Discussion
Funkycoldribena said:
kitz said:
Any fool knows that Hamas resistance fighters have
No mothers
No fathers
No brothers
No sisters
No cousins
No nieces
No nephews
No wife
No loved ones
They are all mad monsters who love death ...
Any fool knows that posters on this thread who have a dog in the fight
never hunt in packs .
Meanwhile the slaughter continues .
You talk a lot of crap but write lovely poems.No mothers
No fathers
No brothers
No sisters
No cousins
No nieces
No nephews
No wife
No loved ones
They are all mad monsters who love death ...
Any fool knows that posters on this thread who have a dog in the fight
never hunt in packs .
Meanwhile the slaughter continues .
Scuffers said:
Funkycoldribena said:
JuniorD said:
There's much talk of Hamas tunnels, but scant evidence of their extent on TV.
Plenty here-http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=tunnels
was looking at one on the BBC that was made from precast reinforced concrete sections and was some 3 miles long and 20M deep, that's some tunnel!
you can see why Israel are so pissed off with them, they were badgered into supplying cement and concrete for them to make houses etc, and this is what it get's used for.
realistically, they must have been digging these tunnels for years.
jonby said:
First of all an apology - I see I've been confusing 2 or 3 different people as one and the same, following on from a post I made on this subject which several different people have replied to / commented on. In particular, with regards to Hamas taking an element of responsibility
With regards to your last couple of paragraphs, surely they amplify my argument that UNRWA is conflicted ? I've never said that they are outright 'bad'. I've suggested for instance (in the post you quote) that one possible explanation is that they are abused. As in the status of their properties is abused by Hamas storing weapons in them. But they are still conflicted - do they publicly condemn (as they have done in at least 3 instances) and risk their own lives (for the reasons you quote) or say nothing in the interests of the greater good ? I can't think of a much better example of a conflict of interest and as such, that to an extent, compromises them. I still struggle to see how that argument doesn't hold water. I see other conflicts too with UNRWA - it's unavoidable
But in context, the only reason that issue ever came up in my post was to point out that if UNRWA say they have found bombs in their schools, I imagine we would all believe it to be true as opposed to say Fox News or IDF making the same statement. You made a post in a conversation I was having with someone else (which of course is great) but in context of the previous exchanges, the whole UNRWA issue would be more apparent. As I say, apologies for mixing you up with someone else and I can understand how in isolation the context would look different
The first bit of your post however i just don't get. To use your example, if lizards were found to be plotting to take over the UK one day then Germany 5 days later, then France 3 days after that, I think it reasonable to assume that on the balance of probability, we would find out a few days later that they were plotting to take over other European countries too (yes I know, the UK isn't actually a country !). Not 100% definite, but likely
I've not invented anything. I've suggested that we believe the UNRWA when they announce what they have found. There have been 3 incidents in less than 2 weeks. If there;s a 4th or 5th incident, that's more extreme than 3 incidents. Probability suggests there will be more incidents. That would make it more extreme a situation than we know. Am I speculating - yes. Wild speculation - no. To compare my stance to one suggesting lizards are plotting to take over the world is only making one person look foolish IMO
Of course UNWRA are "conflicted" as you say, merely to work within Gaza, they have to conform to Hamas's rules; like not telling the Israeli forces when they find an arms cache, because it would undermine their ability to tend for the Palestinian civilians. This is understood: If the Israelis were in the same position as the Palestinians now, they too would receive exactly the same support from UNWRA. If the positions of the war were completely reversed, should UNWRA find 'contraband' rockets in an Israel, they'd tell the Israel powers that be not their "attackers" - no matter how justified the attackers might be. You fail to understand the specific circumstances of the situation on the ground. With regards to your last couple of paragraphs, surely they amplify my argument that UNRWA is conflicted ? I've never said that they are outright 'bad'. I've suggested for instance (in the post you quote) that one possible explanation is that they are abused. As in the status of their properties is abused by Hamas storing weapons in them. But they are still conflicted - do they publicly condemn (as they have done in at least 3 instances) and risk their own lives (for the reasons you quote) or say nothing in the interests of the greater good ? I can't think of a much better example of a conflict of interest and as such, that to an extent, compromises them. I still struggle to see how that argument doesn't hold water. I see other conflicts too with UNRWA - it's unavoidable
