Israel

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

It has been stated several times, but all Israel are doing at the moment is stoking up the conflict for future generations and guaranteeing more events like 7/10 down the line.

 

 

Where does this horseshit come from?

Is it just people wishing that will happen and hoping it will?

I'm sure there were a few dullards saying the same thing when the world went to war with the Nazis, look how that turned out.  Just a few of them left with their belt buckles, not enough to make any real difference.

[hypochondriac]

I also find it bizarre that some people think that Israel reacting like thjs is going to lead to more terror attacks in the future. The reality is that there will be terror attacks no matter what they do. If their reaction had been to do nothing or to suddenly decide to live in peace and harmony and lay down their arms, Hamas woukd use it as an opportunity to kill as many Jews as possible. Hamas doesn't want peace, it doesn't matter what the Israelis do. The Israeli response isn't designed to end attacks - they aren't naive - it's to hamper their ability to attack effectively for as long as possible. From the Israeli point of view, if they kill most of Hamas and destroy what they've built, it should reduce the effectiveness of their attacks for quite a number of years so I can see the attraction. Here's an old but accurate cartoon. 

 

[SotonianWill]

9 hours ago, rallyboy said:

Thankfully I've seen no one one here supporting the attack by Hamas, they are terrorists and should be wiped off the fucking earth, there is no debate.

But murdering hundreds of innocent kids every day as revenge?

Because these rocket attacks on civilians, and let's not pretend otherwise, the numbers of civilian casualties break all international records of recent years, these attacks just create the next generation of hate and manage to make a horrendous situation even fucking worse.

Understandably, Israel wants revenge on Hamas and they want their people back, but look at the news footage, this isn't the revenge on Hamas that everyone wants, it's not helping to free hostages, it's just the slaughter of innocent civilians - only a total cunt would defend it.

If you think this role suits you, apply below.

 

 

I don’t support killing innocents. But why is it that the Palestinians voted in Hamas whose own convention was to wipe out Israel? Before the War why were they still polling at 62% support? Why did 77% of them support the attack on the 7th? Why are there people in this country saying the attack was justified but we are supposed to support the idea the people who voted in the terrorists didn’t want what they voted for. They voted for an organisation which gets their water supply neglected in the chance of more bombs and underground supplies for Hamas only. They vote for some of the richest people in the world to not spend any on themselves just more weapons. No wonder the IDF go in there to get Hamas before and after this war, but yet they’ll still play the victim…

 

They should have been demanding Hamas to give back all hostages and end the war not celebrating.  

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, SotonianWill said:

I don’t support killing innocents. But why is it that the Palestinians voted in Hamas whose own convention was to wipe out Israel? Before the War why were they still polling at 62% support? Why did 77% of them support the attack on the 7th? Why are there people in this country saying the attack was justified but we are supposed to support the idea the people who voted in the terrorists didn’t want what they voted for. They voted for an organisation which gets their water supply neglected in the chance of more bombs and underground supplies for Hamas only. They vote for some of the richest people in the world to not spend any on themselves just more weapons. No wonder the IDF go in there to get Hamas before and after this war, but yet they’ll still play the victim…

 

They should have been demanding Hamas to give back all hostages and end the war not celebrating.  

Yep. Give back the hostages, give up the individuals who went into Israel to commit these crimes and publically destroy the tunnels in Gaza and let's see how long this conflict continues for. If Palestine did that then there really wouldn't be any further justification for Israel to continue. We all know they won't though. Because they want to inflict pain and suffering on Jews and wipe them out. 

[aintforever]

22 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Where does this horseshit come from?

 

Because it's happened time and time again, just not on this scale. Israel will flatten Gaza, blow up some tunnels and kill some Hamas fighters but they won't destroy Hamas, I expect most have already put down their guns and travelled south with everyone else. The more civilians Israel kill, the more buildings they blow up - the more the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab countries want Israel wiped off the map - so the hatred and cause gets stronger. 

