So why pick on Israel[W:95]

[Higgins86]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Since when are combatants "civillians"?

Funny how every single casualty in Gaza was a civilian...

when you use heavy artillery in populated areas your aim tends to be off.

UN shelter in Gaza 'struck by Israeli shells' - Al Jazeera English

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Only one nuclear power has attacked all of its neighbours, yet insists IT'S the victim.

 

[Apocalypse]

Re: So why pick on Israel

That already happened it was called WW2 and we helped win it and defeat the regime responsible.

So Israel can't defend itself but Britain can when attacked. Glad you've made that clear.
Nope, nothing is wrong with your position.

Israel however is not at war with anyone and hasn't been for a while.

And the sky is green, and water is poisonous, and a friend in need is not a friend indeed.
Feel free to throw everything you've got while you're at it.

 

[Higgins86]

Re: So why pick on Israel

So Israel can't defend itself but Britain can when attacked. Glad you've made that clear.
Nope, nothing is wrong with your position.



And the sky is green, and water is poisonous, and a friend in need is not a friend indeed.
Feel free to throw everything you've got while you're at it.

No you are free to defend yourself however your not engaging in conventional warfare or even hunting down your enemies. You intercept rockets on your dome and then respond in turn with heavy air strikes. You don't seem interested in actually destroying your enemy or preventing further attacks, if you were you would of dismantled Hamas by now.

 

[Apocalypse]

Re: So why pick on Israel

No you are free to defend yourself however your not engaging in conventional warfare or even hunting down your enemies. You intercept rockets on your dome and then respond in turn with heavy air strikes.

Not all rockets are intercepted. Tell that to the six year old who was murdered during one of the final days of the recent conflict by the terrorist bastards who launch them. It's ridiculous to expect Israel not to respond to Hamas' fire of rockets. It's delusional to expect a nation to sit idly by as tens of thousands of rockets are being launched at its cities. What you wish is to see Israel sitting idly by as its civilians are murdered, and that is not an option.

You don't seem interested in actually destroying your enemy or preventing further attacks, if you were you would of dismantled Hamas by now.

Yeah and the US doesn't seem interested in actually destroying ISIS. Or al-Qaeda. Or the Taliban. Or pretty much any terror organization out there. Y'know, it's one thing to want a terror organization gone, it's a whole other thing to actually have it completely eradicated. Makes me wonder why you insist on engaging in topics you don't seem to care enough so to gather knowledge about them.

 

[Higgins86]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Not all rockets are intercepted. Tell that to the six year old who was murdered by the terrorist bastards who launch them. It's ridiculous to expect Israel not to respond to Hamas' fire of rockets. It's delusional to expect a nation to sit idly by as tens of thousands of rockets are being launched at its cities. What you wish is to see Israel sitting idly by as its civilians are murdered, and that is not an option.



Yeah and the US doesn't seem interested in actually destroying ISIS. Or al-Qaeda. Or the Taliban. Or pretty much any terror organization out there. Y'know, it's one thing to want a terror organization gone, it's a whole other thing to actually have it completely eradicated. Makes me wonder why you insist on engaging in topics you don't seem to care enough so to gather knowledge about them.

All you seem to do is talk down to other posters and ignore any links or stats they produce.
Israel have been involved with Hamas for many years now and you have had multiple campaigns in the Gaza strip. Your last campaign was met with heavy criticism across the world, even your ally America distanced themselves from you. There is multiple reports of laws broken by your military in the field, your military has been accused of negligence especially in regards to civillians and you continue to use weapons frowned upon by most other countries. All this and your success in the region has been very minimal.

You can continue to brush all this off but it will catch up with you, especially as the rest of the world continues to see heavy casulites on one side and minimal casulties on the other.

 

[Apocalypse]

Re: So why pick on Israel

All you seem to do is talk down to other posters and ignore any links or stats they produce.

Such as your 2000 civilians stats which was caught as a lie? Your linking to a political organization's "report"? No, I haven't ignored these, I provided an explanation to why they are nothing more than empty propaganda.

