Mid East Israel declare war after Hamas attack III

Remove this Banner Ad

You don't have to kill people to eradicate them from an area... As has been shown over the last 6 months. Where will the next letter drop tell Palestinians to flee to? Maldives for a tropical holiday?
Maybe they could go to one of the other Arab muslim states...surely they will accept them...oh wait.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ahh right...like its the IDF not Israel... so why did Hamas attack civilians only on October 7th....not just civilians but highly progressive Israelis probably most sympathetic to the Palestinian cause?
Because they're terrorists who are happy to hurt civilians because they viewed them all as being the enemy. I don't agree with Hamas' view of the world. But any time I see a monster like Hamas, I'm not content to take the simplistic view that killing the monster will mean everyone lives happily ever after. I look at what created the monster, because if that continues, it will simply create another monster in time.

It's clear to me that the path Israel took from 1967 onwards was what created the monster. 1948 created the PLO, who certainly did some monstrous things, but I think you'll agree they were not as bad as Hamas and could have been reasoned with. Turning the PLO and Fatah into cucks by continuing to screw over Palestinians in spite of peace negotiations is what made Hamas powerful. And I don't think the mass killing of civilians and levelling of the Gaza Strip is going to solve anything. Even if it kills Hamas, the human rights abuses guarantees another monster will rise from Hamas' ashes, and they might be just as brutal, but also more competent.

They openly intend on wiping out all Israelis and believe there should be 1 state a Palestinian one from the river to the sea...the complete destruction of Israel....so was October 7th then a Genocide?
No, it was a terrorist attack.

You will find that in Kuwait the vast majority of Palestinian civilians supported Saddam and his declared war on Israel. it was this support en masse that led to their expulsion.
I think that was disgusting of the Kuwaitis then. Refugees should be allowed to hold beliefs so long as they don't engage in violence or insurrection. Black September was indeed an insurrection, but again this was the PLO rather than the whole refugee population.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You don't like the answer do you.

Don't copy the terrorist sympathiser who think there should be no Israel....
You already have your answer - no need for me to confuse your little brainy-wainy with facts, bubby.
 
Because they're terrorists who are happy to hurt civilians because they viewed them all as being the enemy. I don't agree with Hamas' view of the world. But any time I see a monster like Hamas, I'm not content to take the simplistic view that killing the monster will mean everyone lives happily ever after. I look at what created the monster, because if that continues, it will simply create another monster in time.

It's clear to me that the path Israel took from 1967 onwards was what created the monster. 1948 created the PLO, who certainly did some monstrous things, but I think you'll agree they were not as bad as Hamas and could have been reasoned with. Turning the PLO and Fatah into cucks by continuing to screw over Palestinians in spite of peace negotiations is what made Hamas powerful. And I don't think the mass killing of civilians and levelling of the Gaza Strip is going to solve anything. Even if it kills Hamas, the human rights abuses guarantees another monster will rise from Hamas' ashes, and they might be just as brutal, but also more competent.


No, it was a terrorist attack.


I think that was disgusting of the Kuwaitis then. Refugees should be allowed to hold beliefs so long as they don't engage in violence or insurrection. Black September was indeed an insurrection, but again this was the PLO rather than the whole refugee population.

I can absolutely agree with your first two paragraphs.

Is a terrorist attack more morally appealing than an alleged genocide?

We will have to disagree on the last paragraph.

Do you think Israel have a right to half of the land in that area currently contended?
 
Here's a wild idea: people shouldn't steal land or commit mass murder
That would be good, but once stolen it belongs to those that stole it.

You know the Mexicans still had a country at the end of the war, right?
I know, but it could've been a bigger and more wealthy country.

If Israel continues to take more and more land from them, they'll have nothing left.
And if it comes to that the land will belong to "Israel"

They are not the same.
Both had land stolen from them, and the stolen Mexican land belongs to the USA, and whatever "Israel" steal in this war will belong to them, we all have to be prepared to accept that

And, the territories Mexico lost weren't ethnically cleansed of Mexicans after the United States annexed it.
True, but the stolen land belongs to the USA, just like whatever "Israel" attain in this war will be theirs, that's just the way it is
 
I can absolutely agree with your first two paragraphs.

Is a terrorist attack more morally appealing than an alleged genocide?
I would argue they're both awful but it's a matter of scale. Is a single murderer less reprehensible than a serial murderer? I'd say yes. But they're both still reprehensible.

Consider as well that genocide is difficult to carry out using only a non-state militia. It takes the force and reach of a powerful government to make it happen. On account of such power, governments should be held to higher standards than non-state militias if they wish to be part of the international community. We should expect them to be more civilised. This is also why I consider Umkhonto we Sizwe to have been less bad than the government of apartheid South Africa.

Consider, if the Palestinians had been given dignity and a state on reasonable terms in the 1990s instead of being fenced in two giant prisons, would Hamas have become as powerful as it did?

Do you think Israel have a right to half of the land in that area currently contended?
Which areas specifically do you mean?
 
That would be good, but once stolen it belongs to those that stole it.


I know, but it could've been a bigger and more wealthy country.


And if it comes to that the land will belong to "Israel"


Both had land stolen from them, and the stolen Mexican land belongs to the USA, and whatever "Israel" steal in this war will belong to them, we all have to be prepared to accept that


True, but the stolen land belongs to the USA, just like whatever "Israel" attain in this war will be theirs, that's just the way it is
Well I'll tell you what, if Mexico fights another war with the United States with the aim of getting those territories back, I'll commit to expressing support for the Mexican cause. Until then, I'll continue right on with supporting dignity for Palestinians and expressing disgust at the actions of the Israeli government and their merry band of colonising thieves.
 
I would argue they're both awful but it's a matter of scale. Is a single murderer less reprehensible than a serial murderer? I'd say yes. But they're both still reprehensible.

Consider as well that genocide is difficult to carry out using only a non-state militia. It takes the force and reach of a powerful government to make it happen. On account of such power, governments should be held to higher standards than non-state militias if they wish to be part of the international community. We should expect them to be more civilised. This is also why I consider Umkhonto we Sizwe to have been less bad than the government of apartheid South Africa.

Consider, if the Palestinians had been given dignity and a state on reasonable terms in the 1990s instead of being fenced in two giant prisons, would Hamas have become as powerful as it did?


Which areas specifically do you mean?
What is the obsession with scaling depravity? Depravity is depravity.
Every time I see people trying to stratify people like this it’s generally in an effort to make a dogmatic point that their chosen ’side’ is somehow better because they have subjectively done something slightly less depraved than the side they want to hate.

It’s this divisive partisan approach to social politics that has ruined us as a people and I refuse to conscribe to it, it weakens us all to those in ultimate power. Our political elite thrive on this game and that’s all of them, not just those you disagree with.

So in my eyes they are both (Hamas/Israeli government) ****ed pieces of shit that deserve nothing but to be called out by everyone for what have both done and both continue to do, before any debate about the details of the history of these two peoples. Both of their people have suffered immeasurably and neither of them are helped by us in the west barracking for a team.



Gaza, West Bank, Israel.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top