Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

Options
1…1213151718…126

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    mick.fr wrote: »
    I see a lot of strange comments here.

    Those who are posting stuffs and critisizing Israel, have you ever dealt with muslims?

    I am not talking about your Pakistany colleague at work who shaves everyday, I am talking about the real Muslim, the one that think that you cannot wipe your ass with your right hand when you go to the bath room, the one that think that Israel is using dark magic to control the world's economy, the one that think all america, europe, israel should be wiped out, the one that think that the whole world countries should be islamic republics, the one that think he can tell a woman how to wear, to do, to learn, to eat, and have several wifes legally maried, ...

    We are talking about war against people who want to alienate the whole world here. We are talking about extermination actions here.

    What many of you do not even realise, is that it will never end, until one party or another will be wiped out.
    Do you really believe the muslims will sign a treaty? This will never happend.

    Muslims do crazy things way behond your wildest imagination, do not believe all the crap on TV, which certainly does not show reality of things.

    You're a ****ing racist and a bigot. And I know one thing for sure, that is you actually probably haven't met a Muslim.

    PeakOutput wrote: »
    emm wrong and wrong, their intent being to inflict ultimate punishment and maximimum hardship on people who attack them.

    That is, policemen, schoolgirls, schools, hospitals... etc.
    Yep. What about before the airstrikes? Who was targetted when they cut off the essential power supply, water supply and medical supplies? Yep thats right, the Palestinian people.
    the people of gaza electing a terrorist organisation is merely an interesting side story but one easily explained by their lack of choice in the matter.
    Terrorist organisation to you of course, not them.
    they are afraid rightly so hamas are the strongest faction and therefore they win the election on the grounds they are best equipped to protect them which they are.
    So you're saying they won by fear as opposed to building schools, hospitals and the like?
    they are also determined to do everything in their power to hurt israel
    Illogical. If they did they'd have done a lot more damage IMO.


    images dont affect me in that i dont allow them to blur my view of the facts. if you think that makes me somehow a bad person then so be it. if you want some really hard hitting images go here http://www.tomstoddart.com/iwitness.html
    My point is you're defending all of this. And for what? Are you saying this is all going to be sucessful, from a military point of view?
    Lol. Lebanon 2006.

    my support for peace? sure if i thought it would make a difference. if i thought that i wouldnt be automatically labelled as a jew lover and possibly seriously hurt. id also go to israel if i thought i wouldnt be labeled simply as a muslim apologist.
    Thats a stupid, bigoted and racist outlook, and sums up your lack of knowledge on the whole conflict, and war in general. You support this slaughter.


  • Options
    #423
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    turgon wrote: »
    BTW Im sure the people you describe are a) in a small majority or b) grossly unable to affect their desires

    are you for real?

    yes these non peace lovers are the minority however a vocal minority can do everything from affect local politics to genocide if they know what they are doing, which hamas clearly do


  • Options
    #424
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    are you for real?

    yes these non peace lovers are the minority however a vocal minority can do everything from affect local politics to genocide if they know what they are doing, which hamas clearly do

    Forgive my vagueness in not referring directly to the original quote: I was referring to the desires of some Muslims to take over the whole world in Islam, not their ability to destroy Israel.


  • Options
    #425
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    That is, policemen, schoolgirls, schools, hospitals... etc.
    Yep. What about before the airstrikes? Who was targetted when they cut off the essential power supply, water supply and medical supplies? Yep thats right, the Palestinian people.

    who was targetted by the rockets and suicide bombers? thats right palestinian(israeli not palestinian obviously) people. its a non argument, the scale of these actions is irrelavent to the solution to stopping them happening again

    Terrorist organisation to you of course, not them.

    there are hundreds if not thousands or tens of thousands of people who do not believe the ira or al qaeida or list your terrorist hot list were not terrorists that does not make it true

    So you're saying they won by fear as opposed to building schools, hospitals and the like?

    this is were my punctuation lets me down. im saying they won because they people are so afraid of israel and that rational people in a normal situation would not elect a terrorist group like that. im sure mindless propoganda and ruthless political tactics had a major part to play but at the root of it the people were afraid and elected hamas

    Illogical. If they did they'd have done a lot more damage IMO.

    you think they deliberately missed with 95% of their rockets?

