isn't in a war. Go move to Gaza or southern Israel. I suspect your opinions will change drastically.

I guess next you'll tell me the Holocaust wasn't so bad because you were physically and emotionally attached from it since you weren't in the concentration camps, and therefore you have an unbiased and correct opinion on it.

An immediate investigation is needed into mounting evidence that the Israel Defense Forces launched apparently deliberate attacks against hospitals and health professionals in Gaza, which have left six medics dead, said Amnesty International as it released disturbing testimonies from doctors, nurses, and ambulance personnel working in the area.

It's not even certain if the attacks were deliberate. And if Hamas had been putting rocket launching sites in areas where hospitals or medical professionals were operating and they died as a result, that is certainly not deliberate. Deliberate implies the attacks were purposefully targeting these installations / people. Until a full investigation is under way / there is actual evidence (versus speculation) that the Israeli army had commands to specifically attack these targets (and not say the rocket launching sites near the targets), there is no reason to conclude the attacks were on purpose or for that matter war crimes.

 

[Nuclear]

The thing is you don't have any arguments because you didn't make any. You just wrote down your opinion on the matter.

I don't need to have a perfect solution in order to criticize the current situation. You're right, I haven't made any specific arguments, only criticized. But the point still stands, the criticism isn't invalid simply because I don't personally live near the Gaza strip.

I guess next you'll tell me the Holocaust wasn't so bad because you were physically and emotionally attached from it since you weren't in the concentration camps, and therefore you have an unbiased and correct opinion on it.

Nah, that doesn't really make sense. Great job vaguely implying that the reason for my stance is antisemitism though.

It's not even certain if the attacks were deliberate. And if Hamas had been putting rocket launching sites in areas where hospitals or medical professionals were operating and they died as a result, that is certainly not deliberate. Deliberate implies the attacks were purposefully targeting these installations / people. Until a full investigation is under way / there is actual evidence (versus speculation) that the Israeli army had commands to specifically attack these targets (and not say the rocket launching sites near the targets), there is no reason to conclude the attacks were on purpose or for that matter war crimes.

Yes, let's not jump to conclusions. Just posting related news.

 

[Xonok]

Isn't the point already clear?
If you say Israel is right, then you support genocide.
If you say Israel is wrong, then you're antisemitic.

 

[sethmachine]

Isn't the point already clear?
If you say Israel is right, then you support genocide.
If you say Israel is wrong, then you're antisemitic.

Xonok, did you even read my response to your uneducated simplification of Israel and the conflict? Did you even read those sources?

This is a terrible simplification. You can disagree with Israel without being antisemitic. There are many Jews who don't agree with Israel's current policies or government. Note that 20% of Israel's citizens are ethnically Arabs who enjoy full rights. It's when Israel is obsessively targeted and its right to exist is challenged that it becomes antisemitic (e.g. the Jewish people don't deserve their own country). When the Jews were being persecuted in Europe, antisemites would paint signs saying: "Jew, go back to Palestine!" When Jews began to return to Palestine, Arabs would paint signs saying: "Jews, go back to Poland!" Either you are antisemitic, or incredibly uneducated.

But to say that the current conflict is genocide is an insult to the past and on-going genocides.

Here are examples of past genocides:

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide

(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

Here is an example of a possible genocide going on right now:

(4) http://news.sky.com/story/1315089/isis-violence-all-warning-signs-of-genocide

The irony is that it is only militant Arab organizations which have actually officially declared intentions to commit genocide.

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Covenant#Statements_about_Israel

(2) http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/20/did-arab-states-really-promise-to-push-jews-into-the-sea-yes/

(3) http://blog.godreports.com/2014/08/fatah-leader-calls-for-destruction-of-israel/

Yes, there have been nutjob Israelis who have possibly said similar stuff. But they are quickly sidelined and not actually in charge of the government or army. On the other hand, the calls for Israel's destruction come from the leaders and charters of these militant organizations, who have political and military power, and carry out terrorist attacks aimed at killing civilians and destabilizing the state.

I don't need to have a perfect solution in order to criticize the current situation.

Well isn't the purpose of criticism to explain what is wrong and possibly offer alternatives? What use is criticism that doesn't add anything?, i.e. construct criticism. The deaths of the civilians are terrible and it's wrong that they should be the ones paying the price of the conflict. But stating the obvious doesn't really help solve the problem or lead to discussion that could.

