In recent news: the Palestinians are still fucked up

[avshae]

The point is, you're talking about IDF attempts to rescue hostages. If IDF botch a rescue attempt, then that is a genuine accident. But that is completely incompatible to the Hamas human shield situation. The IDF aren't attempting any sort of rescue for human shields in Palestine, you said it yourself, they won't risk sending troops in who might get killed.

It would be ideal for everyone involved (except Hamas) if the IDF could evacuate the entire population of Gaza from the clutches of Hamas before attacking them, but you can't really expect that. Apart from actually flying them out, IDF did everything possible and more - from leaflets telling people where safe zones are, last minute strike cancellations in case of last-minute data of unexpected civilians in the target zone, preceding the fatal strike with a cautionary one to force people to flee, you name it. What additional rescue operations would you have the IDF do (except for not engaging Hamas, or maybe trying to catch them when many of even wear explosive vests to use when soldiers approach them)?

All that happens is a big old bunch of artillery shells get rained down, Hamas and the shields get killed, and then Israel goes, "well we tried not to cause any civillian deaths, but its Hamas fault anyway for taking human shields."

I don't know where you got the impression about "shells raining down" and "bombing the shit out of ..." as it is completely detached from reality. I have told you and shown you time and again that there was no "wild bombing", and that precise identified targets were attacked with pinpoint accuracy. And you still go on with the "wild bombing" rhetoric. What do I need to do to get that out of your head?

No, Hamas aren't fighting a war that makes it easy to fight them. Do you expect them to? Did the IRA do it? The IRA used IEDs and mortars just like islamic terrorists do, and they hid among a civilian populace so that they couldn't be attacked in the open.

As I have said already in a previous post, guerrilla hiding among civilians, although not very courageous, does not in itself constitute using human shields. It is still a length from what Hamas did - forcing civilians to stay and "guard" targets, using civilian buildings as military structures, either for direct combat or for other purposes, etc etc. I don't think even the meanest IRA bastard ever took a kid piggyback to avoid sniper fire, which was a routine tactic by Hamas COWARDS.

Hiding among civilians is meant to work because no sane, moral person is meant to want to drop bombs on innocent people just to kill their enemy.

If so, than I can suggest a tactic with which Hamas (or any other PUSSIE terrorist) can conquer the world: strap civilians to all vehicles and "soldiers", execute 10 civilians in Gaza for every round IDF (or any other opposition) fires at you. No sane person, army, or government in the world can stop you right? Don't you understand the bullshit just had to end?

Yes more soldiers and police officers would die if they sent in to engage Hamas on the ground instead of bombing the shit out of the 6th most dense place on earth. The point is it would be moral and be more beneficial in the long run if Israel decided to do the moral thing and put its troops at risk to apprehend Hamas members, not sacrifice innocent Palestinians by pursuing indiscriminate bombing/shelling campaigns that knowingly.

Don't you fucking dare claim that your forced into a position, and that you can't possibly risk troops in the kind of operations the UK army did in Ireland during the provisional IRA campaign.

As I have already explained to you the key differences between Hamas and IRA, both here and previously, let me just add one thing you may not have considered. Most of the Israeli army is not composed of professional soldiers, but of enlisted persons and reserve duty, meaning they are just average Joes like you and I. There is no moral justification to risk mens lives for the remote possibility of saving others, especially when you know that (a) that is exactly the bait the Hamas wants you to bite on, and (b) Hamas are the ones who set the bait: live Palestinian civilians. They could easily have avoided the situation. Guerrilla warfare still does not necessitate use of human shields as Hamas did.

[avshae]

I hereby declare a "Two-False-You're-Out" policy in this thread. One falsity is allowed in tolerance, but if a post contains two or more gross insurrmountable false statements with not even an attempt at backing evidence, it will be deleted.

There are several pictures, videos and videos of eyewitnesses which are not from major publications.

