FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Suella Braverman gets one's arse handed to her by a student
Suella Braverman gets one's arse handed to her by a student
Jump to: Newest in thread
  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas" That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game" Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist." She's right to some extent though.. Isreal shouldent exist in its current form which in my opinion is why hamas exists.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist." Suella was sacked from her past job. She is the MP for Fareham. She travelled 100 miles from her constituency with a Gbeebies reporter to provoke a reaction and grab sound bites. She is not entitled to debate or a response. She is a loser and should stick to her job as an MP for her constituency. If she can't do this then she should stand down. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist. She's right to some extent though.. Isreal shouldent exist in its current form which in my opinion is why hamas exists.. " If it shouldn't exist in the current form, what's the new form you are proposing? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hilarious in one way .. I loved the bits where slimy suella glances over to Dan Wooten (another right winger NES caster) in desperation for help as she's out in her place.. and that's after a disaster by trying to goad students at a demo camp, in a cheap effort to defame the student action and sell her Zionist, racist , apartheid crap. Dan Wooten from GB news was helping her and failed too. Good example of a busted cover up by suella Braverman who tries to justify fencing in a group of people into a massive prison camp (Gaza) and exterminate people using starvation. Thirst, and military force against civilians.. and live streamed too Excellent viewing GB News! I hope rishie Sunak is next To get roasted live on TV with that student. "Sue Braverman is a lot more successfull than most people. An ex Cabinet Minister and lawyer, her success is self explanatory. Maybe you should concentrate on the atrocities committed by Hamas . Who cares about what a student has to say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist. Suella was sacked from her past job. She is the MP for Fareham. She travelled 100 miles from her constituency with a Gbeebies reporter to provoke a reaction and grab sound bites. She is not entitled to debate or a response. She is a loser and should stick to her job as an MP for her constituency. If she can't do this then she should stand down." If the student wasn't willing to debate her, she shouldn't have gone there in the first place. No one forced her to. If she joined the debate, she should be answering questions directed at her. That's how debates are done. Instead, all she did was to go on some incoherent ramble. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace " Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up." Who here supports the above just for the sake of it? It's a terrible thing that's inevitable because of the way Hamas operates | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up. Who here supports the above just for the sake of it? It's a terrible thing that's inevitable because of the way Hamas operates" ....Or pretends that the IDF have no choice but to starve a civilian population and then bomb them, because it's someone else's fault. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up. Who here supports the above just for the sake of it? It's a terrible thing that's inevitable because of the way Hamas operates ....Or pretends that the IDF have no choice but to starve a civilian population and then bomb them, because it's someone else's fault." If Israel has another choice, please let us know. Tell us how Israel can retrieve their hostages and destroy Hamas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Q: Do you think Israel has the right to exist? A: I think that is a silly question, and you are asking the wrong questions to distract from the question I was asking Blah Blah Blah Blah.... that will be a no then." Same response on Hamas question too
Hamas says Israel shouldn't exist. Israel goes to war to retrieve hostages from Hamas and also destroy Hamas.
But apparently asking their opinions on Hamas or Israel's right to exist is the wrong question  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up. Who here supports the above just for the sake of it? It's a terrible thing that's inevitable because of the way Hamas operates ....Or pretends that the IDF have no choice but to starve a civilian population and then bomb them, because it's someone else's fault. If Israel has another choice, please let us know. " If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. " Tell us how Israel can retrieve their hostages and destroy Hamas." Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. " Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. " Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter?" You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices?" That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Q: Do you think Israel has the right to exist? A: I think that is a silly question, and you are asking the wrong questions to distract from the question I was asking Blah Blah Blah Blah.... that will be a no then." Not in its current form.. no! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Well done to the students more of us should be voicing peace Welcome to Fab forums. A large chunk of the posters here support the above and give a barrage of personal abuse if you speak up." Oh I agree.. Apparently I'm; An anti Semitic (the go to accusation) Racist An IRA supporter Flat earther Virtue signaller All simultaneously I presume lol.. from one poster granted but hey.. anything goes with these people | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, " Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. " Maybe not, but they are mass slaughtering innocent civilians. " They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. " I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. " Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. " What? " That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices?" Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas." Maybe instead of angrily shouting at random punters on here, and using every argument under the sun to excuse/justify the mass slaughter of innocent civilians, maybe you could suggest something? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. Maybe instead of angrily shouting at random punters on here, and using every argument under the sun to excuse/justify the mass slaughter of innocent civilians, maybe you could suggest something?" I am not the one shouting. The pro-Palestine ones are the ones shouting. My argument is that Israel doesn't have a choice. Why are you asking me to suggest?
You are the one who wants to stop Israel right now. So are the one who should tell us the alternative way to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. " And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. " Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. " A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. " All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas." Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. Maybe instead of angrily shouting at random punters on here, and using every argument under the sun to excuse/justify the mass slaughter of innocent civilians, maybe you could suggest something? I am not the one shouting. The pro-Palestine ones are the ones shouting. My argument is that Israel doesn't have a choice. Why are you asking me to suggest?
You are the one who wants to stop Israel right now. So are the one who should tell us the alternative way to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas."Ive already told you. The Answers are out there in abundance | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. Maybe instead of angrily shouting at random punters on here, and using every argument under the sun to excuse/justify the mass slaughter of innocent civilians, maybe you could suggest something? I am not the one shouting. The pro-Palestine ones are the ones shouting. My argument is that Israel doesn't have a choice. Why are you asking me to suggest?
You are the one who wants to stop Israel right now. So are the one who should tell us the alternative way to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas."I have. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral." The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. "
Isreal has tried the same old shit for decades and it's never worked. So why will it work now?! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist. Suella was sacked from her past job. She is the MP for Fareham. She travelled 100 miles from her constituency with a Gbeebies reporter to provoke a reaction and grab sound bites. She is not entitled to debate or a response. She is a loser and should stick to her job as an MP for her constituency. If she can't do this then she should stand down. If the student wasn't willing to debate her, she shouldn't have gone there in the first place. No one forced her to. If she joined the debate, she should be answering questions directed at her. That's how debates are done. Instead, all she did was to go on some incoherent ramble." Just watched it. The student was all over the place. Refused to answer direct questions. Slogans, non-answers, typical shrill neo commie with no facts, just 'you are a liar, asking the wrong question'. Waste of time having Fiona on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. " You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas That's because the student wasn't going to play suella's bullshit game Nah that's because she is a fraud incapable of debating and potential soft corner for Hamas and believes Israel shouldn't exist. Suella was sacked from her past job. She is the MP for Fareham. She travelled 100 miles from her constituency with a Gbeebies reporter to provoke a reaction and grab sound bites. She is not entitled to debate or a response. She is a loser and should stick to her job as an MP for her constituency. If she can't do this then she should stand down. If the student wasn't willing to debate her, she shouldn't have gone there in the first place. No one forced her to. If she joined the debate, she should be answering questions directed at her. That's how debates are done. Instead, all she did was to go on some incoherent ramble. Just watched it. The student was all over the place. Refused to answer direct questions. Slogans, non-answers, typical shrill neo commie with no facts, just 'you are a liar, asking the wrong question'. Waste of time having Fiona on. " That's the problem with most of the people in these protes groups. They think that if a slogan sounds catchy it must be right. It is very easy to tell slogans and virtue signal on the internet. You ask them practical questions and they will deflect or call you inhuman because you are apparently supporting killing people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. " Nope " If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time." Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. " What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. " I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. " Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. " The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. " Which other approach? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The question that I feel should be asked: will Hamas attack Israel in the same manner as it did Oct 7th?The Israeli attack should halt or continue based on the answer to that question. " mabey not for the next few years but all those kids and teenagers who have lost friends family and homes over the last six months will be looking for revenge in the next five years or so, so around and around it will continue to go | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hilarious in one way .. I loved the bits where slimy suella glances over to Dan Wooten (another right winger NES caster) in desperation for help as she's out in her place.. and that's after a disaster by trying to goad students at a demo camp, in a cheap effort to defame the student action and sell her Zionist, racist , apartheid crap. Dan Wooten from GB news was helping her and failed too. Good example of a busted cover up by suella Braverman who tries to justify fencing in a group of people into a massive prison camp (Gaza) and exterminate people using starvation. Thirst, and military force against civilians.. and live streamed too Excellent viewing GB News! I hope rishie Sunak is next To get roasted live on TV with that student. "More of the same old sh1te. Has Israel the right to defend itself. Should the state of Israel have the right to exist. Like another countries Israel has the right to defend itself, now if that defence looks like the mass murder of civilians, cutting of supplies that are needed for life to exist, then those who support this action should think ahead to other wars to come, as civilian lives are no longer of consequence and that is because a minority support this type of action support mass murder. Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't a democracy who mistreats its people is not a democratic state, who locks up innocent people because of their race and complain when the people they mistreat attempt to kill them in return. It was the anniversary of the killing/expulsion and fleeing of 700,00 thousand Palestinians during Nakba 14 may 1948. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip)" Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip) Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here?" States are fought for throughout history the one in question was given ,after being occupied by the Anglo/French. Look at Pakistan and India's history the brits did more or less the same thing. Created the state of Pakistan did they not. Also it baffles me that this state was set up for holocaust survivors after an attempted genocide which was known about but never acted on, then those same people go do the same thing to another race of people. I think there is a term for those who have had an experienced act of violence against them, only to carry out the same act against someone just like them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The question that I feel should be asked: will Hamas attack Israel in the same manner as it did Oct 7th?The Israeli attack should halt or continue based on the answer to that question. mabey not for the next few years but all those kids and teenagers who have lost friends family and homes over the last six months will be looking for revenge in the next five years or so, so around and around it will continue to go" Israel knows this. Netanyahu knows this. The goal has always been to stoke the fire to provide Israel an excuse to constantly bomb and invade Palestinian land
