• 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!

Hamas being Hamas... Killing teens... Cheering the terrorist murderer.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tigerace117 said:
When the US ****s up, we don’t continually pretend that our mistakes were actually legitimate because the people we killed might have been “secret terrorists”.

The US doesn’t casually throw Israel under the bus the second it becomes convenient in any way, shape or form.....your arguments, on the other hand, show this not to be the case when it comes to Israelis seeking to “justify” their countries’ actions.

The US didn’t try to pretend that a minority group was secretly responsible for pushing the Holocaust.

Israel, on the other hand.....

Benjamin Netanyahu's claim that Palestinians caused the Holocaust is a ludicrous distortion - Telegraph
Click to expand...

This is why ive always said Bibi is a vicious ethno nationalist who needs to go asap otherwise there will be no end to this conflict.
 
oneworld2 said:
It absolutely is a fight for national liberation and for a people to free themselves from a brutal and repressive regime that violates en masse their every human right and is also seeking more of their territory and keeping their right to self determination in suspended animation.

The Irish " didn't want Britain " ?? No they wanted the English invaders( not not the British ) out. You know to go back to their own country , England.

"The Indians didn't want England "?? No they wanted Britain ( note not England ,you appear to not understand any of this ) out of their country and the British to go back to Britain

The East Timorese wanted the Indonesians out of East Timor where they were slaughtering the East Timorese in droves . They wanted them to go back to Indonesia

It's actually bizarre to see anybody attempting to use these examples to try to undermine this argument because they actually endorse it.

The Palestinians have wanted the Zionists/Israelis to go back to their own countries which in the early days/pre state days were the likes of Eastern Europe and Tsarist Russia , then Germany , then all of the Arab countries, then the US and Russia.

The Zionists had homelands before they went to Palestine , they were just treated appallingly in them and decided that appalling treatment gave them the right to displace and dispossess the Palestinians which has led us all to this very point

Do you have a dual nationality ? You can have two but you deny those you displaced from even having the one

Bizarre !!!
Click to expand...

The jewish populations in those countries didnt have a place to go so i understand why Israel was formed. Britain just didnt care about the people that were already there because the place was a British colony.
 
bomberfox said:
The jewish populations in those countries didnt have a place to go so i understand why Israel was formed.
Click to expand...

I agree with you and am not against the Jews wanting or working for a safe haven in which to create their own state , my contention is that they didn't and don't have the right to kick some other population out of their home because their own country men and women turned against them

Britain just didnt care about the people that were already there because the place was a British colony.
Click to expand...


I agree again but don't think the British decision to give the homeland of another people to yet another people still was right or just , do you ? Especially when the real and chronic historic antisemitism had taken place on European soil and often times in Britain itself.

Do you think it right that the Arabs were forced into paying the price for European antisemtism that led to the creation of Israel in the first place ?
 
Tigerace117 said:
“Terrifying”

:lamo

Yes, I bet to people used to getting a free pass to walk all over the US it’s “terrifying” to see that Americans have noticed....and aren’t real pleased. It’s also hilarious that you think criticizing Israel in any way, shape or form makes one a Nazi.....yes, you4 little attempt to be cute about it wasn’t real subtle bud.

Yeah, it’s a pretty clearcut sign of a serious issue when you are so unwilling to share intel that even private citizens know about it.

“Pro-terror ignorants”...... like the Stern Gang? They were certainly terrorists, every bit as much as Hamas or Hezbollah is....and they got medals for it. So, it sounds like the government of Israel is therefore full of “pro terrorist ignorants” in that case.

Gaza protest deaths: Israel may have committed war crimes - UN - BBC News

“The commission of inquiry, which was set up by the UN Human Rights Council in May, said on Thursday that more than 6,000 unarmed demonstrators were shot by military snipers at designated protest sites over nine months.
It investigated the deaths of 189 Palestinians at the sites on official protest days and found that Israeli forces had killed 183 with live ammunition. Thirty-five of the fatalities were children, while three were clearly marked paramedics, and two were clearly marked journalists, the commission found.”