 

[whelk]

“I condemn Hamas atrocities but………<continues to blame Israel for everything>”

Akin to “I’m not racist but……..”

 

[Miltonaggro]

On 23/06/2023 at 10:32, Lighthouse said:

In the minds of many; Israel = Jews = rich, powerful Americans = establishment, authority, greed etc. Thats why stuff like this pops up:

 

Like many Americans if George had to put a pin in a world map to tag Palestine for a million dollars he'd likely be ten thousand miles away, even if the map was labelled.  My guess is that middle Eastern politics wasn't too high on his socio-political agenda.  Using the man as a figurehead in this way is meaningless beyond a victimisation dog whistle for the hard of thinking. 

[egg]

46 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It wasn't pathetic in the slightest. Many many of the people on the marches are hateful that's a fact. It was disgusting to hear some of the chants and see the slogans. Imagine being Jewish and living in London right now. I went to a bar mitzvah in London a few years ago and they put bodyguards on the doors to prevent attacks. I can't imagine what it's like there at the moment. 

Don't confuse the hateful behaviour of some individuals in attendance at the protests with the non hateful nature of the protests. 

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

Don't confuse the hateful behaviour of some individuals in attendance at the protests with the non hateful nature of the protests. 

Presume you said the same about EDL marches? They'd be the first to tell you that their marches weren't hateful. 

[hypochondriac]

18 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Because it's happened time and time again, just not on this scale. Israel will flatten Gaza, blow up some tunnels and kill some Hamas fighters but they won't destroy Hamas, I expect most have already put down their guns and travelled south with everyone else. The more civilians Israel kill, the more buildings they blow up - the more the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab countries want Israel wiped off the map - so the hatred and cause gets stronger. 

 

Israel know they won't destroy Hamas, but they can cripple them and hamper their operations for a number of years. The surrounding Arab countries already want them wiped off the map. 

[rallyboy]

Thanks for the applications - as one or two appear to be considerably overqualified, we now have a very strong shortlist. 👍

 

.

[aintforever]

16 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Israel know they won't destroy Hamas, but they can cripple them and hamper their operations for a number of years.  

Yep, and in a few years time we will be back where we are today but worse. Great plan.

[hypochondriac]

17 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Yep, and in a few years time we will be back where we are today but worse. Great plan.

The alternative results in more Israeli raping and beheadings now. If Palestinians want to change this cycle then the opportunity is there to call for new elections, elect someone who isn't Hamas and then call for something that isn't just wiping all Jews out. Like someone said earlier though, Hamas is the most popular party which suggests that a majority of Palestinians want this to continue. 

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Yep. Give back the hostages, give up the individuals who went into Israel to commit these crimes and publically destroy the tunnels in Gaza and let's see how long this conflict continues for. If Palestine did that then there really wouldn't be any further justification for Israel to continue. We all know they won't though. Because they want to inflict pain and suffering on Jews and wipe them out. 

And Israel to remove the West Bank settlers, military checkpoints, and the security barrier,  leaving the Palestinians there in control of their own destinies ?

Edited 31 October, 2023 by badgerx16

[aintforever]

13 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Hamas is the most popular party which suggests that a majority of Palestinians want this to continue. 

Because they have had their land stolen and have been fucked over by Israel for years.  

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Because they have had their land stolen and have been fucked over by Israel for years.  

In the meantime, the country that is called Israel ain't going anwhere...so what next?

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

And Israel to remove the West Bank settlers, military checkpoints, and the security barrier,  leaving the Palestinians there in control of their own destinies ?

If Palestine renounced Hamas and opposed any further aggression or killings of Israelis then I'd certainly like to see that yes. The idea they will do though is fanciful. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Presume you said the same about EDL marches? They'd be the first to tell you that their marches weren't hateful. 