This is why they cannot "eliminate" Hamas. You cannot eliminate an ideology that's fueled by Israeli bombings and killings. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip) Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here? States are fought for throughout history the one in question was given ,after being occupied by the Anglo/French. Look at Pakistan and India's history the brits did more or less the same thing. Created the state of Pakistan did they not. Also it baffles me that this state was set up for holocaust survivors after an attempted genocide which was known about but never acted on, then those same people go do the same thing to another race of people. I think there is a term for those who have had an experienced act of violence against them, only to carry out the same act against someone just like them." Do you think the Brits were responsible for creation of Pakistan? The Muslim League did not want to live in a Hindu majority country. They wanted an Islamic state. They started slaughtering people on what they called the "direct action day". The Brits already wanted to leave the country at that point and the decision was in the hands of Indian leaders who eventually conceded to partition. The mistakes made by the Brits at that time was they were half foot out of the country and weren't clearly decisive. The scale of violence could have possibly been reduced. But the partition itself was inevitable and that was not because of the Brits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip) Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here? States are fought for throughout history the one in question was given ,after being occupied by the Anglo/French. Look at Pakistan and India's history the brits did more or less the same thing. Created the state of Pakistan did they not. Also it baffles me that this state was set up for holocaust survivors after an attempted genocide which was known about but never acted on, then those same people go do the same thing to another race of people. I think there is a term for those who have had an experienced act of violence against them, only to carry out the same act against someone just like them. Do you think the Brits were responsible for creation of Pakistan? The Muslim League did not want to live in a Hindu majority country. They wanted an Islamic state. They started slaughtering people on what they called the "direct action day". The Brits already wanted to leave the country at that point and the decision was in the hands of Indian leaders who eventually conceded to partition. The mistakes made by the Brits at that time was they were half foot out of the country and weren't clearly decisive. The scale of violence could have possibly been reduced. But the partition itself was inevitable and that was not because of the Brits." I think the brits divided the nation, left them to their mess whilst selling arms to both sides. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip) Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here? States are fought for throughout history the one in question was given ,after being occupied by the Anglo/French. Look at Pakistan and India's history the brits did more or less the same thing. Created the state of Pakistan did they not. Also it baffles me that this state was set up for holocaust survivors after an attempted genocide which was known about but never acted on, then those same people go do the same thing to another race of people. I think there is a term for those who have had an experienced act of violence against them, only to carry out the same act against someone just like them. Do you think the Brits were responsible for creation of Pakistan? The Muslim League did not want to live in a Hindu majority country. They wanted an Islamic state. They started slaughtering people on what they called the "direct action day". The Brits already wanted to leave the country at that point and the decision was in the hands of Indian leaders who eventually conceded to partition. The mistakes made by the Brits at that time was they were half foot out of the country and weren't clearly decisive. The scale of violence could have possibly been reduced. But the partition itself was inevitable and that was not because of the Brits. I think the brits divided the nation, left them to their mess whilst selling arms to both sides." That's a simplistic take of complex history. Did the Brits employ divide and rule tactics? Yes of course. Were they solely responsible for the divide between Hindus and Muslims. Not at all. The divide existed even before they came to India. The Brits added fuel to the fire. But partition itself wasn't their decision. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The question that I feel should be asked: will Hamas attack Israel in the same manner as it did Oct 7th?The Israeli attack should halt or continue based on the answer to that question. " The Israeli bombing of Palestine is definitely making it much more likely Hamas or another faction will attack Israel again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach? "Any of the multiple approaches available. Not really sure why you think the options are. 1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working). 2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.""Multiple approaches available" I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Should Israel exist as a state. No it shouldn't...(snip) Your courageous honesty is refreshing. Now we've determined that Israel should not exist as a state, what would be the ideal way forward from here? States are fought for throughout history the one in question was given ,after being occupied by the Anglo/French. Look at Pakistan and India's history the brits did more or less the same thing. Created the state of Pakistan did they not. Also it baffles me that this state was set up for holocaust survivors after an attempted genocide which was known about but never acted on, then those same people go do the same thing to another race of people. I think there is a term for those who have had an experienced act of violence against them, only to carry out the same act against someone just like them. Do you think the Brits were responsible for creation of Pakistan? The Muslim League did not want to live in a Hindu majority country. They wanted an Islamic state. They started slaughtering people on what they called the "direct action day". The Brits already wanted to leave the country at that point and the decision was in the hands of Indian leaders who eventually conceded to partition. The mistakes made by the Brits at that time was they were half foot out of the country and weren't clearly decisive. The scale of violence could have possibly been reduced. But the partition itself was inevitable and that was not because of the Brits. I think the brits divided the nation, left them to their mess whilst selling arms to both sides. That's a simplistic take of complex history. Did the Brits employ divide and rule tactics? Yes of course. Were they solely responsible for the divide between Hindus and Muslims. Not at all. The divide existed even before they came to India. The Brits added fuel to the fire. But partition itself wasn't their decision. " History is complex when the aggressor finds their actions hard to explain, and as you say the brits were the aggressor. I use that as an example of Israel actions now and those who choose to support them in their actions which to me looks like mass murder even if you see it differently please be assured I see this as revenge and mass murder If Israel were defending itself from a well armed and motivated force well then, but they are not their starving, little water no communication with the greater world, the right to reproduce taken away etc those who still believe that Hamas is a force to reckon with have very little imagination, or listen to those who support isreals actions without thought. lemmings for want of a word. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I haven't accused anyone of anything. My alternative to mass slaughtering civilians is to, well, not mass slaughter civilians. And I am asking you to think what happens if Israel stops. Hostages wouldn't have been retrieved. Hamas will laugh at Israel for being weak and attack them again. Is that what you want? If you don't want that, you need to tell how to retrieve the hostages and stop Hamas. Send in team of specialists, or negotiate, or avoid the situation in the first place that radicalised people to the point of doing such things. A ceasefire was negotiated. Who broke the ceasefire? You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation. They are happy to kill as many Palestinians as possible to destroy Israel and protect their own asses. All of which Israel has absolutely zero interest in. They went directly to mass slaughter of innocents, which makes them on a par with Hamas. Hamas went after civilians. Israel went after Hamas and because of the way Hamas(and pretty much all terrorist groups) operate, civilians are dying as collateral. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be doing the job. Maybe they should stop and try something else. "You act like Hamas are democratic peace loving organisation". I don't, this is just more horseshit you made up, and then got angry about. You said Israel should go and negotiate with them. That's the only alternative solution you gave. Nope If you had read about what was going on in the past few months, you would have known why it's impossible. So let me know a viable alternative way to destroy Hamas and retrieve the hostages. I have been waiting and asking for a long time. Mass slaughter of innocent civilians doesn't seem to be doing the trick either. Maybe they could try something else. What do you mean not working? Even by Hamas estimate last month, 6000 to 8000 of their "fighters" have been killed. I thought this was about getting hostages back? Anyway, you've won me over. I'm on board, yay for mass killings of innocent civilians. Getting hostages back and destroying Hamas. Given that Hamas aren't willing to negotiate, destroying them is the way to go. Unless you have a soft corner for Hamas, I don't understand why you wouldn't like that. The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon "Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless. I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
"The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above. " I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion." I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it. You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is. It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice. Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly. We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above.
"Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. " I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion. I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it. " Excellent, thank you, let's see where we get to. " You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is. " You've mis quoted me there. I don't think it's especially "virtuous" to not want civilians to be mass killed. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. " It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice. " Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. " Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly. " Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. " We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice." So to summarise, the answer to the question, and when you said "I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it." Is back to. 1. Mass slaughter civilians (definitely not working). 2. Someone on a swingers site has to give you the answer. (Even though people have suggested things). Nothing else is acceptable to you, to the point you want to argue with people who endlessly? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above.
I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion.
I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it.
You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is. It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice.
Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly.
We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice."Can't see the "multiple options" either. I've looked extensively. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above.
Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads.
I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion.
I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it.
Excellent, thank you, let's see where we get to.
You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is.
You've mis quoted me there.
I don't think it's especially "virtuous" to not want civilians to be mass killed.
The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation.
It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice.
Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc.
Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly.
Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages.
And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering.
We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice.
So to summarise, the answer to the question, and when you said "I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it." Is back to.
1. Mass slaughter civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers site has to give you the answer. (Even though people have suggested things).
Nothing else is acceptable to you, to the point you want to argue with people who endlessly?
"....endlessly makes typos. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above.
Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads.
I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion.
I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it.
Excellent, thank you, let's see where we get to.
You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is.
You've mis quoted me there.
I don't think it's especially "virtuous" to not want civilians to be mass killed.
The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation.
It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice.
Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc.
Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly.
Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages.
And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering.
We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice.
So to summarise, the answer to the question, and when you said "I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it." Is back to.
1. Mass slaughter civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers site has to give you the answer. (Even though people have suggested things).
Nothing else is acceptable to you, to the point you want to argue with people who endlessly?
....endlessly makes typos. "Endlessly fails to detail "multiple options" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. " There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. " The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. " You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. " Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. " This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. " Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. " In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The mass slaughter of civilians doesn't seem to be getting the hostages back. Another approach might be worth trying. Which other approach?
Any of the multiple approaches available.
Not really sure why you think the options are.
1. Mass slaughter of civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers forum has to solve the problem.
"Multiple approaches available"
I am all ears. Please don't keep us in suspense. Tell us soon
Multiple options have been mentioned to you across multiple threads by multiple people. I'm guessing that repeating them would be pointless.
The only option you gave was to "negotiate", something which was tried and didn't workout because Hamas broke the ceasefire. I don't know what "Multiple options" you are talking about. There isn't anything I could see above.
Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads.
I am curious why you get so wound up with people who are voicing opposition to the mass killings of civilians? Maybe if you wanted to explain, it might help get to some kind of conclusion.
I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it.
Excellent, thank you, let's see where we get to.
You are using generic virtuous statements like "You can't kill civilians" and intentionally avoiding any discussion about what it means in practice and what its outcome is.