 

[takakenji]

Israel controls the U.S and most western countries today and they will continue to oppress Islam until everybody is judaic/christian

 

[sethmachine]

Israel controls the U.S and most western countries today and they will continue to oppress Islam until everybody is judaic/christian

Yes because that's helpful and oh so true and not a completely anti-semitic crack pot conspiracy theory. In fact it reminds me of a book I once read called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which made a similar claim.

I think this is your source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

or this one: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100821160717AA1MCzF

 

[Mechanical Man]

That doesn't change the fact that most banks are run by jews and also media, you can notice that if someone says against jews, immediately shit hits the fan, discreditation, threatening with lawsuits and so on, almost like you said something against dictator in your country, if you live in dictatorship. While for other groups (muslims, chinese, africans, ...) is much more lenient.

 

[sethmachine]

That doesn't change the fact that most banks are run by jews and also media, you can notice that if someone says against jews, immediately shit hits the fan, discreditation, threatening with lawsuits and so on

Anti-semites have been spouting this stuff forever, even before WWII. See this article, which sounds exactly like what you said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antise...ons_of_controlling_the_world_financial_system

I think this quote addresses your point nicely:

"Of course, in keeping with the logic of anti-Jewish bigots, perhaps one should ask the following: If media or financial wrongdoing is Jewish inspired, since Jews are prominent in media and finance, should the depredations of white Christian-dominated industries (like the tobacco or automobile industries) be viewed as examples of white Christian malfeasance? After all, 400,000 people per year die because of smoking-related illnesses, and tobacco companies withheld information on the cancerous properties of their products. Likewise, should executives at Ford and Firestone be thought of as specifically white Christian criminals, due to recent disclosures that defective tires were installed on SUV’s, resulting in the deaths of over 150 people worldwide? Is their race, religion or ethnic culture relevant to their misdeeds? If not, why is it suddenly relevant when the executives in question are Jewish?"

Racism is any form is not tolerable. Nobody is obsessed about the Chinese in terms of exterminating them based on their race. Africans / Blacks have many of the same problems as Jews, and if you notice any racism against them is reacted against just as strongly and swiftly. Muslims aren't a race either. Educate yourself before spouting nonsense. The way the Holocaust worked was because people became tolerant of racism and didn't speak out, and its shadow still hangs over the world.

Clearly you follow the whole "Jews control the world" conspiracy. Because that's really not true at all. It's a very common anti-semitic motif that has been around forever. This isn't a discussion about the Jews, in any case. It's about the current Israel-Gaza.

Jews and Israel are not synonymous, but that is another common anti-semitic motif (being Jewish must mean you are pro-Israel. Note: being pro-Israel isn't a crime either).

Here is an interesting quote from a Nazi leader:

"I am the only living witness but I must say the truth. Contrary to the opinion of the National Socialists that the Jews were a highly organized group, the appalling fact was that they had no organization whatsoever. The mass of the Jewish people were taken completely by surprise. Never before has a people gone so unsuspectingly to its disaster. After the first anti-Jewish actions of the Germans, they thought now the wave was over and so they walked back to their undoing."

Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Erich_von_dem_Bach

 

[Xonok]

Jews needed their homeland

Perhaps, but they still took the land from mostly palestines(arabs). How is that fair to those who lived there before? Will my country be taken over by Palestines in the future because they "need their own country"?

It wasn't their land

"The United Nations estimated that more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled during the conflict from what would become Israel."(1948)
"Consequently, the population of Israel rose from 800,000 to two million between 1948 and 1958."
"Between 1948 and 1970, approximately 1,151,029 Jewish refugees relocated to Israel"
"In 1940 there were 467,000 Jews living among 1,050,000 Palestinians."
"In 1946 there were 600,000 Jews living among 1,300,000 Palestinians."
"In 1880 Jews were ONLY 5.3% of the total population of Palestine (and had been this percentage of the population (or less) for more than a thousand years). In 1946 the Jewish population was almost entirely comprised of recent immigrants (people who had been in the country less than twenty years).

This group of recent immigrants were publicly claiming that the (entire) land belonged to them (apparently they believed that some god had given it to them). These wild claims made non-Jews who lived in Palestine (we will call them Palestinians) very nervous, especially since the Jews claimed to want an ethnically pure state.

These non-Jews were (very) afraid that they would be kicked out of any new entity that claimed to be a Jewish state."


The argument that it was already a jewish dominant area goes out of the window. Apparently of the modern 8 million a majority of jews went to Israel after it was founded.
Thus, it was Palestinian land that was taken away and given to jews.