Why would a major publication refrain from publishing incidents of clear human rights violation? Its what they live for, why would they hold back? Perhaps it is because the Palestinians have cried wolf one too many times and the media has been fooled one to many times:

Because they are not unbias on the issue.  I suppose German news papers wrote unbias reports about the Warsaw Ghetto.   I have had to deal with the press on several occasions and they are all politically motivated dependent on who owns them.  I participated in a protest against a law in my state which took away voter approval for private sector government bonds.  The newspaper was in favor of the measure so they edited out the photo to make it appear that the protest signs were in favor of the bill.  Complete misrepresentation of the facts.  The measure passed.  I have had a reporter lie to me personally.  When I asked them to not use my name and they published my name.  I refuse to deal with reporters any more.

Did you not read the Charter of one of the major Israel parties.  A charter which calls for the destruction of the West Bank and Gaza.  It is on their own site not made up by some outside party it is their own material.  The radical Rabbi felt free to publish under his own name that all Palestinian males over the age of 13 that don't refuse to abandon the Gaza and West Bank be murdered.  And you want to point to fingers. 

Oh and like carrying a child would stop and Israel sniper from murdering anyone.  I think they would just consider that a twofer.  Israelis had no problem bombing elementary school children with no cause just more excuses and fabrications of mythical munitions which don't turn up.  Just the small bodies of defenseless kids.

Who introduced Nuclear weapons to the Middle East.  That would be Israel with the help of the USA.  What country refused to sign a anti-nuclear proliferation treaty, that would be Israel.  What country uses depleted uranium on civilian populations.  Yep again that would be Israel and sadly also the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan.   I just don't like being forced through taxes to support these types of activities.

Did you not read the Charter of one of the major Israel parties.  A charter which calls for the destruction of the West Bank and Gaza.

False. I suppose you mean one of the four major ones, as I didn't check all the others, but still quite sure this is False.

Israelis had no problem bombing elementary school children with no cause

False.
Sorry, yurr out.

[libertylover]

Nothing but a complete Israeli apologist thread.  How about you arm Hamas equally to the IDF and we will see who the cowards are then.  Snipers are just a cleaned up name for assassins.  They lurk up to a mile away in hiding and take out targeted individuals who don't have tanks, body armor or any of the billions of USA military aid has given to Israel. 

You call kids in the street throwing rocks at tanks which are demolishing their homes and communities cowards.  They have rocks the Israelis have tanks and automatic rifles and body armor.  Sad you think it is less evil that the Israelis know they are targeting unarmed civilians rather than randomly bombing them. 

By Chris McGreal
UK Guardian
November 24, 2004

An Israeli army officer who repeatedly shot a 13-year-old Palestinian girl in Gaza dismissed a warning from another soldier that she was a child by saying he would have killed her even if she was three years old.

The officer, identified by the army only as Captain R, was charged this week with illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and other relatively minor infractions after emptying all 10 bullets from his gun’s magazine into Iman al-Hams when she walked into a “security area” on the edge of Rafah refugee camp last month.
......    http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/child-killed.html

The UK Guardian Video clip about IDF use of Palestinians as human shields.
[youtube=425,350]v/Hy6-FZz69lE[/youtube]

[libertylover]

I hereby declare a "Two-False-You're-Out" policy in this thread. One falsity is allowed in tolerance, but if a post contains two or more gross insurrmountable false statements with not even an attempt at backing evidence, it will be deleted.

There are several pictures, videos and videos of eyewitnesses which are not from major publications.

Why would a major publication refrain from publishing incidents of clear human rights violation? Its what they live for, why would they hold back? Perhaps it is because the Palestinians have cried wolf one too many times and the media has been fooled one to many times:

Because they are not unbias on the issue.  I suppose German news papers wrote unbias reports about the Warsaw Ghetto.   I have had to deal with the press on several occasions and they are all politically motivated dependent on who owns them.  I participated in a protest against a law in my state which took away voter approval for private sector government bonds.  The newspaper was in favor of the measure so they edited out the photo to make it appear that the protest signs were in favor of the bill.  Complete misrepresentation of the facts.  The measure passed.  I have had a reporter lie to me personally.  When I asked them to not use my name and they published my name.  I refuse to deal with reporters any more.