But in context, the only reason that issue ever came up in my post was to point out that if UNRWA say they have found bombs in their schools, I imagine we would all believe it to be true as opposed to say Fox News or IDF making the same statement. You made a post in a conversation I was having with someone else (which of course is great) but in context of the previous exchanges, the whole UNRWA issue would be more apparent. As I say, apologies for mixing you up with someone else and I can understand how in isolation the context would look different
The first bit of your post however i just don't get. To use your example, if lizards were found to be plotting to take over the UK one day then Germany 5 days later, then France 3 days after that, I think it reasonable to assume that on the balance of probability, we would find out a few days later that they were plotting to take over other European countries too (yes I know, the UK isn't actually a country !). Not 100% definite, but likely
I've not invented anything. I've suggested that we believe the UNRWA when they announce what they have found. There have been 3 incidents in less than 2 weeks. If there;s a 4th or 5th incident, that's more extreme than 3 incidents. Probability suggests there will be more incidents. That would make it more extreme a situation than we know. Am I speculating - yes. Wild speculation - no. To compare my stance to one suggesting lizards are plotting to take over the world is only making one person look foolish IMO
Mr Snap said:
jonby said:
I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that more similar incidents will come to light, either because they haven't been discovered yet or because Hamas are managing to keep a lid on them. They can't be less extreme than reported. It's common sense to assume more discoveries will come to light
I've consistently said that Hamas are doing the Palestinians no favours in hiding rockets in schools. It makes their position weaker. I stand by that position. Your refusal to acknowledge that fairly basic premise speaks volumes
As for the UNRWA, they are not the same as the UN. They have historically consistently denied their facilities ever being used by Hamas. In the incident a week or two ago, they handed over the weapons they found 'to the local authorities'. In the second incident, they 'lost' the weapons. It's taken the third (publically known about) incident for them to think about using a UN weapons disposal team. So are they incompetent, abused or complicit ? Or some other option I can't think of ?
Then it's equally "reasonable" to say things like 'lizards are plotting world rule' (which they aren't, just in case you're worried). You can't just invent stuff and say it's "reasonable' - it's the very opposite of reason. From our position in the UK it's best to say we don't know enough until evidence either way has been provided. You don't have any evidence. Anything else is pouring petrol on the fire. If you think that's a good idea, you're a fool.I've consistently said that Hamas are doing the Palestinians no favours in hiding rockets in schools. It makes their position weaker. I stand by that position. Your refusal to acknowledge that fairly basic premise speaks volumes
As for the UNRWA, they are not the same as the UN. They have historically consistently denied their facilities ever being used by Hamas. In the incident a week or two ago, they handed over the weapons they found 'to the local authorities'. In the second incident, they 'lost' the weapons. It's taken the third (publically known about) incident for them to think about using a UN weapons disposal team. So are they incompetent, abused or complicit ? Or some other option I can't think of ?
I have also said Hamas are not helping the Palestinians, I've said they're terrorists and I've said their actions are wrong. Your saying that I refuse to acknowledge these things is absolutely untrue and you can go back and check my contributions word for word on that. What I have said is that the Israelis are reaping what they've sewn, if they hadn't treated the Palestinians so badly they wouldn't be in this situation - you can check me on that, too.
I've already explained why UNRWA had to hand the arms over to Hamas when the first lot were found, it was the only logical action in the circumstances. If you'd been placed in the same circumstances, you too would have had to do the same if you wanted to live - and if you wish to understand the logic of that you can go back 20 odd pages and check that too.