You've mis quoted me there.
I don't think it's especially "virtuous" to not want civilians to be mass killed.
The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation.
It's like going to a doctor cutting off someone's limb because of an infection and telling "cutting off limb is wrong". It sounds virtuous. But it's a meaningless statement in practice.
Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc.
Civilians are getting killed because Hamas are intentionally hiding behind them. So if you don't want any civilians to be killed, it's implication is that Israel shouldn't go after Hamas at all. That's why I have been asking what is the alternative way to go after Hamas. If you don't like Hamas to be destroyed, at least tell that honestly.
Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages.
And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering.
We don't have to go around in circles, if you tell us clearly what Israel should do after they stop their offensive. Something that ensures that their hostages are back and Hamas are eradicated. Instead repeatedly parroting that "just don't kill civilians" doesn't really tell us what it means in practice.
So to summarise, the answer to the question, and when you said "I have made my point multiple times. Will do it one more time if you still don't get it." Is back to.
1. Mass slaughter civilians (definitely not working).
2. Someone on a swingers site has to give you the answer. (Even though people have suggested things).
Nothing else is acceptable to you, to the point you want to argue with people who endlessly?
....endlessly makes typos.
Endlessly fails to detail "multiple options""Aside from the details of the "multiple options". Yes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it." Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it." The IDF have an impossible task. Hamas have re-emerged in places that the IDF declared cleared. More dead hostages recovered and an endless war with no post war plans! Isreal is failing miserably on its objectives but you and netenyahu fail to see this is a dead end. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything?" Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. " I've addressed that. See above. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. " Sure " You've been told many times some options. " Nope. You didn't. If you did, share that post. It's not that hard. You are lying to a point it's laughable. The only option you suggested was to negotiate with Hamas, something which I refuted by pointing out that they just broke a ceasefire agreement. You never answered that. " All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. " Not really. Israel's justification for what they do is to destroy Hamas. So it's important for us to know what you think about their motivation in the first place. Do you agree that Hamas should be destroyed or not? If you want to deflect this question like the girl in the interview, that's fine too. " The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working" And I said it's working because Hamas themselves told 6000-8000 Hamas fighters were killed. Something which flew over your head as always. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. Sure You've been told many times some options. Nope. You didn't. If you did, share that post. It's not that hard. You are lying to a point it's laughable. The only option you suggested was to negotiate with Hamas, something which I refuted by pointing out that they just broke a ceasefire agreement. You never answered that. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. Not really. Israel's justification for what they do is to destroy Hamas. So it's important for us to know what you think about their motivation in the first place. Do you agree that Hamas should be destroyed or not? If you want to deflect this question like the girl in the interview, that's fine too. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working And I said it's working because Hamas themselves told 6000-8000 Hamas fighters were killed. Something which flew over your head as always. " I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. Sure You've been told many times some options. Nope. You didn't. If you did, share that post. It's not that hard. You are lying to a point it's laughable. The only option you suggested was to negotiate with Hamas, something which I refuted by pointing out that they just broke a ceasefire agreement. You never answered that. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. Not really. Israel's justification for what they do is to destroy Hamas. So it's important for us to know what you think about their motivation in the first place. Do you agree that Hamas should be destroyed or not? If you want to deflect this question like the girl in the interview, that's fine too. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working And I said it's working because Hamas themselves told 6000-8000 Hamas fighters were killed. Something which flew over your head as always. I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. " Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. Sure You've been told many times some options. Nope. You didn't. If you did, share that post. It's not that hard. You are lying to a point it's laughable. The only option you suggested was to negotiate with Hamas, something which I refuted by pointing out that they just broke a ceasefire agreement. You never answered that. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. Not really. Israel's justification for what they do is to destroy Hamas. So it's important for us to know what you think about their motivation in the first place. Do you agree that Hamas should be destroyed or not? If you want to deflect this question like the girl in the interview, that's fine too. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working And I said it's working because Hamas themselves told 6000-8000 Hamas fighters were killed. Something which flew over your head as always. I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives. "Go on then, what are the "real motives"? And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lmao.. That student didn't answer a single question that Suella asked. Suella asked her opinion on Hamas and whether Israel had the right to exist. The way she dodged it was so fun to watch. There are all signs that these pro-Palestine protestors are actually supportive of Hamas" ?? What signs are there that they support hamas?! FFS I'm genuinely interested to know It's nothing to do with hamas, it's about protesting against a country that employs starvation and collective punishment against others! Theres never an excuse for was Isreal is doing and for whatever reason. Can you tell me what civilised country in their right mind would collectively starve people to death? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives.
Go on then, what are the "real motives"?
And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait."Empathy was never a left wing trait. Left wingers are driven by envy and resentment. They hate successful people and successful societies. Equality/Compassion/Empathy are words they use to mask this envy and resentment. Both Dostoevsky and Nietzsche have the number of socialists in their books. Many blame left wingers for being anti-semitist in this matter. I disagree. They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel. Proof is in your attitude towards Hamas. If you really have empathy for Palestine, you would hate Hamas more than Israel because all Hamas had to do was to release hostages, get into negotiation table. They have been siphoning millions in Palestine aid fund to build their terror network instead of building infrastructure for the people. And yet.... Every one of you would deflect any question directed at you about your attitude towards Hamas. No one would open your mouth and tell that Hamas has to be destroyed. Reason? You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives.
Go on then, what are the "real motives"?
And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait.
Empathy was never a left wing trait. Left wingers are driven by envy and resentment. They hate successful people and successful societies. Equality/Compassion/Empathy are words they use to mask this envy and resentment. Both Dostoevsky and Nietzsche have the number of socialists in their books.
Many blame left wingers for being anti-semitist in this matter. I disagree. They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel.
Proof is in your attitude towards Hamas. If you really have empathy for Palestine, you would hate Hamas more than Israel because all Hamas had to do was to release hostages, get into negotiation table. They have been siphoning millions in Palestine aid fund to build their terror network instead of building infrastructure for the people.
And yet.... Every one of you would deflect any question directed at you about your attitude towards Hamas. No one would open your mouth and tell that Hamas has to be destroyed. Reason? You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel."Could you justify how an apartheid state, allows Jews with no connection to the region , apply for Israeli citizen status, while Arabs who were thrown out of the land now occupied by Jews cannot apply to return to their land Why is it also that checkpoints have queues for Israelis and Europeans and another queue for Arabs Why rules exist for Arabs that do not apply to israilis. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives.
Go on then, what are the "real motives"?
And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait.
Empathy was never a left wing trait. Left wingers are driven by envy and resentment. They hate successful people and successful societies.
"This is some of the maddest shit I've ever read. " Equality/Compassion/Empathy are words they use to mask this envy and resentment. Both Dostoevsky and Nietzsche have the number of socialists in their books. Many blame left wingers for being anti-semitist in this matter. I disagree. They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel. " Utter bollocks. " Proof is in your attitude towards Hamas. " I haven't expressed any opinions or attitudes towards Hamas. " If you really have empathy for Palestine, you would hate Hamas more than Israel because all Hamas had to do was to release hostages, get into negotiation table. They have been siphoning millions in Palestine aid fund to build their terror network instead of building infrastructure for the people. And yet.... Every one of you would deflect any question directed at you about your attitude towards Hamas. No one would open your mouth and tell that Hamas has to be destroyed. Reason? You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel." Well, at least you've shown your true colours. This is the craziest shit I've read anywhere for a long long time. I'll leave you to it from now on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above." Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives.
Go on then, what are the "real motives"?
And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait.
Empathy was never a left wing trait. Left wingers are driven by envy and resentment. They hate successful people and successful societies. Equality/Compassion/Empathy are words they use to mask this envy and resentment. Both Dostoevsky and Nietzsche have the number of socialists in their books.
Many blame left wingers for being anti-semitist in this matter. I disagree. They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel.
Proof is in your attitude towards Hamas. If you really have empathy for Palestine, you would hate Hamas more than Israel because all Hamas had to do was to release hostages, get into negotiation table. They have been siphoning millions in Palestine aid fund to build their terror network instead of building infrastructure for the people.
And yet.... Every one of you would deflect any question directed at you about your attitude towards Hamas. No one would open your mouth and tell that Hamas has to be destroyed. Reason? You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel.
Could you justify how an apartheid state, allows Jews with no connection to the region , apply for Israeli citizen status, while Arabs who were thrown out of the land now occupied by Jews cannot apply to return to their land
Why is it also that checkpoints have queues for Israelis and Europeans and another queue for Arabs
Why rules exist for Arabs that do not apply to israilis.
"Would you apply the same rule to judge the other Islamic countries surrounding Israel and hate them too? Or do you apply different standards to different countries? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I genuinely don't understand where you're coming from, your perspective is a complete mystery to me. And I understand my perspective is a complete mystery to you. So let's move on. Yeah of course
Your perspective or most other left wing people's perspective on this issue and most other issues is not a mystery to me. It's just fun watching people like you doing mental/verbal gymnastics to hide your real motives.
Go on then, what are the "real motives"?
And just because I oppose the mass slaughter of civilians, doesn't mean I'm "left wing". Plenty of people from across the political spectrum are appalled at what's happening in Palestine. Empathy isn't an inherently left wing trait.
Empathy was never a left wing trait. Left wingers are driven by envy and resentment. They hate successful people and successful societies.
This is some of the maddest shit I've ever read.
Equality/Compassion/Empathy are words they use to mask this envy and resentment. Both Dostoevsky and Nietzsche have the number of socialists in their books.
Many blame left wingers for being anti-semitist in this matter. I disagree. They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel.
Utter bollocks.
Proof is in your attitude towards Hamas.
I haven't expressed any opinions or attitudes towards Hamas.
If you really have empathy for Palestine, you would hate Hamas more than Israel because all Hamas had to do was to release hostages, get into negotiation table. They have been siphoning millions in Palestine aid fund to build their terror network instead of building infrastructure for the people.
