Netanyahu's victims

Bachelors Hall

Bachelors Hall

Conditional
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
763
The Putin thread is getting derailed a little so I figured I'd pop this here.

If I start with a simplistic cartoon, hopefully a balanced, well informed and maturely conducted discussion will ensue.

1323223069493.jpg
 
Reposted from the Putin thread. These are facts ragrding the current outbreak of hostilities, not personal opinion.

Recent timeline of events in Gaza for the benefit of those who have just come in recently and are unaware of the facts.

1) 3 Israeli boys are kidnapped and burnt alive.
2) Israel asks for named perpetrators to be handed over. Hamas refuses to do so and refuses to condemn the murders. It also condemns Abbas for doing so.
3) Israel enters the West Bank to take action.
4) An Arab boy is kidnapped and burnt alive.
5) Rocket activity from Gaza, which had been at an all time low, explodes. Literally.
6) Israel arrests those responsible for killing the Arab boy (he has subsequently been charged with terrorism offences)
7) Palestinian rocket activity continues regardless leaving Netanyahu with no choice but to respond - which he had, up till then, refused to do in the face of significant pressure from within.
8) Palestine starts bleating about being bombed with better weapons than the ones they are using.
9) Egypt puts together a cease fire plan (I've ignored the disputed first plan) - Hamas decides that, despite the fact that they were the ones who started this particular turns of events, there should be beneficial conditions before they finish.
10) As a result, Israel decides to enter Gaza on the ground.
 
The beautiful thing about facts, as opposed to opinion, is that they can be checked and challenged if incorrect.

If any of my facts are incorrect (they are not - they can all be proved), then do feel free to do so.
 
To be honest, I'd rather observe a discussion than engage. But just to get it rolling...

At the start, you missed out the apartheid system, the illegal blockades, the illegal settlements and the perpetual contraventions of international law.

2) Hamas claimed zero responsibility for the kidnappings (which is unlike them since they're typically proud of their work) but Netanyahu calls vendetta all the same.

3) Ten Palestinians are killed and 500 Hamas members (the equivalent of IDF soldiers/politicos) are arrested/kidnapped depending on one's perspective.

5) In response, rocket activity from Hamas increases killing nobody. Literally.

7) Netanyahu responds by killing hundreds with full internal political backing. It can be argued that this is Netanyahu's legacy.

7.5) Israeli civilians bring out the deckchairs and cheer on the deaths of women and child civilians. (PROTIP, if you're genuinely in danger from an aggressive force, the last thing you'd want to be is a sitting duck on an open Sderot range)
 
simmo said:
Very simplistic and hopelessly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Is this one any better?

both_sides_of_gaza_conflict_by_latuff2.jpg


My response to yours was a very basic one which I'm hoping will stimulate reasoned debate.

As I said, I'd rather observe than engage. Not because I'm doubtful of my opinions on the events, I do like to think of myself as rather well read and up to date on the matter. Rather, I am too emotionally involved. Nevertheless, I do enjoy reading the opinions of those whose opinions may or may not differ from mine.

My girlfriend was born in 1989 and spent her formative years growing up slap bang in the middle of the besieged Sarajevo. For all she tells me about what it was like, I can never understand. However, she frequently confides in me as to how it was like growing in a hellish siege and not unlike the Gaza situation, it was never a matter of religion, rather it was a matter of ethnicity and politicking. Conversely, I grew up in the North West of (the feasibly imperialistic) England. The North West of England was near enough neighbouring the Irish region which had a stronghold of terrorists. Terrorists who throughout a perpetually threatened childhood of mine tragically took too many an innocent life in Warrington, made a fatality-bereft blast in Manchester that blew my Grandmother's kitchen door two and postponed the 1997 Grand National.

The difference between the two is incomparable and it's for that reason, I'm too vulnerable to subjectivity to be offering an objective angle - not that any view of any war is ever purely objective.

harry said:
Idiot
Click to expand...

1) Please refrain from argumentum ad hominem (name calling).

2) If you're going to call somebody you disagree with an idiot, please be more specific as to whom you're directing said disagreement.
 
Last edited:
You and Clivex are going to get on like a house on fire, BH. :D

There's been plenty of political discussion on here over the years. Have a trawl through some of the historical threads in this forum, and you'll get an idea as to people's opinions on a variety of geo-political topics. :cool:
 
It's is frankly anti Semitic and contemptuous to suggest that the the israelis should just accept being shelled without reacting or defending in any way. It would not be suggested for any other state or community anywhere in the world

The argument is that they should accept being bombed. Unbelievable . Put aside the fact that it's jews and think it through

This is stormfront or ken livingstone territory

Not contributing to this Jew bating thread.

The last line on that post is a perfect example of that.
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
It's is frankly anti Semitic and contemptuous to suggest that the the israelis should just accept being shelled without reacting or defending in any way. It would not be suggested for any other state or community anywhere in the world
Click to expand...

Indeed. It is idiotic to suggest otherwise.
 
clivex said:
It's is frankly anti Semitic and contemptuous to suggest that the the israelis should just accept being shelled without reacting or defending in any way. It would not be suggested for any other state or community anywhere in the world
Click to expand...

Has anyone actually suggested that anywhere on this thread?
 
Flagship uberalles said:
Has anyone actually suggested that anywhere on this thread?
Click to expand...

The answer to that question is 'No', Flagship. As was the case with Israel's last incursion into Gaza, it's about proportionality of response.

