kidnapped Israeli teens bodies found

[jacee]

imagine that... the guy turns yet another post toward Canada! It truly begs the question as to what transgression/liberty some Canadian border guard must have taken with the guy... and at what point he will be set free to say "Mission Accomplished"!

Nah ... he's paid to agitate.

.

[bush_cheney2004]

Ya. Get the hell out of their territory and stop provoking.

.

The attacks would still continue. There are legal ways to adjudicate "unsettled land claims" without thousands of rocket attacks, suicide bombers, and Olympic kidnappings/murder.

[Big Guy]

Then my following question is, would it be enough for our government to just sit back and rely on missile defence to intercept attacks? Would that be enough for you if rockets were aimed at your neighbourhood? Or would you want your government to take it a step further and do something to ensure that the rocket attacks stop and the people launching them are "taken care of"?

I would expect our government to find out why these people are shooting rockets at us. Once we find that out then we deal with the cause of the rockets coming in.

This is all political on all sides. There are about 260 people killed in Israel a year in traffic accidents. The outrage seems disproportionate.

I am saying that the Palestinians are winning the PR war. Israeli bombs are killing hundreds of civilians. I do not think that the fact that they are Palestinian civilians should make any difference. This is not a "measured" response and Israel is looking like an oppressive bully nation slaughtering the civilians of another nation. Does it matter why?

Edited July 13, 2014 by Big Guy

[Shady]

The attacks would still continue. There are legal ways to adjudicate "unsettled land claims" without thousands of rocket attacks, suicide bombers, and Olympic kidnappings/murder.

Exactly. Apparently jacee is justifying rocket attacks from First Nations in response to land disputes.

[waldo]

Nah ... he's paid to agitate.

.

who is paying him? Perhaps we could pass the hat and make a better offer - yes?

[jacee]

So it's impossible to reason with you. Got it. Hamas will not stop even if Israel stops "occupying their territory."

You know that how?

Do you know what Hamas considers its territory? ALL of Israel. Is that your position too: Israel has no right to exist?

Is that why they agreed to a two state solution?

Different state of affairs now.

.

[cybercoma]

I would expect our government to find out why these people are shooting rockets at us. Once we find that out then we deal with the cause of the rockets coming in.

That's nice in theory, meanwhile rockets are being aimed at your neighbourhood daily. In that situation, I'm sure you wouldn't care about the root causes, but want to be protected. Figuring out root causes and dealing with the those is fine in the long-term, but certainly has little to do with protecting your people during an attack.

This is all political on all sides.

It's not political. It's very practical. Israel and Palestine are under attack. That has very real consequences and real situations. It's not ALL political. Sometimes you need to be pragmatic.

I am saying that the Palestinians are winning the PR war. Israeli bombs are killing hundreds of civilians. I do not think that the fact that they are Palestinian civilians should make any difference. This is not a "measured" response and Israel is looking like an oppressive bully nation slaughtering the civilians of another nation. Does it matter why?

I don't know why you view them as an oppressive bully. Why? I believe Israel has every right to defend itself. I also think Hamas is scum for launching their attacks behind human shields.

[bush_cheney2004]

Exactly. Apparently jacee is justifying rocket attacks from First Nations in response to land disputes.

Yes....by such logic, Iran could begin smuggling rockets to First Nations to use in their "legitimate" struggle against the occupiers and deniers of land use rights.

[cybercoma]

You know that how?

Is that why they agreed to a two state solution?

Different state of affairs now.

.

I know that because they have said publicly that they will not be happy until Israel is pushed into the sea. That's how I know an Israeli withdraw would not end the violence. It would be seen as a victory and a chance for them to push back even harder. There needs to be a two-state solution, but both parties need to agree to it and that's not going to happen anytime soon.

In the meantime, what are Israel or Palestine to do when rockets are launched into their neighbourhoods? The answer is defend themselves. So you and everyone else who's indignant about Israel's recent attacks need to take a step back and consider what response you would want our government to take if rockets were being launched into your neighbourhood every day.

[Big Guy]

...

I don't know why you view them as an oppressive bully. Why? I believe Israel has every right to defend itself. I also think Hamas is scum for launching their attacks behind human shields.

I do not condone the launching of rockets into Israel nor do I condone bombing civilians in Gaza.

The score is Gaza - 170 dead, 900 injured

Israel - 0 dead, 2 injured

Do you believe that this is a fair conflict - especially that most of the dead and injured are civilians. Is this a "measured" response?

