Global Conflict Escalations

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I don't see the convictions as enforcable by themselves, but I'm waiting to hear the evidence presented and the ruling.

 

If it could be tied to an individual country and enforced by the other countries, that would be more interesting to me, I'll agree that much with you on that.

 

Germany and South Africa saying they know genocide when they see it, I say let them make their case.  Germany coming to Israel's defense in that context deserves to be heard out.

 

There's a map from an article in the WaPo that shows Israel destroyed more buildings in Northern Gaza then Assad did Allepo during Syrian Civil War

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2023/israel-war-destruction-gaza-record-pace/

 

Where else besides International Court should the case be made on whether or not this is what many folks believe it is? Twitter?

yes, the case should go ahead and the accused should provide the evidence for genocide.

 

But you were using the fact they were accused as evidence they were guilty. Israel tried to talk to other countries like Egypt but no one wanted to help them.

[Renegade7]

22 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

yes, the case should go ahead and the accused should provide the evidence for genocide.

 

But you were using the fact they were accused as evidence they were guilty. Israel tried to talk to other countries like Egypt but no one wanted to help them.

 

I'm using the freely public information on what they've already done to form an opinion, I'm not a court.

 

No country should have to bail out a another that's asking that many people to move around like fish in a fish tank while it's being fumigated one end of the tank at a time.  Thats not how you clean a fish tank anyways and certainly not how you treat civilians in densely populated urban areas like the Gaza strip.

 

Yeah, countries have the right to say "no" to helping facilitate what could've been the largest diaspora refugee crisis since and Rohingya and demand Israel figure out another way to deal with Hamas.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

10 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I'm using the freely public information on what they've already done to form an opinion, I'm not a court.

 

No country should have to bail out a another that's asking that many people to move around like fish in a fish tank while it's being fumigated one end of the tank at a time.  Thats not how you clean a fish tank anyways and certainly not how you treat civilians in densely populated urban areas like the Gaza strip.

 

Yeah, countries have the right to say "no" to helping facilitate what could've been the largest diaspora refugee crisis since and Rohingya and demand Israel figure out another way to deal with Hamas.

The fish tank needed to be fumigated.

[Renegade7]

35 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

The fish tank needed to be fumigated.

 

Easy to say a continent away...

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Easy to say a continent away...

I mean, there was a terrorist bunker under a hospital and a command/data center under the UN aid agency.

 

 

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I mean, there was a terrorist bunker under a hospital and a command/data center under the UN aid agency.

 

 

 

That's the second time you've mentioned that like thats a justification for your continued stance of resolving everything with a method of war that wont be anywhere near us.

 

It's damaging the lefts and our country's credibility even appearing to blankly support how Israel is going about it. When does that matter?

[CousinsCowgirl84]

8 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

That's the second time you've mentioned that like thats a justification for your continued stance of resolving everything with a method of war that wont be anywhere near us.

 

It's damaging the lefts and our country's credibility even appearing to blankly support how Israel is going about it. When does that matter?

You are acting like you are confused about why the fishbowl needs to be fumigated or how I can talk that a half a world  away. You could see Gaza needed to be fumigated from a galaxy away.

 

Damaging the lefts? lol. What?

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

You are acting like you are confused about why the fishbowl needs to be fumigated or how I can talk that a half a world  away. You could see Gaza needed to be fumigated from a galaxy away.

 

Damaging the lefts? lol. What?

 

You don't fumegate a fish tank, you take the fish out when cleaning the tank.

 

Not sure what you're insisting you're right on.

Edited February 12 by Renegade7

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Just now, Renegade7 said:

 

You don't fumegate a fish tank, you take the fish out when cleaning the tank.

 

Not sure what you're insisting your right on.

 

Israel offered to take the fish out,  no one wanted to give them a tank. Not even their supposed allies like Iran or Egypt. 

[Renegade7]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Israel offered to take the fish out,  no one wanted to give them a tank. Not even their supposed allies like Iran or Egypt. 

 

Every wonder why or seen reasons given for "no"?

 

We're going in circles now.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

 

We're going in circles now.

 

Because you are pretending there was a way for Israel to deal with Hamas in a different way or pretending like Hamas is a victim and Israel is some evil actor.

 

Hamas attacked Israel and started this war, Israel is finishing it. 

[Renegade7]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Because you are pretending there was a way for Israel to deal with Hamas in a different way or pretending like Hamas is a victim and Israel is some evil actor.

 

Hamas attacked Israel and started this war, Israel is finishing it. 