    My point is you're defending all of this. And for what? Are you saying this is all going to be sucessful, from a military point of view?
    Lol. Lebanon 2006.

    if israel wanted to win a military conflict they could over run the palestinians in days if not hours. what is happening is not the right course of action. it is however inevitable until both sides agree to sit down in real peace and come to a compromise.


    Thats a stupid, bigoted and racist outlook, and sums up your lack of knowledge on the whole conflict, and war in general. You support this slaughter.

    it has nothing to do with what country they are from or what religon they are. when you have been in conflict for so long you believe you are in the right completely and completely justified. jst like in ireland in the early 1900's if i had of come here and preached to forgive britain and move on i would of been laughed at just like if i had of preached the same to the british men who had fought here and the families of those that died. eventually however someone on both sides has to stand up and put emotions aside and do what is necessary to stop the bloodshed.
    turgon wrote: »
    I was referring to the desires of some Muslims to take over the whole world in Islam, not their ability to destroy Israel.

    i understood that part i was trying to say that just because they dont actually have the ability to take over the world does not mean they will not reak havoc while they try


  • Options
    #426
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    This happened after (a) Hamas was elected, or (b) Hamas declared the ceasefire over and started lobbing rockets.

    Cause and effect.

    NTM

    Because in the 40 years before Hamas, life was flowers n bunnies....Theres a reason they seem half mad in that place, and no, its not actually their natural disposition.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    mick.fr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,974 ✭✭✭mick.fr


    The Saint wrote: »
    Nice buddy. Not even going to bother with this as pretty much all points are beyond idiotic. I suggest you read some of th previous pages with facts before coming out with completely non-sensical posts.

    I was not pretending to teach you anything, and obviously you would need a lot, but I am used to this kind of comments down here.


  • Options
    #428
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,405 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    However if their killing of a few of the Waterford populace was matched by a big bombing campaign on Cork City involving the deaths of 300 people I would be pretty peeved and more likely to join the group. If on the other hand the revenge attack had been of the same small scale I would be more inclined to dismiss it. Would ye agree?

    And you have just nailed one of the Paradoxes of COIN.

    The US Army manual has it written thusly:
    FM 3-24 wrote:
    Sometimes, the More Force Is Used, the Less Effective It Is

    1-150. Any use of force produces many effects, not all of which can be foreseen. The more force applied, the greater the chance of collateral damage and mistakes. Using substantial force also increases the opportunity for insurgent propaganda to portray lethal military activities as brutal. In contrast, using force precisely and discriminately strengthens the rule of law that needs to be established. As noted above, the key for counterinsurgents is knowing when more force is needed—and when it might be counterproductive.
    This judgment involves constant assessment of the security situation and a sense of timing regarding insurgents’ actions.

    Note that this is vastly difference from saying that force is always wrong. Just that you had better work out in advance that the advantages will outweigh the disadvantages.
    Because in the 40 years before Hamas, life was flowers n bunnies....

    In the six months before Hamas declared the truce over, there were a lot less people getting blown up. I think this is a step backwards, not forwards.

    NTM


  • Options
    #429
    mick.fr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,974 ✭✭✭mick.fr


    turgon wrote: »
    Hardly any as strange as yours, in what was my opinion blatent stereotypical remarks of the Muslim people and by extension racism. How can you have an objective view of anything when you judge group of people like that?

    BTW Im sure the people you describe are a) in a small majority or b) grossly unable to affect their desires

    Yes the usual excuse for ignorant people calling others racists.
    I have been there dude, don't call me anything else that a guy who knows the muslims, I ate the same shiit as theirs.