And yet.... Every one of you would deflect any question directed at you about your attitude towards Hamas. No one would open your mouth and tell that Hamas has to be destroyed. Reason? You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel.
Well, at least you've shown your true colours.
This is the craziest shit I've read anywhere for a long long time. I'll leave you to it from now on."If you have any other reason why lefties against Israel never speak against Hamas, I am all ears. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. " I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated."" Here you are again telling us there are many options but not really telling is what they are | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated."" Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. " People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. " They won't give any alternate options. They wouldn't say anything about Hamas. They just want Israel to stop attacking so that they can get fucked by Hamas. They just hate Israel. Their compassion for Palestinians is just a veil to hide this hatred. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has." Let's face it, you're doing a Michael Howard and refusing to answer the question because you're in a bind and don't know how to get out of it. If that's too far back for you, try Fiona Lali. Multiple people here seem to be asking you the "wrong question". If I had numerous options that would work to solve a situation as desperately grave as this, I'd be repeating them incessantly. How strange that you won't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Let's face it, you're doing a Michael Howard and refusing to answer the question because you're in a bind and don't know how to get out of it. If that's too far back for you, try Fiona Lali. Multiple people here seem to be asking you the "wrong question". If I had numerous options that would work to solve a situation as desperately grave as this, I'd be repeating them incessantly. How strange that you won't. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t hate Israel. I just don’t like shit hole apartheid countries "There are lot of countries which have death penalty for homosexuality, a trait people are born with. Do you don't like those shithole countries to the same extent you don't like Israel? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"(Just messing, I have no socials..or virtues) " I hope you at least have some vices. Nihilism is a dangerous path. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has." Maybe to resolve this issue about options being already answered you just say out of all the options mentioned to date which you think stands the best chance of bringing this very sad situation to an end that is tolerable for all sides. Just your personal opinion, not expecting you to solve the situation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Let's face it, you're doing a Michael Howard and refusing to answer the question because you're in a bind and don't know how to get out of it. If that's too far back for you, try Fiona Lali. Multiple people here seem to be asking you the "wrong question". If I had numerous options that would work to solve a situation as desperately grave as this, I'd be repeating them incessantly. How strange that you won't. "A well regarded poster from Milton Keynes would like your options. We're all still waiting..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Let's face it, you're doing a Michael Howard and refusing to answer the question because you're in a bind and don't know how to get out of it. If that's too far back for you, try Fiona Lali. Multiple people here seem to be asking you the "wrong question". If I had numerous options that would work to solve a situation as desperately grave as this, I'd be repeating them incessantly. How strange that you won't.
A well regarded poster from Milton Keynes would like your options.
We're all still waiting..... " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Maybe to resolve this issue about options being already answered you just say out of all the options mentioned to date which you think stands the best chance of bringing this very sad situation to an end that is tolerable for all sides. Just your personal opinion, not expecting you to solve the situation. " Seems pointless. Has been done many times (even in this thread), and they just ignore it and say "give me the options". Have a read up in the thread on the insane ranting about "left wingers", you'll see why it's pointless. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Have to say, nothing beats the entertainment of watching lefties doing gymnastics to try and hide their intentions even after they are crystal clear to everyone. This thread wasn fun. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"
Have to say, nothing beats the entertainment of watching lefties doing gymnastics to try and hide their intentions even after they are crystal clear to everyone. This thread wasn fun."It's rare, but moreover troubling, that someone would double-down so persistently, when multiple other profiles are saying the same thing : where are your options? That doesn't mean there isn't an element of schadenfreude in it though! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"
Have to say, nothing beats the entertainment of watching lefties doing gymnastics to try and hide their intentions even after they are crystal clear to everyone. This thread wasn fun.
It's rare, but moreover troubling, that someone would double-down so persistently, when multiple other profiles are saying the same thing : where are your options?
That doesn't mean there isn't an element of schadenfreude in it though! "You have read the insane ramblings about "left wingers" from the person you're lining your views up with? Meanwhile just keep repeating the same phrase "what are the options" no matter how many times options have been presented. Regardless of the core argument you're making which is that mass slaughter of civilians is the only option. Which is a silly argument. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"
Have to say, nothing beats the entertainment of watching lefties doing gymnastics to try and hide their intentions even after they are crystal clear to everyone. This thread wasn fun.
It's rare, but moreover troubling, that someone would double-down so persistently, when multiple other profiles are saying the same thing : where are your options?
That doesn't mean there isn't an element of schadenfreude in it though!
You have read the insane ramblings about "left wingers" from the person you're lining your views up with?
Meanwhile just keep repeating the same phrase "what are the options" no matter how many times options have been presented. Regardless of the core argument you're making which is that mass slaughter of civilians is the only option. Which is a silly argument. "What you called "insane ramblings" was basically inspired from great philosphers like Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. Lining up with their views isn't particularly a bad thing. I have also backed up my arguments with facts from this very thread. You saying "I gave you the options already" isn't going to change it. Those replies just prove my point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"
Have to say, nothing beats the entertainment of watching lefties doing gymnastics to try and hide their intentions even after they are crystal clear to everyone. This thread wasn fun.
It's rare, but moreover troubling, that someone would double-down so persistently, when multiple other profiles are saying the same thing : where are your options?
That doesn't mean there isn't an element of schadenfreude in it though!
You have read the insane ramblings about "left wingers" from the person you're lining your views up with?
Meanwhile just keep repeating the same phrase "what are the options" no matter how many times options have been presented. Regardless of the core argument you're making which is that mass slaughter of civilians is the only option. Which is a silly argument.
What you called "insane ramblings" was basically inspired from great philosphers like Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. Lining up with their views isn't particularly a bad thing. I have also backed up my arguments with facts from this very thread. You saying "I gave you the options already" isn't going to change it. Those replies just prove my point."Maybe you need to re-read your post. It was insane sounding. Here's an example. "You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel." Here's another. "They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region." And "Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel." There's no point in any kind of debate if you're going to have and post thoughts like these. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel. " True. The fact that you wouldn't open your mouth about Hamas proves it. The fact that you want Israel to go back without providing them an alternative to take on Hamas proves that because the consequence of that would be Hamas attacking Israel again. " They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. " True again " Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel. " That's true too. It's pretty much what the philosphers I mentioned I said too - Socialists aren't driven by equality or justice but by envy and hatred. I didn't fully believe it when I read their books. But the more I talk with socialists, the more I realise how true their writings were. Your replies and some spicy DMs I received just proved their points. - Had to repost a multiple times due to the damn quotes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't pity about Palestinians. You just hate Israel. True. The fact that you wouldn't open your mouth about Hamas proves it. " I've condemned the actions of Hamas many times on this forum. Even if I hadn't, it wouldn't confirm your bizarre assumptions about left wing people. " The fact that you want Israel to go back without providing them an alternative to take on Hamas proves that because the consequence of that would be Hamas attacking Israel again. " I have. And again, it's not my job to advise Israel what to do. " They hate Israel simply because they are successful in a shithole of a region. True again " Utter nonsensical bollocks. It's not a "shit hole of a region", it's culturally and historically rich. And I don't know by what measures you think Israel are successful. " Yours or any other left winger's opinion in this matter isn't driven by empathy for Palestinians but hatred for Israel. That's true too. It's pretty much what the philosphers I mentioned I said too - Socialists aren't driven by equality or justice but by envy and hatred. I didn't fully believe it when I read their books. But the more I talk with socialists, the more I realise how true their writings were. Your replies and some spicy DMs I received just proved their points. " This is simply confused nonsense. I have no idea why you're confusing left wingers with socialists with people opposed to the mass killings or civilians. Or why you have such bizarre views of these people. " - Had to repost a multiple times due to the damn quotes" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I've condemned the actions of Hamas many times on this forum. Even if I hadn't, it wouldn't confirm your bizarre assumptions about left wing people. " Oh. I didn't see a single reply above to the question. So you agree they are terrorists? " I have. And again, it's not my job to advise Israel what to do. " You haven't, unless you are leaving in a different universe, because multiple people pointed out to you. If you want Israel go back without an alternative to handle Hamas, you are asking Israel to self destruct because that's the outcome of what you are asking for. " Utter nonsensical bollocks. It's not a "shit hole of a region", it's culturally and historically rich. And I don't know by what measures you think Israel are successful. " The measurement? The number of people who want to run away to other countries. " This is simply confused nonsense. I have no idea why you're confusing left wingers with socialists with people opposed to the mass killings or civilians. Or why you have such bizarre views of these people. " How are left wingers different from socialists? And my point was about the massive intersection of left wingers and the ones who are against Israel. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I've condemned the actions of Hamas many times on this forum. Even if I hadn't, it wouldn't confirm your bizarre assumptions about left wing people. Oh. I didn't see a single reply above to the question. So you agree they are terrorists? I have. And again, it's not my job to advise Israel what to do. You haven't, unless you are leaving in a different universe, because multiple people pointed out to you. If you want Israel go back without an alternative to handle Hamas, you are asking Israel to self destruct because that's the outcome of what you are asking for. Utter nonsensical bollocks. It's not a "shit hole of a region", it's culturally and historically rich. And I don't know by what measures you think Israel are successful. The measurement? The number of people who want to run away to other countries. This is simply confused nonsense. I have no idea why you're confusing left wingers with socialists with people opposed to the mass killings or civilians. Or why you have such bizarre views of these people. How are left wingers different from socialists? And my point was about the massive intersection of left wingers and the ones who are against Israel. " How about we give this a break? If the things you said about people speaking out about the situation in Palestine, left wingers and Socialists is a true reflection of the things you believe. We're so far apart, and we're never going to reach any kind of conclusion, on anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP: I have yet to see any protesting student provide a succinct argument to support their camp outs. Plenty of quotes that seem to be travelling around them all like a virus, but nothing past that. Demands they make on their universities are also spurious, reminds of the first wave who boycotted McDonald’s, I do wonder why it took this phase of protestors so long to get their shit together…. Braverman, didn’t get her arse handed to her, she couldn’t communicate effectively with a person who can only shout predetermined quotes, it goes nowhere and she knew it. " I thought the student that went on GB news was articulate, and seemed to leave braverman speechless. The only other clip I saw was the GB news one where they all refused to speak to her. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP: I have yet to see any protesting student provide a succinct argument to support their camp outs. Plenty of quotes that seem to be travelling around them all like a virus, but nothing past that. Demands they make on their universities are also spurious, reminds of the first wave who boycotted McDonald’s, I do wonder why it took this phase of protestors so long to get their shit together…. Braverman, didn’t get her arse handed to her, she couldn’t communicate effectively with a person who can only shout predetermined quotes, it goes nowhere and she knew it. I thought the student that went on GB news was articulate, and seemed to leave braverman speechless. The only other clip I saw was the GB news one where they all refused to speak to her." She didn’t answer a question that she was asked, she was on a script and stuck to it. That approach tends to alienate and do more damage than good. In my opinion the protestors are dwindling in numbers, the more extremist views and actions are now taking front and centre positions, pushing out any type of meaningful debate and as mentioned weakening the protesters positions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP: I have yet to see any protesting student provide a succinct argument to support their camp outs. Plenty of quotes that seem to be travelling around them all like a virus, but nothing past that. Demands they make on their universities are also spurious, reminds of the first wave who boycotted McDonald’s, I do wonder why it took this phase of protestors so long to get their shit together…. Braverman, didn’t get her arse handed to her, she couldn’t communicate effectively with a person who can only shout predetermined quotes, it goes nowhere and she knew it. I thought the student that went on GB news was articulate, and seemed to leave braverman speechless. The only other clip I saw was the GB news one where they all refused to speak to her. She didn’t answer a question that she was asked, she was on a script and stuck to it." She explained her approach, and why she didn't answer the question, I thought she did well. " That approach tends to alienate and do more damage than good. " Probably true for GBNews. But their audience are going to be against her from the go anyway, so she's not going to be winning anyone over. " In my opinion the protestors are dwindling in numbers, the more extremist views and actions are now taking front and centre positions, pushing out any type of meaningful debate and as mentioned weakening the protesters positions." Possibly true. But the student in question didn't seem to be extreme at all. Quite calm and articulate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Maybe to resolve this issue about options being already answered you just say out of all the options mentioned to date which you think stands the best chance of bringing this very sad situation to an end that is tolerable for all sides. Just your personal opinion, not expecting you to solve the situation. Seems pointless. Has been done many times (even in this thread), and they just ignore it and say "give me the options". Have a read up in the thread on the insane ranting about "left wingers", you'll see why it's pointless." Oh well never mind. I thought it would be an easy way to prove your point and just copy and paste the option you personally felt had the best chance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP: I have yet to see any protesting student provide a succinct argument to support their camp outs. Plenty of quotes that seem to be travelling around them all like a virus, but nothing past that. Demands they make on their universities are also spurious, reminds of the first wave who boycotted McDonald’s, I do wonder why it took this phase of protestors so long to get their shit together…. Braverman, didn’t get her arse handed to her, she couldn’t communicate effectively with a person who can only shout predetermined quotes, it goes nowhere and she knew it. I thought the student that went on GB news was articulate, and seemed to leave braverman speechless. The only other clip I saw was the GB news one where they all refused to speak to her. She didn’t answer a question that she was asked, she was on a script and stuck to it. She explained her approach, and why she didn't answer the question, I thought she did well. That approach tends to alienate and do more damage than good. Probably true for GBNews. But their audience are going to be against her from the go anyway, so she's not going to be winning anyone over. In my opinion the protestors are dwindling in numbers, the more extremist views and actions are now taking front and centre positions, pushing out any type of meaningful debate and as mentioned weakening the protesters positions. Possibly true. But the student in question didn't seem to be extreme at all. Quite calm and articulate." She was rehearsed and came over as disingenuous. I’ve no axe to grind, but the students here in the UK are looking like copycats to their US peers, again it drives mistrust, and will water down future protest support little by little. In my opinion | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I've condemned the actions of Hamas many times on this forum. Even if I hadn't, it wouldn't confirm your bizarre assumptions about left wing people. Oh. I didn't see a single reply above to the question. So you agree they are terrorists? I have. And again, it's not my job to advise Israel what to do. You haven't, unless you are leaving in a different universe, because multiple people pointed out to you. If you want Israel go back without an alternative to handle Hamas, you are asking Israel to self destruct because that's the outcome of what you are asking for. Utter nonsensical bollocks. It's not a "shit hole of a region", it's culturally and historically rich. And I don't know by what measures you think Israel are successful. The measurement? The number of people who want to run away to other countries. This is simply confused nonsense. I have no idea why you're confusing left wingers with socialists with people opposed to the mass killings or civilians. Or why you have such bizarre views of these people. How are left wingers different from socialists? And my point was about the massive intersection of left wingers and the ones who are against Israel. How about we give this a break? If the things you said about people speaking out about the situation in Palestine, left wingers and Socialists is a true reflection of the things you believe. We're so far apart, and we're never going to reach any kind of conclusion, on anything. " Sure, let's call it a disagreement. But if you criticize my views, I will have to call you out on that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP: I have yet to see any protesting student provide a succinct argument to support their camp outs. Plenty of quotes that seem to be travelling around them all like a virus, but nothing past that. Demands they make on their universities are also spurious, reminds of the first wave who boycotted McDonald’s, I do wonder why it took this phase of protestors so long to get their shit together…. Braverman, didn’t get her arse handed to her, she couldn’t communicate effectively with a person who can only shout predetermined quotes, it goes nowhere and she knew it. I thought the student that went on GB news was articulate, and seemed to leave braverman speechless. The only other clip I saw was the GB news one where they all refused to speak to her. She didn’t answer a question that she was asked, she was on a script and stuck to it. She explained her approach, and why she didn't answer the question, I thought she did well. That approach tends to alienate and do more damage than good. Probably true for GBNews. But their audience are going to be against her from the go anyway, so she's not going to be winning anyone over. In my opinion the protestors are dwindling in numbers, the more extremist views and actions are now taking front and centre positions, pushing out any type of meaningful debate and as mentioned weakening the protesters positions. Possibly true. But the student in question didn't seem to be extreme at all. Quite calm and articulate. She was rehearsed and came over as disingenuous. I’ve no axe to grind, but the students here in the UK are looking like copycats to their US peers, again it drives mistrust, and will water down future protest support little by little. In my opinion " She didn't answer the two most important questions. Her views on Hamas and whether Israel has a right to exist as a country. I don't know how any debate could be had on this matter without hearing her opinions on these topics. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Nope, plus as mentioned it was from multiple people across multiple threads. There isn't any. If there is one, point out exactly where it is. You have been writing paragraphs without telling what or where it is. At this point, you are just lying. The outcome of not mass killing civilians, would be better than the current plan and situation. You need to think about what this outcome will result in practice. The hostages will never come back. Hamas will survive and go back to kill more Israelis. Unless you believe, it's better for Israelis to die than Palestinians, you should explain how this is a better outcome. Erm, this is a terrible analogy. This would only work is Palestinian civilians were asking the IDF to bomb them, cut off food and water etc. This is the perfect analogy. Someone is doing something because he doesn't have a choice. If you are asking him to not do it, you need to tell them an alternative which I have asked numerous times and still haven't heard. Earlier on it was all about rescuing the hostages. And not sure why you're trying to impose views on me. Or what this has got to do with the question you said you were answering. In all my posts, I mentioned both retrieving hostages and destroying Hamas. If you think Hamas shouldn't be destroyed, it's time to come clean of it. Let's summarise my points as basically as possible. You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated. All the points you made up about what I personally believe are not related to the discussion, and are mostly bullshit. The point we seem to disagree on is very simple. You seem to think Israel have no choice but to bomb and starve civilians. Even though it's not working, and that they've tried nothing else. I think that's a silly point of view, and that they should try something else. Did I miss anything? Yes, glaringly. You are unable to articulate what the 'something else' is. I've addressed that. See above. Saw above, not addressed. Unsure why you think you have. You may be confused. I'll copy and paste it for you. "You've been told many times some options. You just keep accusing people of not giving options, so seems pointless reiterating them, for you just just pretend were never iterated." Multiple profiles cannot see the options you claim to have iterated. Please detail them again. Thank you. People have even listed options in this thread. And you're still pretending that they haven't. Repeating them again and again and again isn't going to change anything, you'll presumably still claim no one has. Maybe to resolve this issue about options being already answered you just say out of all the options mentioned to date which you think stands the best chance of bringing this very sad situation to an end that is tolerable for all sides. Just your personal opinion, not expecting you to solve the situation. Seems pointless. Has been done many times (even in this thread), and they just ignore it and say "give me the options". Have a read up in the thread on the insane ranting about "left wingers", you'll see why it's pointless. Oh well never mind. I thought it would be an easy way to prove your point and just copy and paste the option you personally felt had the best chance. " Copy and paste would only work if there's an option to copy in the first place! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hilarious in one way .. I loved the bits where slimy suella glances over to Dan Wooten (another right winger NES caster) in desperation for help as she's out in her place.. and that's after a disaster by trying to goad students at a demo camp, in a cheap effort to defame the student action and sell her Zionist, racist , apartheid crap. Dan Wooten from GB news was helping her and failed too. Good example of a busted cover up by suella Braverman who tries to justify fencing in a group of people into a massive prison camp (Gaza) and exterminate people using starvation. Thirst, and military force against civilians.. and live streamed too Excellent viewing GB News! I hope rishie Sunak is next To get roasted live on TV with that student. ". A student? Get real. Dan Wooton and Suella Bravernan have a long track record of success. They have proved themselves time and time again. Why would anyone be bothered about what a student has to say. ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Disturbing videos emerging of IDF soldier(terrorist) assaulting group of young girls and hurling Islamophobic abuse at a Muslim women after he pulled the hijab off one of them. This incident reportedly took place (Not in Gaza) but in London at Whitechapel Station. "Just watched it and not surprised at all. He is just showing off what he’s learned from the IDF terrorists training camps  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Disturbing videos emerging of IDF soldier(terrorist) assaulting group of young girls and hurling Islamophobic abuse at a Muslim women after he pulled the hijab off one of them. This incident reportedly took place (Not in Gaza) but in London at Whitechapel Station.