This is complicated, but the fact was that all of Israel's neighbors rejected its creation and would have destroyed it (a possible second Holocaust of sorts) had they been military victorious. Thus the borders Israel took were in response to the security situation (being surrounded by hostile neighbors in every direction).

The reason for invasion seems obvious - A jewish state was about to be founded in an arab-dominated area. Furthermore, the jews talked about ethnic cleansing even before Israel's founding was (officially) planned.

If you say Israel is right, then you support genocide.

The ethnic cleansing that Jews talked about before Israel, perhaps?

If you say Israel is wrong, then you're antisemitic.

Every person who has argumented against what Israel is doing was labelled antisemitic. Several by you, sethmachine.

I believe we should move this discussion to Medivh's tower, because currently there has been way too much flaming and way too little facts. (why did no one in the thread mention the founding of Israel? It's pretty much the beginning of an era of conflicts in Palestine)

 

[sethmachine]

@Xonok It's about how you frame your approach to the topic that makes it appeared tainted with some anti-semitism or ignorance on the history of the conflict.

So we're getting way off-topic already. But I'll address your points regardless.

Perhaps, but they still took the land from mostly palestines(arabs).

First of all, the Arabs in what is modern day Israel did not have their own country, government, authority, etc. The area was controlled by the British. So if the land belonged legally to anyone, it was the British at the time. Second, the Jews bought land from the Arab owners. That is not stealing. They also developed the desert and turned it into viable land. This is how the city Tel Aviv was founded, among many other cities and settlements where there were no Arabs.

History of Tel Aviv: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Aviv#History

Read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel#First_years

and this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish...s_as_an_arm_of_the_World_Zionist_Organization

The United Nations estimated that more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled during the conflict from what would become Israel.

The keyword is that it is a combination of expelling and fleeing on their own.

The reason for invasion seems obvious - A jewish state was about to be founded in an arab-dominated area.

I completely agree. While the UN passed a resolution creating a Jewish and Arab state in the British Mandate of Palestine, the Arabs rejected it, because they did not want their to be a Jewish state in the Middle East.

The ethnic cleansing that Jews talked about before Israel

That's certainly not genocide to talk about ethnic cleansing. What do you think the Arab armies were doing when they invaded?

Apparently of the modern 8 million a majority of jews went to Israel after it was founded

Do you know why Jews fled to Israel?

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kielce_pogrom

(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor's_Plot

(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries

it was Palestinian land that was taken away and given to jews.

It wasn't given. The Jews had to fight to survive when they declared their state. No foreign power intervened on their behalf.

See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab–Israeli_War

Every person who has argumented against what Israel is doing was labelled antisemitic. Several by you, sethmachine.

If you mean these comments, then yes, they are totally anti-semitic (in bold).

That doesn't change the fact that most banks are run by jews and also media

Israel controls the U.S and most western countries today and they will continue to oppress Islam until everybody is judaic/christian

1. One day the UN and an internation jew organization simply decided that jews need a country.
2. The location was chosen to be roughly the area believe to be controlled by jews several thousand years ago.
3. The current inhabitants (Palestinians), were simply not considered to have any veto right over this decision, despite it being their land.
4. A lot of jews moved to israel from all over the world.
5. Very early israel started to conquer more land from palestinians. Land which wasn't given to them by the mandate, no matter how abusive we consider it towards palestinians.
6. Apparently now Israel is the victim and they are being attacked by "terrorists" in Gaza.
Oh wait, the mandate didn't give them Gaza, so how can a country be attacked in an area that it doesn't have?

Isn't the point already clear?
If you say Israel is right, then you support genocide.
If you say Israel is wrong, then you're antisemitic.

I explained in my previous posts what was anti-semitic about these posts.

 

[Xonok]

So we're getting way off-topic already. But I'll address your points regardless.

First of all, the Arabs in what is modern day Israel did not have their own country, government, authority, etc. The area was controlled by the British. So if the land belonged legally to anyone, it was the British at the time. Second, the Jews bought land from the Arab owners. That is not stealing. They also developed the desert and turned it into viable land. This is how the city Tel Aviv was founded, among many other cities and settlements where there were no Arabs.

I completely agree. While the UN passed a resolution creating a Jewish and Arab state in the British Mandate of Palestine, the Arabs rejected it, because they did not want their to be a Jewish state in the Middle East.

That's certainly not genocide to talk about ethnic cleansing. What do you think the Arab armies were doing when they invaded?