  • Options
    #430
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    mick.fr wrote: »
    I have been there dude, don't call me anything else that a guy who knows the muslims, I ate the same shiit as theirs.

    And I imagine your observations on Muslims were taken after a long study amongst various diverse kinds of Muslims, and within different classes of their society?


  • Options
    #431
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    Originally Posted by FM 3-24
    Sometimes, the More Force Is Used, the Less Effective It Is

    1-150. Any use of force produces many effects, not all of which can be foreseen. The more force applied, the greater the chance of collateral damage and mistakes. Using substantial force also increases the opportunity for insurgent propaganda to portray lethal military activities as brutal. In contrast, using force precisely and discriminately strengthens the rule of law that needs to be established. As noted above, the key for counterinsurgents is knowing when more force is needed—and when it might be counterproductive.
    This judgment involves constant assessment of the security situation and a sense of timing regarding insurgents’ actions.

    What military objectives does bombing a university achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Perestroika wrote: »
    What military objectives does bombing a university achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    what military objectives does launching 400+ rockets at civilian targets achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?


  • Options
    #433
    mick.fr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,974 ✭✭✭mick.fr


    turgon wrote: »
    And I imagine your observations on Muslims were taken after a long study amongst various diverse kinds of Muslims, and within different classes of their society?

    No unlike you mine is based on real life experience far away from Ireland.
    While yours is probably based on BBC.CO.UK and other online forums.

    There is no different kind of muslims, they all obey the same laws and messia.


  • Options
    #434
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    what military objectives does launching 400+ rockets at civilian targets achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    LOL Your logic is mental.

    You're justifying the butchering of Palestinians simply because Hamas are firing rockets?


  • Options
    #435
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users Posts: 17,205 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    what military objectives does launching 400+ rockets at civilian targets achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    Whataboutery at it's finest


  • Options
    #436
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Perestroika wrote: »
    LOL Your logic is mental.

    You're justifying the butchering of Palestinians simply because Hamas are firing rockets?

    im not justifying anything im trying to illustrate the pointlessness and futility of trying to decide who is good and bad in war. i dont care about either of them but i do know that the majority of neither of them are the crazed genocidal maniacs your trying to make israelis out to be


  • Options
    #437
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »
    Whataboutery at it's finest

    As well as assuming everyone against this butchery is definitely pro-Hamas rocket attacks.
    im not justifying anything im trying to illustrate the pointlessness and futility of trying to decide who is good and bad in war. i dont care about either of them but i do know that the majority of neither of them are the crazed genocidal maniacs your trying to make israelis out to be

    You're making generalisations.
    I asked you what is the military significance of attacking a University (which is so obviously a civilian target). This happened in the assault you're defending. You couldn't answer me, you ran away from it an asked another question. Israel are quite obviously maniacs. When I say Israel I refer to the establishment.


  • Options
    #438
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Perestroika wrote: »
    What military objectives does bombing a university achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    how is that question more valid than this one
    PeakOutput wrote: »
    what military objectives does launching 400+ rockets at civilian targets achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    its not which is why this argument is pointless

    the fact is neither of these questions need to be answered to come to a solution to the problem in the region

    this is why i say people who cannot seperate their hearts from their minds can never look at something objectively. you see the tradgedy you dont see the answers
    You're making generalisations.
    I asked you what is the military significance of attacking a University (which is so obviously a civilian target). This happened in the assault you're defending. You couldn't answer me, you ran away from it an asked another question. Israel are quite obviously maniacs. When I say Israel I refer to the establishment.

    yet another point that can be turned around and with a few words being changed made look like its about the palestinians

    i didnt answer your question because as i said it has no need to be answered i dont care for the answer either even though the very answer was in what you quoted from manic moran....mistakes happen....collateral damage happens. these are facts, but they are irrelevant


  • Options
    #439
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    how is that question more valid than this one



    its not which is why this argument is pointless

    the fact is neither of these questions need to be answered to come to a solution to the problem in the region

    this is why i say people who cannot seperate their hearts from their minds can never look at something objectively. you see the tradgedy you dont see the answers

    You're not recognising whats happening. Israel is targetting civilians.
    That is wrong. You're defending it. You are wrong.