Israel have been involved with Hamas for many years now and you have had multiple campaigns in the Gaza strip. Your last campaign was met with heavy criticism across the world, even your ally America distanced themselves from you. There is multiple reports of laws broken by your military in the field, your military has been accused of negligence especially in regards to civillians and you continue to use weapons frowned upon by most other countries. All this and your success in the region has been very minimal.

You can continue to brush all this off but it will catch up with you, especially as the rest of the world continues to see heavy casulites on one side and minimal casulties on the other.

The world is hypocritical, no force would have managed itself moral-wise better than the IDF does in the situations that it faces on a daily basis and that is a given fact. That you appeal to what the international community does and says as a way to decide who is right and who is wrong is pathetic, that you believe the unfair criticism Israel gains from idiots and/or terror supporters around the globe immediately makes it a culprit is pathetic, that you falsely accuse the soldiers of the IDF of being murderers and people who target the civilian population of the other side isn't merely pathetic, it's repulsive.

Your wet dream might be this false prophecy of "it all catching up to you" thing, but I'll tell you something which is quite obvious; Israel ain't going anywhere. Learn to deal with it and keep your repulsive and immoral opinions to yourself mate.

 

[Higgins86]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Such as your 2000 civilians stats which was caught as a lie? Your linking to a political organization's "report"? No, I haven't ignored these, I provided an explanation to why they are nothing more than empty propaganda.



The world is hypocritical, no force would have managed itself moral-wise better than the IDF does in the situations that it faces on a daily basis and that is a given fact. That you appeal to what the international community does and says as a way to decide who is right and who is wrong is pathetic, that you believe the unfair criticism Israel gains from idiots and/or terror supporters around the globe immediately makes it a culprit is pathetic, that you falsely accuse the soldiers of the IDF of being murderers and people who target the civilian population of the other side isn't merely pathetic, it's repulsive.

Your wet dream might be this false prophecy of "it all catching up to you" thing, but I'll tell you something which is quite obvious; Israel ain't going anywhere. Learn to deal with it and keep your repulsive and immoral opinions to yourself mate.

What about the use of heavy artillery in densly populated areas? No one is saying you are targeting civillians on purpose but Israel's actions would appear to many as unsympathetic to the civiilans caught in the middle.
The fact your prime minister's words and actions undermine his allies?

As for wanting Israel to go away, please quote me saying that? I don't want Israel to go anywhere but I do want Israel to change its tactics. I mean you can't really be happy with the way you currently deals with threats? This endless back and forth with no winner emerging must get tiresome?

 

[Apocalypse]

Re: So why pick on Israel

What about the use of heavy artillery in densly populated areas? No one is saying you are targeting civillians on purpose but Israel's actions would appear to many as unsympathetic to the civiilans caught in the middle.

What about the dropping of leaflets and phoning homes to tell people to evacuate before incoming strikes?
Why do you consistently ignore these policies of the IDF that no other military implements? Policies that prove it does more to counter civilian casualties than any other military on the planet? You can't completely avoid civilian casualties when you're fighting a terror organization that takes its own population hostage, but I strongly disagree with the notion that Israel is firing indiscriminately or that it does not attempt to avoid civilian casualties. That's wrong, it does so a lot more than the rest of the Western world did in Iraq and Afghanistan and it deserves far less criticism than these nations.

As for wanting Israel to go away, please quote me saying that? I don't want Israel to go anywhere but I do want Israel to change its tactics. I mean you can't really be happy with the way you currently deals with threats? This endless back and forth with no winner emerging must get tiresome?

I'm not happy with the threats existing and I believe we should learn from what we did wrong in previous operations and correct them in the next, from all kinds of perspectives, but what I don't believe is that when we're being attacked we should just stand back and say "hey there's a 89% that this rocket will fall in an open field or be intercepted midair, so we're alright". Israel should always return fire towards those who are attacking its civilians, and if the bastards are hiding behind civilians and are launching rockets from schools and hospitals and houses and whatnot then I believe we must find the best way to target them while minimizing civilian casualties - but I don't believe that completely avoiding civilian casualties in such a dense area filled with people who act as human shields is a possibility, just as I don't believe that not responding at all to attacks on Israel's civilian population that are coming from such places to be a possibility - that would be a case where the government abandons its top priority, to defend its citizens' very lives.

