- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 23,525
- Reaction score
- 15,421
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
-- Actually yes you did, I think it was quite obvious that was what you were implying and that was what the argument was about, you've tried to refer to the use of "third person terms" in the first and second post as if it means that I didn't use those to state my own opinion, as well as others'.
Nevertheless in the third post I was clearly using first person terms, so there is no reasoning behind your claims that I have not made the same conclusions as the Eiland committee did.
And I said your third post was the nearest to actually appearing like a critique – but it's still undermined by attacking another poster for saying more clearly that the decision-making was wrong.
Twist as much as you like, you only convince the zealots.
-- That's irrational of you, I would never "attack" gunner for making the statement that the violence on board of the Mavi Marmara is not the fault of the commandos on the ground, that'd be ridiculous and insane since it's my own position
So why attack him? He clarified his position times on both threads. “I have maintained throughout, no blame rests with the soldiers on the ground. The 'blame' should be placed with the politicians/commanders who executed an avoidable shambolic mission.”
That's pretty clear to most people. He doesn't blame the grunts.
-- gunner however has blamed the commanders for the violence on board the Mavi Maramra, contrary to my opinion and to the conclusion reached by the Eiland committee, which is the same, and that's what you fail to see right now, perhaps deliberately perhaps not.
You posted a link – and then misread it. You apply your own interpretation and then try to say gunner has blamed the commandos for the violence. He asked you umpteen times before Tashah intervened as moderator in the IHH thread to copy and paste his blaming “the commandos for the violence”
No such reply ever came – but you have the gall to come here and lie repeatedly.
--Trust me when I say that you do not want to enter a competition against me as to who is having more experience as a grunt.
I have no interest in your military service, especially if you are low enough to insult another soldier's service - just in getting some honesty from you. You accused gunner repeatedly but when he asks you to post his own words, you never do.
Why is that?
-- Yes, but he did lay the blame for the violence on the commanders, which is absolutely wrong. The Eiland committee has reached the fact that it was neither the soldiers on the ground nor their commanders' fault that violence has occurred on board of the Mavi Marmara. It was plainly the planning of the activists themselves.
Neither gunner nor I are interested in who caused the violence. It's clear who is (the activists) – now get to the crux – who is to blame for putting the commandos into that position? You keep asking and falsely accusing him of blaming the commandos for starting the violence and it's only you and your fellow fanatics who think you have something to prove when the discussion is completely elsewhere.
-- First thing first, gunner has indeed went that far, and that's my entire claim against him here.
He was making the assertion that the commanders' are to blame for the violence
Post his words then and prove your argument. However, your record against me so far is zero.
-- The violence is clearly the fault of those who've wished it and have gained it in the end, those who've planned to incite it all along, the activists themselves.
Show me where he says otherwise.
-- Secondly since you are saying here that you do blame the commanders' for the violence, you are obviously going against the conclusions of the Eiland committee which brings us back to the point when I've asked you why you're using it, if it completely contradicts your assertions.
OK, you say you are translating from Hebrew into English. Do you understand the difefrence between “I” and “They”? Do you understand the difference between “put the commandos into a position” and “the commandos caused the violence?”
If you don't – get someone to translate because neither Gunner nor I have said the commandos caused the violence.
-- 100% false, the blockade on Gaza was eased due to international pressure, which doesn't rely on reality in its basis.
And the international pressure has nothing to do with the deaths or the flotilla. Yeah right...
-- gunner has exposed his lack in professionalism and military knowledge in general when he has blamed the commanders for the violence on board of the ship.
I for one have criticized the way the operation was committed almost instantly, because it was clearly putting the soldiers' lives at risk, however I've also acknowledged that the activists were entirely to blame for the violence and not the commanders, unlike gunner who has blamed the commanders for the violence.
Most people tread lightly before insulting someone else's military experience. Most people try to educate themselves in a language they are trying to debate in. I expect nothing honourable from you anymore.
-- My opinion is the one backed by the Eiland committee, while yours and gunner's is neglected and contradicted. The violence is not to be blamed on the commanders of the soldiers, gunner is wrong in doing so.
You have friends who can translate what I have asked you to understand. Tonight I have seen a poster reach the lowest form of the gutter – insulting another person's military service. I fully expect to see you thanked for this.
-- Because you're too narrow minded and offer less than nothing to back your arguments behind pure emotionalism and bad opinions about Israel and the IDF.
We've reached the “reductio ad anti-semitism” moment haven't we. First you insult a professional soldier and now we're at the “anti Israel” moment.
Well done. How honourable of you. I want no apology from someone who insults another poster's military service.
-- Besides that, I see no words yet about the third comment that was written in first-person terms, I wonder why really, care to explain?
Get yourself a new pair of glasses. I already commented about this a few pages ago.