• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the proper response to Hamas rockets?

Originally Posted by Oftencold
Troops are not for arresting criminals. They are for causing vast destruction, death, suffering and most importantly, enormous contrition in one's enemies.

Precise strikes are part of the problem. The general Palestinian population seem to support these savages, (making them savages themselves, of course.) All Palestinians who survive this war need to understand that their model of politics through terror is probably only going to win them land in the form of unmarked, communal graves.
Excuse me!

Their model of politics is this western democracy we keep telling everyone to live by.
 
Well, unless I missed something, the proper response to Hamas rockets is to fire super laser space beams from out of a Tom Clancy novel to take out the terrorists without harming citizens.

Is that about right?

No the proper response is to carpet bomb they with gummy bears and cracklings.
 
I wouldn't be so sure, despite political differences they still see them as Palestinians. Israel's attacks are only pushing them closer together. The Fatah is having difficult times preventing people of the West Bank from openly supporting Hamas and starting protests on Israeli lines.

I accept that Hamas is being repressed in the West Bank. For example even flying a Hamas flag is illegal there. But my point was that their not fireing rockets into Isreal and this hasnt done them any good. This demonstrates a big hole in the argument that palestinians would be fine if it wasnt for terroism. If this is the case why are those on the West Bank having land taken off them?

This is also relevant to all the demonisation the palestinians get for voting for Hamas. It has been proven that the moderate line taking by Fatah isnt going to get them anywhere so what choice do they have?

At the end of the day abhorrent though Hamas is palestinians are voting for it not because of some defect in their genes but because they are given no alternative other than to sit back and let there land get taken from them. If they where offerd some insentive then maybe they would be more willing to compromise [though it has to be said they have already compromised the vast majority of their country:roll:]
 
Fission and fusion bombs are both nuclear.

WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.
 
WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.

They are still both nuclear.
 
WRONG.

The atom bombs dropped on Japan were substantially weaker and less destructive than the current nuclear weapons.

There is a VAST difference.

I didn't argue that they were just as destructive. They ARE nuclear though. This is basic science...fission and fusion are both nuclear processes. I'm not going to debate a basic fact with you.

Besides, you're splitting hairs and ignoring the content of what I wrote. Call them whatever kind of bombs you like, my point still stands.
 
I've had a few debates with people in (in "real life"), and as I'm an artist and generally keep artists for company, I'm pretty much alone in my position that Israel has the right to eradicate active threats to its people. The discussion always devolves into who threw spitballs at whom first, (e.g. "Hasn't Israel had a tendency to overreact in the past?" as if that has any bearing on what's going on right now) and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets at Israeli population centers during the course of the cease fire is ignored or waved aside.

So, forget who was naughty first. Hamas launches rockets at Israel.

If military retaliation is not the correct response, then what is?

I`m OK with the proposed 30 to 1 ratio of rockets ,Israel over Hamas. When I think about the carnage I do shudder. WE aparently will have to beat many ,in the world of Islam,into submissiion. That sucks ,but as they persist....
 
Last edited:
I think the proper response to Hamas rockets is the total destruction of Hamas and for Israel to take over Gaza and rule it. Then the people will be better off and Israel will never have to fight another terrorist government that rules in Gaza. Simple.
 
By the way, you are aware that rockets are being launched from civilian structures, are you not?

...civilian structures,hospitals,schools,malls,apartment buildings,other multi-family structures,shelters,more hopitals,more schools,their own homes. Cardinal,they just don`t,(and won`t) ever get it. Interesting point here,"some very fine western government", has provided Israel with state of the art technology for instant targeting of terrorist missile launch locations to increase the rate of kill of the launcher,terrorist ,and additional rockets,in an attempt to reduce collateral damage unless the collateral is on and the same as the launch site.In the event of collateral and terrorist launch site being one and the same ,the Israeli army will have to enter Gaza to get the,"good loveing muslims",without harm to inocents.
 
I think the proper response to Hamas rockets is the total destruction of Hamas and for Israel to take over Gaza and rule it. Then the people will be better off and Israel will never have to fight another terrorist government that rules in Gaza. Simple.

WALLEYE,it really is that easy...it is,"SIMPLE".
 
I've had a few debates with people in (in "real life"), and as I'm an artist and generally keep artists for company, I'm pretty much alone in my position that Israel has the right to eradicate active threats to its people. The discussion always devolves into who threw spitballs at whom first, (e.g. "Hasn't Israel had a tendency to overreact in the past?" as if that has any bearing on what's going on right now) and the fact that Hamas was launching rockets at Israeli population centers during the course of the cease fire is ignored or waved aside.

So, forget who was naughty first. Hamas launches rockets at Israel.

If military retaliation is not the correct response, then what is?
Accepting one of the various olive-branches offered to Israel, rather than rejecting out of hand any that doesn't include the complete removal of Islam from the Promised Land would work. The problem is that Israel is a power-house in that part of the world, mostly because we (the most powerful country in the world) support them.
 
Back
Top Bottom