Please provide a source of the US military shooting and killing hundreds of unarmed civilian protestors. Shooting, as opposed to an air strike going awry. There’s an important difference....we’ll see if you can grasp it.

In other words you are throwing a tantrum because you don’t like that people aren’t just giving Israel a free pass to blow away civilians with impunity. Deal with it. Try arguing like a grow-up, not a petulant five year old.

Playing hypotheticals is fun, but they don’t change the facts. Unless you can provide concrete evidence of any such event occurring, it’s nothing more you desperately chucking stuff at the wall in hopes that some of it might stick.

So in other words “give Israel a free pass on whatever atrocities it commits or else your a NAZI”. Like I said before, your arguments are pathetic.
Click to expand...

It can also be said that we meddle in that conflict for the interests of our own arms manufacturers
 
bomberfox said:
This is why ive always said Bibi is a vicious ethno nationalist who needs to go asap otherwise there will be no end to this conflict.
Click to expand...

He absolutely is and that's why people should support the just ending of this conflict in line with international law and an end to the cycle of violence that drives people into the arms of the extremists on both sides
 
oneworld2 said:
I agree with you and am not against the Jews wanting or working for a safe haven in which to create their own state , my contention is that they didn't and don't have the right to kick some other population out of their home because their own country men and women turned against them




I agree again but don't think the British decision to give the homeland of another people to yet another people still was right or just , do you ? Especially when the real and chronic historic antisemitism had taken place on European soil and often times in Britain itself.

Do you think it right that the Arabs were forced into paying the price for European antisemtism that led to the creation of Israel in the first place ?
Click to expand...

The bolded i completely agree with. Britain ****ed up royally
 
bomberfox said:
It can also be said that we meddle in that conflict for the interests of our own arms manufacturers
Click to expand...

Isolationism at this point is just folly. The oceans weren’t big enough to keep the outside world out in 1941, much less today; like it or not the US is involved in the wider world and expected to have a stance on important issues. “Meddling” isn’t the right word
 
stevecanuck said:
And that's where I stopped reading. If you're going to start a response by suggesting I might be lying about a personal account, then we have nothing to say to each other.
Click to expand...

Personal anecdotes are just a horrible basis for a wider understanding especially from some rando on the internet.
 
oneworld2 said:
They routinely condemn Hamas terrorism and have done so on many occasions, they do however recognize that there is an ongoing military conflict being fought out in a national liberation struggle so they tend to describe the actions correctly as crimes against humanity and/or war crimes

What you appear to want is UN resolutions being passed condemning it and the groups involved which is NOT what all of the examples you gave consist of........... it's a goal post shift on your behalf
Click to expand...

What resolutions have been passed INRE Hamas terror attacks?
 
Tigerace117 said:
They were shooting into crowds of unarmed protesters with sniper rifles.

That is not something a “democracy” does. The amount of pants ****ting that would go down if something like that happened in the US would be unreal, and yet, we are just supposed to give Israel a pass....for no apparent reason.

But hey, maybe Hamas should use that line. “Our explosives are only meant to cripple people, not kill them. That makes it okay” :roll:

Other than the fact that IDF snipers have been shooting medics with regularity for quite some time?
Click to expand...

The "unarmed" protesters card.

Please see this thread... Hamas being Hamas.... Drones, Stones and IEDs..... Peacefully attacking the fence once again.

As noted, if they were shooting at legs they weren't trying to kill them.

And have you evidence the IDF intentionally targeted medics?
 
oneworld2 said:
They routinely condemn Hamas terrorism and have done so on many occasions, they do however recognize that there is an ongoing military conflict being fought out in a national liberation struggle so they tend to describe the actions correctly as crimes against humanity and/or war crimes

What you appear to want is UN resolutions being passed condemning it and the groups involved which is NOT what all of the examples you gave consist of........... it's a goal post shift on your behalf
Click to expand...

Attacks upon the civilian populace is terrorism and not a "military conflict".
 
oneworld2 said:
I agree with you and am not against the Jews wanting or working for a safe haven in which to create their own state , my contention is that they didn't and don't have the right to kick some other population out of their home because their own country men and women turned against them
Click to expand...

Perhaps they should have accepted the partition plan rather than opting for war. There would have been no need to evacuate Israel and there would have been a Palestinian state.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Isolationism at this point is just folly. The oceans weren’t big enough to keep the outside world out in 1941, much less today; like it or not the US is involved in the wider world and expected to have a stance on important issues. “Meddling” isn’t the right word
Click to expand...

Meddling is 100% the right word. Israel/palestine conflict is worse with our involvement since the US is HIGHLY biased in favor of one side. Time to stop meddling and supplying. We have a hegemonic empire for our own completely selfish reasons too. Do you really think Bush’s bull**** was truth? We can pull back our empire easily but we dont because we love killing and ruling just as any empire has in the past.
 
Last edited:
bomberfox said:
Meddling is 100% the right word. Israel/palestine conflict is worse with our involvement since the US is HIGHLY biased in favor of one side. Time to stop meddling and supplying. We have a hegemonic empire for our own completely selfish reasons too. Do you really think Bush’s bull**** was truth? We can pull back our empire easily but we dont because we love killing and ruling just as any empire has in the past.
Click to expand...

The US is highly biased against terrorists... Correct.

The US is highly biased for a democratic nation that has been attacked by practically every nation in the middle east. Correct...
 
Tigerace117 said:
Isolationism at this point is just folly. The oceans weren’t big enough to keep the outside world out in 1941, much less today; like it or not the US is involved in the wider world and expected to have a stance on important issues. “Meddling” isn’t the right word
Click to expand...

Im speaking from an anti imperialist angle as well as being against meddling for the sake of satisfying some pretense of being a positive influence.
 
bomberfox said:
Meddling is 100% the right word. Israel/palestine conflict is worse with our involvement since the US is HIGHLY biased in favor of one side. Time to stop meddling and supplying. We have a hegemonic empire for our own completely selfish reasons too. Do you really think Bush’s bull**** was truth? We can pull back our empire easily but we dont because we love killing and ruling just as any empire has in the past.
Click to expand...

What “empire” is that? Claiming the US “has an empire” is nonsensical, especially since the usual cry of “but we have lots of military bases overseas” is at the request of said countries’ themselves.

And what “bull****” would that be? The tired old conspiracy theory about oil?
 
bomberfox said:
Im speaking from an anti imperialist angle as well as being against meddling for the sake of satisfying some pretense of being a positive influence.
Click to expand...

“Anti imperialist”

Imperialism ended a while ago, and the US doesn’t have an empire.

You don’t think enabling women to vote in places like Afghanistan, just to name one example, is a good thing?
 
Tigerace117 said:
“Anti imperialist”

Imperialism ended a while ago, and the US doesn’t have an empire.

You don’t think enabling women to vote in places like Afghanistan, just to name one example, is a good thing?
Click to expand...

Tigerace117:

Many writers and historians including American one's disagree with you. Since the end of the 19th Century the USA has been both a traditional imperialist power and a novel one too. The novel aspect was creating an invisible, commercial empire of strong person to person relationships, supported by US tax dollars (dollar diplomacy) and oftentimes military interventions, rather than one that appears on a map like the British or French Empires did. So you have in fact two empires.

American imperialism - Wikipedia

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Evilroddy said:
Tigerace117:

Many writers and historians including American one's disagree with you. Since the end of the 19th Century the USA has been both a traditional imperialist power and a novel one too. The novel aspect was creating an invisible, commercial empire of strong person to person relationships, supported by US tax dollars (dollar diplomacy) and oftentimes military interventions, rather than one that appears on a map like the British or French Empires did. So you have in fact two empires.