In the second situation, losing the arms is also explicable. Once UNWRA has found arms the only thing they can do is to walk away from them and, in a Hamas controlled area, tell Hamas. Why? Because by hanging around you're liable to get dead very very quickly at the hands of either side if you are found. What do you UNWRA should do if they find arms, leave one of their trained nurses to stand by and guard them FFS? UNRWA are unarmed, they cannot be seen to get involved in handling arms. The only thing they can do is inform Hamas as outlined in my explanation 20 pages ago. To suggest otherwise is again foolish. This isn't somewhere in the Home Counties, where you can tell the local bobby, it's a war zone and different rules apply - especially if you want to live through it.\
Step back and think about what you're saying.
Let's acknowledge that you agree Hamas are terrorists, are no friend to the Palestinians, etc. That said, let's return to the basic question; Hamas was rocketing Israel by the thousands, what is Israel to do? Your solution please.The level of hate (on both sides no doubt) is just off the scale. They see the other side as subhuman.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/29/israeli...
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/29/israeli...
Mr Snap said:
Jimbeaux said:
Yep, been a corrupting influence on PH for about 10 years. So pained that I do not meet your standards for being above contempt; not sure how I will live with myself. Which part was "bigoted"? Would hate to miss that. That said, what army intenet on killing as many civilians as possible would drop any warning leaflets?? Wake up please. Sarcasm aside from both parties, we probably would get on in person TBH.
Ah, the curtain gets pulled aside a little.Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 30th July 15:10
Lots of armies have dropped leaflets cynically warning civilians to move.
The Nazis did it over London and the Allies responded in kind. And I'm sure you're already aware that the US leaflets, advising Japanese to leave Hiroshima, were dropped only three or four days after the bomb itself...
You know no history and this means you can be taken to pieces if you want to pick historical arguments. I'd drop that tack if I was you.
Sarcasm aside, we most certainly wouldn't.
JuniorD said:
skyrover said:
JuniorD said:
Anyone know how many satellites IDF might have placed above Gaza? With their resources, you'd think they'd have one or two, and would therefore have a very close eye on movement and deployment of missiles. Otherwise, the IDF intellegence must be petty w
k. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.
If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.k. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.
Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq
They couldn't wipe Gaza of the map if they wanted to. They would be stopped before they could. Instead they are doing it by attrition, bit by bit and by as much as they can justify/get away with each time.
As for comparisons with ISIS, well that's a different thread. But nevertheless, ISIS don't masquerade as a just, peaceful democracy and we would expect nothing less than their barbarism.
Jimbeaux said:
I'll give you this, you certainly win the prize for calling the most people foul names. Let's acknowledge that you agree Hamas are terrorists, are no friend to the Palestinians, etc. That said, let's return to the basic question; Hamas was rocketing Israel by the thousands, what is Israel to do? Your solution please.
Easy peasy. Not to have treated the Palestinians so badly in the first place. To have sought peace rather than conflict and to understand that the Palestinians have genuine grievances. It requires a climbdown on both sides and, if not admissions of guilt, admission of error. Let's acknowledge that you agree Hamas are terrorists, are no friend to the Palestinians, etc. That said, let's return to the basic question; Hamas was rocketing Israel by the thousands, what is Israel to do? Your solution please.Oh. And to ignore anyone who claims to be a "Consultant in Emergency Management & Homeland Security", because they're more likely to be part of the problem rather than the solution. Men with guns and a high opinion of themselves usually are the problem. No matter how amusing they might find themselves.
That veneer of jollity is getting thinner by the minute, Jim, old pal.
Mr Snap said:
Jimbeaux said:
I'll give you this, you certainly win the prize for calling the most people foul names. Let's acknowledge that you agree Hamas are terrorists, are no friend to the Palestinians, etc. That said, let's return to the basic question; Hamas was rocketing Israel by the thousands, what is Israel to do? Your solution please.