I guess that if eventually the rockets stop going into Israel then the end will justify the means.

And if it takes 1,000 dead Palestinian women and children? How about 2,000 or 10,000 or 100,000? Why not just carpet bomb with chemicals and kill everybody in Gaza?

Does the fact that they are Palestinians make a difference?

But if the end justifies the means then we know where that leads.

Edited July 13, 2014 by Big Guy

[Shady]

The score is Gaza - 170 dead, 900 injured

Israel - 0 dead, 2 injured

That's because one side, guess which one, uses people as human shields to guard their military resources.

[Rue]

The original thread and its title speaks for itself. The headline is deliberately inflammatory and designed to incite hatred against Israel.

In some forums the title of the thread and the ensuing first thread would have been considered trolling, On this forum such banners are considered acceptable and that is fine but I do not believe such threads are worthy of a direct response. The intent of the title makes it clear to me the initiator is not interested in any debate, he's just interested in hearing himself.He's another armchair warrior far from the conflict thinking his words explode like shells on the evil Zionist enemy.

Not quite and I will never understand why some people fart directly into the wind.

Edited July 13, 2014 by Rue

[cybercoma]

I do not condone the launching of rockets into Israel nor do I condone bombing civilians in Gaza.

The score is Gaza - 170 dead, 900 injured

Israel - 0 dead, 2 injured

Do you believe that this is a fair conflict - especially that most of the dead and injured are civilians. Is this a "measured" response?

I guess that if eventually the rockets stop going into Israel then the end will justify the means.

And if it takes 1,000 dead Palestinian women and children? How about 2,000 or 10,000 or 100,000? Why not just carpet bomb with chemicals and kill everybody in Gaza?

Does the fact that they are Palestinians make a difference?

But if the end justifies the means then we know where that leads.

The situation warrants a hell of a lot more than a simple tallying of the bodies. Just because someone attempts to murder my family and fails to do so when I murder him, that doesn't mean killing him was excessive.

[cybercoma]

The original thread and its title speaks for itself. The headline is deliberately inflammatory and designed to incite hatred against Israel.

Israel does do stupid things though. They indiscriminately launch rockets into civilian areas, knowing full well the casualties and deaths that will result. While it's true the attackers are using human shields, that doesn't mean Israel should just shoot the hostages to get the bad guys. Israel's response would be like a bank heist gone wrong, where the robbers take everyone in the bank hostage, so the police respond by levelling the building and killing everyone inside. When the public complains about their aggression, the cops will just say "it's the robbers' fault for hiding behind innocent civilians. You should be mad at them." No, idiots. We're mad at you because you have the weapons, gear, and technology to handle things in a more responsible way. Levelling the building and killing all the hostages inside makes you worse than the robbers. Edited July 13, 2014 by cybercoma

[Michael Hardner]

Cyber, honest question here - if Israel was more responsible (your word), do you think it would have a different response ?

[Rue]

http://virualjerusalem.com.news.php?Intemid=12033

www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/177071#.U8LhOJtOXrc

Reality is not determined by finding an article you think agrees with you Marcus.

Reality is not defined from sitting in your bedroom googling for soundbites you think back up your subjective opinions.

Reality Marcus is actually taking the time to understand how a boycott works and who it will actually harm.

Reality is every time Hamas engages in terrorism it hurts its own people more than anything Israel does in retaliation,

[Big Guy]

That's because one side, guess which one, uses people as human shields to guard their military resources.

So then the end justifies the means?

[Big Guy]

The situation warrants a hell of a lot more than a simple tallying of the bodies. Just because someone attempts to murder my family and fails to do so when I murder him, that doesn't mean killing him was excessive.

What about if you kill him, his wife, his kids, his grandmother and his cousins? Would that be excessive? Or does the end justify the means?

I do see your point cybercoma. It is just that this recent use of "acceptable collateral damage" has been stretched to a point past being credible. Just what amount of "acceptable collateral damage" can be used to rationalize the killing of innocent civilians?

Edited July 13, 2014 by Big Guy

[bush_cheney2004]

If the rocket launcher is in their back yard, then grandma is certainly at risk. Bake treats grandma....not rocket launchers.

[Rue]

Sometimes a picture speaks a thousand words and Bush's picture Cyber is the way to try respond to you and get you to understand Israel does not indiscriminately shoot at civilians. It in fact has a protocol of sending two warnings before it blows up a house.