 

Jus putting words in my mouth at this point...

 

Israel likely wouldn't take them back if they got them all out because they don't want them there in the first place.

 

If the rest of the world is saying Israel coulda gonna about this invasion differently and US called them out for not knowing what they were doing before starting the ground invasion, citing lessons we learned from Felluja and Mosul, then you're pretending there was no other way versus actually being right.

 

Let the evidence be brought forth in the appropriate process, saying there's no impartial place to do that is a cope out.

[Larry]

50 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Hamas attacked Israel and started this war, Israel is finishing it. 

 

Yep. You're right. Hamas started this war. 

 

I mean, there was nothing wrong prior to that. 

 

I mean, it's simply inconceivable that both sides have done things that are wrong. One side started it, and has sole responsibility. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

7 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Yep. You're right. Hamas started this war. 

 

I mean, there was nothing wrong prior to that. 

 

I mean, it's simply inconceivable that both sides have done things that are wrong. One side started it, and has sole responsibility. 

 

This attack was different than everything that happened before. One side started it, the other is finishing it. Hamas isn’t the victim and Israel isn’t the aggressor.
 

Who is right and wrong is depends on who you ask so there isn’t much value in discussing that.

Edited February 12 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Larry]

13 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Who is right and wrong is depends on who you ask so there isn’t much value in discussing that.

 

Does that mean you intend to stop trying to paint one side as completely right and one as completely wrong?  

 

(This is what's called "a rhetorical question".  Every person in this thread already knows you won't).

[CousinsCowgirl84]

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Does that mean you intend to stop trying to paint one side as completely right and one as completely wrong?  

 

I didn’t. 

 

 

 

[PeterMP]

2 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

This attack was different than everything that happened before. One side started it, the other is finishing it. Hamas isn’t the victim and Israel isn’t the aggressor.
 

Who is right and wrong is depends on who you ask so there isn’t much value in discussing that.

 

But other attacks have been different than everything that happened before that attack.  That's the nature of history.  Somebody does something and somebody else does something that's never been done before.

 

This attack by Israel is something that hasn't happened before.  Does that mean somebody now has a right to respond in a way that has never been done before?

[CousinsCowgirl84]

38 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

This attack by Israel 

It isn’t an attack. Prior to Hamas’ attack in October, there was a ceasefire. Hamas broke it. The military operation is a defensive response to Hamas unilaterally pulling out of the ceasefire after years of seeking and gaining to a certain extent political legitimacy. What choice did Israel have? 
 

Antisemitism is well rooted in American and world history for that matter. I’m not suprised so many people want to jump on the blame the Jews bandwagon so soon.

 

 

 

Edited February 12 by CousinsCowgirl84

[PeterMP]

6 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

It isn’t an attack. Prior to Hamas’ attack in October, there was a ceasefire. Hamas broke it. The military operation is a defensive response to Hamas unilaterally pulling out of the ceasefire after years of seeking and gaining to a certain extent political legitimacy. What choice did Israel have? 
 

Antisemitism is well rooted in American and world history for that matter. I’m not suprised so many people want to jump on the blame the Jews bandwagon so soon.

 

In 2022, Israel pre-emptively launched attacks against a small group in Gaza that was supported by Iran.  Killing Gazans in the process including reportedly children.

 

https://www.vox.com/2022/8/14/23304670/israel-gaza-struggle-islamic-jihad-hamas

 

Why can't the Hamas Oct. attack be in response to that?

 

And then be ok.

 

Nobody in this thread is blaming the Jews.  People are making the point that the situation isn't as simplistic as you trying to make it.   There's so much Islamophobia in this country, it isn't surprising that people are in such a rush to blame the Palestinians.

 

(Also the earlier cease fire didn't include Hamas.  It was with the PA. )

Edited February 12 by PeterMP

[CousinsCowgirl84]

7 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

In 2022, Israel pre-emptively launched attacks against a small group in Gaza that was supported by Iran.  Killing Gazans in the process including reportedly children.

 

https://www.vox.com/2022/8/14/23304670/israel-gaza-struggle-islamic-jihad-hamas

 

Why can't the Hamas Oct. attack be in response to that?

Iran has called for the destruction of Israel. Targeting people supported by Iran is self defense and certainly doesn’t justify the attacks on civilians launched by Hamas.

 

Hamas doesn’t care about palestians and uses them as body shields. Getting rid of Hamas was always going to be painful, unfortunately. If Hamas attacked Israel military targets, maybe you would have a point. But they attacked civilians. Israel is attacking military targets.

Edited February 12 by CousinsCowgirl84

[PeterMP]

50 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Iran has called for the destruction of Israel. Targeting people supported by Iran is self defense and certainly doesn’t justify the attacks on civilians launched by Hamas.

 

At what cost?  vs. at what risk.  In targeting people supported by Iran is there a limit to how many people, including civilians and children, that Israel can kill?  Can Israel kill every Palestinian (commit genocide) if they are targeting people supported by Iran?

 

Does the practicality of the people attacking and destroying Israel matter?  If they just killed every Gazan to destroy people supported by Iran, would other Palestinians then be justified in attacking Israel and killing civilians?

 

Where do you draw the line?  Why do you get to decide what is justified (vs. let's say some Palestinian)?

 

(Hamas only used to attack Israeli military personal and sites.  They changed because Israeli non-military personal (settlers) were attacking and killing Palestinians and Israel wasn't really doing anything about it.  They see Israeli citizens as legitimate targets because Israeli citizens were attacking, taking land from, and killing Palestinians.  Hamas' position in their view is justified based on prior Israeli actions.  Just like you and Israel are justifying Israel's current and unprecedented (in the context of this conflict) attack on Gaza as justified based on Hamas' prior actions.

 

And you can keep going back until you are arguing about what a bunch of dead people did.  Which IMO doesn't do any good.)

Edited February 12 by PeterMP

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

In targeting people supported by Iran is there a limit to how many people, including civilians and children, that Israel can kill?  Can Israel kill every Palestinian (commit genocide) if they are targeting people supported by Iran?

 

That isn’t Israel’s goal. And they haven’t done that.
 

 

 Moving your argument to the imaginary extremes kinda shows how desperate you are to cast the blame for this on Israel.

[PeterMP]

16 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

That isn’t Israel’s goal. And they haven’t done that.
 

 

 Moving your argument to the imaginary extremes kinda shows how desperate you are to cast the blame for this on Israel.

 

I'm not trying to blame Israel.  I specifically said in my post, you can keep going back to you are blaming a bunch of dead people that doesn't do any good.  I'm trying to point out flaws in your logic and yes by pointing to the extremes.

 

But I'll also note that you didn't answer the question. 

 

What do you draw the line?  And why do you get decide that's where the line is drawn?

 

Would you rather we discuss something that has been proposed by some Israelis in the government?  In trying to destroy Iranian supported organizations is Israel allowed to dispose every Gazan of their land and make Gaza part of Israel?

 

You ignored the key question to continue placing simplistic blame on Palestinians.

Edited February 12 by PeterMP

[CousinsCowgirl84]

4 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

 

 

But I'll also note that you didn't answer the question. 

 

Because the question is pointless and retarded. The goal is a minimize civilian casualties while getting rid of Hamas.
 

Hamas knows civilian casualties will hurt Israel, so they do everything in their power to increase civilian casualties.
 

 

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Because the question is pointless and retarded. The goal is a minimize civilian casualties while getting rid of Hamas.
 

Hamas knows civilian casualties will hurt Israel, so they do everything in their power to increase civilian casualties.
 

 

 

I don't think it is pointless.  Because it isn't clear that Hamas can be destroyed this way.  And certainly not destroyed in this way that practically does any good (i.e. destroyed and not replaced by an organization that will have similar goals and similar methods (e.g. the Muslim Brotherhood)).

 

But whether that goal is reasonable and achievable and how well they are minimizing civilian casualties has been questioned. e.g.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/12/israel-gaza-war-can-hamas-actually-be-eliminated-experts-weigh-in.html#:~:text=It has substantial support in,still not eliminate the organization.

 

Even Israel admits that they haven't been successful in minimizing civilian deaths.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-67447942

 

And Biden called their bombing indiscriminate (early on):

https://apnews.com/article/biden-israel-hamas-oct-7-44c4229d4c1270d9cfa484b664a22071

 

And emptying Gaza of Palestinians has been raised by at least one person in the Israeli government.

 

You can't even discuss what Israel shouldn't do with respect to Palestinians in trying to destroy Hamas?  Or whether they've set themselves a goal that can be achieved without eliminating Palestinians from Gaza (to be clear that doesn't mean killing them but would also include moving them to somewhere else)?

 

Is it not possible that Israel will do things that are "wrong" that having a discussion of what that would look like so that we know if we see it pointless and retarded?

Edited February 12 by PeterMP