Netanyahu's victims

In that case, Icebreaker, I hope you also give your son some guidance on what he can expect, when he blatantly tries to take the pi*ss out of someone. It's probably a more valuable life-lesson than telling him that certain words are bad. While you';re at it, you might also want to tell him where he can buy the latest Rock'n'Roll records, or where the Soda Fountain is, as your mindset appears one stuck in the 1950's. You're not Marty McFly, are you??

I've spent 10 years on Horse Racing forums, and I can count on more-or-less one-hand, the amount of people who've wound me up to an extent that I couldn't give a toss what they think. You have somehow made it onto the list twice in your brief tenure at TH alone.

Maybe it's nothing more than a personality clash? If so, I'm prepared to acknowledge that our personalities clash, and will try not to get drawn into any discussion with you (it's proving 100% pointless anyway, so no loss on my part).
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
In that case, Icebreaker, I hope you also give your son some guidance on what he can expect, when he blatantly tries to take the pi*ss out of someone. It's probably a more valuable life-lesson than telling him that certain words are bad. While you';re at it, you might also want to tell him where he can buy the latest Rock'n'Roll records, or where the Soda Fountain is, as your mindset appears one stuck in the 1950's. You're not Marty McFly, are you??

I've spent 10 years on Horse Racing forums, and I can count on more-or-less one-hand, the amount of people who've wound me up to an extent that I couldn't give a toss what they think. You have somehow made it onto the list twice in your brief tenure at TH alone.

Maybe it's nothing more than a personality clash? If so, I'm prepared to acknowledge that our personalities clash, and will try not to get drawn into any discussion with you (it's proving 100% pointless anyway, so no loss on my part).
Click to expand...

No it's not a personality clash Grassy, and you're quite entitled to your rant. I too in all my time in forumland have never had the misfortune to exchange words with such a condescending idiot.

The level of arrogance he displays when he responds to anyone who holds a different view to his is astonishing. Worse still he continues seemingly unaware that literally everyone else can see it.

The question is whether he does it deliberately to get a reaction (troll), or whether he is as contemptible in real life as he is on here?
 
It's been facts and well considered arguments all the way which, as we have just seen, most have struggled with

There is a washy washy wimpy liberal guardian hang wringing consensus on this forum that doesn't like being challenged. Might be a shock to find that in the outside world there are a huge number of people who hold views very similar to icebreakers. There is rightly a lot of contempt for Islamists and their backers

The raf point was a trite and frankly daft one. Trounced very quickly and deserved the contempt. That is not trolling
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
It's been facts and well considered arguments all the way which, as we have just seen, most have struggled with

There is a washy washy wimpy liberal guardian hang wringing consensus on this forum that doesn't like being challenged. Might be a shock to find that in the outside world there are a huge number of people who hold views very similar to icebreakers. There is rightly a lot of contempt for Islamists and their backers

The raf point was a trite and frankly daft one. Trounced very quickly and deserved the contempt. That is not trolling
Click to expand...

It is only 'trite' and 'daft' because it exposes your argument that any Western country would do the same as Israel. Whilst the example I gave was clearly flawed, it was only ever offered only as a 'reference-point' - not a parallel - and it was at least an example of sorts, rather than the kind of baseless rune-stone babbling you're indulging in. Also, note that "facts" are generally things you can back-up with evidence, so it's somewhat incongruous to claim "facts all the way" in one breath, then speculate on what Western Governments may/may not do in similar circumstances in the next. I won't allow you to have your cake and eat it. ;)

As for Icebreaker, I'm quite happy to debate with anyone on here, but I'm not going to allow myself to be mocked* by someone who clearly can't debate in a civil manner, then has the gall to call me out on it, when he gets a dose of his own medicine.

* Again, I make an exception for you, under my 'Care in the Community' rule.
 
Last edited:
You never answered the point. Would they? Yes they would frankly because the electorate would simply not stand for being told they "had to accept a bombardment and living in shelters because world opinion hates our race"

Anyway, Maruco. I would suggest that wildly inflated claims that they are starving are closer to trolling wouldn't you? Ever asked how it is they can still get so many missiles into the country? Presumably missiles are easy to smuggle but cans of beans aren't. Now I know it's not your style but a blatant falsehood is trolling. Lets just put it down to lefty lazy slogans

It's also a question that asks whether the blockade is tight enough. I think not
 
Last edited:
You may not have picked up the fact that the Disasters Emergency Committee are in full swing because of the food and water crisis Clive. Hardly wildly inflated claims or trolling I'd suggest. I did point this out to our friend earlier in the thread but he chose to ignore that one after he'd tried to call me out!
 
clivex said:
It's also a question that asks whether the blockade is tight enough. I think not
Click to expand...

Well you can blame the bringing of democracy to Egypt for that Clive, as M-302 came into Gaza via Sudan through Egypt in the days of the Muslim Brotherhood, doubtless cheered on by that deranged Mekon William (I must sleep with my SPAD to save money) Hague
 
clivex said:
The raf point was a trite and frankly daft one. Trounced very quickly and deserved the contempt.
Click to expand...

In your imagination maybe

As I recall the point being was about proportional response and Grasshopper pointing out that the RAF didn't set about indiscriminately bombing Belfast. It's true of course, no one, not even yourself if going to claim that Tornado or any frontline aircraft were used to carpet bomb the Falls Road. Sure helicopters and surveilance aircraft were used, as were limited attack helicopters against selected targets, but Israel doesn't really select targets and are far too prone to bomb indiscriminately

You can quote the number of rocket attacks if you like Clive, the simple fact is a vast majority of them are short range, wildly inaccurate and carry a payload of no significance. The comparison with the IRA (the one Grasshopper was making) stacks up. You will kill more people placing bombs in public places than optimistically lobbing rockets over a border. Indeed, we've had more people killed in the last decade to terrorist activity than the Israelis have had killed by Hamas rockets, yet we haven't taken to indiscriminantly bombing Luton (which might be a good idea anyway - for different reasons)

The number of Jewish/ Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets fired from Gaza since 2001, stands at a mouth-watering 13. For context, since 2006 four people have been killed in the UK by fireworks, and a further seven on the M5 as a result of smoke from a bonfire and firework display

The IRA could easily 'beat' 13 in a single bomb and routinely did most years

The overall figure for fatalities attributed to Hamas rockets is 41 incidentally. This includes non-israelis, children playing with UXB's, GRAD systems, Mortar attacks, and military targets

The most accurate is actually mortar attacks delivered at short range against Israeli soldiers
 
Warbler said:
The IRA could easily 'beat' 13 in a single bomb and routinely did most years
Click to expand...
Indeed, many of the perpetrators were subsequently given letters of assurance stating they would not be prosecuted.
There are obviously different schools of thought between the way Israeli politicians initiate military action and our ones..

There are probably factors that influence their approach and make it different to ours, more inhumane and ruthless, with less consideration for their 'enemy'.. E.G, I'm guessing they don't have six million citizens of Palestinian descent living within Jewish populated communities, as is this case with the Irish citizens or people with Irish backgrounds that live in the U.K (and lived in the U.K throughout the I.R.A's bombing campaigns).

I think the Isreali's are generally a different type of people than us.
The British.. Tony Blairesque...hippy...middle class... Oxford educated... weed smoking generation of the 1960's turned out a wave of barristers and politicians (or both in his case) who shaped British society, seeking resolutions and peace in conflicts with groups such as the I.R.A.

