Israel

[Weston Super Saint]

38 minutes ago, aintforever said:

Hamas were always going to fight back the way they did, they are not is a position to go toe to toe with one of the world's most advanced armies.

Once this war dies down I expect they will do the same again if the situation is as it was before.

And no doubt you will celebrate once more and all will be forgiven.

[aintforever]

7 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And no doubt you will celebrate once more and all will be forgiven.

Twat.  

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

When the head of the UN says "it didn't happen in a vacuum", what do you suppose he meant?

Odd how everyone seems to answer my questions with another question. That's two posters unable to give a straight answer. 

Edited February 27 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Hamas were always going to fight back the way they did, they are not is a position to go toe to toe with one of the world's most advanced armies.

Once this war dies down I expect they will do the same again if the situation is as it was before.

Yeah they were always going to do it. It's quite understandable really. Bit of rape and murder. Seems pretty fair to me given the oppression. Bit of retribution, seems about time. 

[sadoldgit]

Not that this will make the slightest difference to the Islamophobes, after all, Khan is a Muslim and deserves all he gets where ever it comes from.

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/27/sadiq-khan-faces-death-threats-from-islamist-extremists-source-says

[whelk]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

Not that this will make the slightest difference to the Islamophobes, after all, Khan is a Muslim and deserves all he gets where ever it comes from.

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/27/sadiq-khan-faces-death-threats-from-islamist-extremists-source-says

Islamaphobes? You racist old fucker

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Twat.  

Bless.

The aintclever laughing emoji, signifying the end of his wit, reason and debating prowess.

Same pattern followed every single time.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Not that this will make the slightest difference to the Islamophobes, after all, Khan is a Muslim and deserves all he gets where ever it comes from.

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/27/sadiq-khan-faces-death-threats-from-islamist-extremists-source-says

Wow. Those Islamist extremists sound like a real problem. In the same week that reports surface of MPs having to use bodyguards for their own protection to prevent themselves coming to harm. Sounds like someone should do something about these Islamist extremists if they are going so far as to even threaten death to the London mayor. 

Edited February 27 by hypochondriac

[Fan The Flames]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Wow. Those Islamist extremists sound like a real problem. In the same week that reports surface of MPs having to use bodyguards for their own protection to prevent themselves coming to harm. Sounds like someone should do something about these Islamic extremists if they are going so far as to even threaten death to the London mayor. 

That post isn't half as clever as you think it is.

[hypochondriac]

26 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

That post isn't half as clever as you think it is.

So you don't think that Islamist extremists sending death threats to high profile politicians is a worry? Given the many examples of Islamist terror we've seen in the UK, it would be foolish not to takes threat of violence seriously. When the targets are even other Muslims as well as the Kafir then you know there's a serious problem and @sadoldgitwas certainly right to bring it to the attention of this thread and to call it out. He's rightly highlighted the serious problem from Islamists here which needs sorting. We can't have high profile politicians fearing for their lives due to extremists following their brand of religion. Well done to him I say. 

Edited February 27 by hypochondriac

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So you don't think that Islamist extremists sending death threats to high profile politicians is a worry? Given the many examples of Islamist terror we've seen in the UK, it would be foolish not to takes threat of violence seriously. When the targets are even other Muslims as well as the Kafir then you know there's a serious problem. 

Just imagine the fuss if Jews were involved?

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Just imagine the fuss if Jews were involved?

Wouldn't be difficult to imagine what some posters in this very thread would be posting had we had some Jewish extremists sending death threats to politicians. Not sure there's much of a track record of Jewish extremism in the UK to speak of though so I'm not sure it would be treated as seriously. 

[whelk]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Wouldn't be difficult to imagine what some posters in this very thread would be posting had we had some Jewish extremists sending death threats to politicians. Not sure there's much of a track record of Jewish extremism in the UK to speak of though so I'm not sure it would be treated as seriously. 

I imagine there would be some serious research going on

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, whelk said:

I imagine there would be some serious research going on

I'm waiting for a guardian article telling me about the 2017 terror incident of the old zionist who farted in the direction of a goyim. I can't wait to have egg on my face when I hear about all those dangerous Jew mass shootings and bombings on the district and circle line. 

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Bless.

The aintclever laughing emoji, signifying the end of his wit, reason and debating prowess.

Same pattern followed every single time.

There was no debate though you bellend. Just your pathetic attempt at trolling. That’s what I was laughing at.