Did you not read the Charter of one of the major Israel parties.  A charter which calls for the destruction of the West Bank and Gaza.  It is on their own site not made up by some outside party it is their own material.  The radical Rabbi felt free to publish under his own name that all Palestinian males over the age of 13 that don't refuse to abandon the Gaza and West Bank be murdered.  And you want to point to fingers. 

Oh and like carrying a child would stop and Israel sniper from murdering anyone.  I think they would just consider that a twofer.  Israelis had no problem bombing elementary school children with no cause just more excuses and fabrications of mythical munitions which don't turn up.  Just the small bodies of defenseless kids.

Who introduced Nuclear weapons to the Middle East.  That would be Israel with the help of the USA.  What country refused to sign a anti-nuclear proliferation treaty, that would be Israel.  What country uses depleted uranium on civilian populations.  Yep again that would be Israel and sadly also the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan.   I just don't like being forced through taxes to support these types of activities.

Did you not read the Charter of one of the major Israel parties.  A charter which calls for the destruction of the West Bank and Gaza.

False. I suppose you mean one of the four major ones, as I didn't check all the others, but still quite sure this is False.

Israelis had no problem bombing elementary school children with no cause

False.
Sorry, yurr out.

Just because you call something false doesn't make it false jerk.
The Likud party's platform expressly rejects the idea of a Palestinian state, and is adamant that the settlers must stay put.

    The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities [i.e. settlements in Judea and Samaria] and will prevent their uprooting. (...)

    The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

    The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.


And its charter claims sovereignty over the whole Land of Israel, which (as different from the State of Israel) includes Judea and Samaria. The charter calls for:

    Preserving the right of the Jewish Nation to the Land of Israel as an eternal, inalienable right; perseverance in the settlement and development of all parts of the Land of Israel; implementation of the State's sovereignty on them.

For those who don't know Judea and Samaria are the West Bank and Gaza which are suppose to be sovereign Palestinian territory.  However the LIKUD party a major political party in Israel calls for those territories to become the sole property of Israel and for colonization by Zionist. 

[fatcat]

All that happens is a big old bunch of artillery shells get rained down, Hamas and the shields get killed, and then Israel goes, "well we tried not to cause any civillian deaths, but its Hamas fault anyway for taking human shields."

I don't know where you got the impression about "shells raining down" and "bombing the shit out of ..." as it is completely detached from reality. I have told you and shown you time and again that there was no "wild bombing", and that precise identified targets were attacked with pinpoint accuracy. And you still go on with the "wild bombing" rhetoric.

Erm, the IDF, the UN, the PCHR (although the IDF's word is golden)?

3 dead Israeli civilians, 10 dead soldiers, most of whom where killed by other Israelis, and 295(IDF)-900(PCHR) dead innocent Palestinians.

Yeah, thats not alot of dead innocents, Israel have such a hard time with their 3 civillian deaths.

Hamas are the evil indiscriminate terrorists, yet Israel, by their own estimates kill 100 times more civillians than Hamas.

Yeah the shells weren't raining down, it was hardly a scratch really. 

No, Hamas aren't fighting a war that makes it easy to fight them. Do you expect them to? Did the IRA do it? The IRA used IEDs and mortars just like islamic terrorists do, and they hid among a civilian populace so that they couldn't be attacked in the open.

As I have said already in a previous post, guerrilla hiding among civilians, although not very courageous, does not in itself constitute using human shields. It is still a length from what Hamas did - forcing civilians to stay and "guard" targets, using civilian buildings as military structures, either for direct combat or for other purposes, etc etc. I don't think even the meanest IRA bastard ever took a kid piggyback to avoid sniper fire, which was a routine tactic by Hamas COWARDS.