It wasn't given. The Jews had to fight to survive when they declared their state. No foreign power intervened on their behalf.

If you mean these comments, then yes, they are totally anti-semitic (in bold).

I explained in my previous posts what was anti-semitic about these posts.

It's not off-topic. Gaza has everything to do with Israel.

It may have legally belonged to the British, but that doesn't change the fact that 2/3 of the people were of Arabian origin.

At least we agree on something.

Ethnic cleansing is closely related to genocide. Do you honestly think that 700 000 people of 1.8m left simply because they suddenly wanted to? (Disregarding the fact that many were killed)

And I began to find out about the barbaric methods used to rid the fledgling state of as many Palestinians as possible. The world recoils today at the thought of bacteriological warfare, but Israel was probably the first to actually use it in the Middle East. In the 1948 war, Jewish forces would empty Arab villages of their populations, often by threats, sometimes by just gunning down a half-dozen unarmed Arabs as examples to the rest. To make sure the Arabs couldn't return to make a fresh life for themselves in these villages, the Israelis put typhus and dysentery bacteria into the water wells.

Of course they had to fight, because invaders are not usually welcome. Palestinians didn't ask Jews to take their land.

Foreign powers probably didn't intervene directly, but where do you think they got the funding to build several cities? Or the nuclear bomb research? Or to build a highly advanced army?
I refuse to believe that they simply invented it all within a few decades by themselves.
This goes to show that Israel either has powerful friends (USA, who is the main player in UN) and/or that there is a considerable amount of rich Jews(proven by researching who the top 10 richest people are).

Of the comments you highlighted, only one could be considered "hatespeech". The others are simply facts and facts stated in an accusing tone. Besides, anti-semitic is a catch-all phrase useful for disregarding any criticism (valid or not) towards Jews. I bet you are intelligent enough to do better.

 

[Nuclear]

Takakenji is a well known troll by the way, no need to respond to him.

 

[sethmachine]

Ethnic cleansing is closely related to genocide. Do you honestly think that 700 000 people of 1.8m left simply because they suddenly wanted to? (Disregarding the fact that many were killed)

There were certainly cases where the Israelis were guilty of ethnic cleansing, but as a whole it was not the actual organized policy. Many Palestinians fled because the invading Arab armies told them to leave to clear way for military operations (they turned many villages into fortresses), and the Palestinians believed it would only be days before the Arabs would be victorious and they would return home.

It's a mix, and not black and white.

Or the nuclear bomb research?

Many of the scientists working on the project were Jewish and the government hoped this would sympathize them to Israel's cause. However here is what seemed to happen:

That year Hemed Gimmel funded six Israeli physics graduate students to study overseas, including one to go to the University of Chicago and study under Enrico Fermi, who had overseen the world's first artificial and self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction

So a bunch of smart Israelis went to study under the nuclear scientists to learn their trade, them come back to Israel to build the program.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel#Development_history

they got the funding to build several cities?

Funded by Jewish organizations and very affluent Jews.

Or to build a highly advanced army?

If we're sticking to 1948, some of the Jews were veterans in the British regiments. And actually a lot of the weaponry was manufactured by the Jews in secret because the British obviously would have none of it. Lipstick cases were used as bullets for example.

To conceal the purpose of the purchases, the Jews applied to import copper for what they said were cases for Kosher lipstick. The British accepted this explanation, which was reinforced by gifts from the Jews of lipstick cases to British officials.

Source: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/ayalon.html

Also, the only western country that actually sold Israel military equipment was Czechoslovakia during the 1948 period.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_shipments_from_Czechoslovakia_to_Israel_1947–49





(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Agency_for_Israel

Of the comments you highlighted, only one could be considered "hatespeech". The others are simply facts and facts stated in an accusing tone.

They aren't facts at all. Jews controlling the banks and the media? That's a common anti-semitic conspiracy. I'll put the link to the very article on wikipedia.

Jews controlling the media: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations_of_controlling_the_media

Jews controlling the banks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antise...ons_of_controlling_the_world_financial_system

So yes, those comments are anti-semitic (or is Wikipedia also controlled by the Jews?).

To make sure the Arabs couldn't return to make a fresh life for themselves in these villages, the Israelis put typhus and dysentery bacteria into the water wells.

This is another anti-semitic conspiracy theory.

Jews poisoning wells:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations_of_well_poisoning

 

[Xonok]

You refer to wikipedia as your only source of information. There's a good reason why many university teachers say: "Wikipedia is not a source".