Just watched it and not surprised at all. He is just showing off what he’s learned from the IDF terrorists training camps "As opposed to the peace loving ones who drew Swastikas in Oxford campus or the ones who went in a convoy in London on a loudspeaker shouting "Fuck the jews. R*pe their daughters"? These pro-Palestine protestors are only compassionate about Palestinians right? It has nothing to do with hatred right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? " Apparently "all reasonable people" want police to start restricting the freedom to protest. Specifically those who object to the mass slaughter of Palestinians. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? " Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? " Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined?" Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's an overall feeling based on far too many things to list here, only for someone to individually tear apart. " Just one example would do. " Look, no nation is perfect. Everywhere you go, there will be idiots and things governments could be doing better. But modern Britain is making a fairly good stab at being incredible. At the very least, it’s clearly not a nation driven to destruction by Brexit, evil Tory elites or incoming foreigners. " There's plenty right, and plenty wrong. Some are working hard to make the country work only for those richest at the very top. From your examples, it's not foreigners. " The sooner people stop moaning about the destruction of Great Britain and realise that it’s still pretty great, the better. " Should people not express dissent, and strive for the country to be the best it can be instead of just accepting the negatives? " If people don't like it, they're pretty much free to go to where they think it's better. " We used to be free to go to other EU countries. But people voted to lose that ability. " Do you not like it here? " It's good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be?" Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did. "I'm interested in your view on this question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did.
I'm interested in your view on this question."What question? He said that the UK is the best country in the world. I asked for some info and an example. I'm not making any claims here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did.
I'm interested in your view on this question.
What question?
He said that the UK is the best country in the world. I asked for some info and an example.
I'm not making any claims here. "My question referring to whether you had any examples of the UK being best in the world at. You might not, there again you might. I'm interested in your thoughts, I think it you asked a great question | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did.
I'm interested in your view on this question.
What question?
He said that the UK is the best country in the world. I asked for some info and an example.
I'm not making any claims here.
My question referring to whether you had any examples of the UK being best in the world at.
You might not, there again you might. I'm interested in your thoughts, I think it you asked a great question "I have only lived in four different countries. So I am not qualified to answer which categories the UK is the best in the world at. Just to clarify one more time. You're not asking the person who made the claim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? " Oh gosh Anonymous Ollie you are now going back over 35 years comparing today's police resources with those in the 1980s! You seem to live in the distant past. I didn't call for tougher policing you did! I attended a Support Palestine March back in October. Far from being a hate march as claimed by Braverman it was family oreintated, good natured and friendly. No different from the other marches I have attended. Please don't make false claims about me from your anonymous little word - thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did.
I'm interested in your view on this question.
What question?
He said that the UK is the best country in the world. I asked for some info and an example.
I'm not making any claims here.
My question referring to whether you had any examples of the UK being best in the world at.
You might not, there again you might. I'm interested in your thoughts, I think it you asked a great question
I have only lived in four different countries. So I am not qualified to answer which categories the UK is the best in the world at.
Just to clarify one more time. You're not asking the person who made the claim. "You're therefore much better qualified than me, who's only ever lived in one country. I've given my answer, it's a combination of things that, when taken together with what I see, hear and read about other countries in the world, leads me to be happy to have been born here and continue to live here. Which 4 countries did you live in out of interest and rating the UK "good" is great to hear, but what was your rating of the other 3 countries? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Oh gosh Anonymous Ollie you are now going back over 35 years comparing today's police resources with those in the 1980s! You seem to live in the distant past. I didn't call for tougher policing you did! I attended a Support Palestine March back in October. Far from being a hate march as claimed by Braverman it was family oreintated, good natured and friendly. No different from the other marches I have attended. Please don't make false claims about me from your anonymous little word - thank you." So "orientated" - what does this even mean? 2011 is only 13 years ago? How is that living in the "distant past" lol? It was a time of austerity, so what evidence have you got that today's police resources couldn't cope? Yes, the policing of some elements needs to be tougher. Just because you managed to get to one of these marches in October, doesn't mean you witnessed everything, everywhere that day. You make them sound like wonderful fun-filled family get-togethers, but you must have missed the women sporting stickers glorifying anti-Semitic terrorists, or the men shouting Arabic war slogans about the murder of Jews, or the Islamists chanting ‘Allahu Akbar’. Do you not go on You Tube? As for "please don't make false claims about me from your anonymous little word", what secret word are you referring to? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas." -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now?" Simplistic approach is comparing IRA to Hamas. There are so many differences, one of the main ones being their mission. IRA's goals were about Ireland's governance, something that can be negotiated. Hamas goal on the other hand is elimination of Israel. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""Why so damned soft" asks the anonymous poster afraid to reveal their profile. In the UK, Parliament legislates and our Police enforce. We police by consensus not by force because that's what people want, and the police haven't got the numbers or equipment to handle riots. Braverman, despite being Home Secretary, didn't understand this. Even Sunak joined her and tried to get the Met to take a different approach. Rowley saw then both off easily. Why don't you go and live in Russia if you want to benefit from "tough policing"? Speak to Fab Admin if you want them to explain or abolish Privacy Settings or you want to give them Feedback. It generally has nothing to do with people being "afraid to reveal their profile" and more to do with not presently looking for a meet. "Enforce" is not happening in some cases and in relation to some groups. Even-handed policing is all that is needed to restore confidence. That means getting tougher in some cases. I'm not talking about "tough policing", the likes of which you may be thinking of in Russia or Georgia. We police by consent, not "consensus". The police have got the numbers and equipment to handle riots. We've seen it in the past. Brixton and Toxteth riots, Poll Tax riot, Broadwater Farm riot, May Day 2001 riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors, the 2011 riots following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham to name but a few. But most of us don't want riots and what is it then about the pro-Palestinian protestors that you think a riot might break out? Braverman and Sunak were right to seek a tougher, more even-handed approach. Still, the UK is the best country in the world. Lucky to be born here, to be living here and will die here. If that's OK with you? Do you have an example of what the UK is best in the world at? Is it across the board, every category that the UK is best, or just in an overall tally of all aspects combined? Do you have any examples? Or is the UK simply not a good place to be? Why are you asking me to give examples of what the other chap thinks the UK is best at? Maybe ask him. Like I did.
I'm interested in your view on this question.
What question?
He said that the UK is the best country in the world. I asked for some info and an example.
I'm not making any claims here.
My question referring to whether you had any examples of the UK being best in the world at.
You might not, there again you might. I'm interested in your thoughts, I think it you asked a great question
I have only lived in four different countries. So I am not qualified to answer which categories the UK is the best in the world at.
Just to clarify one more time. You're not asking the person who made the claim.
You're therefore much better qualified than me, who's only ever lived in one country. I've given my answer, it's a combination of things that, when taken together with what I see, hear and read about other countries in the world, leads me to be happy to have been born here and continue to live here.