"In similar incidents, the IRA deliberately killed 91 Protestant civilians in 1974-76"

11 December 1971: A bomb attack on a furniture shop on the Shankill Road in Belfast killed four Protestant civilians, including two children.

20 March 1993: Two IRA bombs exploded in Warrington, killing two children and injuring over fifty people

One child murderer is as bad as another in my opinion. I don't see how using a child as a shield for bullets is any worse than deliberately bombing places and killing children in the process. Hamas are cowards, okay, now what. Does this mean its okay to bomb civilian areas.

I don't see how any of this means Israel can't fight a campaign like the UK did.

UK never pursued a policy of shelling residential areas. More UK civilians had died in certain years compared to 2008 in Israel, the year Israel said enough was enough and invaded, yet the UK military never decided that too many civillians had died and now they had

If UK didn't have to do it for 10 times the civilian deaths, and hundreds of times the military casualties, then Israel don't HAVE to do it, they just WANT to do it, because they know Israeli soldiers dying in battle is much worse come election than having 100 dead palestinians in their place.

The majority of IRA killings where in the forms of bombs and mortars, and some very occasional gun battles. The only way the UK military managed to try and kill and capture IRA terrorists was to go into Ireland, where they would get frequently ambushed and hit by roadside bombs.

IRA terrorists: 293 dead

British Armed Forces: 655 dead

RUC (police): 272 dead

Thats how the readout looks when you're not being a pussy and launching shells into a major city from miles away. Of course you'll never accept that Israel could follow a similar strategy, because that would mean what Israel are doing is horrifically immoral, what with killing thousands of innocent people they didn't have to.

If so, than I can suggest a tactic with which Hamas (or any other PUSSIE terrorist) can conquer the world: strap civilians to all vehicles and "soldiers", execute 10 civilians in Gaza for every round IDF (or any other opposition) fires at you. No sane person, army, or government in the world can stop you right? Don't you understand the bullshit just had to end?

This bullshit has ended has it? As far as I know Hamas are still launching rockets on Israel on a regular basis.

You've engaged in a shell game.

Its indicative of how confused your moral compass is that you can equate Hamas shooting civillians to Israel bombing Hamas and killing civilians in the process.

If you kill a Hamas militant, and they decide to kill some Palestinian, then fuck them, the blood is on their hands, you did nothing wrong. You didn't make them kill that civillian. They did, the blood is on their hands, and you were justified in killing the Hamas militant in self defense. Just like Hamas aren't making Israel bomb Gaza.

ITS NOT ABOUT WHAT HAMAS DO. Its about what you do. Kill as many people in self defense as you want, but when you kill innocent people, take yourself to a fucking jail cell because you're a murderer.

As I have already explained to you the key differences between Hamas and IRA, both here and previously, let me just add one thing you may not have considered. Most of the Israeli army is not composed of professional soldiers, but of enlisted persons and reserve duty, meaning they are just average Joes like you and I. There is no moral justification to risk mens lives for the remote possibility of saving others, especially when you know that (a) that is exactly the bait the Hamas wants you to bite on, and (b) Hamas are the ones who set the bait: live Palestinian civilians. They could easily have avoided the situation. Guerrilla warfare still does not necessitate use of human shields as Hamas did.

This is simple dodging.

"There is no moral justification to risk mens lives for the remote possibility of saving others, especially when you know that (a) that is exactly the bait the Hamas wants you to bite on, and (b) Hamas are the ones who set the bait: live Palestinian civilians. They could easily have avoided the situation. Guerrilla warfare still does not necessitate use of human shields as Hamas did."

Israel is the ones enlisting people into the IDF.

Fine, don't risk Israeli soldiers lives with ground operations in Gaza, but then don't risk innocent Palestinians

Its completely fucking ridiculous to say an 18 year old male with body armor, an assault rifle, and billions of dollars of logistics support, can't be risked in battle, but we can kill 100 times more Palestinian civilians through artillery bombardments if it means not sending that man into battle.

What you're essentially saying is, we can't risk Israeli soldiers lives by sending them into dangerous place, but we can risk Palestinian civillian lives because we need to kill Hamas, but we can't risk Israeli soldiers doing it, so its okay to risk Palestinian innocents. Even women or children, anything to avoid Israeli soldiers being put at risk.

What about the moral justification for killing innocent Palestinians? Shit, I forgot, IDF soldiers are "average joes", like you or me.

Except for the ones that launch artillery shells on residential areas knowing innocent people will die. I'm nothing like those immoral fuckers, or apparently anything like you.

All the reasons you've given that Israel have to kill innocent people in order to effectively fight Hamas I have disproved with my correlaries with IRA and the UK.

I've already shown how the UK military where willing to suffer 100 times the losses the IDF has in order not to fight a campaign exactly, where you use long distance weapons to keep your troops safe, and let innocent people take the risk soldiers should be taking.

[rabidfurby]

Nothing but a complete Israeli apologist troll thread. 

And thanks to you & fatcat, a quite successful one.

[avshae]

Did you not read the Charter of one of the major Israel parties.  A charter which calls for the destruction of the West Bank and Gaza.

False. I suppose you mean one of the four major ones, as I didn't check all the others, but still quite sure this is False.

Just because you call something false doesn't make it false jerk.
The Likud party's platform expressly rejects the idea of a Palestinian state, and is adamant that the settlers must stay put.

    The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities [i.e. settlements in Judea and Samaria] and will prevent their uprooting. (...)

    The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

    The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel's existence, security and national needs.


And its charter claims sovereignty over the whole Land of Israel, which (as different from the State of Israel) includes Judea and Samaria. The charter calls for:

    Preserving the right of the Jewish Nation to the Land of Israel as an eternal, inalienable right; perseverance in the settlement and development of all parts of the Land of Israel; implementation of the State's sovereignty on them.

For those who don't know Judea and Samaria are the West Bank and Gaza which are suppose to be sovereign Palestinian territory.  However the LIKUD party a major political party in Israel calls for those territories to become the sole property of Israel and for colonization by Zionist. 

As I said, and even in light of your quoting from the Likud charter, your statement above was and remains FALSE, as were all the other ones I have previously pointed out. You can't just go writing total bullshit and not expect me to point it out.

[avshae]

I don't know where you got the impression about "shells raining down" and "bombing the shit out of ..." as it is completely detached from reality. I have told you and shown you time and again that there was no "wild bombing", and that precise identified targets were attacked with pinpoint accuracy. And you still go on with the "wild bombing" rhetoric.

Erm, the IDF, the UN, the PCHR (although the IDF's word is golden)?

3 dead Israeli civilians, 10 dead soldiers, most of whom where killed by other Israelis, and 295(IDF)-900(PCHR) dead innocent Palestinians.

Yeah, thats not alot of dead innocents, Israel have such a hard time with their 3 civillian deaths.

Hamas are the evil indiscriminate terrorists, yet Israel, by their own estimates kill 100 times more civillians than Hamas.

Fail. The amount casualties by itself is no indication whatsoever of fighting tactics and does not indicate "wild bombing" as you claim. I can reasonably assert that most of these casualties were off of Hamas' direct hands, for example when Hamas blew up buildings trying to stop Israeli advance, not bothering to check whether civilians were inside, and other incidents along those lines.
And the amount of Israeli civilian casualties on the other side definitely has nothing to do whether or not there was indiscriminate bombing of Gaza. There definitely was indiscriminate shelling of Israel as Hamas barely made no effort to conceal it.

As I have said already in a previous post, guerrilla hiding among civilians, although not very courageous, does not in itself constitute using human shields. It is still a length from what Hamas did - forcing civilians to stay and "guard" targets, using civilian buildings as military structures, either for direct combat or for other purposes, etc etc. I don't think even the meanest IRA bastard ever took a kid piggyback to avoid sniper fire, which was a routine tactic by Hamas COWARDS.

"In similar incidents, the IRA deliberately killed 91 Protestant civilians in 1974-76"

11 December 1971: A bomb attack on a furniture shop on the Shankill Road in Belfast killed four Protestant civilians, including two children.

20 March 1993: Two IRA bombs exploded in Warrington, killing two children and injuring over fifty people

One child murderer is as bad as another in my opinion. I don't see how using a child as a shield for bullets is any worse than deliberately bombing places and killing children in the process. Hamas are cowards, okay, now what. Does this mean its okay to bomb civilian areas.

We were talking about human-shields. None of the IRA incidents you referenced involved use of human shields. I agree that using civilians as human shields in combat is just as bad as blowing up cafes, but the issue arises when people like you don't understand that in both cases the culprit is the same one. Don't get confused: who rigged up civilians buildings? Who used civilian infrastructure on its inhabitants for military uses? Who forced civilians to guard targets with their own flesh?

More UK civilians had died in certain years compared to 2008 in Israel, the year Israel said enough was enough and invaded, yet the UK military never decided that too many civillians had died and now they had

You should take that up with the UK government why they allowed so many people to die while they played our-shit-don't-stink games.

The majority of IRA killings where in the forms of bombs and mortars, and some very occasional gun battles. The only way the UK military managed to try and kill and capture IRA terrorists was to go into Ireland, where they would get frequently ambushed and hit by roadside bombs.

IRA terrorists: 293 dead
British Armed Forces: 655 dead
RUC (police): 272 dead
Thats how the readout looks when you're not being a pussy and launching shells into a major city from miles away. Of course you'll never accept that Israel could follow a similar strategy, because that would mean what Israel are doing is horrifically immoral, what with killing thousands of innocent people they didn't have to.

I wonder why you seem to conveniently forget the fact that IDF did go in on the ground, and was in there for weeks. And you're quoting casualty numbers from a period of decades, and comparing them to two weeks ground incursion, which is pointless. Do the math how many casualties per week the UK security forces suffered. Or compare to how many casualties IDF suffered since 1987, the beginning of the first Intifada.

Or think of it this way: compare the two decades of the IRA campaign, to the two decades of conflict with the Gaza and Judea-Samaria Arabs. Call it "the soft phase" of the two conflicts. Now IRA stood down eventually, its leaders realizing they had achieved nothing in years of bloody conflict, and lost most of their popularity due to the violence they had caused. But what if they hadn't stood down? What if amidst the ruins of the IRA campaign the most extreme of the IRA factions would rise and continue the terrorism, much more brutally and relentlessly than any of the other factions. The IRA's parallel to Hamas. People who just don't know when enough is enough, and its time to lay down your arms and pursue peaceful solutions. What would the UK do then?

Unfortunately I don't have time to respond to the rest.

[Luke Smith]

Fatcat, Libertylover: The bottom line is that Hamas is a terrorist group. The fact that they were voted into power in the Gaza Strip in the 2006 parliamentary elections does not change that fact in the least. In fact, the fact that they won that election reflects badly on the people of the Gaza Strip, and makes me wonder what kind of people they are that they could hand a brutal terrorist organization such an overwhelming number of seats in the Palestinian parliament. Hamas' actions are in no way legitimate, and the brave men and women in the IDF should do everything in their power to punish Hamas for their terrible crimes.

[rookie]

In fact, the fact that they won that election reflects badly on the people of the Gaza Strip, and makes me wonder what kind of people they are that they could hand a brutal terrorist organization such an overwhelming number of seats in the Palestinian parliament.  Hamas' actions are in no way legitimate,

[libertylover]

In fact, the fact that they won that election reflects badly on the people of the Gaza Strip, and makes me wonder what kind of people they are that they could hand a brutal terrorist organization such an overwhelming number of seats in the Palestinian parliament.  Hamas' actions are in no way legitimate,