Stay on topic Hypo. This ain't EDL. A few hate filed nutters in a group of peaceful protesters doesn't make the protests 'hate marches'.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Stay on topic Hypo. This ain't EDL. A few hate filed nutters in a group of peaceful protesters doesn't make the protests 'hate marches'.

I am staying on topic the principle is the same. Who are you to brand the protestor as a few people who are hate filled? I saw enough signs and heard enough chants to understand what was going on it was shameful. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

“I condemn Hamas atrocities but………<continues to blame Israel for everything>”

Akin to “I’m not racist but……..”

 

"I don't like what you're saying, so I'll imply that you're a racist. Bollox to my islamaphobia though". 

[whelk]

11 minutes ago, egg said:

"I don't like what you're saying, so I'll imply that you're a racist. Bollox to my islamaphobia though". 

I think phobia might be overplaying it but I admit not being a fan of Islam. Far too many zealots and fanatics at odds with my values I’m afraid.

[whelk]

14 minutes ago, egg said:

"I don't like what you're saying, so I'll imply that you're a racist. Bollox to my islamaphobia though". 

And I wasn’t suggesting it was coming from a racist viewpoint. Comparing an opening line as a token caveat to what I really want to say.

Edited 31 October, 2023 by whelk

[Turkish]

31 minutes ago, egg said:

Stay on topic Hypo. This ain't EDL. A few hate filed nutters in a group of peaceful protesters doesn't make the protests 'hate marches'.

Its a valid point. What’s the cut off line? The BLM protests were described as “largely peaceful” because the mantra was we had to support the cause even though there were over 200 arrests and plenty of video evidence of large scale disorder. 
 

so how many people does it take to make a peaceful protest a violent one? How many nutter who will blow innocent people up does it take to make a peaceful religion a violent one? 

Edited 31 October, 2023 by Turkish

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Because it's happened time and time again, just not on this scale. Israel will flatten Gaza, blow up some tunnels and kill some Hamas fighters but they won't destroy Hamas, I expect most have already put down their guns and travelled south with everyone else. The more civilians Israel kill, the more buildings they blow up - the more the Palestinians and the surrounding Arab countries want Israel wiped off the map - so the hatred and cause gets stronger. 

 

Wasn't the same said about ISIS and the caliphate?

Military action has reduced it to a few nutters who want their virgins for eternity.

Whilst religion exists, religious hatred will exist also. Doesn't mean "do nothing" should be the default answer.

[Turkish]

32 minutes ago, whelk said:

I think phobia might be overplaying it but I admit not being a fan of Islam. Far too many zealots and fanatics at odds with my values I’m afraid.

What particular values of yours are they at odds with?

[sadoldgit]

38 minutes ago, egg said:

"I don't like what you're saying, so I'll imply that you're a racist. Bollox to my islamaphobia though". 

We have seen it in Parliament, in the media, here, everywhere.

No one gives a damn about Islamophobes but get labelled as an antisemite and you are in trouble, you can even lose your livelihood over it. An ex PM made Islamophobic remarks and it was laughed off by many.

We live in a strange world where you can condemn the murderous acts of a bunch or terrorists and also those carried out as revenge and still get labelled as an antisemite.

I have been following this on other forums too and it is evident that there are people out there who think that the lives of innocent Jewish people are worth more than the lives of innocent Muslims. No doubt by writing these words those who believe this will immediately label the words as antisemitic too.

For those who the words of Suella Braverman are aimed at, your argument really doesn’t stand up unless your hatred of Muslims is so great you can’t see the wood for the trees.

[egg]

39 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Its a valid point. What’s the cut off line? The BLM protests were described as “largely peaceful” because the mantra was we had to support the cause even though there were over 200 arrests and plenty of video evidence of large scale disorder. 
 

so how many people does it take to make a peaceful protest a violent one? How many nutter who will blow innocent people up does it take to make a peaceful religion a violent one? 