 

[Higgins86]

Re: So why pick on Israel

What about the dropping of leaflets and phoning homes to tell people to evacuate before incoming strikes?
Why do you consistently ignore these policies of the IDF that no other military implements? Policies that prove it does more to counter civilian casualties than any other military on the planet? You can't completely avoid civilian casualties when you're fighting a terror organization that takes its own population hostage, but I strongly disagree with the notion that Israel is firing indiscriminately or that it does not attempt to avoid civilian casualties. That's wrong, it does so a lot more than the rest of the Western world did in Iraq and Afghanistan and it deserves far less criticism than these nations.



I'm not happy with the threats existing and I believe we should learn from what we did wrong in previous operations and correct them in the next, from all kinds of perspectives, but what I don't believe is that when we're being attacked we should just stand back and say "hey there's a 89% that this rocket will fall in an open field or be intercepted midair, so we're alright". Israel should always return fire towards those who are attacking its civilians, and if the bastards are hiding behind civilians and are launching rockets from schools and hospitals and houses and whatnot then I believe we must find the best way to target them while minimizing civilian casualties - but I don't believe that completely avoiding civilian casualties in such a dense area filled with people who act as human shields is a possibility, just as I don't believe that not responding at all to attacks on Israel's civilian population that are coming from such places to be a possibility - that would be a case where the government abandons its top priority, to defend its citizens' very lives.

Why not use more ground troops ( as you did last year towards the end) and flush them out that way. Takes more time and soldiers will be at a much bigger risk but its a far more efficent way to deal with an enemy hiding within a population. I served in basra Iraq with the British army and after the initial invasion the majoirty of our COIN tactics were ground level and we were often face to face with our enemies.
Another good example would be how the British government handled Northern Ireland. The British mainland was bombed, civillians attacked as were soldiers and politicans but other than a couple of rare cases the British military avoided mass civillian casulties and still managed to apply a huge amount of pressure on the IRA.

 

[PeteEU]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Israel is picked on like no other country and I can find no reasonable explanation.

Oh really?

Israel is in now way the woprst human rights abuser.

No one accuses Israel of being the worst human rights abuser, just of being a human rights abuser.. but so is the US, UK and others. Depends on the degree of abuse and how organized it is.

China occupies Tiber.

Never heard of that place.. Tibet yea, but Tiber?

Indonesia occupies Iryan Jaya.

Well not exactly true...

Turkey Occupies Kurdistan etc etc

Kurdistan has never existed, so how can Turkey occupy it?

Thes regimes have killed 100s of times as many people.

There is also 10s of millions more people in those countries than in Israel..

WHat is special about Israel. No one can tell me.

Go read a history book.. start about 5000 BC and go forward.

Sure the Muslim nations are upset because Jews have been 2nd class citizens in Arab countries for centuries and how dare they have their own state but the rest of the world and all the left?

LOL if that is what you really think, then I urge you to read up on history again.

 

[ido_]

Re: So why pick on Israel

LOL if that is what you really think, then I urge you to read up on history again.

as a decedent of Iraqi Jews, what exactly was wrong with what he wrote?

 

[Hyena]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Kurdistan has never existed, so how can Turkey occupy it?

That's exactly what I say about "occupied palestine" !
Looks like arabs have some special right that Kurds haven't.

 

[PeteEU]

Re: So why pick on Israel

as a decedent of Iraqi Jews, what exactly was wrong with what he wrote?

First off.. all non Muslims were/are considered "2nd class" citizens in most Arab countries..nothing new.. just as Muslims are considered 2nd class citizens in Israel and many western societies as well.

Secondly.. historically the Jewish populations of the Islamic world has been treated very well and in the Ottoman Empire held very high governmental positions, especially within finance.

Thirdly.. historically it was the Christian populations that persecuted Jews.. not Muslims. Muslims actually defended them more than once.

And the issues with Jewish populations in Arab countries stem from the formation of Israel and the consequences of this. Before this, Jews were living quite peacefully in the Muslim world.. and frankly more free and not persecuted than in the Christian western world.

So his comment is at best ignorance and worst utter propaganda.. I suspect more of the first though.

 

[PeteEU]

Re: So why pick on Israel

That's exactly what I say about "occupied palestine" !
Looks like arabs have some special right that Kurds haven't.

There are differences in the two situations that are kinda critical, but yes there has never been " a palestinian state" per say but you can have the same argument about Israel. Arabs and Jews have had states in the area going back 1000s of years on and off.. so at one point in time there has been an actual "state" of people that today are the Palestinians... now this is something the Kurds never have had as far as I know, as they have always been under the rule of others.. and have been so for the last 1000 years at least. The only "Kingdom of Kurdistan" was unofficial and last 2 years after the fall of the Ottomans and was actually in areas under British technical control and it was destroyed by the British.

 

[LeoVlaming]

Re: So why pick on Israel

There are differences in the two situations that are kinda critical, but yes there has never been " a palestinian state" per say but you can have the same argument about Israel. Arabs and Jews have had states in the area going back 1000s of years on and off.. so at one point in time there has been an actual "state" of people that today are the Palestinians... now this is something the Kurds never have had as far as I know, as they have always been under the rule of others.. and have been so for the last 1000 years at least. The only "Kingdom of Kurdistan" was unofficial and last 2 years after the fall of the Ottomans and was actually in areas under British technical control and it was destroyed by the British.

Nice try, but obviously completely untrue. There never has been a Palestinian state in any shape or form (which - for the record - doesn't mean the Palestinians don't have a right to self-determination).

 

[Hyena]

Re: So why pick on Israel

There are differences in the two situations that are kinda critical, but yes there has never been " a palestinian state" per say but you can have the same argument about Israel. Arabs and Jews have had states in the area going back 1000s of years on and off.. so at one point in time there has been an actual "state" of people that today are the Palestinians... now this is something the Kurds never have had as far as I know, as they have always been under the rule of others.. and have been so for the last 1000 years at least. The only "Kingdom of Kurdistan" was unofficial and last 2 years after the fall of the Ottomans and was actually in areas under British technical control and it was destroyed by the British.

Of course there are huge differences; the Kurds are a people with their own history, ethnicity, culture and language. The palestinians are.... Arabs. At least nowadays, as until British Mandate, a "palestinian" was whoever was living there, with no reference of their ethnicity or/and religion. After all we should also keep in mind that "Syria Palaestina" is the name given by the Romans to what was the Kingdom Of Israel in an attempt to remove the relationship of the Jewish people to the region.

So no, there were Jewish States but not "palestinian" ones. That doesn't mean that I don't recognize their right to have a State, it's just history.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Kurdistan has never existed, so how can Turkey occupy it?

Neither has Palestine...

You kind of walked into that one.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Re: So why pick on Israel

There are differences in the two situations that are kinda critical, but yes there has never been " a palestinian state" per say but you can have the same argument about Israel. Arabs and Jews have had states in the area going back 1000s of years on and off.. so at one point in time there has been an actual "state" of people that today are the Palestinians... now this is something the Kurds never have had as far as I know, as they have always been under the rule of others.. and have been so for the last 1000 years at least. The only "Kingdom of Kurdistan" was unofficial and last 2 years after the fall of the Ottomans and was actually in areas under British technical control and it was destroyed by the British.

What "per se"? There has never been a Palestinian state and the Palestinian Arabs have never been a people distinct from the rest until they created a national identity around the core value of preventing Jews from achieving sovereignty in Israel (unlike the Kurds who were and are clearly distinct from their neighbours. they have also "been under the control of others" for a very, very long time.)

And none of this is to say that the Palestinians do not deserve sovereignty in gaza and their population centres in the west bank (and surrounding territories required for that state to function) as soon as they demonstrate that they are not still solely interested in destoying Israel and will no longer act as a threat to their neighbour. Only that the BS historical justification that it is "their" land and they should rightly be entitled to it all while other more legitimate groups like the Kurds are entitled to nothing is just partisan nonsense junk.