  • Options
    #440
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Perestroika wrote: »
    You're not recognising whats happening. Israel is targetting civilians.
    That is wrong. You're defending it. You are wrong.

    and your not willing to concede that palestine is doing the same thing?


  • Options
    #441
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    and your not willing to concede that palestine is doing the same thing?

    Already tried to discuss this but of course you only reply to what suits.
    It wrecks my brain trying to figure out why you're defending Israel so much.

    They are targeted a University right (to use just one example).
    They killed civilians, obviously. It was a civilian target.

    What in the world did they do to deserve it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Perestroika wrote: »
    You're not recognising whats happening. Israel is targetting civilians.
    That is wrong. You're defending it. You are wrong.
    To put a little context into the thread that most appear to have missed (and hey, I provided the figures a few pages back and all of you can subtract and even polarised as many of you are, no-one jumped on it so I'm quite disappointed in all of you with the chance to be faux-scientific and all that), the declared figures were 315 Palestinians dead as of this morning, of which the UN said that 51 were civilians. Making a short assumption, that would appear to indicate that 264 were not. That gives the Israeli air force a 17% error rate over the weekend. Hamas, having killed 100% civilians, have a 100% error rate lately.

    That's statistics and damned lies for you, eh? Still up for saying that one side is more wrong or guilty or, like, totally more naughty than the other? Please say why. And if you're not saying that, just move on.

    Yes, there's a very noticeable underlying point to all of my posts on this topic so far. It's really not hard to get what it is. As an aside, one can say that something is wrong without necessarily supporting the other side in this myopic bloodbath.


  • Options
    #443
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    ok first of all i dont believe they deliberately and with reckless abandon targetted a university just to kill civilians


    but for the millionth time. even if i did IT IS IRRELEVANT

    i will say this one more time in bold and as clearly as i can

    both sides are equally at fault, the numbers killed on both sides have nothing to do with intent or one being more inately good than the other it is simple technological efficiency. what matters is the root reasons for these actions on both sides and BOTH sides are 100% in the wrong until they agree to sit down in the same room for as long as it takes to hammer out an agreement.


    thats it im done i wont bother you anymore with my extremist bigotted racist views


  • Options
    #444
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,405 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    What military objectives does bombing a university achieve - apart from killing and injuring civilians?

    Could it have been that the opposition were using the university for military purposes? I have video footage of one of our tanks firing main gun on a mosque. Mosques themselves are protected buildings. However, I know the backstory, the apparent egregiousness was anything but. Any protected place can lose their status if certain circumstances are met, how do you know with such certainty that this is not the case with the university?

    [ETA: The Israeli claim is that there was a munitions manufacturing and storing facility on the grounds. You may not believe it, but it is a valid reason if true. I guess the question becomes if the entire university and the grounds got hit, or just a couple of select buildings.]

    NTM


  • Options
    #445
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    sceptre wrote: »
    To put a little context into the thread that most appear to have missed (and hey, I provided the figures and all of you can subtract and even polarised as many of you are, no-one jumped on it so I'm quite disappointed in all of you with the chance to be faux-scientific and all that), the declared figures were 315 Palestinians dead as of this morning, of which the UN said that 51 were civilians. Making a short assumption, that would appear to indicate that 264 were not. That gives the Israeli air force a 17% error rate over the weekend. Hamas, having killed 100% civilians, have a 100% error rate lately.

    That's statistics and damned lies for you, eh?

