Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Bullockist wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


That's interesting...except that's not how it works. The IAF released scores of videos during Cast Lead of JDAM strikes averted because the target drove his launcher into a populated area. Whenever possible, we tried to minimize casualties. It's not "douchey" to defend yourself against an Islamic death cultist firing rockets at you if he's going to hide behind civilians. If it's him or me, it's going to be him every single time. You wouldn't understand that because you've never been in that situation.

Civilians die in war time. That's just how it is. Look at the civilian death tolls in Iraq. Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

If a country hasn't been pacified in 50 years maybe it's time to GTFO ? Or optionally actually approach the peace process in a serious manner and not just as a stalling method so more settlements can be placed.

50 years? That country hasn't been pacified for 2,000 years!

Correction. That country has been pacified, unpacified, pacified again so on and so forth for 2000 years

 LordofHats wrote:
Correction. That country has been pacified, unpacified, pacified again so on and so forth for 2000 years

Countries didn't exist 2000 years ago.

Sure it did... A country doesn't just pop out of then air. Or is the geographical location of Israel/Palestine/the Levant as a distinct geo-political region just a figment of my hyperactive imagination @_@

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
Correction. That country has been pacified, unpacified, pacified again so on and so forth for 2000 years

Countries didn't exist 2000 years ago.

Let's say area then.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
That's interesting...except that's not how it works. The IAF released scores of videos during Cast Lead of JDAM strikes averted because the target drove his launcher into a populated area. Whenever possible, we tried to minimize casualties. It's not "douchey" to defend yourself against an Islamic death cultist firing rockets at you if he's going to hide behind civilians. If it's him or me, it's going to be him every single time. You wouldn't understand that because you've never been in that situation.

Civilians die in war time. That's just how it is. Look at the civilian death tolls in Iraq. Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

I find your refusal to partake in childish naivete regarding how much better everything would be if we just adopted the peacenik plan of letting Palestine wage an unrestricted, uncontested terror campaign against Israel to have no place in this thread.

Relapse wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
Correction. That country has been pacified, unpacified, pacified again so on and so forth for 2000 years

Countries didn't exist 2000 years ago.

Let's say area then.

I know what you meant I'm just being a smart ass.

 Seaward wrote:

I find your refusal to partake in childish naivete regarding how much better everything would be if we just adopted the peacenik plan of letting Palestine wage an unrestricted, uncontested terror campaign against Israel to have no place in this thread.

If someone invaded my country , occupied it and then imposed harsh terms on my country I'm pretty sure I'd be launching rockets too. Lets not forget the refused partition of palestine that was offered by Fatah and refused by Israel and people wonder how Hamas got into power.

Unrestricted terrorism , pffft, it's called defending your country.

Bullockist wrote:
Unrestricted terrorism , pffft, it's called defending your country.

Nah. Getting idiots to strap bombs to themselves and walk into pizza parlors or get on buses is terrorism.

Also, if you've been "defending your country" for fifty straight years and have lost far more than you've gained, you're terrible at it and should give up.

Bullockist wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


That's interesting...except that's not how it works. The IAF released scores of videos during Cast Lead of JDAM strikes averted because the target drove his launcher into a populated area. Whenever possible, we tried to minimize casualties. It's not "douchey" to defend yourself against an Islamic death cultist firing rockets at you if he's going to hide behind civilians. If it's him or me, it's going to be him every single time. You wouldn't understand that because you've never been in that situation.

Civilians die in war time. That's just how it is. Look at the civilian death tolls in Iraq. Arabs are knocking each other off in Syria like it's going out of style, yet for some reason, everyone focuses on Israel. Hmmmm...

If a country hasn't been pacified in 50 years maybe it's time to GTFO ? Or optionally actually approach the peace process in a serious manner and not just as a stalling method so more settlements can be placed.

To where? Israel isn't a colony. Israelis fought and died for that land. They have as much right to be there as every American in the United States.

out of Gaza and the west bank

Bullockist wrote:
out of Gaza and the west bank

You think that'll magically make the Palestinians stop?

Bullockist wrote:
out of Gaza and the west bank

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel

We are supposed to reward terrorism? They're lucky we don't push them into Egypt.

What do you think the United States would do if Mexicans fired 1,000 rockets annually into US border towns?

I think it will go a long way to reducing it. Have you ever looked at the conditions the Palestinians live under? It's making things worse currently and always has.
Do you realize how many people are living without freedom of movement in the Gaza area, and how many are refugees?

You realise just how often Israel has ended or stalled the negotiating for peace all the while getting more settlers in the west bank.

Bullockist wrote:
I think it will go a long way to reducing it. Have you ever looked at the conditions the Palestinians live under? It's making things worse currently and always has.
Do you realize how many people are living without freedom of movement in the Gaza area, and how many are refugees?

You realise just how often Israel has ended or stalled the negotiating for peace all the while getting more settlers in the west bank.

You have a problem with settlers?

Wait...so a Jew can't live on Arab land, but Arabs deserve to live in Israel? Please tell me more.

Gaza is not Israel, neither is the west bank. These rocket attacks started according to that entry in wiki in 2001, which is a long while after the occupation.

Bullockist wrote:
Gaza is not Israel, neither is the west bank. These rocket attacks started according to that entry in wiki in 2001, which is a long while after the occupation.

So wait a minute. Palestinians weren't waging terror campaigns against Israel prior to the occupation?

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
I think it will go a long way to reducing it. Have you ever looked at the conditions the Palestinians live under? It's making things worse currently and always has.
Do you realize how many people are living without freedom of movement in the Gaza area, and how many are refugees?

You realise just how often Israel has ended or stalled the negotiating for peace all the while getting more settlers in the west bank.

You have a problem with settlers?

Wait...so a Jew can't live on Arab land, but Arabs deserve to live in Israel? Please tell me more.

The Arabs in Israel are descendents of Arabs living in Israel since before it was founded. You can bet that Israel doesn't allow Arab immigration after all.
Meanwhile Israel conquers arab land kciks off Arabs and imports settlers, big difference.

 Orlanth wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
I think it will go a long way to reducing it. Have you ever looked at the conditions the Palestinians live under? It's making things worse currently and always has.
Do you realize how many people are living without freedom of movement in the Gaza area, and how many are refugees?

You realise just how often Israel has ended or stalled the negotiating for peace all the while getting more settlers in the west bank.

You have a problem with settlers?

Wait...so a Jew can't live on Arab land, but Arabs deserve to live in Israel? Please tell me more.

The Arabs in Israel are descendents of Arabs living in Israel since before it was founded. You can bet that Israel doesn't allow Arab immigration after all.
Meanwhile Israel conquers arab land kciks off Arabs and imports settlers, big difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

Arabs are 20% of the Israeli population. You don't really know very much about this conflict. The families that left did so voluntarily in 1948 to make way for the Arab armies intent on massacring the Jews there.

 Seaward wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
Gaza is not Israel, neither is the west bank. These rocket attacks started according to that entry in wiki in 2001, which is a long while after the occupation.

So wait a minute. Palestinians weren't waging terror campaigns against Israel prior to the occupation?

I was just quoting the article. The Palestinians just want their own state, an entirely justified notion in my mind. There have been Palestinian terror attacks since the British occupation of Palestine (Jewish terror attacks at this time too) and probably before then under the Ottomans. The longer settlements go on the less chance there is of that happening which is one of the reasons that peace negotiations get stalled , every single time.
The best proposal put forward by the Palestinians was under Fatah which basically gave Israel everything they wanted (including an unpartitioned Jerusalem - Palestinian capital would have been a suburb on the outskirts of Jerusalem) which was rejected by Israel. This lead to a loss of faith in Fatah eventually leading to Hamas gaining increasing power.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

What a load of fething crap. Are you serious?

Yes, excerpt its not crap.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

People are free to hire whoever they want.

Yes they are, we agree on this, including Jews, non Jews anyone.
Never said otherwise.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

There's no global Jewish conspiracy to hire other Jews.

I was careful to point out, repeatedly, that there was no 'Jewish conspiracy', only natural networking, which would inevitably occur that allow complaints of Jewish conspiracy to happen which in turn leads to large scale discontentment.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Are you really suggesting that Jews help Jews any more than Blacks help Blacks?

Another point I made if you look. You should read more and panic less.

However who networks more, the Jews or the Blacks?
If that question is difficult ask which group has more successful lobbying power in proportion to its population. Ask why that is.

Bullockist wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

Bullockist wrote:
Gaza is not Israel, neither is the west bank. These rocket attacks started according to that entry in wiki in 2001, which is a long while after the occupation.

So wait a minute. Palestinians weren't waging terror campaigns against Israel prior to the occupation?

I was just quoting the article. The Palestinians just want their own state, an entirely justified notion in my mind. There have been Palestinian terror attacks since the British occupation of Palestine (Jewish terror attacks at this time too) and probably before then under the Ottomans. The longer settlements go on the less chance there is of that happening which is one of the reasons that peace negotiations get stalled , every single time.
The best proposal put forward by the Palestinians was under Fatah which basically gave Israel everything they wanted (including an unpartitioned Jerusalem - Palestinian capital would have been a suburb on the outskirts of Jerusalem) which was rejected by Israel. This lead to a loss of faith in Fatah eventually leading to Hamas gaining increasing power.