Easy peasy. Not to have treated the Palestinians so badly in the first place. To have sought peace rather than conflict and to understand that the Palestinians have genuine grievances. It requires a climbdown on both sides and, if not admissions of guilt, admission of error. Let's acknowledge that you agree Hamas are terrorists, are no friend to the Palestinians, etc. That said, let's return to the basic question; Hamas was rocketing Israel by the thousands, what is Israel to do? Your solution please.Oh. And to ignore anyone who claims to be a "Consultant in Emergency Management & Homeland Security", because they're more likely to be part of the problem rather than the solution. Men with guns and a high opinion of themselves usually are the problem. No matter how amusing they might find themselves.
That veneer of jollity is getting thinner by the minute, Jim, old pal.
As to your solution to Hamas rocketing Israel.....You say they should "stop treating the Palestinians badly". NOT the point. Hamas does not do what they do because Palestinians are treated badly, you all but admitted that in your post condemning Hamas. You are picking your own argument apart. My question stands; 1,000s of rockets are fired by Hamas into Israel, what is Israel to do? Take another breath and give it the old school try.
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 30th July 20:40
Jimbeaux said:
JuniorD said:
skyrover said:
JuniorD said:
Anyone know how many satellites IDF might have placed above Gaza? With their resources, you'd think they'd have one or two, and would therefore have a very close eye on movement and deployment of missiles. Otherwise, the IDF intellegence must be petty wk. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.
If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.k. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.
Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq
They couldn't wipe Gaza of the map if they wanted to. They would be stopped before they could. Instead they are doing it by attrition, bit by bit and by as much as they can justify/get away with each time.
As for comparisons with ISIS, well that's a different thread. But nevertheless, ISIS don't masquerade as a just, peaceful democracy and we would expect nothing less than their barbarism.
s1962a said:
Jimbeaux said:
JuniorD said:
skyrover said:
JuniorD said:
Anyone know how many satellites IDF might have placed above Gaza? With their resources, you'd think they'd have one or two, and would therefore have a very close eye on movement and deployment of missiles. Otherwise, the IDF intellegence must be petty wk. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.
If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.k. But hey, who needs intelligence when you go bomb the frig out of a place with total impunity and no regard for collateral death and damage.The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.
Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq
They couldn't wipe Gaza of the map if they wanted to. They would be stopped before they could. Instead they are doing it by attrition, bit by bit and by as much as they can justify/get away with each time.
As for comparisons with ISIS, well that's a different thread. But nevertheless, ISIS don't masquerade as a just, peaceful democracy and we would expect nothing less than their barbarism.
Funkycoldribena said:
league67 said:
Good source that, David Hornik. You might want to read up about author before you portray that as 'The Truth'.
So those videos are fabricated then?That ex-Israeli minister summed Israel's PR quite nicely.
I'm not saying Brand is right in all he says here, but I do pity you Jimbeaux for suffering the quality broadcasters that go by the name of Fox News.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5632882
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5632882
skyrover said:
If they were not concerned about collateral damage the death toll would be much much higher.
The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.
Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq
I know, those pesky Palestinians should be grateful. It's only like thousand+ of them died. Pfft, in great scheme of things; nothing. The Israeli's could literally wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to.
Incidentally they have killed less in two weeks than Isis killed in 48 hours in Iraq
Edited by league67 on Wednesday 30th July 21:12
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I don't watch them much either; sorry if that disappoints. BTW, Hannity is an opinion segment, "entertainment". Watch the different networks news segments, not their nighttime opinion shows. He no more speaks for Fox's news portion than Piers Morgan did for CNN. BTW, this is certainly encouraging
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/30/gaza-ce...
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 30th July 21:14
Jimbeaux said:
I don't watch them much either; sorry if that disappoints. BTW, Hannity is an opinion segment, "entertainment". Watch the different networks news segments, not their nighttime opinion shows. He no more speaks for Fox's news portion than Piers Morgan did for CNN.
BTW, this is certainly encouraging
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/30/gaza-ce...
From your link:BTW, this is certainly encouraging
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/30/gaza-ce...
Edited by Jimbeaux on Wednesday 30th July 21:14
"The Zionist entity will not know security unless the Palestinian people live in peace".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff