Jump to content

israel responds to terrorism by killing civilians


bud

Recommended Posts

wrong, bobby.

control of borders, sea, air and control of movement = occupation

How do you control a border? Israel controls its side of its shared border with Gaza. Gaza controls its side of the shared border. The air and sea blockade is simply a necessary arms embargo to defend Israeli security. It is entirely legitimate.

Edited by Bob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 436
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How do you control a border? Israel controls its side of its shared border with Gaza. The air and sea blockade is simply a necessary arms embargo to defend Israeli security. It is entirely legitimate.

control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement.

occupation, bobby.

stop fighting reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement.

occupation, bobby.

stop fighting reality.

There is no control of movement within Gaza. Anyways, I can see you're not going to answer my simple question. We both know why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement.

occupation, bobby.

stop fighting reality.

So we control our borders...the air space...the sea...are we occupying the USA....wait, the USA controls their border....are they occupying us? egypt controls its border...are they occupying Gaza...

all these questions must be answered before I chuckle again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the term palestine was used before the christian calendar came to be.

correct...but there were no palestinians then...no arabs there either. the arabs didn't arrive to the locale till a few hundred years into the christian era

Link to comment
Share on other sites

correct...but there were no palestinians then...no arabs there either. the arabs didn't arrive to the locale till a few hundred years into the christian era

The very name "Palestinian", used to describe the Arab residents of the area, is itself politicized in order to associate themselves with the land. The name is mentioned in the Torah, as are the people who were called "Filistinim" ("Palestinians" in Hebrew). Modern day Arabs who refer to themselves as "Palestinians" are, however, just Arabs. They're pretty much indistinguishable from neighbouring Arabs. Anyways, the falsehood that is Palestinian nationalism is entirely another subject.

I guess I was silly to think to think that bud might actually answer a simple and straightforward question explaining Arab/Palestinian violence pre-1967.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm....how many civilians would you have killed to kill Hitler in 1943? Personally I think 500K would not have been too many...the value of the target is weighed against the non military damage, whether it is the catherdral of cologne or a family of bedouins. So obviously killing a terrorist mastermind who has attacked and killed and will attack and kill is worth at least as many as he has killed times 4 or 5...

Well, how about Dresden? Not that it's really relevant to this thread.

Edited by GostHacked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wrong, bobby.

control of borders, sea, air and control of movement = occupation

No, that's called a blockade, or if you wanna be melodramatic, a siege. An occupation means occupying the land inside the borders, not just controlling the borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, how about Dresden? Not that it's really relevant to this thread.

Dresden was a high value target.

It was a commercial centre.

It was a transport hub.

It was an industrial centre containing poison gas, anti aircraft and munitions factories.

It was a communications centre.

....need more?

The attack prevented its use as a transport hub and hobbled Nazi efforts to reinforce against the Soviet red army.

and given that with the "dumb" munitions used at the time, the casualty rate of .025 means value for money.

The only fault with the attacks on Dresden is; it wasn't levelled earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's called a blockade, or if you wanna be melodramatic, a siege. An occupation means occupying the land inside the borders, not just controlling the borders.

Siege only refers to the encirclement or blockade of a city (or fort)...

And for the record, there is only a maritime naval blockade of Gaza...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I swear, your wit wouldn't cut warm butter...

Don't need to cut butter when it's that warm. It just melts all over the place without any effort at all. And like in the other thread, I save the good stuff for the adults.

But I'll let you get back to the regular stuff you do best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The very name "Palestinian", used to describe the Arab residents of the area, is itself politicized in order to associate themselves with the land. The name is mentioned in the Torah, as are the people who were called "Filistinim" ("Palestinians" in Hebrew).

Alexander the Great removed the Philistines from the map of history round about 332BC after they resisted at Tyre and Gaza. Men slaughtered...women/children shipped to Macedonia and slavery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a lot more important an event in history than all the Arab-Israeli Wars put together.

How so? It was one bombing of one city as part of a major war that saw the destruction of thousands of cities. It was not a turning point, it did not destroy some unparalleled historical treasures, it did not have an unusual amount of casualties, it did not demonstrate a revolutionary new weapon or tactic, it did not alter the balance of power.

On the other hand, the 1948 Arab-Israeli war resulted in the creation of a new country and the following wars resulted in the changes of international borders.

Edited by Bonam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so? It was one bombing of one city as part of a major war that saw the destruction of thousands of cities. It was not a turning point, it did not destroy some unparalleled historical treasures, it did not have an unusual amount of casualties, it did not demonstrate a revolutionary new weapon or tactic, it did not alter the balance of power.

On the other hand, the 1948 Arab-Israeli war resulted in the creation of a new country and the following wars resulted in the changes of international borders.

40,000 dead...that's why. That's a lot of family trees cut off and turned into stumps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,723
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    DACHSHUND
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • babetteteets went up a rank
      Rookie
    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • paradox34 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      First Post
    • paradox34 earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...