It has to blow up those houses or buildings and sadly civilians may die because Hamas uses civilians as a cover. It wants them killed for the publicity.

Some young men have actually walked back into houses they know will be bombed to die as martyrs.

Its a world far removed from yours and yes innocent civilians die, but its not all black and white as you paint it.

Israel uses drones and satellites as much as it can but there is a limit to their technology and their abilities.

No Cyber they can't sit on their asses as missiles come in at them. Yes innocent civilians will die in response. No they do not sit there planning that, yes Hamas does.

That's the best way I can explain it other than Bush's picture.

Thank you Bush.

[Big Guy]

Sometimes a picture speaks a thousand words and Bush's picture Cyber is the way to try respond to you and get you to understand Israel does not indiscriminately shoot at civilians. It in fact has a protocol of sending two warnings before it blows up a house.

It has to blow up those houses or buildings and sadly civilians may die because Hamas uses civilians as a cover. It wants them killed for the publicity.

Some young men have actually walked back into houses they know will be bombed to die as martyrs.

Its a world far removed from yours and yes innocent civilians die, but its not all black and white as you paint it.

Israel uses drones and satellites as much as it can but there is a limit to their technology and their abilities.

No Cyber they can't sit on their asses as missiles come in at them. Yes innocent civilians will die in response. No they do not sit there planning that, yes Hamas does.

That's the best way I can explain it other than Bush's picture.

Thank you Bush.

To try to rationalize the fact that the Israelis have killed hundreds of innocent civilians while those missiles from Gaza have done little damage, and try to somehow equate the two as equal is ludicrous!

"Its a world far removed from yours and yes innocent civilians die, but its not all black and white as you paint it." What!?!?!

Hundreds of innocent civilians, mostly women and children, are slaughtered and you try to explain it as some misunderstanding?

Looks like Rue is another fan of the "the end justifies the means" rationalization.

Just how many deaths of innocent women and children are acceptable and justified to achieve end of Israeli bombings?

'... you to understand Israel does not indiscriminately shoot at civilians. It in fact has a protocol of sending two warnings before it blows up a house.". Are you seriously spinning that it is okay to make a phone call or drop a small bomb on your house to tell the family to get out and then demolish the building with anyone there is an acceptable behaviour?

Are you really stating that indiscriminate bombing to kill innocent civilians is somehow less acceptable than discriminate bombings to kill innocent civilians?

But these are only ignorant Palestinian women and children so that makes it OK?

[jacee]

I know that because they have said publicly that they will not be happy until Israel is pushed into the sea. That's how I know an Israeli withdraw would not end the violence. It would be seen as a victory and a chance for them to push back even harder. There needs to be a two-state solution, but both parties need to agree to it and that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Palestine agrees, has appealed to the UN for state status, and ...

UNITED NATIONS The Palestinians and their international supporters are discussing a U.N. draft resolution that would condemn all violence against civilians in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and call for "an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire."

An initial draft of the proposed Security Council resolution, obtained by The Associated Press, expresses "grave concern" at the escalating violence and deteriorating situation in the Palestinian territories due to Israeli military operations, particularly against the Gaza Strip, and at the heavy civilian casualties including children.

...

The elements, obtained by The Associated Press, call for "immediate calm and ending the hostilities in Gaza including the launching of rocket attacks," restoration of the 2012 cease-fire and resumption of direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations aimed at a comprehensive peace agreement and a two-state solution. They also call for protection of civilians.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/07/12/palestinians-draft-un-resolution-urging-cease-fire/

Israel's creds are all used up, imo.

Edited July 13, 2014 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

The UN ? Let's see what that debating club's Charter has to say...

Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security...

Between 2000 and May 2009, Palestinian attacks killed nearly 1,200 Israelis and injured close to 10,000, through suicide bombings, rocket and mortar attacks, shootings, stabbings, bombings, and vehicular assaults. In executing these attacks, Palestinian groups deliberately targeted Israeli civilians and population centers.[1] In defense, Israel applied a vigorous counter-terrorism strategy.

http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/international_law_series_the_right_to_self_defense0

[jacee]

Exactly. Apparently jacee is justifying rocket attacks from First Nations in response to land disputes.

/report

[Shady]

/report

/ridiculous

Instead of reporting, maybe you should defend your ideas. Explain to us which land disputes are justifyed for rocket attacks, and which ones aren't. And how you came up with said criteria.

Edited July 14, 2014 by Shady