 

[ARealConservative]

Re: So why pick on Israel

the political activism that caused Israel to once again control land in the middle east is the biggest mistake made in the last century.


I don't think holding that view is picking on Israel, but I know plenty of people that will say otherwise.

 

[mendelssohn]

Re: So why pick on Israel

Thes regimes have killed 100s of times as many people.

There is also 10s of millions more people in those countries than in Israel..

You and Stalin can work together on this new ludicrous concept of 'killed per capita'. Seriously, have you gone insane?

This is the problem with the left of today. Their wicked agenda is so vociferously pushed, that all they're left with are absurd arguments and a moral compass gone haywire.

 

[mendelssohn]

Re: So why pick on Israel

First off.. all non Muslims were/are considered "2nd class" citizens in most Arab countries..nothing new.. just as Muslims are considered 2nd class citizens in Israel and many western societies as well.

To compare the two is to show how how oblivious you are to the reality. Israel is the first country where Arabs got to vote in free democratic elections. It's practically the only country in the Middle East where they live entirely free today. They are not at all considered 'second-class citizens' in Western societies. They may have some issues as many immigrants do, but to compare the two is entirely absurd. Try to get a license to build a church in Saudi Arabia. Try opening a dissident organization against the government in any Arab country. Arabs enjoy all these rights in Western countries.

Secondly.. historically the Jewish populations of the Islamic world has been treated very well and in the Ottoman Empire held very high governmental positions, especially within finance.

Thirdly.. historically it was the Christian populations that persecuted Jews.. not Muslims. Muslims actually defended them more than once.

More babble. I'll admit that Jews were much better off (most of the time) in Arab lands, compared to their European brethren. However, to paint this as some kind of paradise for Jews? What on earth you are you talking about? Read Martin Gilbert's 'In Ishmael's House', or, more specifically, 'The Silent Minority in Turkey: Turkish Jews' by Libra Yayinevi. This idylle in which Jews supposedly lived freely in Arab lands is a myth. Compared to Christian overlords, they fared quite well. Otherwise, in their dhimmied and subjugated status, it wasn't much to write home about.

And the issues with Jewish populations in Arab countries stem from the formation of Israel and the consequences of this. Before this, Jews were living quite peacefully in the Muslim world.. and frankly more free and not persecuted than in the Christian western world.

Right, and the Arab massacres of Jews going back to 1850, those were what, off-the-hand justifiable whims?

 

[mendelssohn]

Re: So why pick on Israel

There are differences in the two situations that are kinda critical, but yes there has never been " a palestinian state" per say but you can have the same argument about Israel. Arabs and Jews have had states in the area going back 1000s of years on and off.. so at one point in time there has been an actual "state" of people that today are the Palestinians... now this is something the Kurds never have had as far as I know, as they have always been under the rule of others.. and have been so for the last 1000 years at least. The only "Kingdom of Kurdistan" was unofficial and last 2 years after the fall of the Ottomans and was actually in areas under British technical control and it was destroyed by the British.

Thank you for this splendid demonstration of absolute historical ignorance. You've spared us many paragraphs of deciphering obscurantist theories and profoundly absurd ideas.

 

[mendelssohn]

Re: So why pick on Israel

If you have the time and a open mind then watch this video.It explains why so many people have grievances against Israel. Most of those whose lips are firmly planted on Israel's **** will simply dismiss the video as propaganda instead of actually watching it.

Keep posting this ridiculous video with this girl, coated in obscene references to fellatio, and one might reach quite different conclusions about you.

 

[mendelssohn]

Re: So why pick on Israel

I'm not starting threads claiming that Britain is being unfairly picked on and yes I believe all those things because they are true no matter how you spin them.

- Britain never bombed civillain areas in Iraq/Afghan as much as Israel has in such a small region. ( Fish in a barrel).

Actually, the comparison with Iraq and Afghanistan is a completely fallacious one. But since you brought up Britain, there is actually a comparable situation which Britain endured during the Second World War, when London and other British cities where bombed indiscriminantly by the Germans. And how did Churchill respond? Let's see if we can find a Dresdenite among us here to elaborate.