"Any examples of what you've read about other countries that makes you say the UK is the best country in the world. There must be something that you can point at that the UK is best at, otherwise it'd a fairly empty statement. " Which 4 countries did you live in out of interest and rating the UK "good" is great to hear, but what was your rating of the other 3 countries? " The other three countries I would also rate as good. Two others within the EU and one in North America. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you think Israel has no choice but to mass slaughter innocent civilians, then not sure there's any point in any conversation. Israel's goal is not mass slaughtering civilians. They are going after Hamas and civilians are being collateral damage. You accused us all that we are "pretending" that Israel doesn't have a choice. So instead of deflecting, please let us know what the other choices are. Why is this down to me to solve? If I personally can't do this, does that justify the mass slaughter? You told other choices exist. That's why I am asking you what the other choices are. If you don't know any, why do you go around telling us that Israel has other choices? That argument is easily flipped! "Hamas are forced to kill civilians whilst liberating the country taken from them " The opportunity for peace have been pissed away by Isreal. The current Israeli attitude is to bludgeon a group of people into submission through fencing people in an brutalising them and it'll never ever work! Distinguishing hamas from ordinary palisitinians and treating them with sympathy and respect would be a really good start... Especially for Isreal! Turning Isreal away from being a racist aphartied country would be a really good start too, Which opportunity for peace was pissed away by Israel? Who broke the last ceasefire? Do you think it's that easy to distinguish Hamas from ordinary civilians? I am not sure if people like you who suggest that Israel should just stop has actually thought this through. Hamas kills Israel people and takes away hostages. Israel tries to save the hostages and destroy Hamas but Hamas has tactically hidden themselves among civilians. Now if you force Israel's hands to stop and go back, Hamas would take the opportunity with a great smile and do the exact same attack again. The cycle will continue. In fact, Hamas knows that there will be many useful idiots for them in the west who try to force Israel's hands. Israel cannot show weakness when it's surrounded by enemies. If they do, that will be the death sentence for them. That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now? Simplistic approach is comparing IRA to Hamas. There are so many differences, one of the main ones being their mission. IRA's goals were about Ireland's governance, something that can be negotiated. Hamas goal on the other hand is elimination of Israel." ---------------------- You're missing my point, the scorching of Irish soil, rather than seeking a diplomatic solution would have eradicated the IRA wouldn't it? Incidentally regarding your final point, isn't it obvious the Israeli goal is the eradication of Palestine? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now? Simplistic approach is comparing IRA to Hamas. There are so many differences, one of the main ones being their mission. IRA's goals were about Ireland's governance, something that can be negotiated. Hamas goal on the other hand is elimination of Israel. ---------------------- You're missing my point, the scorching of Irish soil, rather than seeking a diplomatic solution would have eradicated the IRA wouldn't it? Incidentally regarding your final point, isn't it obvious the Israeli goal is the eradication of Palestine?" Britain had an alternative at that point which is negotiation. That's because IRA's goal was only about the politics of Ireland. But Hamas's goal is to destroy Israel at all costs and they are religiously driven. How do you negotiate with them? Just let them kill half of Israeli people? If Israel's goal is eradication of Palestine, they would have done it long back. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now? Simplistic approach is comparing IRA to Hamas. There are so many differences, one of the main ones being their mission. IRA's goals were about Ireland's governance, something that can be negotiated. Hamas goal on the other hand is elimination of Israel. ---------------------- You're missing my point, the scorching of Irish soil, rather than seeking a diplomatic solution would have eradicated the IRA wouldn't it? Incidentally regarding your final point, isn't it obvious the Israeli goal is the eradication of Palestine? Britain had an alternative at that point which is negotiation. That's because IRA's goal was only about the politics of Ireland. But Hamas's goal is to destroy Israel at all costs and they are religiously driven. How do you negotiate with them? Just let them kill half of Israeli people? If Israel's goal is eradication of Palestine, they would have done it long back." --------------------------- You continue to conflate Hamas with Palestinian people generally, just as associating the IRA with all Irish people is equally as erroneous. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's why I am asking the geniuses who want Israel to stop attacking to also provide alternate solutions to retrieve the hostages and destroy Hamas. -------------------------- Extending your simplistic approach, it's surprising the British government didn't carpet bomb Ireland in order to resolve the historic conflict between us and Republican terrorist groups, do you think that would have fixed the problem and secured the relative peace we have now? Simplistic approach is comparing IRA to Hamas. There are so many differences, one of the main ones being their mission. IRA's goals were about Ireland's governance, something that can be negotiated. Hamas goal on the other hand is elimination of Israel. ---------------------- You're missing my point, the scorching of Irish soil, rather than seeking a diplomatic solution would have eradicated the IRA wouldn't it? Incidentally regarding your final point, isn't it obvious the Israeli goal is the eradication of Palestine? Britain had an alternative at that point which is negotiation. That's because IRA's goal was only about the politics of Ireland. But Hamas's goal is to destroy Israel at all costs and they are religiously driven. How do you negotiate with them? Just let them kill half of Israeli people? If Israel's goal is eradication of Palestine, they would have done it long back. --------------------------- You continue to conflate Hamas with Palestinian people generally, just as associating the IRA with all Irish people is equally as erroneous. " Where did I conflate Hamas with all Palestinians? I was comparing IRA with Hamas. Both groups had different goals, one wanting to achieve some political goals while the other wanted to destroy Israel totally. If IRA's goal was to destroy Britain and wipe all the people off instead of just to fight over of control over Ireland, we have a fair comparison. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed "This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel. Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th. That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war. "lol  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
lol "Oh dear they are blaming rogue soldiers now. “The IDF lost control over the units, especially reserve units, months ago. In Gaza, in the West Bank and in bases in Israel, soldiers record themselves destroying Palestinian property and civilian infrastructure. Blowing up homes without permission and spreading political messages identified with the far right. What is photographed and distributed is only the tip of the iceberg. The vast majority of offenses are committed beyond the range of cameras, and in the vast majority of these cases, the army responds weakly if at all. Some of the incidents are serving ICJ prosecutors as proof of the allegations against Israel.” Haaretz This isn’t a war, this is a genocide, holocaust against innocent unarmed civilians, women and children. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There are those pro Israel folks who are just genocide enablers. Zionism and White Supremacy go together. The people protesting are doing the right thing. " Some of the protestors are doing the right thing, others are not and are antisemitic and /or supportive of Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation here in the UK. Those who are against antisemitism are not "genocide enablers" "Zionism and White Supremacy" appear to me to be strange bedfellows. It's only 80 years after Jews were murdered en masse specifically for being non-white and non-Aryan. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You continue to conflate Hamas with Palestinian people generally, just as associating the IRA with all Irish people is equally as erroneous. Where did I conflate Hamas with all Palestinians? I was comparing IRA with Hamas. Both groups had different goals, one wanting to achieve some political goals while the other wanted to destroy Israel totally. If IRA's goal was to destroy Britain and wipe all the people off instead of just to fight over of control over Ireland, we have a fair comparison. " The IRA that I recall murdered a leading member of the British royal family and very nearly wiped out most of the British Goverment. Therefore I'm not convinced by your view the two aren't comparable. And after decades of supression in NI it looks as if the nationists have won the political argument, even if they didn't win the war. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war. "This is not a war. When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide. Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries. Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy. Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble. Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion."So far from the truth, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x"please point out my lies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One more thing that baffles me. A race of people suffer mass organised murder, face extinction even. Then the relations and some survivors of this mass murder then carry out the same actions to another race of people and to the letter." I am not defending the Israeli govt or actions of the IDF (and shouldn’t have to qualify what I am about to say but on here lately it is a requirement)… It is not “to the letter”. Far from it. That is totally inaccurate. Is dropping bombs on civilians acceptable? To me no it is not. The Nazis rounded up women and children, separating them from the men, and then walking them into gas chambers disguised as showers to kill them by the 000s then burning their bodies and getting the men to sift the ashes looking for gold teeth and jewellery etc, then using the men as sl@ve labour until they drop dead of starvation and exhaustion or are no longer of use and gas chamber them as well? Or use them in medical experiments, including seeing how long a human can stay alive in an oven and at what temperature, etc etc No it is not the same! It is not TO THE LETTER! Seriously stop saying such fucking awful things. What is happening in Gaza is dreadful, absolutely horrendous and a serious over-reaction on the part of Israel. The condemnation they are facing is deserved. But saying what is happening is the same as the holocaust! No it is not! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my lies"Never said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian. Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%. It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind. Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east. Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans. I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies. But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x"When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho. Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being. Or am I bensiko the one and only? only you can decide. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x
When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho.
Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being.
Or am I bensiko the one and only?
only you can decide."I don't care, just be nice to have some facts to argue about. You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying though. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x
When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho.
Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being.
Or am I bensiko the one and only?
only you can decide.I don't care, just be nice to have some facts to argue about. You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying though.
Mrs x"I am disagreeing I do not like seeing starving and dead children and seeing the aggressors justifying it. 76 percent of British people are now against this so called war 76%. South Africa had the same system and the people of colour worked and were citizens but still couldn't use a white persons toilet, or drink from a whiten persons cup or use a white persons seat, same for the USA, so no I do not agree with that. Israel control when that water is allowed to flow, I note you ignored utilities and internet. If this is a war, then it is like having weapons from the 70's against the latest weapons, hang on it is. And as said earlier by another poster Ireland wasn't carpet bombed when the IRA was bombing mainland England, they negated with the Irish whilst telling us the population being bombed that the government will not negotiate with terrorist something we now know is a lie a big fat one. Israel came into being your right, a piece of land were they could go after ww2 given to them by the USA, we are told it was the UN but it was the USA by proxy. I suggest you watch a documentary by Adam Curtis called Bitter Lake. You say you do not agree, but you have been a major player on this forum speaking for murder, sorry war and you have stated your reasons. The trouble is I can only talk about Israel now as they are still killing people, whilst Hamas attempt to fire non guided missiles which hardly hit there mark and if they do little damage is done. I am long past this conflict murder war genocide, where I am at now is that this could become the norm, even though we 76% do not want it, and as long as the small minority speak for Israel then this may become the norm. the killing fields, with phil pot, and his shoe owning wife Bosnia South Africa Rwanda These mass murders were not normal and everyone condemned them. Now in this age people are programmed to believe murder is good on a mass scale. So maybe you don't agree with the method but it is the method which is terrifying and wrong and many are seeing this now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x
When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho.
Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being.
Or am I bensiko the one and only?
only you can decide.I don't care, just be nice to have some facts to argue about. You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying though.
Mrs x
I am disagreeing I do not like seeing starving and dead children and seeing the aggressors justifying it.
76 percent of British people are now against this so called war 76%.
South Africa had the same system and the people of colour worked and were citizens but still couldn't use a white persons toilet, or drink from a whiten persons cup or use a white persons seat, same for the USA, so no I do not agree with that.
Israel control when that water is allowed to flow, I note you ignored utilities and internet.
If this is a war, then it is like having weapons from the 70's against the latest weapons, hang on it is.
And as said earlier by another poster Ireland wasn't carpet bombed when the IRA was bombing mainland England, they negated with the Irish whilst telling us the population being bombed that the government will not negotiate with terrorist something we now know is a lie a big fat one.
Israel came into being your right, a piece of land were they could go after ww2 given to them by the USA, we are told it was the UN but it was the USA by proxy.
I suggest you watch a documentary by Adam Curtis called Bitter Lake.
You say you do not agree, but you have been a major player on this forum speaking for murder, sorry war and you have stated your reasons.
The trouble is I can only talk about Israel now as they are still killing people, whilst Hamas attempt to fire non guided missiles which hardly hit there mark and if they do little damage is done.
I am long past this conflict murder war genocide, where I am at now is that this could become the norm, even though we 76% do not want it, and as long as the small minority speak for Israel then this may become the norm.
the killing fields, with phil pot, and his shoe owning wife
Bosnia
South Africa
Rwanda
These mass murders were not normal and everyone condemned them.
Now in this age people are programmed to believe murder is good on a mass scale.
So maybe you don't agree with the method but it is the method which is terrifying and wrong and many are seeing this now."I'm not ignoring what you say, I'm just taking no further part on this thread as this is not what this thread is about and I apologise to the OP for hijacking it like this. Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x
When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho.
Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being.
Or am I bensiko the one and only?
only you can decide.I don't care, just be nice to have some facts to argue about. You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying though.