[Fan The Flames]

7 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

So you don't think that Islamist extremists sending death threats to high profile politicians is a worry? Given the many examples of Islamist terror we've seen in the UK, it would be foolish not to takes threat of violence seriously. When the targets are even other Muslims as well as the Kafir then you know there's a serious problem and @sadoldgitwas certainly right to bring it to the attention of this thread and to call it out. He's rightly highlighted the serious problem from Islamists here which needs sorting. We can't have high profile politicians fearing for their lives due to extremists following their brand of religion. Well done to him I say. 

This insincere style of posting is a bit naff mate.

[Weston Super Saint]

7 hours ago, aintforever said:

There was no debate though you bellend. Just your pathetic attempt at trolling. That’s what I was laughing at.

And yet, throughout this thread, you've consistently justified the atrocious Hamas attacks because 'tHeY dIdN'T haPPen iN a VaCuUm'.  Now you've moved on and are happy to justify more of the same when / if the war finally ends.

And you have the audacity to call me a 'twat'.

[Weston Super Saint]

57 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

This insincere style of posting is a bit naff mate.

Is it not one insincere post answering another insincere post - unless you agree with Soggy that this board is full of 'Islamaphobes'?

[hypochondriac]

37 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And yet, throughout this thread, you've consistently justified the atrocious Hamas attacks because 'tHeY dIdN'T haPPen iN a VaCuUm'.  Now you've moved on and are happy to justify more of the same when / if the war finally ends.

And you have the audacity to call me a 'twat'.

You know that in private he thinks that the Jews were asking for it. A few posters on here have come very close to saying just that but can't bring themselves to answer a straight question publically. That's why they'll allude to Hamas not starting it without going all the way and saying unequivocally that they think the Jews brought it on themselves and that they should have expected a bit of a reaction from Hamas. Aintforever has come the closest yet, I wonder who will be the bravest and actually answer some straight questions. 

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

This insincere style of posting is a bit naff mate.

I just find it interesting that certain posters will go out of their way to deny that there is any sort of problem with Islamists in the UK and then post an article which says the exact opposite to try to dunk on the "Islamophobes". 

[egg]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And yet, throughout this thread, you've consistently justified the atrocious Hamas attacks because 'tHeY dIdN'T haPPen iN a VaCuUm'.  Now you've moved on and are happy to justify more of the same when / if the war finally ends.

And you have the audacity to call me a 'twat'.

Nobody has 'justified' the hamas attacks. That kind of false allegation makes sensible debate impossible. The point has been made that the Hamas attack did not happen in a vacuum - you mock the statement but it's a reality and I'm unsure whether you agree with it. 

[egg]

32 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You know that in private he thinks that the Jews were asking for it. A few posters on here have come very close to saying just that but can't bring themselves to answer a straight question publically. That's why they'll allude to Hamas not starting it without going all the way and saying unequivocally that they think the Jews brought it on themselves and that they should have expected a bit of a reaction from Hamas. Aintforever has come the closest yet, I wonder who will be the bravest and actually answer some straight questions. 

Jews? Twice? Soggy gets told off for less. Have some consistency. 

[Weston Super Saint]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Nobody has 'justified' the hamas attacks. That kind of false allegation makes sensible debate impossible. The point has been made that the Hamas attack did not happen in a vacuum - you mock the statement but it's a reality and I'm unsure whether you agree with it. 

That's exactly the justification that aintclever has used!

It's a complex arena dating back hundreds of years involving the vitriol and hatred derived from religions. Of course there is no vacuum.

Recheck his posts on the subject. He seems to be secretly delighted that those pesky Jews got what was coming and is stating that it will happen all over again.  He even seems delighted that this will happen.

There is no justification for the attack by the Hamas terrorists.  Similarly there is no justification for the attacks carried out by any other terrorist organisation. And yes, I agree that the retribution from Israel is above and beyond what is justifiable and neither condone nor celebrate it.

[sadoldgit]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I just find it interesting that certain posters will go out of their way to deny that there is any sort of problem with Islamists in the UK and then post an article which says the exact opposite to try to dunk on the "Islamophobes". 

Not one person doesn’t believe that extremists don’t pose a threat in the UK. God knows we have seen enough terror attacks in this country. That includes the killing of MPs by extreme nationalists by the way.

What  I find interesting is the way some of you pass off the blame of the deliberate killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians and the destruction of large swathes of the Gaza infrastructure as the fault of Hamas. Netanyahu had choices in the way he carried out his reprisal. He has chosen to deliberately kill women, children, babies, the elderly, the sick and the infirm. This is called “common punishment”. The use of “common punishment” is a war crime.

You are quick to call out atrocities carried out by Hamas. Perhaps you should also, in the interest of balance, understand that atrocities have been and are also being carried out by the Israelis. You won’t though because you blame all Muslims for the actions of a minority. And before you try and pretend otherwise, when I have argued on a previous thread about terrorism that you can’t blame all Muslims for the actions of a minority, you disagreed. You said that all Muslims in the UK were complicit in the actions of the extremists because they didn’t go to the police with information about terrorists. Somehow, in your hatred for Muslims, you have decided that all Muslims know and fully support what a minority of extremists plans are. It is exactly the same blind, mad, logic that Netanyahu is using to justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians.

Netanyahu had choices when he planned his retaliation against Hamas. To blame Hamas for those choices is a weak and pathetic attempt to absolve Netanyahu of any responsibility for what may well legally found to be genocide.

If this Government had any moral backbone, it would have called for an end to the killing as soon as his plans to destroy Gaza became apparent. They were too afraid of being labelled antisemitic to do anything but to stand by Netanyahu. The reason so much pressure is now being brought to bear on Parliament to change its stance is because so many people are now sick and tired of the daily death and destruction and want to see our elected representatives (the Government) actively putting pressure on both sides to stop the killing and to start working towards a lasting peace. 

You get yourself into a right old lather about pressure being put upon MPs by those who want to see an end of the deliberate attacks on Palestinian civilians but you don’t raise a peep about the pressure being put on MPs when they dare to criticise the actions of Israelis. You clearly don’t have a problem with the fact that antisemitism trumps Islamophobia in British politics. I think most of us would just prefer that innocent civilians on both sides were both given equal footing and respect.

 

 

 

[egg]

10 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

That's exactly the justification that aintclever has used!

It's a complex arena dating back hundreds of years involving the vitriol and hatred derived from religions. Of course there is no vacuum.

Recheck his posts on the subject. He seems to be secretly delighted that those pesky Jews got what was coming and is stating that it will happen all over again.  He even seems delighted that this will happen.

There is no justification for the attack by the Hamas terrorists.  Similarly there is no justification for the attacks carried out by any other terrorist organisation. And yes, I agree that the retribution from Israel is above and beyond what is justifiable and neither condone nor celebrate it.

Where's there been justification? Don't get me wrong, I skim or ignore a lot of the stuff on here, but I've only seen comment that Palestinian retaliation was inevitable, not justified. 

Edited February 28 by egg

[aintforever]

10 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

That's exactly the justification that aintclever has used!

It's a complex arena dating back hundreds of years involving the vitriol and hatred derived from religions. Of course there is no vacuum.

Recheck his posts on the subject. He seems to be secretly delighted that those pesky Jews got what was coming and is stating that it will happen all over again.  He even seems delighted that this will happen.

There is no justification for the attack by the Hamas terrorists.  Similarly there is no justification for the attacks carried out by any other terrorist organisation. And yes, I agree that the retribution from Israel is above and beyond what is justifiable and neither condone nor celebrate it.

I have never once justified them, the attacks were abhorrent. My point, which I thought was quite obvious, was that the situation the Palestinians were in made them depressingly inevitable. Just like what is happening now is.

It's hardly surprising you missed my point though. Go and sweep some floors.

 

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

both sides to stop the killing and to start working towards a lasting peace. 

Well done. If only others realised that’s what is needed. So fucking simple eh

[Weston Super Saint]

15 hours ago, aintforever said:

Hamas are responsible but if you steal people's land and deprive them of their freedom you have got to expect some comeback.

Justification for terror attacks by Hamas in that post.

14 hours ago, aintforever said:

Hamas were always going to fight back the way they did, they are not is a position to go toe to toe with one of the world's most advanced armies.

Once this war dies down I expect they will do the same again if the situation is as it was before.

More justification for their terrorist actions.

Justification for future terrorist attacks.

39 minutes ago, egg said:

Where's there been justification? Don't get me wrong, I skim or ignore a lot of the stuff on here, but I've only seen comment that Palestinian retaliation was inevitable, not justified.

Those posts were in the last couple of pages.

There seems to be some confusion regarding Palestinians being aggrieved (rightly so) by hundreds of years of religious conflict in the region, with the actions of a terrorist group who were created specifically to destroy the Jews in the region.

Let's not forget that both sides - Palestinians and Jews - have legitimate historical claims to the land.  

There is no justification for terrorist actions.

[Weston Super Saint]

27 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I have never once justified them, the attacks were abhorrent. My point, which I thought was quite obvious, was that the situation the Palestinians were in made them depressingly inevitable. Just like what is happening now is.