I think it comes down to the intention of those organising, and the majority of the attendees. If that is to stand there holding a Palestinian flag and a placard saying "free Palestine" or similar, then there's no hate on that. If some loons then shout "death to Israel" or similar, then you have a hate element, but I don't accept that changes the nature of the protest. 

 I take your point on numbers. It's impossible to quantify for me. However, if we start to see peaceful protests becoming generally aggressive, unpleasant, anti semitic, etc, then that's an issue to address. 

SoG has hit the nail in the head up there about the lack of balance in the discussion, and in the labelling. The government are throwing fuel on that fire. Wrongly labelling peaceful protests mean that we continue this issue of wrongly labelling peaceful protesters or objectors. 

[Turkish]

18 minutes ago, egg said:

I think it comes down to the intention of those organising, and the majority of the attendees. If that is to stand there holding a Palestinian flag and a placard saying "free Palestine" or similar, then there's no hate on that. If some loons then shout "death to Israel" or similar, then you have a hate element, but I don't accept that changes the nature of the protest. 

 I take your point on numbers. It's impossible to quantify for me. However, if we start to see peaceful protests becoming generally aggressive, unpleasant, anti semitic, etc, then that's an issue to address. 

SoG has hit the nail in the head up there about the lack of balance in the discussion, and in the labelling. The government are throwing fuel on that fire. Wrongly labelling peaceful protests mean that we continue this issue of wrongly labelling peaceful protesters or objectors. 

the problem with these protests is it will always attract the nutters who take things too far, whatever group it is, we’ve seen it from all sides of the argument and it does more harm than good but depending on what narrative you want to believe you’ll side with the one which suits you.

The problem with Sog making any point on labelling is that he’s a hypocrite as he’s the first one to label someone racist, right wing, etc when they don’t line up with his viewpoint. I’m sure he’s referring to himself being called an antisemite but this goes back a lot further than his comments on this thread. A history of strange posts regarding Jews going back years have led to that. He may be right about it but when it comes from the mouth of the biggest hypocrite on here it’s a bit rich and carries little credence  

Edited 31 October, 2023 by Turkish

[egg]

4 minutes ago, Turkish said:

the problem with these protests is it will always attract the nutters who take things too far, whatever group it is, we’ve seen it from all sides of the argument and it does more harm than good but depending on what narrative you want to believe you’ll side with the one which suits you.

The problem with Sog making any point on labelling is that he’s a hypocrite as he’s the first one to label someone racist, right wing, etc when they don’t line up with his viewpoint. I’m sure he’s referring to himself being called an antisemite but this goes back a lot further than his comments on this thread. A history of strange posts regarding Jews going back years have led to that. He may be right about it but when it comes from the mouth of the biggest hypocrite on here it’s a bit rich and carries little credence  

I make no comment about SoG - I'm playing posts, not posters. As an aside ,there are a number of anti semitic (now racist) slurs on this thread from posters who have more class than to do that. 

On your main point, we must as a society allow peaceful protest, whatever the subject, and the government policy. It's for the police to deal with those acting illegally, but my main point remains. 

[hypochondriac]

44 minutes ago, Turkish said:

What particular values of yours are they at odds with?

For me the major things I disagree with are the polls from attitudes of Muslims which for me is more interesting than the religion itself which can be ignored or interpreted different ways. Routinely, a significant number oppose many rights for women and gays and smaller but significant numbers show an aggressive attitude towards non Muslims which I'm uneasy about. A large number want to live under sharia too. When asked, most cite their religion for these views and that's what I oppose. If you want to pray to Allah and avoid pork then go ahead but if you're going to start oppressing others or intimidating people trying to live their lives then they can leave. 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

I make no comment about SoG - I'm playing posts, not posters. As an aside ,there are a number of anti semitic (now racist) slurs on this thread from posters who have more class than to do that. 

On your main point, we must as a society allow peaceful protest, whatever the subject, and the government policy. It's for the police to deal with those acting illegally, but my main point remains. 

