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.

I never said that Hamas was innocent. I only say that Israel is not the only victim and they do plenty of wrong things themselves and are agitators as well.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
You're going to have to work considerably harder to justify terrorism, the use of human shields, and the torture and murder of captured soldiers.

Didn't you learn that "but they did it too!" isn't an excuse when you were a small child?

It isn't? It sure seems to be working for the US in the past 10+ years.

The US illegal invasion of Iraq caused 114,000 civilian deaths according to the most conservative estimates and left a country in ruins and all I see as outrage from US citizens in this regard is at best a shrug of the shoulders and the rest of the "international community" does even less than that.

Iraq didn't do a single thing to provoke the US invasion, the Hamas launches tens of rockets daily into Israel with the sole purpose of killing Israeli civilians. The US invades and destroys Iraq and is seen as a force of justice and liberty, Israel defends itself from terrorists and we have people claiming that they should have their country taken away from them and that they should be walled of until they die (where have I seen this before)...

Is there a big sale on strawmen today? Buy one, get one free? Because "but the US does it too" is a completely ridiculous strawman. Nobody here is arguing that the invasion of Iraq was a good thing, and nothing about that invasion in any way justifies Israel's actions.

 Peregrine wrote:
Is there a big sale on strawmen today? Buy one, get one free? Because "but the US does it too" is a completely ridiculous strawman. Nobody here is arguing that the invasion of Iraq was a good thing, and nothing about that invasion in any way justifies Israel's actions.

And no one is saying that the invasion of Iraq justifies Israel's actions, what people are noting is the blatant hypocrisy in the treatment of two sovereign nations in what are ultimately, comparable situations (i.e. the justification or lack of justification regarding collateral civilian casualties).

PhantomViper wrote:
And no one is saying that the invasion of Iraq justifies Israel's actions, what people are noting is the blatant hypocrisy in the treatment of two sovereign nations in what are ultimately, comparable situations (i.e. the justification or lack of justification regarding collateral civilian casualties).

Where exactly is the hypocrisy? Criticism of the Iraq invasion, by both US citizens and other countries, is not exactly rare, while Israel's strongest supporter is the US. The same people who are responsible for the Iraq invasion also support Israel, while many of the people who criticize Israel also criticize the US. As far as I can see the opinions are pretty consistent.

The only "hypocrisy" I can see is that you assume that everyone from the US posting here must agree with their country's actions, therefore any criticism of Israel is hypocrisy.

 Peregrine wrote:
Didn't you learn that "but they did it too!" isn't an excuse when you were a small child?

I did, yes, which is why I'm not using it. Israel doesn't "do it too." Israel does not deliberately target civilians, use human shields, or mob-kill captured Hamas operatives.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
All rhetoric aside, Sebster's absolutely right here. Firing rockets randomly in the hope of inflicting as many civilian casualties as possible, strapping a bomb to your chest and detonating it where you'll maximize the number of children killed, and stabbing, disemboweling, and gouging out the eyes of two captured soldiers are all perfectly civilized forms of making your point.

Nobody would be blaming Israel if they just killed the people who were responsible for those things (at least the ones that didn't already kill themselves), the problem is that Israel is a big fan of guilt by association and collateral damage.

PS: "but they did it too" isn't an excuse.

NO. If they were a fan of collateral damage there would be no Gaza, just a region completely scorched by napalm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
It's both hilarious and sad that you feel accidentally hitting a UN building while firing on guys who've been trying to kill your civilians, and apologizing for it once it became clear what you hit, is exactly equivalent to getting on a civilian bus and blowing it up with the explosives you're wearing.

Nice straw man. Criticizing Israel does not mean dismissing all of the horrible things that their enemies have done, nor does it mean that both are exactly equivalent. Palestinian terrorists kill civilians deliberately, Israel kills more civilians but does it "accidentally". Both of them suck in their own ways, and the solution is to build a wall around Israel and re-settle the ruins in a few decades.

It does when only Israel is criticzed however, which what seems to be the PC thing.

My comrade here practically did a jig when he heard the news. Under the Frazzled-X peace treaty plan, Israel should now make it official, have a nice ceremony with Abbas where each side eats some bread, and declares the West Bank its own separate country with all that entails.

The real question is, who gets Jerusalem? If there is a 2 state solution who would get the city?

It will be the new Berlin!

 Grey Templar wrote:


I know they are seperate, it just keeps slipping my mind. So get off your high horse, people can make little mistakes now and again.