It's hardly surprising you missed my point though. Go and sweep some floors.

 

Apart from you claiming that the "comeback" is justified because people's land and freedoms were stolen.

Other than that, good point well made.

(I imagine some post will now follow containing some form of abuse followed by a laughing emoji).

[aintforever]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Apart from you claiming that the "comeback" is justified because people's land and freedoms were stolen.

Other than that, good point well made.

(I imagine some post will now follow containing some form of abuse followed by a laughing emoji).

I have never once said I think what they did was right, just explained the context of what led up to the attacks and why it will probably happen again. 

Apart from that, great point.  

[Fan The Flames]

21 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I have never once said I think what they did was right, just explained the context of what led up to the attacks and why it will probably happen again. 

Apart from that, great point.  

You would think that would be a simple enough concept for others to understand.

Too much binary thinking, exemplified by the 'if you don't agree with me, you MUST agree with soggy'.

[whelk]

39 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

You would think that would be a simple enough concept for others to understand.

Too much binary thinking, exemplified by the 'if you don't agree with me, you MUST agree with soggy'.

It’s more nuanced than that. Not saying people are right but if you qualify each time with ‘but’ it isn’t a case of clarifying technically more where people’s sympathies may lie. I expect from my posts many will think I am with Netanyahu- I am certainly not but I make no secret that I support Israel generally what with being a democracy (for now) that allows diversity and an being an ally to the West. Less sympathetic to Islamic countries with death to the infidel, cartoonists, gay people and of course Jews

[whelk]

If my reaction to Christmas shoppers bombed and killed by the IRA wasnt complete condemnation but I said it was awful  ‘but look ar what the Brits are doing occupying land, potato famine etc. you probably suspect I had republican sympathies.

Edited February 28 by whelk

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Jews? Twice? Soggy gets told off for less. Have some consistency. 

I wasn't using my language. Clearly. 

[hypochondriac]

27 minutes ago, whelk said:

It’s more nuanced than that. Not saying people are right but if you qualify each time with ‘but’ it isn’t a case of clarifying technically more where people’s sympathies may lie. I expect from my posts many will think I am with Netanyahu- I am certainly not but I make no secret that I support Israel generally what with being a democracy (for now) that allows diversity and an being an ally to the West. Less sympathetic to Islamic countries with death to the infidel, cartoonists, gay people and of course Jews

That's basically my position too. It's like when owen Jones writes ten pages with a qualifier at the start about how 7/10 was bad so he can use that to then write pages about Israel. It's transparently obvious what is going on. 

[hypochondriac]

24 minutes ago, whelk said:

If my reaction to Christmas shoppers bombed and killed by the IRA wasnt complete condemnation but I said it was awful  ‘but look ar what the Brits are doing occupying land, potato famine etc. you probably suspect I had republican sympathies.

Indeed. There were always going to fight back how they did, this sort of response from the IRA was inevitable. They were put in this situation by the British. 

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, aintforever said:

I have never once said I think what they did was right, just explained the context of what led up to the attacks and why it will probably happen again. 

Apart from that, great point.  

I've never claimed you have said it's right, that's a whole new kettle of fish.

I've said you've justified their actions. You can do that without claiming them to be right or wrong.

Personally, I don't believe the actions of ANY terrorist group can be justified, but to each their own I guess.

By the way, you haven't "explained the context of what led up to the attacks" at all, you've merely skimmed the last 20 odd years of history in the region and completely ignored the previous thousand odd years and the religious hatred that has existed for at least that long.

[egg]

19 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I've never claimed you have said it's right, that's a whole new kettle of fish.

I've said you've justified their actions. You can do that without claiming them to be right or wrong.

Personally, I don't believe the actions of ANY terrorist group can be justified, but to each their own I guess.

By the way, you haven't "explained the context of what led up to the attacks" at all, you've merely skimmed the last 20 odd years of history in the region and completely ignored the previous thousand odd years and the religious hatred that has existed for at least that long.

You don't have to go back thousands of years to understand context form a Palestinian perspective. You can start in 1948, then add 1967, then add 1982 (not least Sabra and Shatila), then keep adding the Israeli behaviour since. Palestinians reacted to Israeli behaviour in an appalling way, and Israel reacted to that in an appalling way. It seems that the differences on here are that some feel that a Palestinian response to what they've suffered was inevitable, whereas others focus on the justification of the Israeli response to the events of 7/10. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

If my reaction to Christmas shoppers bombed and killed by the IRA wasnt complete condemnation but I said it was awful  ‘but look ar what the Brits are doing occupying land, potato famine etc. you probably suspect I had republican sympathies.

Are you suggesting that people can't simultaneously have sympathy with the republican (and Palestinian) cause, and have genuine condemnation for how militants behave?   

[Weston Super Saint]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Are you suggesting that people can't simultaneously have sympathy with the republican (and Palestinian) cause, and have genuine condemnation for how militants behave?   

They can.

Some don't.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

They can.

Some don't.

True.

Some don't seem have any sympathies for the Palestinians either. 

[hypochondriac]

40 minutes ago, egg said:

Are you suggesting that people can't simultaneously have sympathy with the republican (and Palestinian) cause, and have genuine condemnation for how militants behave?   

Of course they can it's just that when a word of condemnation is followed immediately by paragraphs talking about the other side, it's clear for some that they don't actually care about the side they condemned originally at all, they just know it looks bad if they don't mention it. 

Edited February 28 by hypochondriac

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Indeed. There were always going to fight back how they did, this sort of response from the IRA was inevitable. They were put in this situation by the British. 

But to say the actions of the British didn't contribute to the terrorism in NI would just be a lie, same applies to Israel. It's not justifying anything, it's just putting the whole thing in context and understanding why these things happen. 

[badgerx16]

3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 

There is no justification for terrorist actions.

is there justification for turning Gaza into ''a pile of rubble'' and forcibly displacing the entire population ?

[hypochondriac]

13 minutes ago, aintforever said:

But to say the actions of the British didn't contribute to the terrorism in NI would just be a lie, same applies to Israel. It's not justifying anything, it's just putting the whole thing in context and understanding why these things happen. 

How you phrase it suggests that it's your belief that Israelis have a share of the responsibility for the raping and murderings on 7/10. You may not believe that but that's certainly how it comes across. 

[hypochondriac]

6 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

is there justification for turning Gaza into ''a pile of rubble'' and forcibly displacing the entire population ?

Was there justification for n for bombing German cities during WW2? 

[hypochondriac]

Fact is that awful things happen during a war which is what the Israelis view this as. I happen to think they have gone to far in some instances but at the same time I am not an Israeli and I can absolutely see why they are doing what they are doing. I also honestly believe that the outcome would be very different with intense pressure from Israel's allies to desist if the terrorist scum had given themselves up already, stopped hiding in civilian populations and handed back the hostages. Like I said already though, Hamas have no interest in doing any of those things so I can absolutely understand why they would want to destroy then as an organisation or at the very least cripple them and their capabilities for a generation. 

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Was there justification for n for bombing German cities during WW2? 

That is an interesting question on which University theses could be written, and would need to cover the political situation, the evolving theories of military aviation tactics in the 1930s, the practicalities of navigation and target identification, the limited accuracy of bomb aiming technology, and the morale impact at home and in Germany.

In reality there was little strategic or tactical advantage to be gained, and the impact was far less than was anticipated, but for the hierarchy of Bomber Command in 1940-44, and with the need to be seen to be ''hitting back', their zealous, though misguided, belief that wars could be won solely by strategic bombing justified it for them.

[hypochondriac]

7 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

That is an interesting question on which University theses could be written, and would need to cover the political situation, the evolving theories of military aviation tactics in the 1930s, the practicalities of navigation and target identification, the limited accuracy of bomb aiming technology, and the morale impact at home and in Germany.

In reality there was little strategic or tactical advantage to be gained, and the impact was far less than was anticipated, but for the hierarchy of Bomber Command in 1940-44, and with the need to be seen to be ''hitting back', their zealous, though misguided, belief that wars could be won solely by strategic bombing justified it for them.

Thanks for the considered answer. So is it ever justified in a war to take actions that may result in civilian casualties or deaths? Because imo the nature of war makes both of those impossible to avoid. You can argue about the proportionality of Israel's response of course, but it's not a black or white issue and obviously mistakes and tragedies occur during the fog of war too. 

I do wonder if some people would feel a greater level or sympathy for Israel if Hamas had been similarly armed and one of their main objections is that Hamas don't have the same level of firepower with which to retaliate. 

Edited February 28 by hypochondriac

[egg]

38 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Of course they can it's just that when a word of condemnation is followed immediately by paragraphs talking about the other side, it's clear for some that they don't actually care about the side they condemned originally at all, they just know it looks bad if they don't mention it. 

Nonsense. Talking about both sides of an issue is taking a balanced approach. Idiotic comments like yours are used by people to try to shut off opinion and cast aspersions.