Let's be honest though there is a difference in the handling of protests depending on who it is who is protesting. Either it's neutral or protesting is banned. 

[Turkish]

19 minutes ago, egg said:

I make no comment about SoG - I'm playing posts, not posters. As an aside ,there are a number of anti semitic (now racist) slurs on this thread from posters who have more class than to do that. 

On your main point, we must as a society allow peaceful protest, whatever the subject, and the government policy. It's for the police to deal with those acting illegally, but my main point remains. 

Completely agree about allowing protests it’s part of a democracy and should be allowed regardless of if we agree with them or not. However we also have to acknowledge that these will be sort of things will be jumped on by those with agendas not to be peaceful and it’s the responsibility of the protesters to call these types out if they genuinely want them to remain peaceful. 
 

as for sog, difficult to ignore his views when he’s been repeatedly outspoken for years about labelling people whose views don’t align with his own, now he’s whinging about getting one himself. Reap what you sow. 

Edited 31 October, 2023 by Turkish

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

How many nutter who will blow innocent people up does it take to make a peaceful religion a violent one? 

It makes a questionable interpretation of a peaceful religion violent.

[badgerx16]

17 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

For me the major things I disagree with are the polls from attitudes of Muslims which for me is more interesting than the religion itself which can be ignored or interpreted different ways. Routinely, a significant number oppose many rights for women and gays and smaller but significant numbers show an aggressive attitude towards non Muslims which I'm uneasy about. A large number want to live under sharia too. When asked, most cite their religion for these views and that's what I oppose. If you want to pray to Allah and avoid pork then go ahead but if you're going to start oppressing others or intimidating people trying to live their lives then they can leave. 

Opposing rights for gays or women - are we talking about the newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, who wants to more closely align the direction of US politics to Old Testament Biblical teachings ?

Edited 31 October, 2023 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

On 29/10/2023 at 13:01, sadoldgit said:

the chant “from the river to the sea” is all about ending the oppression of the Palestinians and has nothing to do with wiping Israel off of the map. 

 

14 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I see some MPs and celebs are making fools of themselves by using the phrase from the river to the sea and getting themselves in hot water. 

 

13 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Stupid twats.

Everyone knows what the chant means it’s a long established Anti semitic trope, from the Jordan river to the med will be Palestinian land. Where does Isreal fit into that? Nowhere. That’s where. 
 

Stupid Twat or anti semite?  Past language against Jewish people indicates stupid twat is a bit on the mild side when it comes to some people. 

[hypochondriac]

38 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Opposing rights for gays or women - are we talking about the newly elected Speaker of the House of Representatives, who wants to more closely align the direction of US politics to Old Testament Biblical teachings ?

I can't say I know too much about him. What rights for women and gays has he opposed? 

[hypochondriac]

51 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It makes a questionable interpretation of a peaceful religion violent.

Does the religion of peace have a problem with extremism? 

Edited 31 October, 2023 by hypochondriac

[aintforever]

40 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

 from the Jordan river to the med will be Palestinian land. Where does Isreal fit into that? Nowhere. That’s where.  

Maybe they could force the Israelis into a 365 sq km strip of land and control what goes in or out to make sure there is no bother? 

[hypochondriac]

28 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Maybe they could force the Israelis into a 365 sq km strip of land and control what goes in or out to make sure there is no bother? 

If the Israelis are going to look to murder every Palestinian they can get their hands on and have rejected any chance for peace given the chance then fair enough. 

[aintforever]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

If the Israelis are going to look to murder every Palestinian they can get their hands on and have rejected any chance for peace given the chance then fair enough. 

Maybe they would in that situation? 

[hypochondriac]

49 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Maybe they would in that situation? 

I haven't seen proof of that claim. It's not like Israel haven't had the capability to kill all Palestinians and remove them from Palestine if they had wanted to. 

[aintforever]

14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I haven't seen proof of that claim. 

Of course you havn't, that's my point. Israeli's havn't been forced to live in an effective open prison for the last 15 years and had everything that comes in or out controlled by the people that stole their land. 

Whatever the reasons that led to that situation (I get the purpose of the blockade), it is a situation that is going to create hatred and spawn extremism. It was never going to be sustainable.

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I can't say I know too much about him. What rights for women and gays has he opposed? 

Same-sex marriage and any form of access to abortion are near the top of his agenda, for starters. He also believes that the Bible should be a much more formal basis for Government, rejecting the separation of Church and State.

Edited 31 October, 2023 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Does the religion of peace have a problem with extremism? 

Yes, but generally with one sect targeting another. One issue with Islam is that a lot of it's teaching is left open to interpretation rather than having a figurehead to guide the congregation, such as the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury.

Thankfully, Christianity has largely grown out of it's fanatical fundamentalist phase, but it does have quite a history.

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Of course you havn't, that's my point. Israeli's havn't been forced to live in an effective open prison for the last 15 years and had everything that comes in or out controlled by the people that stole their land. 

Whatever the reasons that led to that situation (I get the purpose of the blockade), it is a situation that is going to create hatred and spawn extremism. It was never going to be sustainable.

Are you suggesting that the hatred and extremism did not exist prior to this? You seem to be suggesting that this is the cause of the hatred and desire to exterminate Jews. It isn't... 

[hypochondriac]

16 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Same-sex marriage and any form of access to abortion are near the top of his agenda, for starters. He also believes that the Bible should be a much more formal basis for Government, rejecting the separation of Church and State.

Making abortions more difficult or considering marriage to be between a man and a woman isn't something I'd consider to be extremist, even if I disagree with those policies. I was talking more about making homosexuality illegal or in more extreme cases throwing them off buildings or making women the property of their husbands. 

[hypochondriac]

13 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Yes, but generally with one sect targeting another. One issue with Islam is that a lot of it's teaching is left open to interpretation rather than having a figurehead to guide the congregation, such as the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury.

Thankfully, Christianity has largely grown out of it's fanatical fundamentalist phase, but it does have quite a history.

The history of Christianity is largely irrelevant nowadays as you say (plus loads of Christians don't have figureheads like you said so not sure that's true anyway.) I'm more concerned about the present day and how a religion impacts the world. It's undeniable that a not insignificant number interpret Islam in a manner that causes great harm to others and infringes peoples' rights. I'd certainly argue that this is to a much greater extent nowadays than all other religions so that's why I have the most problem with the ideology. I wouldn't give a toss if they just left people alone but they don't. I was shocked by how aggressive a relative of my wife was about the subject of Salman Rushdie and this is a generally mild mannered and intelligent man but Islam can and does make people act in ways that I disagree with. 

[badgerx16]

11 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Making abortions more difficult or considering marriage to be between a man and a woman isn't something I'd consider to be extremist, even if I disagree with those policies. I was talking more about making homosexuality illegal or in more extreme cases throwing them off buildings or making women the property of their husbands. 

The longest journey begins with a single step.

[AlexLaw76]

20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Making abortions more difficult or considering marriage to be between a man and a woman isn't something I'd consider to be extremist, even if I disagree with those policies. I was talking more about making homosexuality illegal or in more extreme cases throwing them off buildings or making women the property of their husbands. 

And dont get started on the serious hate crime of making a cartoon picture of the great prophet. That will end your life as you know it..

Edited 31 October, 2023 by AlexLaw76

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

The longest journey begins with a single step.

It's an absurd comparison let's be honest. The idea that America is going to start throwing gays off buildings, cutting hands off or go and stab non believers because they happen to have a speaker that is probably a fundamentalist Christian and opposes gay marriage and abortion is not a serious argument. On the democrat side you've got many who support sterilisation for children and teaching them about anal sex and drag queen story hour and on the republican side you've got an obsession with guns and qanon conspiracies. Neither are correct but they can't really hold a candle to the extremes of Islam.