To people who see this on the news every few years when it heats up its a small mistake. To people who actually read about all the time it's liketthinking there's only one Dakota. Nothing wrongvwith only being the former, but if that's all someone knows do you think they should spend more time reading or posting?

I'm fine with it, actually.

Good, you're a country. Now stop lobbing missiles into Israel and hiding your bunkers under schools.

I believe that both China and Russia votes for Palestine nationhood. also Iran adds a vote

and so many Latin american nations.

Any Israel army VS Hamas conflict does not only leads to war between the two 'nations' but also Israel will face another war. against Iran.
should Palestine annexed again. Iran will push the nukin' button. i'm sure of it.

 Lone Cat wrote:
Iran will push the nukin' button. i'm sure of it.

If Iran had a Nuke, they'd have used it already.

He said they'd just push the "Nukin' Button".

For all we know it could be attached to an automated candy floss dispenser.

 Seaward wrote:

All rhetoric aside, Sebster's absolutely right here. Firing rockets randomly in the hope of inflicting as many civilian casualties as possible, strapping a bomb to your chest and detonating it where you'll maximize the number of children killed, and stabbing, disemboweling, and gouging out the eyes of two captured soldiers are all perfectly civilized forms of making your point.

You've failed your reading test again, buddy. It's left you trying to disprove the claim that Palestine is civilised, except I never said they were.

Its bs spewed by idiots to make claims about anyone being civilised. There's rich and poor, and that dictates capability and need. Everything else is marketing listened to by idiots.

 kronk wrote:
I'm fine with it, actually.

Good, you're a country. Now stop lobbing missiles into Israel and hiding your bunkers under schools.

Blindingly true words.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
He said they'd just push the "Nukin' Button".

For all we know it could be attached to an automated candy floss dispenser.

I have a highlighter I like to click. Can I have the UN declare it a "nukin button?" Come on give peace a chance guys!

 sebster wrote:
You've failed your reading test again, buddy. It's left you trying to disprove the claim that Palestine is civilised, except I never said they were.

Its bs spewed by idiots to make claims about anyone being civilised. There's rich and poor, and that dictates capability and need. Everything else is marketing listened to by idiots.

I was agreeing with you. I also agree it's about rich and poor. If you're poor, you have every right in the world to claw someone to death, or blow yourself up in their cafe with the intent of taking as many of them with you as possible. If you're rich, you have an obligation to allow the poor to do such without ever trying to prevent it from happening again.

It's an excellent point.

 Lone Cat wrote:


Any Israel army VS Hamas conflict does not only leads to war between the two 'nations' but also Israel will face another war. against Iran.
should Palestine annexed again. Iran will push the nukin' button. i'm sure of it.

No, that's all nonsense. First up, Iran doesn't give two gaks about Palestine. They make a lot noise about Palestine to make Israel look bad and to score points and expand their profile in the region, but they have no actual concern that'd make them commit to actually help them.

Second up, Mossad, fething Mossad, have stated that Iran is not close to a nuke and if they were it military action is not justified. So given that your personal opinion that Iran isvgoing to a launch is kind of ridiculous compared to that.

Well about time too.

Maybe now Palestine can get the full force of the UN brought down on Israel when the Israeli "Defence" Force next bombs their schools.

 Seaward wrote:
If you're poor, you have every right in the world to claw someone to death, or blow yourself up in their cafe with the intent of taking as many of them with you as possible. If you're rich, you have an obligation to allow the poor to do such without ever trying to prevent it from happening again.

It's an excellent point.

I guess it's got to be a lot easier to argue with the things you wish someone had said; rather then what they actually did, huh?

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Well about time too.

Maybe now Palestine can get the full force of the UN brought down on Israel when the Israeli "Defence" Force next bombs their schools.

I agree. However its important to note this could be bad. If both sides shifted and really declared the two terriroties to be independent nations, then the next rocket coming over is an act of war and Israel really can bomb them back to the stone age with impugnity.

Frankly I'd go to the 1967 lines on the WB, declare the WB free and move on. The Gaza however is very twitchy.

 Seaward wrote:

I was agreeing with you. I also agree it's about rich and poor. If you're poor, you have every right in the world to claw someone to death, or blow yourself up in their cafe with the intent of taking as many of them with you as possible. If you're rich, you have an obligation to allow the poor to do such without ever trying to prevent it from happening again.

It's an excellent point.

That'd be some pretty cutting satire if I'd ever questioned Israel's actions in retaliation to the rocket fire. But given I haven't its just another of your pointless posts.

Seriously dude, read. You'll learn things and start making points that make sense. It'll be a whole new wored for all of us.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Well about time too.

