Jump to content

Israel


egg
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, egg said:

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.

It's not nonsense at all it's all over social media. One mealy mouthed word about 7/10 being wrong and then reams of stuff about Israel often devoid of context and clearly with an agenda. That isn't talking about both sides like you claim. Also a shame you continue to prove you can't disagree over a topic without resorting to insults. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 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.

Didn’t Hitler hate it that his own people were vulnerable when they thought the fuhrer would protect them? Like what he was in the Downfall sketch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 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 flattening Hiroshima and Nagasaki . These things happen in war.

Had 7/10 not happened, Gaza wouldn’t be a pile of rubble & a lot more people would be alive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Was there justification for flattening Hiroshima and Nagasaki . These things happen in war.

Had 7/10 not happened, Gaza wouldn’t be a pile of rubble & a lot more people would be alive. 

And the response to that from some on here would be that if Israeli "oppression" hadn't happened prior to 7/10 then it wouldn't have happened. Then they get mad when someone points out that that's justifying a terror attack. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

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. 

That's a more constructive and considered post. Fwiw, I don't see this as a war - you can't have a war between a strong military and a glorified militant group. What we've had is 7/10 followed by an undeniably ott reaction with lots of unnecessary killing of civilians and destruction of infrastructure.

Handing back hostages won't end this, and I appreciate you won't share my view on this, but Israel 'arresting' thousands of people in the west bank (without charge) isn't much better conduct. As for Hamas hiding themselves, that keeps getting said but in reality they ain't going to stand in the open. In any event, Israel taking out 100+ people to get one bloke who's suspected of being a Hamas member, is not on any assessment necessary or proportionate. 

I've highlighted the last bit as the stated aim of Israel just isn't achievable. Sure, they'll nullify the Hamas threat for a while at least, and may even force the organisation to disband, but they'll jack in the box as something else. If anyone thinks otherwise, just remember the attempts to do the same with the PLO in 1982. Other entities formed from the ashes of that, and it was cited as the motivation for 9/11. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Didn’t Hitler hate it that his own people were vulnerable when they thought the fuhrer would protect them? Like what he was in the Downfall sketch

The first bombs dropped on Berlin were delivered on 7th June 1940 when a single French air force bomber flew there. Goering is reported widely to have said ''If a single bomb falls on Berlin, you can call me Meyer'' - 'Meyer' being a German insult, however what he actually said referred to the Ruhr industrial area rather than Berlin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It's not nonsense at all it's all over social media. One mealy mouthed word about 7/10 being wrong and then reams of stuff about Israel often devoid of context and clearly with an agenda. That isn't talking about both sides like you claim. Also a shame you continue to prove you can't disagree over a topic without resorting to insults

Your posts are littered with your opinions of people who don't agree with you. Glass houses etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, egg said:

Your posts are littered with your opinions of people who don't agree with you. Glass houses etc. 

At no point during this exchange have I called any of your opinions idiotic. I regularly take jabs at soggy but that's not exactly an example of the average poster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Was there justification for flattening Hiroshima and Nagasaki . These things happen in war.

Had 7/10 not happened, Gaza wouldn’t be a pile of rubble & a lot more people would be alive. 

The American justification was to stop the war without the need for a full scale invasion of Japan, the casualties from which would have been horrendous on both sides. The bombing of Hiroshima was intended to be the leverage for this, but after the bombing there was a significant risk of a military coup in Japan, as a result of which fanatical elements of the army, who formed the Governmenrt, would have driven the nation to utter destruction rather than suffer the ignomy of surrender, so the second bomb was dropped - Nagasaki was the 'alternative' target, the orginal was masked by cloud. After the second bomb was dropped, factions close to the Emperor managed to regain control and the Emperor, who up to that point was rarely seen and never spoke publicly, made a national broadcast announcing that Japan would surrender.

( One side conspiracy theory has it that the bombs had to be dropped to frighten Stalin with this new wonder weapon, but tthe Russians already knew about them ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

At no point during this exchange have I called any of your opinions idiotic. I regularly take jabs at soggy but that's not exactly an example of the average poster. 

Your post that I labelled idiotic followed you casting aspersions on people for mentioning both sides of the debate in the same breath. Your opinion is wrong, yet you state it as a fact and disrespect people in the process. When you're disrespectful, don't complain when you get a bit back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

In amongst the WW2 whataboutery, what is the view on whether the reponse to Oct 7th would have been different with a less Nationalist Israeli Government ?

I don't think it would have been much different. I think the only real difference would have been if the US had put a hand on their shoulders early on. Conversely, and reverting to the Britain/Ireland/NI point, I'm not sure how that would have gone had the US not been supportive of Ireland. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, egg said:

Your post that I labelled idiotic followed you casting aspersions on people for mentioning both sides of the debate in the same breath. Your opinion is wrong, yet you state it as a fact and disrespect people in the process. When you're disrespectful, don't complain when you get a bit back. 

I didn't cast aspersions on people for "mentioning both sides of the debate in the same breath" you've either misunderstood or misquoted what I wrote. Go back and read it again. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

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

 

7 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

And yes, I agree that the retribution from Israel is above and beyond what is justifiable and neither condone nor celebrate it.

Hope that helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This first part is for you Weston. Forgive me but I try and ignore your posts as much as possible so I am not across this as well as I might be. I have seen you use the phrase “pesky Jews” a few times which, I assume, is your attempt to make some kind of point against those posting about the disproportionate  retaliation by Netanyahu and the IDF? Given that Netanyahu, his far right extremist cabinet members, the IDF and their enablers are being investigated for war crimes and possible genocide, why would you use a word like “pesky” to describe them? Would you describe the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot as “pesky dictators” ? Why try and minimise what is going on by conflating the situation with an episode of Scooby Doo?

Now on to the current issue of the threats to MPs. Clearly it is troubling and these people should be able to carry out their duties without death threats or threats of violence. For those making it an issue about ProPalestinian protesters, I trust you were equally concerned and posted those concerns here when Jo Cox was murdered by a white supremacist? We wouldn’t want any double standards here would we? 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

This first part is for you Weston. Forgive me but I try and ignore your posts as much as possible so I am not across this as well as I might be. I have seen you use the phrase “pesky Jews” a few times which, I assume, is your attempt to make some kind of point against those posting about the disproportionate  retaliation by Netanyahu and the IDF? Given that Netanyahu, his far right extremist cabinet members, the IDF and their enablers are being investigated for war crimes and possible genocide, why would you use a word like “pesky” to describe them? Would you describe the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot as “pesky dictators” ? Why try and minimise what is going on by conflating the situation with an episode of Scooby Doo?

Now on to the current issue of the threats to MPs. Clearly it is troubling and these people should be able to carry out their duties without death threats or threats of violence. For those making it an issue about ProPalestinian protesters, I trust you were equally concerned and posted those concerns here when Jo Cox was murdered by a white supremacist? We wouldn’t want any double standards here would we? 

Interesting. Are you aware of the rate of far right terror attacks carried out in the UK in say the last ten years? Are you aware of the rate of Islamist terror attacks? If one of these was substantially higher than the other do you think that whilst both would represent a problem that one would represent a greater threat than the other? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

This first part is for you Weston. Forgive me but I try and ignore your posts as much as possible so I am not across this as well as I might be. I have seen you use the phrase “pesky Jews” a few times which, I assume, is your attempt to make some kind of point against those posting about the disproportionate  retaliation by Netanyahu and the IDF? Given that Netanyahu, his far right extremist cabinet members, the IDF and their enablers are being investigated for war crimes and possible genocide, why would you use a word like “pesky” to describe them? Would you describe the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot as “pesky dictators” ? Why try and minimise what is going on by conflating the situation with an episode of Scooby Doo?

 

See the post directly before this waffle for your answer.

It was better when you claimed you had me on ignore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

 

Now on to the current issue of the threats to MPs. Clearly it is troubling and these people should be able to carry out their duties without death threats or threats of violence. For those making it an issue about ProPalestinian protesters, I trust you were equally concerned and posted those concerns here when Jo Cox was murdered by a white supremacist? We wouldn’t want any double standards here would we? 

Likewise, I'm sure you penned some strongly worded letters to your local paper during the 80's when Tory MPs were under threat.

We wouldn't want any double standards would we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

This first part is for you Weston. Forgive me but I try and ignore your posts as much as possible

It’s not just so much that you lie so very very much; it’s also that you’re so terribly bad at it.

Utterly full of shit.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Just to break this article down a little bit.

It was published yesterday as an opinion piece by Nick Lowles.

It refers to a poll conducted in 2020 by 'Hope not hate' https://hopenothate.org.uk/2020/09/30/the-cultural-problem-of-islamophobia-in-the-conservative-party/

The poll was exclusively for Conservative party members, of which 1,213 were polled.

No other political party members were polled so there is nothing to compare the Conservative party members against.

There is no link to the polling questions - which may or may not have been leading questions.

At the end of the Guardian article it acknowledges "Nick Lowles is chief executive of Hope Not Hate".

Your confirmation bias gets worse every day.

Edit : why did you consider this relevant for the Israel thread - presumably as some sort of deflection from your antisemitism?  

Edited by Weston Super Saint
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

 

Your confirmation bias gets worse every day.

Edit : why did you consider this relevant for the Israel thread - presumably as some sort of deflection from your antisemitism?  

You think that’s bad, wait until tomorrow after he’s seen this. Fuck me, it’s TV viagra for him. 
 

 

IMG_7743.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/02/2024 at 17:03, Weston Super Saint said:

See the post directly before this waffle for your answer.

It was better when you claimed you had me on ignore.

For once I agree with you, but I will leave you with this. Happy that the current Israeli regime doesn’t allow journalists into Gaza unless they have control? And I have no problem with “confirmation bias” given what is going on there. I really don’t have a problem with calling out the massacre of innocent people, whichever side of the conflict they are on. Go back and read the early posts if you don’t believe me.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/israel-hamas-war-our-first-mission-as-journalists-is-to-tell-the-full-story-denied-access-to-gaza-we-cannot-do-that-13082634

By the way Weston, judging by your posting history, we both know that if I was to say that today is Friday, you would be straight on here saying that it isn’t and calling me racist, antisemitic, datest or whatever for claiming that it is.

 

 

 

Edited by sadoldgit
Added text
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

For once I agree with you, but I will leave you with this. Happy that the current Israeli regime doesn’t allow journalists into Gaza unless they have control? And I have no problem with “confirmation bias” given what is going on there. I really don’t have a problem with calling out the massacre of innocent people, whichever side of the conflict they are on. Go back and read the early posts if you don’t believe me.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/israel-hamas-war-our-first-mission-as-journalists-is-to-tell-the-full-story-denied-access-to-gaza-we-cannot-do-that-13082634

 

 

 

dont you have him on ignore? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/02/2024 at 16:29, sadoldgit said:

This first part is for you Weston. Forgive me but I try and ignore your posts as much as possible 

 

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

 

By the way Weston, judging by your posting history, we both know that if I was to say that today is Friday, you would be straight on here saying that it isn’t and calling me racist, antisemitic, datest or whatever for claiming that it is.

 

 

 

🤦🏻

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Anyone here moving to Rochdale?

Ha!! I'm not sure that outcome would have been much different in a town with a lower Muslim demographic - that's a vote that's in step with the feelings of the masses imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Anyone here moving to Rochdale?

no im happy living in a 95% white British middle class town and telling everyone how they should be more welcoming to immigrants from here thanks

Edited by Turkish
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

no im happy living in a 95% white British middle class town and telling everyone how they should be more welcome to immigrant from here thanks

But if you change your mind, remember to vote early and vote often at the next election...

Edited by AlexLaw76
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, egg said:

Ha!! I'm not sure that outcome would have been much different in a town with a lower Muslim demographic - that's a vote that's in step with the feelings of the masses imo. 

Genuine question because I don't know - is it suspicious that there's been a big increase in postal voting? Some suggestion on social media that there was some dodgy business but could be an invention of course. I'd be in favour of policies that discourage that form of voting unless it's really necessary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, egg said:

Ha!! I'm not sure that outcome would have been much different in a town with a lower Muslim demographic - that's a vote that's in step with the feelings of the masses imo. 

What people want a vain terrorist supporting cunt representing them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, whelk said:

What people want a vain terrorist supporting cunt representing them?

Historically, those in Northern Ireland ? ( On either side ).

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, whelk said:

What people want a vain terrorist supporting cunt representing them?

They voted for a principle in a protest vote, not the personality fronting it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Genuine question because I don't know - is it suspicious that there's been a big increase in postal voting? Some suggestion on social media that there was some dodgy business but could be an invention of course. I'd be in favour of policies that discourage that form of voting unless it's really necessary. 

I'm not that a case can't be made linking who's getting the votes with the method. That said, I share your view that postal voting should be discouraged unless absolutely necessary. People should get to the polling station (and give ID) imo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Genuine question because I don't know - is it suspicious that there's been a big increase in postal voting? Some suggestion on social media that there was some dodgy business but could be an invention of course. I'd be in favour of policies that discourage that form of voting unless it's really necessary. 

Tony Blair relaxed the rules to encourage turnout, but it’s rife for fraud. Particularly with well organised “community leaders” & wives that are dominated by their husbands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-children-twins-killed-gaza-25282b273b92aec7fc75c3212f8d8e3f
 

Another in a countless list of tragedies in this conflict. Still, we can all take solace when the IDF tell us they are taking care to keep civilian casualties to a minimum. Let’s add those who were shot trying to get food the other night to the list too. Worth another laughing emoji?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, whelk said:

Can’t debate just endless links to stories.  Seems to take pleasure in highlighting terrible casualties and being sarcastic 

You just don't like the links because they show what "your side" are doing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, aintforever said:

You just don't like the links because they show what "your side" are doing.

I don’t click on them pal. Believe it or not I don’t get enlightened by some of the half wits on here. I am quite aware of the suffering going on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, whelk said:

I don’t click on them pal. Believe it or not I don’t get enlightened by some of the half wits on here. I am quite aware of the suffering going on. 

Everyone is aware, but nothing is done about it, that is probably part of SOG's point.

As Frankie Boyle says: "If we can have a genocide live-streamed during the Super Bowl and say nothing, theres no challenge in the coming years that we won’t fail."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...