The dynamic has changed in the Middle East since the Arab Spring, and the myriad events which sprung from it.

Insofar as Israel is concerned, a direct result was that Hamas could rely on increased support from Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood took charge, allowing them to govern the place, pay wages etc....all of which helped quell unrest. However, their supply lines have been cut since the Army re-imposed their will in Cairo, and support from the wider Arab community has been further diluted due to Hamas' position as a Sunni group - resulting in withdrawal of support from Iran and Syria (though acknowledge that both were always much stauncher supporters of Shia Hezbollah). Regardless, with Egypt now also effectively running their own blockade of Gaza, Hamas as found itself seriously weakened.

The rapproachement with Fatah appears to be skin-deep, and there are rumours that more militant Sunnis within Hamas - boosted by the apparent success of ISIS - are acting independently of the leadership. It is these rogue elements that are believed to have carried-out the kidnap/murder of the three Israeli kids, and who are carrying out the majority of the rocket attacks.

Throw all the usual standing-dish issues/challenges into the mix, and you have a situation in Gaza which is spiralling out of the control of even Hamas - something perhaps reflected in Israel's decision to deploy ground troops.

In 200 years - if mankind survives that long - Religion will be a defined as a mental illness.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
You and Clivex are going to get on like a house on fire, BH. :D
Click to expand...

You mean like a Palestinian maternity ward on fire!!!1! (Ho ho!.. I'm here all week... Thank heavens it's Sunday... I'll grab my jacket...)


clivex said:
It's is frankly anti Semitic and contemptuous to suggest that the the israelis should just accept being shelled without reacting or defending in any way. It would not be suggested for any other state or community anywhere in the world

The argument is that they should accept being bombed. Unbelievable . Put aside the fact that it's jews and think it through

This is stormfront or ken livingstone territory

Not contributing to this Jew bating thread.

The last line on that post is a perfect example of that.
Click to expand...

This really is the the oldest, cheapest and most insulting trick in the book. Do you genuinely believe that all criticism of Israeli policy is inextricably linked with a seething antisemitism? It is this attitude that has sprouted that loathsome term "self hating Jew"... a term that can be hurled towards many a Jew such as Norman Finkelstein, Ella Shohat, Elmer Berger, Naeim Giladi, Noam Chomsky etc etc etc....

In this very thread, I've described the conflict as one not of religion, rather one of ethnicity and politicking. Indeed, I had not even mentioned the term "Jew" in this thread. As such, I suggest it is you who should remove the term "Jew" from the equation and look at it as a conflict between two states.
 
harry said:
Idiot
Click to expand...

Harry, in one short period, Bachelor's Hall has brought more to the forum than you with your monosyllabic responses have in years. If you can't response without insulting or abusing someone, better say nothing at all.

What great mods we have here! Ban Clivex for square root of bugger all and let new members be abused by the likes of Harry.
 
Last edited:
Anti semitism undoubtably drives this. It is the ONLYdebate that stirs up many. Particularly on the left

someone landing from the mars tomorrow would quickly wonder why israel is THE obsession. Time and again

the answer is very clear

i can understand opposition to certain aspects of israelu policy but the desperation to get it into the mh77 thread. Well....
 
Last edited:
It was me how got it into the thread.

It's quite simple - I don't understand why you started a thread on Putin if you won't start one on Netanyahu and Obama how are responsible for many, many more civilian deaths. It's quite simple, really.

I'm not anti-jewish but strongly anti-zionist. You should know having met me the first part is true.
 
The point was that on the putin thread there was an immediate hurry to drag israel into the discussion.

Shall we drag up sudan here???
 
The fatal flaw in your every argument about Israel, is that you always default to "antisemitism" when analysing any critique of their policy as a stand-alone State.
 
clivex said:
The point was that on the putin thread there was an immediate hurry to drag israel into the discussion.

Shall we drag up sudan here???
Click to expand...

I mentioned Netanyahu AND Obama. These are the two western media must often absolve of their war crimes of killing civilians, hence why I suggested both of these. You can focus on antisemitism if you choose to but I wasn't.
 
You could drag Sudan into the equation but there isn't really a connection.

The reason Gaza was drawn into the Putin thread was that for all Western governments (governments which are funded by the taxes paid by a vast majority of the users on this forum) condemn Putin and his actions, they are very quiet about Netanyahu's activities. Indeed, they're funding it. The connection is clear for all to see.

Accusations of anti-Semitism do nothing but divert and degrade the discussion. Are there anti-Semites in the anti-Israel camp? Of course there are. Does Islamophobia exist within the pro-Zionist camp? Absolutely. However, avoiding the argument to attack the individual really is primary school level stuff. Most sensible people know that not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. Just as they understand that not all terrorists are Muslims just as not all Muslims are terrorists. And so forth.

For what it's worth, on the appropriate platform, I will harshly criticise the House of Saud or Boko Haram even though my girlfriend is a Muslim. I will sternly rebuke UK foreign policy when needed even though my passport is British. And I hate to be the guy who says "I can't be anti-Semetic because my..." but this line of accusation necessitates same. *Deep breath* I can't be anti-Semetic because my best friend in college and my hairdresser are Jews, plus I have an ex-girlfriend who was half-Jewish.
 
There really is nothing to add to simmos post. Either you believe that israel have every right to defend their civilians or not

it would be some leader who would tell his citizens to accept being bombed because " we mustnt upset the muslims and the jew hating left"
 
You seem to think the first event in the Israel-Palestine conflict began was Hamas firing rockets...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top