They have a state. It's called Jordan. They fought to win the whole thing and lost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:


However who networks more, the Jews or the Blacks?
If that question is difficult ask which group has more successful lobbying power in proportion to its population. Ask why that is.

Why is it? Tell me more.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:


The Arabs in Israel are descendents of Arabs living in Israel since before it was founded. You can bet that Israel doesn't allow Arab immigration after all.
Meanwhile Israel conquers arab land kciks off Arabs and imports settlers, big difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

Arabs are 20% of the Israeli population. You don't really know very much about this conflict.

The two pieces of information highlighted are connected.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

The families that left did so voluntarily in 1948 to make way for the Arab armies intent on massacring the Jews there.

That's total bollocks and very one sided, stop drinking the Kool Aid.

There were many Arab families were kicked off land or even massacred by Jews.
An example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:



However who networks more, the Jews or the Blacks?
If that question is difficult ask which group has more successful lobbying power in proportion to its population. Ask why that is.

Why is it? Tell me more.

I did, not thast I needed to, its should be obvious to anyone.
The question has rhetorical.

 Orlanth wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:


The Arabs in Israel are descendents of Arabs living in Israel since before it was founded. You can bet that Israel doesn't allow Arab immigration after all.
Meanwhile Israel conquers arab land kciks off Arabs and imports settlers, big difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

Arabs are 20% of the Israeli population. You don't really know very much about this conflict.

The two pieces of information highlighted are connected.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

The families that left did so voluntarily in 1948 to make way for the Arab armies intent on massacring the Jews there.

That's total bollocks and very one sided, stop drinking the Kool Aid.

There were many Arab families were kicked off land or even massacred by Jews.
An example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:



However who networks more, the Jews or the Blacks?
If that question is difficult ask which group has more successful lobbying power in proportion to its population. Ask why that is.

Why is it? Tell me more.

I did, not thast I needed to, its should be obvious to anyone.
The question has rhetorical.

It warrants an explanation. You're drawing a conclusion about an entire religion, so please make it good.

ENOUGH.

Guess what? You're all off-topic. Next post that isn't about the original topic earns the poster a ban from the OT forum.

Thank you.

You know, I'm wondering what they're actually using these organs for. If they're from dead soldiers they can't be much use for transplant-soldiers don't just drop down dead without significant bodily harm, and I imagine any useful organs would be ruined by the hail of bullets/burst of shrapnel/bits of rocket that killed them in the first place. And essentially being left in the blazing hot desert before having their organs harvested...

Unless they're using them as rations (which I sincerely hope they're not) I can't see what use they'd have with them.

It really depends on what they are actually using.

There are many parts of a body that can be used for a while after death. Bones, arteries, tissues, corneas. You don't have to take them out as soon as somebody dies, that's how certain funeral homes got away with harvesting all these before burying people.

Bullockist wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

I find your refusal to partake in childish naivete regarding how much better everything would be if we just adopted the peacenik plan of letting Palestine wage an unrestricted, uncontested terror campaign against Israel to have no place in this thread.

If someone invaded my country , occupied it and then imposed harsh terms on my country I'm pretty sure I'd be launching rockets too. Lets not forget the refused partition of palestine that was offered by Fatah and refused by Israel and people wonder how Hamas got into power.

Unrestricted terrorism , pffft, it's called defending your country.

You mean like Germany after WWII, or the Ottoman Empire after the British conquered it in WWI?

edited

Just saw Janth's post.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Thank you.

You know, I'm wondering what they're actually using these organs for. If they're from dead soldiers they can't be much use for transplant-soldiers don't just drop down dead without significant bodily harm, and I imagine any useful organs would be ruined by the hail of bullets/burst of shrapnel/bits of rocket that killed them in the first place. And essentially being left in the blazing hot desert before having their organs harvested...

Unless they're using them as rations (which I sincerely hope they're not) I can't see what use they'd have with them.

Probably for civilians. Israeli soldiers don't deploy outside of the country generally, and the country is very small. Many soldiers are treated for injuries at civilian hospitals.

To answer your other point, during war time, most soldiers wear armor during operations that covers most vital organs. Many soldiers die from extremity wounds or head injuries. If these soldiers were evacuated for medical care and died either en-route or in the hospital, the organs could easily be recovered.