American imperialism - Wikipedia

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

The end of the 19th century was literally hundreds of years ago. I literally addressed the silly “the US has lots of military bases! Imperialism!” stupidity one post from that. The article you posted certainly has plenty of dumb folks offering hot takes though: from “Iwo Jima was American imperialism!” to all sorts of desperate grasping at straws.

But I I guess folks in Canada need any excuse to ignore all those Indigenous women who’ve gotten hacked to pieces over the years.
 
Tigerace117 said:
The end of the 19th century was literally hundreds of years ago. I literally addressed the silly “the US has lots of military bases! Imperialism!” stupidity one post from that. The article you posted certainly has plenty of dumb folks offering hot takes though: from “Iwo Jima was American imperialism!” to all sorts of desperate grasping at straws.

But I I guess folks in Canada need any excuse to ignore all those Indigenous women who’ve gotten hacked to pieces over the years.
Click to expand...

Tigerace117:

Regarding your first paragraph and as this is a tangent in this thread I invite you to the history part of the Academia forum to debate the issue.

Regarding your second paragraph, this forum's I/P ML rules prevent me from replying to your disgusting comment in a thorough way, so I'll just let it slide rather than taking your ding-bait.

No cheers for you.
Evilroddy
 
Tigerace117 said:
Isolationism at this point is just folly. The oceans weren’t big enough to keep the outside world out in 1941, much less today; like it or not the US is involved in the wider world and expected to have a stance on important issues. “Meddling” isn’t the right word
Click to expand...

I agree Hegemony is
 
Fledermaus said:
What resolutions have been passed INRE Hamas terror attacks?
Click to expand...

Goal post shifting continues. You asked for UN condemnations of Hamas actions and they are to be found in the UN investigations into the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict in the form of condemnations wrt rocket attacks/terrorist attacks but they factor in the obvious context that this is still a conflict/war. Thus they use the correct framework and refer to them as crimes against humanity and/or war crimes. So the condemnations of Hamas actions or acts of terrorism are there for any who wish to look them up in the relevant reports.

So, now we see the UN condemnations as a fact we are led to the moving of goalposts of "where are the resolutions ? " There are none because they treat terrorism as a general menace and have NO resolutions on any group that I am aware of.

On the same theme they haven't condemned Israel or many other countries for their acts of state terrorism but have many resolutions pertaining to it that , again, come into the realm of conflict terminology

It's easy to understand if you allow yourself the freedom of intellectual movement required to do it

The list of examples you gave shows UN staff condemning various terrorist attacks but crucially for your claim is void of any UN resolutions condemning those responsible by name

They have an Anti Terrorist Strategy that has been endorsed by multiple resolutions voted on in the UNGA , AFAIR.You can follow some of them in this link......

United Nations Official Document
 
oneworld2 said:
Goal post shifting continues. You asked for UN condemnations of Hamas actions and they are to be found in the UN investigations into the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict in the form of condemnations wrt rocket attacks/terrorist attacks but they factor in the obvious context that this is still a conflict/war. Thus they use the correct framework and refer to them as crimes against humanity and/or war crimes. So the condemnations of Hamas actions or acts of terrorism are there for any who wish to look them up in the relevant reports.

So, now we see the UN condemnations as a fact we are led to the moving of goal
posts of "where are the resolutions ? " There are none because they treat terrorism as a general menace and have NO resolutions on any group that I am aware of.

On the same theme they haven't condemned Israel or many other countries for their acts of state terrorism but have many resolutions pertaining to it that , again, come into the realm of conflict terminology

It's easy to understand if you allow yourself the freedom of intellectual movement required to do it

The list of examples you gave shows UN staff condemning various terrorist attacks but crucially for your claim is void of any UN resolutions condemning those responsible by name

They have an Anti Terrorist Strategy that has been endorsed by multiple resolutions voted on in the UNGA , AFAIR.You can follow some of them in this link......

United Nations Official Document
Click to expand...

All that typing.

And yet no actual answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom