Thoughts on 🇵🇸🇮🇱

@Richard65 They also poison water supplies

@TrashCat I'd be suspicious of any report coming from either side right now. The biggest conflict is the one concerning propaganda designed to win global support. I don't believe babies were purposely decapitated, I don't believe the water supply has been poisoned. Some of it might be true, but at present there's zero evidence, so I'll reserve my judgement on reports like that.

@Richard65 Hamas and Israel are engaged in some very dirty tactics. Nothing surprises me at this point nor can I dismiss it.

@TrashCat I agree, it might be true. I just don't trust any reports right now as it's in the heat of battle, so to speak. What depresses me is that murdering people and taking hostages doesn't seem to be sensational enough for either the combatants or the media. They have to report that babies have been decapitated. The public must have their ultra-violence. One IDF soldier originally reported that atrocity, but when a reporter asked an IDF commander for confirmation, he was told by him that the IDF couldn't confirm it as true, but added they weren't particularly interested in confirming or denying it anyway. But it's just been reported as true by many media outlets since.

@Richard65 Actually it is not a dilemma. One is a war crime.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow
That's arguable, as the Geneva Convention states: "The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy. Protection may, however, cease only after due warning has been given, naming, in all appropriate cases, a reasonable time limit, and after such warning has remained unheeded." Israel can argue that hospitals and schools are being used to commit harmful acts outside their humanitarian duties if Hamas are using those buildings as bases.

The Jews have been kicked around for millennia. They've been abused, tortured, suffered pogroms, murder and genocide in practically every country they've settled in, so I'm not really surprised they have had enough. What's happening is tragic and abhorrent, but at some point they were going to kick back. Unfortunately, the Palestinians are paying a high price for a history of crimes committed by many other countries against the Jews. I don't agree with any of it, but when you've suffered a determined attempt to wipe six million of you out, you can't blame them for having had enough.

@Richard65 No, it really is not. And it speaks alot that you are looking for excuses to justify war crimes against civilians no less.

It also speaks volumes that you don't cite the relevant parts on human shields because it contradicts your justification.

Also the laws of war didn't start or stop with the Geneva Conventions.


Also it is cute how you pretend Jewish people are the only people in history to have suffered and then claim that justifies any atrocity. You say you don't agree with it but that is a lie because your entire post is an excuse to justify it.


Vengeance is not and never has been a valid excuse.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I was pointing out how difficult it is to actually clarify what international laws have been broken and under what circumstances. You then disingenuously belittle the enormity of what has been historically perpetrated against the Jews. That must mean you don't think the Holocaust is a particularly abhorrent crime in modern history (see, I can play the straw man game too).

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]It also speaks volumes that you don't cite the relevant parts on human shields because it contradicts your justification.[/quote]

I'm sure you mean Hamas using patients, medical staff and the civilians they kidnapped as human shields, right?

@Northwest Either way it is totally irrelevant and still a war crime.


And the convention specifically addresses human shields and that makes it especially suspicious when someone omits the relevant sections on purpose.

The claims of human shields are also backed up with nothing more than "trust me bro" and don't fly.


It also doesn't explain away indiscriminate saturation bombing, indirect artillery fire into civilian areas, chemical weapons use....etc.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I'm guessing you're not an expert lawyer in international war crimes and you're not on the ground in Gaza, so like everyone else, you're just expressing an opinion after reading reports from an ongoing conflict in which hardly anything can be completely verified. I'm not justifying anything, but you're free to think whatever you want, as I am.

@Richard65 And now you are trying to pretend all opinions are equally valid so you can claim everything is a wash.


I am not a lawyer but I am literate. The laws of war are in plain language and publicly available.

Which is probably why you omitted the parts that blow up your justifications for war crimes.


Those reports have been verified by numerous sources that specialize in conflicts. You pretending war correspondents and NGOs don't exist now?


And various experts on international law and those that specialize in genocide and war crimes have also pointed out this is probably the most clear cut case in recent history.



And can you at least be honest about your bullshit. Your entire post history here is one big justification.

At least have the balls to stand behind your terrible political stances.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]Either way it is totally irrelevant and still a war crime.[/quote]

You used the 'human shields' argument as a war crime, and that's the part I'm responding to.

[quote]The claims of human shields are also backed up with nothing more than "trust me bro" and don't fly.
[/quote]

No bro, it's backed up by Hamas kidnapping hundreds of people, and holding them hostage. They were hoping Netanyahu would care if he has to kill human shields, but he doesn't.

@Northwest Richard65 was originally using human shields as an excuse and when he got called out on that started babbling about hospitals.

Almost certainly because it was the only part of the Geneva Convention he could try and twist to suit his justifications.


[quote]No bro, it's backed up by Hamas kidnapping hundreds of people, and holding them hostage. They were hoping Netanyahu would care if he has to kill human shields, but he doesn't.
[/quote]

Umm no. Hostages taken down into underground tunnels that even Bibi and co claim is where they are are just hostages or prisoners if you want less loaded language.


A human shield by definition means you are putting them in the line of fire not hide them in bunkers. That is a definitional distinction. Try again.