Mrs x
I am disagreeing I do not like seeing starving and dead children and seeing the aggressors justifying it.
76 percent of British people are now against this so called war 76%.
South Africa had the same system and the people of colour worked and were citizens but still couldn't use a white persons toilet, or drink from a whiten persons cup or use a white persons seat, same for the USA, so no I do not agree with that.
Israel control when that water is allowed to flow, I note you ignored utilities and internet.
If this is a war, then it is like having weapons from the 70's against the latest weapons, hang on it is.
And as said earlier by another poster Ireland wasn't carpet bombed when the IRA was bombing mainland England, they negated with the Irish whilst telling us the population being bombed that the government will not negotiate with terrorist something we now know is a lie a big fat one.
Israel came into being your right, a piece of land were they could go after ww2 given to them by the USA, we are told it was the UN but it was the USA by proxy.
I suggest you watch a documentary by Adam Curtis called Bitter Lake.
You say you do not agree, but you have been a major player on this forum speaking for murder, sorry war and you have stated your reasons.
The trouble is I can only talk about Israel now as they are still killing people, whilst Hamas attempt to fire non guided missiles which hardly hit there mark and if they do little damage is done.
I am long past this conflict murder war genocide, where I am at now is that this could become the norm, even though we 76% do not want it, and as long as the small minority speak for Israel then this may become the norm.
the killing fields, with phil pot, and his shoe owning wife
Bosnia
South Africa
Rwanda
These mass murders were not normal and everyone condemned them.
Now in this age people are programmed to believe murder is good on a mass scale.
So maybe you don't agree with the method but it is the method which is terrifying and wrong and many are seeing this now.I'm not ignoring what you say, I'm just taking no further part on this thread as this is not what this thread is about and I apologise to the OP for hijacking it like this.
Mrs x"Now if I was you in the past forums I would now be belittling you for not replying, but I am not you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is going on? Videos emerging of IDf soldiers from a special unit called Shayetet 13 surrendering and taken into tunnels underground, the number of the soldiers is around 16 between dead and captured. Also Israeli settlers flee as homemade rockets fired towards Tel Aviv. The iron dome fails to intercept with more than 8 direct impacts, causing damages, injuries & fires to break out. We’re at day 233 and all the lies created by Israel about dismantling Hamas is being revealed
This is a 1400 year old dispute that has yet to be solved and there doesn’t seem to be a solution on the horizon. Most recently added to the list of violent controversy is the 7th October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.
Israel officially declared war on Hamas on October 8th.
That's what is going on. Your post is further evidence of a continuing war.
This is not a war.
When a population is prevented from reproduction, eventually they will die out, when the reason is that a nation prevents reproduction then to me that is not a war but genocide.
Should Israel exist no not in its present form, apartheid systems are not a trait of democratic countries, to control water and utilities is not the way of democratic countries, to put children in prision without trial is not the way of democratic countries.
Mass murdering of women and children because a few are hiding among them is not a democracy.
Yes Hamas did kill Israelis !300 not an exact figure, but is it 40 thousand they have killed, with an undisclosed number under rubble.
Should Hamas have taken hostages, if my children were locked up for years with statements of abuse and torture, I was held in a strip of land becoming over populated living on aid with no determination of my country or my or my families lives and my captures or those preventing my freedoms as a human being, then eventually I will strike back, even if it would cost me my life as living is Gaza is no way to live, and I suppose they had come to that conclusion. So far from the truth, Mrs x
please point out my liesNever said lies. It's not an apartheid state. 2 million of zisraels citizens are Palistinian.
Israel never controlled the majority of the water supply in Gaza, only less than 10%.
It is a war, Israel was attacked on 7th Oct and declared war against Gaza, something any state could choose to do following an attack of this kind.
Gaza has been ruled by Hamas since 2005, 19 years now. No Israeli political control there since then.Hamas has not held elections and yet you say Israel is not democratic. It's the only democratic state in the middle east.
Why should Israel not exist as a state. It was lawfully created by the UN. And has existed for thousands of years prior to being expelled by the Romans.
I do not necessarily agree with how Israel is conducting this war but just because I don't agree with it doesn't mean it's not legitimate. This is to be decide by the relevant bodies.
But saying all this i just expect you to talk about the numbers killed by Israel but ignoring the tens of thousands of attack by Hamas from Gaza on Israel,
Mrs x
When a person writes "So far from the truth" I take that as I haven't wrote the truth and your statement that followed corrected me, but hey ho.
Now most importantly are you sure you're not talking to another poster you accused me being.
Or am I bensiko the one and only?
only you can decide.I don't care, just be nice to have some facts to argue about. You are not disagreeing with what I'm saying though.
Mrs x
I am disagreeing I do not like seeing starving and dead children and seeing the aggressors justifying it.
76 percent of British people are now against this so called war 76%.
South Africa had the same system and the people of colour worked and were citizens but still couldn't use a white persons toilet, or drink from a whiten persons cup or use a white persons seat, same for the USA, so no I do not agree with that.
Israel control when that water is allowed to flow, I note you ignored utilities and internet.
If this is a war, then it is like having weapons from the 70's against the latest weapons, hang on it is.
And as said earlier by another poster Ireland wasn't carpet bombed when the IRA was bombing mainland England, they negated with the Irish whilst telling us the population being bombed that the government will not negotiate with terrorist something we now know is a lie a big fat one.
Israel came into being your right, a piece of land were they could go after ww2 given to them by the USA, we are told it was the UN but it was the USA by proxy.
I suggest you watch a documentary by Adam Curtis called Bitter Lake.
You say you do not agree, but you have been a major player on this forum speaking for murder, sorry war and you have stated your reasons.
The trouble is I can only talk about Israel now as they are still killing people, whilst Hamas attempt to fire non guided missiles which hardly hit there mark and if they do little damage is done.
I am long past this conflict murder war genocide, where I am at now is that this could become the norm, even though we 76% do not want it, and as long as the small minority speak for Israel then this may become the norm.
the killing fields, with phil pot, and his shoe owning wife
Bosnia
South Africa
Rwanda
These mass murders were not normal and everyone condemned them.
Now in this age people are programmed to believe murder is good on a mass scale.
So maybe you don't agree with the method but it is the method which is terrifying and wrong and many are seeing this now.I'm not ignoring what you say, I'm just taking no further part on this thread as this is not what this thread is about and I apologise to the OP for hijacking it like this.
Mrs x
Now if I was you in the past forums I would now be belittling you for not replying, but I am not you.
" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hamas is a vile terrorist organisation and, at least historically, terrorist organisations have fared badly when the full weight of an established state’s military force is brought to bear on it. For Israel, the disadvantage is the captives seized by Hamas. The captives have already been dispersed throughout the Gaza Strip, riven with tunnels, bunkers, and other hidden places that will make locating, much less rescuing, the remaining hostages hard. These locations and even the hostages themselves will likely be laden with traps. This is a challenge of a magnitude that has never been faced before. How this war will end is anyone’s guess, but the shedding of more innocent blood — Israeli, Palestinian, and indeed non-combatant citizens of other countries — is guaranteed. That's war. " I cannot think of any terror outfits that have had the full weight of an army brought to bear on them. Except.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief " Two questions Should Israel provide fuel and water to a country that wants to and tries to massacre their population? How would you solve the problem of a terrorist threat that fires rockets from residential areas? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Isreal shouldent exist in its current form which in my opinion is why hamas exists.. " I agree. Israel should have annexed the disputed territories years ago and expelled any of the Arabs who didn't want to live in peace. Arabs are from the Arabian Peninsula, they are the colonisers and Israel's efforts are comparable to the 'land back' movement of all other indigenous peoples. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Except maybe the Sri Lankan military’s campaign, for one? In 2009, the campaign completely crushed the Tamil Tigers. Approximately 20,000 civilians were killed along with the Tigers’ founder and leader, his entire command staff, and virtually all the organisation’s officers and rank-and-file. So, a terrorist organisation can be annihilated in this way, but it comes with a massive loss of civilian lives. " Since the end of the civil war, the Sri Lankan state has been subject to much global criticism for violating human rights as a result of committing war crimes through bombing civilian targets, usage of heavy weaponry, the abduction and massacres of Sri Lankan Tamils and sexual violence. Plus it was a civil war | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Did not see this but how anyone thinks starving people, cutting off water Bombing hospitals Killing innocent people Is ok goes beyond belief Two questions Should Israel provide fuel and water to a country that wants to and tries to massacre their population? How would you solve the problem of a terrorist threat that fires rockets from residential areas?" ------------------------ I'm not sure the children being killed and injured by Israeli bombing are firing rockets from residential areas. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Isreal shouldent exist in its current form which in my opinion is why hamas exists.. I agree. Israel should have annexed the disputed territories years ago and expelled any of the Arabs who didn't want to live in peace. Arabs are from the Arabian Peninsula, they are the colonisers and Israel's efforts are comparable to the 'land back' movement of all other indigenous peoples. " I don't know if this is supposed to be a sarcastic post of not. But there are definitely lots of people who don't understand the situation, and history, and think that Israel doing violence is perfectly fine whole anyone else doing violence is not acceptable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Except maybe the Sri Lankan military’s campaign, for one? In 2009, the campaign completely crushed the Tamil Tigers. Approximately 20,000 civilians were killed along with the Tigers’ founder and leader, his entire command staff, and virtually all the organisation’s officers and rank-and-file. So, a terrorist organisation can be annihilated in this way, but it comes with a massive loss of civilian lives. Since the end of the civil war, the Sri Lankan state has been subject to much global criticism for violating human rights as a result of committing war crimes through bombing civilian targets, usage of heavy weaponry, the abduction and massacres of Sri Lankan Tamils and sexual violence. Plus it was a civil war " So you think it doesn't count and have won the point? An innocent civilian death is just that...irrespective of what word you place in front of "war" and anyway, I thought you didn't like the word "war"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