    I don't blindly accept the UN statistics, I wouldn't be happy doing so at this point. There should and probably will be an agreement by different organisations as to the statistics. Either way, I don't think indiscriminate bombing of civilian infrastructure is justified, how the hell could it be?
    The media has people believing exactly what it wants, and that is the Palestinians deserve it for ''firing rockets''. Even though the schoolchildren that were butchered or the University that was bombed had nothing to do with it...


  • Options
    #446
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    ok first of all i dont believe they deliberately and with reckless abandon targetted a university just to kill civilians


    but for the millionth time. even if i did IT IS IRRELEVANT

    i will say this one more time in bold and as clearly as i can

    both sides are equally at fault, the numbers killed on both sides have nothing to do with intent or one being more inately good than the other it is simple technological efficiency. what matters is the root reasons for these actions on both sides and BOTH sides are 100% in the wrong until they agree to sit down in the same room for as long as it takes to hammer out an agreement.


    thats it im done i wont bother you anymore with my extremist bigotted racist views

    Right, so going by what you say basically everything is a target, civilians, universities, schools, its all the same?
    And whether Palestinians civlians get murdered, or Israeli civilians get murdered, its irrelevant as they themselves are responsible?
    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Could it have been that the opposition were using the university for military purposes? I have video footage of one of our tanks firing main gun on a mosque. Mosques themselves are protected buildings. However, I know the backstory, the apparent egregiousness was anything but. Any protected place can lose their status if certain circumstances are met, how do you know with such certainty that this is not the case with the university?
    It could have been. But it wasn't.


  • Options
    #447
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    From Independent.co.uk

    The Israeli government did indeed withdraw from the Gaza Strip in 2005 – in order to be able to intensify control of the West Bank. Ariel Sharon's senior adviser, Dov Weisglass, was unequivocal about this, explaining: "The disengagement [from Gaza] is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians... this whole package that is called the Palestinian state has been removed from our agenda indefinitely."

    Click here for the whole article

    I think it provides interesting context concerning Israels "peace efforts".


  • Options
    #448
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,405 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Perestroika wrote: »
    It could have been. But it wasn't.

    A very definitive statement. And you know this with such certainty how, exactly? I'm not making a definitive statement either way, since I'm not privy to the Islamic University's security cameras, and neither am I included in the IAF's targetting process.

    I do note that apparently the Science building was the only one to get hit. If you're going to go making explosives, that would certainly be the one to do it in.

    NTM


  • Options
    #449
    marco murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,715 ✭✭✭marco murphy


    wes wrote: »
    I think it provides interesting context concerning Israels "peace efforts".

    Yes they left, but they turned it into a prison, with their small incursions, denial of basic supplies, regular switching off of electricity and water.
    The siege intensified up until the end of the ceasefire. They brought it to an end.


  • Options
    #450
    PeakOutput
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    Perestroika wrote: »
    Right, so going by what you say basically everything is a target, civilians, universities, schools, its all the same?

    of course they are targets its war, in war you hate your enemy and will do whatever it takes to win, it dosnt make it right it just makes it war. you are trying to rationalise the irrational that will never work.

    however there is always a reason for war (which can also be irrational like one warlords pure lust for power, this is simply solved unfortunately the reason in this region is not so simple) and its that reason that is important. not the headline grabbing propagandising of one side or the other

    anyway i said im done its been a fun debate ill do my level best not to join in anymore and let the real politics guys fight it out


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    Mr.Micro
    Registered Users Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    Originally Posted by Manic Moran
    Could it have been that the opposition were using the university for military purposes? I have video footage of one of our tanks firing main gun on a mosque. Mosques themselves are protected buildings. However, I know the backstory, the apparent egregiousness was anything but. Any protected place can lose their status if certain circumstances are met, how do you know with such certainty that this is not the case with the university?
    It could have been. But it wasn't.

    I do not think it would matter a damn to Israel if it was a University being used for military or not. The policy in Israel appears to be destruction of the infrastructure no matter what it is.


Advertisement