You really must hate me if you are going to join the side of genocide apologists just so you can pick a fight with me.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]A human shield by definition means you are putting them in the line of fire not hide them in bunkers. That is a definitional distinction. Try again.
[/quote]

You're using $5 words, but you have no clue what they mean. I don't have to try again, as you really have no fucking clue. Hamas has its tunnels under hospitals and is keeping those hostages in the same bunkers they use for command and control, and offensive operations. It does not get any clearer than this.

[quote]
You really must hate me if you are going to [b][i][u]join the side of genocide apologists [/u][/i][/b]just so you can pick a fight with me.
[/quote]

Why am I not surprised you're making this claim. But it's well in line with your character.

@Northwest It is not $5 words. It is the literal definition of what human shield means.

You clearly seem to not understand what the term means.

And again babbling about tunnels under hospitals that has never actually been proven doesn't magically absolve Israel of war crimes or suddenly make the laws of war not apply.



The claim is the only logical conclusion since you jumped in to help these people justify war crimes.

Dying on that hill is something you chose to do, not me.


That is also in line with your character.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]It is the literal definition of what human shield means.[/quote]

I'll give you a hint: people kidnapped and put in a position, to prevent an attempt to defeat the kidnappers. It's really not that complicated. Hamas kidnapped hundreds of people, and it's using them to protect its fighters from getting hit.

[quote]doesn't magically absolve Israel of war crimes or suddenly make the laws of war not apply.[/quote]

And that's where your mandatory strawman comes in.

[quote]Dying on that hill is something you chose to do, not me.
[/quote]

🤣😭

@Northwest [quote]I'll give you a hint: people kidnapped and put in a position, to prevent an attempt to defeat the kidnappers. It's really not that complicated. Hamas kidnapped hundreds of people, and it's using them to protect its fighters from getting hit.[/quote]


There is a word for that. Prisoner. I see English is still something you struggle with. Words and terms have definitions.


Human shield is self explanatory but somehow you still can't understand it.



It is not a strawman. That is literally the position you decided to sign onto.


So either you didn't even bother reading what you were getting into before picking a fight with me. Which is just stupid but would not surprise me in the slightest.


Or you are a Bibi fanboy who believes war crimes are justified by the IDF.

That would be consistent with the far right narratives taken straight from the most radical elements of the American right that I called out out on specifically on Iran in the past.

So for all I know this could just be your version of ideological consistency.

@Northwest I also see from your made up definition of human shield you don't under stand what 'in the line of fire" means either.


And even if we pretend the definition of human shields has changed it still is totally irrelevant. It doesn't justify saturation bombing, indirect artillery fire, chemical weapons use on civilian populations etc.

And if you don't want to be lumped with genocide apologists don't jump to their aid just to pick a fight with me because you are feeling contrarian on a particular day.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]And even if we pretend the definition of human shields has changed it still is totally irrelevant. It doesn't justify saturation bombing, indirect artillery fire, chemical weapons use on civilian populations etc.[/quote]

Look dummy, the issue I raised is whether Hamas is using human shields. They are. End of fucking story. Everything else is one of your strawman MOs.

[quote]And if you don't want to be lumped with genocide apologists don't jump to their aid just to pick a fight with me because you are feeling contrarian on a particular day.[/quote]

And another strawman, mixed in with delusional self-importance. In other words, your MO.

@Northwest Umm no. Again, hiding people in bunkers is the exact opposite.




And it is not a strawman. Either you didn't bother reading what you were signing onto when you picked this fight or you agree with the apologists.


Again, do some basic reading or man up to your bad politics.

And it is not delusional self importance when you go out of your way to pick fights with me and seem to be willing to sign on to any political position to do so.

But personal insults instead of an actual argument are another specialty of yours.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow [quote]Umm no. Again, hiding people in bunkers is the exact opposite.[/quote]

Umm, again, they are not simply hiding them in bunkers, they have them right alongside them in bunkers.

[quote]And it is not a strawman. Either you didn't bother reading what you were signing onto when you picked this fight or you agree with the apologists.
[/quote]

You always try to present yourself as a victim, and everyone else is picking fights with you.

I commented on whether Hamas is using human shields. They are.

You threw everything else into it. That's your strawman. Rebel Without a Clue.

@Northwest [quote]Umm, again, they are not simply hiding them in bunkers, they have them right alongside them in bunkers.[/quote]


A distinction without a difference.

And you are also making an argument based on claims by the IDF being facts when there are numerous doctors who have worked in these hospitals who have publicly stated tunnels under the hospitals are total fiction.

[quote]You always try to present yourself as a victim, and everyone else is picking fights with you.[/quote]

And a strawman from you.

I said you pick fights with me on the regular. That is a statement of fact.


Again, assume your opinion is fact even when I demonstrated that the basis of your argument is nonsense.

And the only reason you picked up this argument which is being used by genocide apologists on this thread (since you clearly have no idea who you are defending).


It is not my problem you don't bother to see if you are siding with David Duke before you jump into an argument to pick a fight with me.