Maybe now Palestine can get the full force of the UN brought down on Israel when the Israeli "Defence" Force next bombs their schools.

I agree. However its important to note this could be bad. If both sides shifted and really declared the two terriroties to be independent nations, then the next rocket coming over is an act of war and Israel really can bomb them back to the stone age with impugnity.

Frankly I'd go to the 1967 lines on the WB, declare the WB free and move on. The Gaza however is very twitchy.

You realise this makes you more radical than most Palestinians? They''ve given up on getting back to 1967 lines.

 Ouze wrote:
I guess it's got to be a lot easier to argue with the things you wish someone had said; rather then what they actually did, huh?

That's exactly what he said, actually.

 sebster wrote:

I don't condone violence, but I recognise that when you want your own country, you use the tools you have at your disposal. For the Jews at the time, outgunned as they were, that meant bombing campaigns and abductions. It sucks, but that's how it is.

Now, 60 something years later, the Palestinians are doing the same.

And people on-line, with absolutely no understanding of the history of these events, take up this moralistic positions against one side for using whatever weapons they have at their disposal.

All the Palestinians have at their disposal, according to Sebster, is terrorism, so we - and Israel - have no right to criticize (or, excuse me, "take up moralistic positions" against one side) because of it.

If all they can do is deliberately target civilians, who are we to judge?

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the modern state of Israel created in 1948? Up until then wasn't it a region in general flux, with "ownership" changing hands over the years? During that time we the Jews stopped from going to their sacred places or were they still open to them?

I have a question and it will be blunt, but I mean no disrespect to any parties involved.

As mentioned, the State of Israel didn't exist until 1948. A Zionist movement towards this started sometime in the 19th Century, but before that there was no Jewish homeland as we'd know it today. Obviously the Jews had a historic religious claim to the region, but were a displaced people, which was the case for around 2,500 ish years? Given the more modern timescale of displacement of Native Americans, Australian Aborigines, New Zealand Moaris, Native South American peoples and including Islanders kicked off their island so a military base can be built there. Plus the fact that they were all in situ when the displacement happened... how did we get to this state of affairs?

We are caught up in situation that takes up so much time an effort for what? A race that lost their homeland back at the time of the Pharoahs?

 sebster wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:


Any Israel army VS Hamas conflict does not only leads to war between the two 'nations' but also Israel will face another war. against Iran.
should Palestine annexed again. Iran will push the nukin' button. i'm sure of it.

No, that's all nonsense. First up, Iran doesn't give two gaks about Palestine. They make a lot noise about Palestine to make Israel look bad and to score points and expand their profile in the region, but they have no actual concern that'd make them commit to actually help them.

Second up, Mossad, fething Mossad, have stated that Iran is not close to a nuke and if they were it military action is not justified. So given that your personal opinion that Iran isvgoing to a launch is kind of ridiculous compared to that.

Iran Theocrats never says good things about Israel (and Jews in general). supporting Palestine is one thing. what will Iran do after Palestine is recognised by U.N. ?
How can you sure that Iran doesn't have any nukes? What proofs that Iran only denounce Israel and jews but never actually sends any military aid to Hamas no matter if they actually can?

 sebster wrote:


Second up, Mossad, fething Mossad, have stated that Iran is not close to a nuke and if they were it military action is not justified. So given that your personal opinion that Iran isvgoing to a launch is kind of ridiculous compared to that.

It's safe to assume that Mossad knows everything. Including what you personally had for breakfast this morning, your total body composition down to the DNA, and the last time you kissed your significant other on the mouth and if he/she was into the kiss at all.

That is not a joke.

 Lone Cat wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:


Any Israel army VS Hamas conflict does not only leads to war between the two 'nations' but also Israel will face another war. against Iran.
should Palestine annexed again. Iran will push the nukin' button. i'm sure of it.

No, that's all nonsense. First up, Iran doesn't give two gaks about Palestine. They make a lot noise about Palestine to make Israel look bad and to score points and expand their profile in the region, but they have no actual concern that'd make them commit to actually help them.

Second up, Mossad, fething Mossad, have stated that Iran is not close to a nuke and if they were it military action is not justified. So given that your personal opinion that Iran isvgoing to a launch is kind of ridiculous compared to that.

Iran Theocrats never says good things about Israel (and Jews in general). supporting Palestine is one thing. what will Iran do after Palestine is recognised by U.N. ?
How can you sure that Iran doesn't have any nukes? What proofs that Iran only denounce Israel and jews but never actually sends any military aid to Hamas no matter if they actually can?

Well, if Iran had nukes, they would have probably used them by now. Or given one to a third party to use for them. Less chance of an international invasion that way(if only slight)

A bigger concern is a dirty bomb, not an actual nuclear weapon. They are far easier to make and cause far more radiation.

^ Of course! simple dynamite covered with rad materials and concealment leave rads once it goes off (or even before that!). and it chills my skin! how can I navigate Khaosarn street lookin' for attractive white dream girls without gettin' hit by that rad weapons? Earlier this year Iranian terrorists was caught in Bangkok, all of them were looking going after Israelites in Khaosarn street. remember??

Not sure if serious

But mommy, he did it too!!!!

Didn't this excuse stop working when you were a small child? And for the record, I hate the things the US is doing, but that's not the topic here.

Hah, no it didn't, but since I've grown older pointing out hypocrisy in an argument has worked.

Except that:

1) The US invaded other nations, while Israel is bombing occupied territory. This is like arguing that because the military in a war is allowed to shoot an enemy with a gun without hesitation the police should also drop a hellfire missile on anyone who looks like a suspect.

Really? What would you call Iraq and Afghanistan during the US occupation? Oh wait..........

2) The US has at least made a token attempt to create a long term solution (occupying Afghanistan and putting a new government in place), while Israel has no interest in any kind of long-term peace other than complete surrender to Israel. Until then they just keep bombing civilians.

Huh, you could almost say that Israel has also put in token efforts to provide a long term solution via the peace talks. Hence the "token" part.

Nobody would be blaming Israel if they just killed the people who were responsible for those things (at least the ones that didn't already kill themselves), the problem is that Israel is a big fan of guilt by association and collateral damage.

PS: "but they did it too" isn't an excuse.

You see, it's not that I'm defending Israel's use of attacks that cause collateral damage (lol well I am but to be honest I don't really care either way) but I'm pointing out your lack of outrage for what the Palestinians do. Again with the hypocrisy! Oish!

By your standard North Korea is a legitimate nation, and I think you might be the only person outside North Korea that considers their government legitimate. "Might makes right" stopped being a legitimate ethical system a long, long time ago.

Huh, the UN seems to be full of nations that recognise North Korea as a legitimate nation. Just because it's not a nice state doesn't make it illegitimate, and just because you don't like something doesn't make it false. No matter how much you scream otherwise.

Uh, almost every claim that one party involved isn't civilised is directed at Palestine. I mean, you've seen this, haven't you?



And no-one is saying Israel has to hand their territory over to anyone else. People are saying that should stop taking other people's land.

I think you should go and re-read peregrine's posts, that's exactly what he says.

Well I guess everything is okay then. I mean seriously, dude, you honestly think 'oh people aren't as outraged when people needlessly die in this other situation' is a defence?

I'm not using it as a defence, or at least that wasn't my intention of its use. I was pointing out the inherent hypocrisy between the two scenarios.

Oh look, and when the side you've chosen blows up a building, there's all kinds of excuses and rationalisations. You know that wasn't the only violent act they undertook... they were pretty hardcore. And while violence is wrong and all that, you have to say well they were trying to fight for their own country, and that kind of stuff is what it took.

Some goes for Palestine.

Yep, I sure do, but you ommitted the context from your post, I thought I should add it because your post implied that they intended to kill those 91 people from the get go which simply wasn't true.

I think you're about 350 years behind in your reading on international law.

And you know, here I am wondering how those laws are enforced, oh wait, the means is in the word. But really, the only thing that legitimises a state is it's ability to hold it's own, nothing else matters because as long as they hold their own they don't have to pay attention to whatever anyone outside does or says, because they have to come in and get them if they want to do something about it. North Korea is actually the Prime example of this.

Now I would say that might makes right isn't exactly the best way to interact with each other as individuals, but that doesn't invalidate the power of the argument. It doesn't matter one iota what anyone else thinks as long as you're okay with it and you win and keep on winning. It's when/if you lose that the human fecal matter starts hitting the metallic propellant device, because when you lose it means that someone else now has the requisite force to force you to bend to their will. Any kind of world view that doesn't incorporate this fact is inherently flawed. Those that don't acknowledge it are either naive, ignorant, or self deluding.



Oh and Sebster, regarding the posts between you and Seaward, it did seem that you were alluding to that, namely because you critisized the one and did mention the other. Now I'm not making the case that that's what you meant, I'm just pointing that it was a rather easy thing to read into the post.

Also your post about the rich and poor does make it seem that you are endorsing the Palestinian terrorist's tactics. Just thought I'ld let you know.