You denied several facts by calling them conspiracies, instead of just googling things like:
. The heritage of top 10 billionaires(several of them jews)
. The maps of Palestine before and after Israel occupation.
. It is a fact that the largest western banks, including the federal reserve where USA gets money from, are mostly owned by jews.

. Called it semitism when I brought out the fact that Palestinians didn't have any veto over Israel being founded. (Only a third were Jews. Palestines didn't vote for themselves to be opressed)
. Denied that Israel has conquered a large portion of land not given to it by British mandate (however questionable the mandate itself is)

Along with several other things. Trying to argument with you is simply pointless, because you don't listen to anything that doesn't directly support your views.

I will no longer post in this thread, as I refuse to be trolled.

 

[sethmachine]

You refer to wikipedia as your only source of information. There's a good reason why many university teachers say: "Wikipedia is not a source".

In most cases professional academics will not cite Wikipedia, which is a totally different ballpark than a forum discussion. Wikipedia provides citations for what it writes, so you can always follow those as well.

The heritage of top 10 billionaires(several of them jews)

I never denied this as a fact? When it is a crime to be Jewish and a billionaire?

The maps of Palestine before and after Israel occupation.

When did I deny this as a fact?

This source addresses almost all of your previous points:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFmandate.html

Called it semitism when I brought out the fact that Palestinians didn't have any veto over Israel being founded. (Only a third were Jews. Palestines didn't vote for themselves to be opressed)

Read this source, it addresses your points about the Arabs not having a right to veto.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MFpartition.html

Along with several other things. Trying to argument with you is simply pointless, because you don't listen to anything that doesn't directly support your views.

Bringing in anti-semitic motifs certainly doesn't help. Jews don't control the world's banks or media. And they certainly don't control the world. Nor do they poison wells, which they have been falsely accused of for hundreds of years.

Jumping to conclusions and labeling everything doesn't help at all.

 

[N.Knight]

First of all, the Arabs in what is modern day Israel did not have their own country, government, authority, etc. The area was controlled by the British. So if the land belonged legally to anyone, it was the British at the time.

More like they (British) had colonized it like they did elsewhere. India for example, and later created Pakistan out of it and Kashmir region behind as a no man's territory thereby creating a conflict similar to that of Gaza Israel.

Then tell us how the Israelis should go about their campaign to neutralize the rocket attacks.

Perhaps go inside the building and shoot them in the head, like they did to Bin Laden. I mean you don't blow up a bus or a plane if a terrorist has taken people inside as hostages or using them as human shields. Even if all of them are delinquents being transported from one prison to another. There has to be some means to do it you know, other than blowing up everything to pieces. Just saying.

Jews and Israel are not synonymous, but that is another common anti-semitic motif (being Jewish must mean you are pro-Israel. Note: being pro-Israel isn't a crime either).

This isn't a discussion about the Jews, in any case. It's about the current Israel-Gaza.

+1 Couldn't agree more. Also thanks for maintaining the discussion level and all the citations which were clearly required.

Israel controls the U.S and most western countries today and they will continue to oppress Islam until everybody is judaic/christian

And all American presidents have been Illuminati, secretly in concert with an advanced alien race who can transform into Bigfoot, reptilians and greys. Yeah right!


The Neturei Karta,
"The name was given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who refused (and still refuse) to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called "State of Israel" and made (and still make) a point of publicly demonstrating their position, the position of the Torah and authentic unadulterated Judaism."
---taken from their website
Clearly not that organized

[/url]

 

[Mechanical Man]

Another example of jewish influence in media is the turkish prime minister/president Tayyip Erdogan. First nobody gave a shit about him, but now that he is expressing anti Israel views such as condemning these Israeli attacks on Palestine (not just the current one, also previous ones), he immediately became a dictator, autocrat, Putin and whatever. Not that I support him, but you can see clearly a pattern here.

 

[sethmachine]

Perhaps go inside the building and shoot them in the head, like they did to Bin Laden. I mean you don't blow up a bus or a plane if a terrorist has taken people inside as hostages or using them as human shields. Even if all of them are delinquents being transported from one prison to another. There has to be some means to do it you know, other than blowing up everything to pieces. Just saying.

In the case of a plane being used as a missile I believe the correct thing to do is shoot it down, and possibly likewise with a bus? Thankfully there isn't a commercial airport in Gaza (there was one but it was destroyed).

From what I've read the reason why Israel didn't go in and fight Hamas on the ground is because a pure ground campaign would end up exacting a heavy toll in casualties for the Israeli army. I believe Israeli soldiers didn't start dying until they began to go into Gaza in order to get rid of the tunnels, which apparently airstrikes cannot do.

I'd imagine fighting in a densely populated urban area with terrorists who look like civilians would be very difficult. Also, unlike say the U.S. over throwing the corrupt Iraqi government, none of the citizens would actually welcome the troops or cooperate.

This is what happens to Palestinians who cooperate with the Israelis:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-said-to-kill-over-30-suspected-collaborators-with-israel/

an estimated 822 Palestinians killed as alleged collaborators (1988-April 1994),[16] although fewer than half had any proven contact with the Israeli authorities

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Intifada

and

120 were "Palestinians killed by Palestinians for suspected collaboration with Israel".

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada

The point being is that if you're even suspected of cooperating with Israel it is ok for you to be murdered.

All of these would make it very costly in terms of lives for a purely urban ground campaign that might have lower civilian casualties, considering the civilian population itself would be hostile.

The Neturei Karta

Hadn't heard of this group, thanks for bringing them up.

Another example of jewish influence in media is the turkish prime minister/president Tayyip Erdogan. First nobody gave a shit about him, but now that he is expressing anti Israel views such as condemning these Israeli attacks on Palestine

Erdogan's rhetoric is very anti-semitic and outspoken, and is making a solution to the conflict harder. Here are some things he's said.

“They curse Hitler morning and night, however, now their barbarism has surpassed even Hitler’s.”

source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...compares-israel-gaza-offensive-to-hitler.html

"What is the difference between what Nazis and Hitler did and what this Israeli administration is doing now? Israeli genocide is reminiscent of Hitler’s holocaust because of acting with the same immorality as Hitler.”

source: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ive-evacuates-wounded-palestinians-from-gaza/

He's the political leader of one of the most progressive Muslim countries, Turkey, which until recently had been a close ally to Israel.

The Israelis have a really long way to go before they could "surpass the barbarism of Hitler." What Erdogan is saying is anti-semitic, another common motif is to compare Jews / Israel to the Nazis. How does it help solve the conflict? If anything it would just make uneducated folk hate Israel and possibly even Jews more.

Why is he saying it then? Hopefully it's because he wants to get re-elected, that's what some believe, and that the rhetoric is just to win votes. Even so, it's up there with Ahmadinejad denying the Holocaust.

See: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...holocaust-on-cnns-piers-morgan_n_1911821.html

 

[Callahan]

inb4 the "antisemitism" card.
Oh too late.

 

[sethmachine]

inb4 the "antisemitism" card.
Oh too late.

I don't blame you for confusing the two, it's alright to be ignorant and uneducated these days. The masses of protesters in Europe and elsewhere are similarly confused: attacking Jews, Jewish owned businesses, synagogues, and schools.

The irony is it's the many who protest against Israel that actually make it anti-semitic, and not pro-Israelis who misuse the term to delegitimize any criticism of Israel. Actions speak far louder than words.

(1) http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/08/11/anti-semitic-muslim-protesters-chant-heil-hitler-in-london/

(2) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/07/israel-gaza-anti-semitism_n_5657889.html

(3) http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/07/antisemitism-rise-europe-worst-since-nazis

(4) http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/07/w...fronts-protesters-in-a-tense-france.html?_r=0

In any case, it's indisputable that Erdogan's rhetoric is anti-semitic.

And bringing up unfounded conspiracy theories about Jews controlling the world's banks and media? Or Israel poisoning wells? Those are literally the canonical anti-semitic canards. You can find all these right here:

(1) Jews controlling banks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antise...ons_of_controlling_the_world_financial_system

(2) Jews controlling media: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations_of_controlling_the_media

(3) Jews poisoning wells: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitic_canard#Accusations_of_well_poisoning

None of these have anything to do with the discussion on the current Israel-Gaza conflict. By all means, if you want to talk about conspiracy theories of Jews, open a new thread about it. Just don't bring them up here, as are distracting and unhelpful this discussion.

NKnight001 brings up a good criticism of Israel's actions in the current conflict, and by no means is it anti-semitic.

Perhaps go inside the building and shoot them in the head, like they did to Bin Laden. I mean you don't blow up a bus or a plane if a terrorist has taken people inside as hostages or using them as human shields. Even if all of them are delinquents being transported from one prison to another. There has to be some means to do it you know, other than blowing up everything to pieces. Just saying.