Sadly, a similar sort of generation of Isreali's hasn't seemed to emerge yet, or doesn't seem to be there. The best brains they had was Albert Einstein and he was more interested in other things.
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
In your imagination maybe

As I recall the point being was about proportional response and Grasshopper pointing out that the RAF didn't set about indiscriminately bombing Belfast. It's true of course, no one, not even yourself if going to claim that Tornado or any frontline aircraft were used to carpet bomb the Falls Road. Sure helicopters and surveilance aircraft were used, as were limited attack helicopters against selected targets, but Israel doesn't really select targets and are far too prone to bomb indiscriminately

You can quote the number of rocket attacks if you like Clive, the simple fact is a vast majority of them are short range, wildly inaccurate and carry a payload of no significance. The comparison with the IRA (the one Grasshopper was making) stacks up. You will kill more people placing bombs in public places than optimistically lobbing rockets over a border. Indeed, we've had more people killed in the last decade to terrorist activity than the Israelis have had killed by Hamas rockets, yet we haven't taken to indiscriminantly bombing Luton (which might be a good idea anyway - for different reasons)

The number of Jewish/ Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets fired from Gaza since 2001, stands at a mouth-watering 13. For context, since 2006 four people have been killed in the UK by fireworks, and a further seven on the M5 as a result of smoke from a bonfire and firework display

The IRA could easily 'beat' 13 in a single bomb and routinely did most years

The overall figure for fatalities attributed to Hamas rockets is 41 incidentally. This includes non-israelis, children playing with UXB's, GRAD systems, Mortar attacks, and military targets

The most accurate is actually mortar attacks delivered at short range against Israeli soldiers
Click to expand...

I find it pretty disgusting that missile attacks on civilians are dismissed as nothing more than fireworks simply because, so far, they have been defended adequately and they have organised proper sheltering rather than human sheilds.

Ill tell you what. If the israelis invited the missiles onto their civilians and ensured that they became targets with maximum casulties, would it be ok for them to respond ? Drop the drome system and shut the shelters? That would be "proportionate" would it? To act in the same way as the filth?

Will it be ok to actually do something about when a chemical weapon gets through eh? They have to wait for that do they?
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
The Royal Academy :blink: We demand to know
Click to expand...

Yes... THE Royal Academy. After winning the Breeders Cup Mile in 1990, he was retired. Soon afterwards, as with many retired athletes, he became despondent. Not only was his career and the accompanying fame and glory over, but the existentialist dread of feeling that his life had peaked too early dawned on him. As angry virile men tend to do, he tried to fill this hole by, well, filling holes. But this wasn't doing it for him. Disenchantment became depression, became discomfort, became anger spiralling and descending into a blind rage and fury before complete and utter intoxicating madness.

Free of the natural horsey grace and gentleness bestowed upon him when created by god, Royal Academy developed an obsessive fascination with famed killers. Remmitance Man had killed many a sheep that wasn't Nobby. Sir Ken slaughtered his paddock companion. These animals became idols to him. Crimson Saints. They had everything his deranged mind desired. Power. Dominion. INFAMY!

He lusted for blood so one night, he crept out of his barn and spotted a lead pony grazing in a field and with consummate brutality, slaughtered him. The lust grew and standing in Kentucky presented him with a smorgasbord of victim souls he could claim for himself. Mare, dead. Donkey, dead. Zebra, dead. Foal, dead. Colt, dead. Filly, dead. Gelding, dead. Front runner, hold up horse, chestnut, bay, grey, US bred, European bred, South American bred dead dead dead dead dead DEAD DEAD! DEAD!!!

Royal Academy was a veritable equine barbarian. The greatest tragedy (apart from this story being grossly unreported) is that none of the 650 horses were War Horses. They were all civilians.
 
I wouldn't know about defended Clive. A Patriot missile costs money, the Israelis won't waste that many of them on a Hamas rocket (if any) which needs to pretty well hit you on the head direct to kill.

Now in fairness since Egypt momentarily flirted with democracy they have been able to get themselves a temporary supply of better rockets, which have something like 300Ib payload, albeit they will exhaust these

I want to come back to this point again that Grasshopper raised and you think you've so brilliantly batted back.

It could be a simple yes/ no answer

Lets take the Birmingham pub bombings of 1974, which killed 21 people, and injured 182, as that single action alone killed more British civilians than the combined efforts of the Hamas rocket attacks that started in 2001

Would you have retaliated for this by flying squadrons of RAF bombers over the catholic areas of Belfast for an extended month, in the knowledge that catholics lived there, and dropped thousands of tonnes of high explosives on them knowing that you'd be killing catholics, but would almost certainly get a few of the real bad guys as well if you broadly targeted last known addresses by post code and those of their families?

Yes or No

If you say yes, then at least that clears up your position, but somehow I think we're going to get some kind of evasive non-answer again
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
Lets take the Birmingham pub bombings of 1974, which killed 21 people, and injured 182, as that single action alone killed more British civilians than the combined efforts of the Hamas rocket attacks that started in 2001

Would you have retaliated for this by flying squadrons of RAF bombers over the catholic areas of Belfast for an extended month, in the knowledge that catholics lived there, and dropped thousands of tonnes of high explosives on them knowing that you'd be killing catholics, but would almost certainly get a few of the real bad guys as well if you broadly targeted last known addresses by post code and those of their families?

Yes or No

If you say yes, then at least that clears up your position, but somehow I think we're going to get some kind of evasive non-answer again
Click to expand...

The answer HAS to be yes for Clive, otherwise it contradicts every single point he has made on this thread.
 
Stupid point. The birmingham pub bombings were not missiles from a location and were not a daily sustained attack over a period of years.

Ridiculous
 
Just dwell on that answer Clive, as I fear you're making yourself look ridiculous now. Well actually I don't fear that, obviously I think it's funny

Are you going to explain to the world then what the difference is between a sustained attack by explosives delivered from the air over a period of years against civilians, as opposed to a sustained attack delivered from the ground over a period of years against civilians? You can't seriously be suggesting that one type of explosive is somehow different in its objective

Indeed, the IRA tactic is the more deadly of the two as the respective body counts prove

If you want to expand the temporal horizon however, because you think they aren't compatiable, then OK let's do that.

During the period 1969 - 1990 the IRA prosecuted a series of attacks against the UK (they also involved mortars and crude rockets like Hamas) at what point would you have carpet bombed Belfast with justfication
 
Last edited:
On the first point it is hopefully true that the larger missiles will run dry. I suspect that with egypts support this is the zenith of hamass military capability. The rest of the middle east has virtually turned their back on them and there must be an undercurrent of dissatisfaction amongst many palestinians. They didnt all vote for hamas

Expect more executions
 
Dont come out with that.

Body counts are secondary to intent. Hamas makes it clear that they would go to any lengths to maximise deaths of jews. Israel has every right to stop the current attacks and suppress future attacks

The only stupidity on this thread is the laughable suggestion that any government should ask its citizens to shelter from missile attacks on a continual basis and refuse to take any action to prevent an escalation

That is exactly what is being stated on this thread.
 
Warbler said:
claim that Tornado or any frontline aircraft were used to carpet bomb the Falls Road.
Click to expand...
And neither did the Israeli's "carpet bomb" Gaza City in the current conflict. Airstrikes were strategic and against selective targets.

You can talk all you want about the "low" casualty rate resulting from Hamas rockets, be it 13 or 41. In the same period (since 2001) over 600 Israeli citizens have been killed by palestinian suicide bombers detonating their devices in Israel's cities.

How many British citizens have been killed by IRA rockets fired into British mainland territory? None, because no rockets were fired. Still, that did not deter Britain from sending a large-scale military force into N. Ireland to deal with the problem, and rightly so. Would you and similar minded Palestinian sympathisers on here agree with Britain's response at the time? If so, how can you condemn Israel for also responding to an even worse terrorist threat?
 
Back
Top