Discussion
Grumfutock said:
Please see my comments on post above. You just cant help yourself can you?
Your misanthropy towards Israel is very concerning.
And your denial of the Nakba would only be mirrored by Holocaust denial. Your misanthropy towards Israel is very concerning.
Edited by Grumfutock on Saturday 15th November 20:46
Again, you represent the loony right of Israel's loony right. You've proved it time and time again.
With friends like you, Israel doesn't need enemies.
Fortunately its people still have some friends.
Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Saturday 15th November 23:53
TheRealFingers99 said:
Grum: Well if they weren't out on the streets - they wouldn't be getting in trouble would they now. They just bring it upon themselves - there's no helping people who don't want to help themselves.Oh and suspending Arab members of the Knesset that happen to disagree with you - classy, very classy.
I would actually compare people like Grum to ISIS sympathisers. Both try to rationalise the unjustifiable.
Edited by zuby84 on Sunday 16th November 02:23
zuby84 said:
Grum: Well if they weren't out on the streets - they wouldn't be getting in trouble would they now. They just bring it upon themselves - there's no helping people who don't want to help themselves.
Oh and suspending Arab members of the Knesset that happen to disagree with you - classy, very classy.
I would actually compare people like Grum to ISIS sympathisers. Both try to rationalise the unjustifiable.
ISIS sympathiser? Well that just shows your utter ignorance and the pathetic levels that you will fall to. To compare me to an ISIS sympathiser is, even by somebody of your low intellect, a pretty ridiculous thing to say.Oh and suspending Arab members of the Knesset that happen to disagree with you - classy, very classy.
I would actually compare people like Grum to ISIS sympathisers. Both try to rationalise the unjustifiable.
Edited by zuby84 on Sunday 16th November 02:23
At school did you get reports that said "sets very low standards and repeatedly fails to achieve them"?
If you were a horse I wouldn't breed from you!
Zub: Oh I feel the need to be hip and trendy, what cause can I support today? Oh I know the poor little Arabs in Jerusalem. That will make me look cool and chic at dinner parties. How very cosmopolitan. Pass the lentils!
Edited by Grumfutock on Sunday 16th November 09:10
TheRealFingers99 said:
Surely Grads (or an Israeli version) were just what Israel was using to deliver cluster munitions (another terror weapon) on South Lebanon?
Any weapon can be a terror weapon. Supply Hamas with more wire guided anti tank missiles and accurate surface to surface missiles and I'm sure the IDF would be really, really happy. (What's that hole in my tank? Why didn't it just bounce off?)
Still, there is no viable military solution to this conflict.
You are obsessed with cluster munitions. There was no international law governing them or legislating their use until 2008 so it was not illegal for Israel to use them and I fail to see why you keep banging on about them. Many nations have used them. NATO used them in Iraq and Afghanistan. Britain used them in the Falklands. I would also suggest that if they could get hold of them that Hamas would sure as hell use them.Any weapon can be a terror weapon. Supply Hamas with more wire guided anti tank missiles and accurate surface to surface missiles and I'm sure the IDF would be really, really happy. (What's that hole in my tank? Why didn't it just bounce off?)
Still, there is no viable military solution to this conflict.
How the hell is the Israeli Menatetz, a multi launch rocket system (MLRS), a terror weapon? It is a M270 MLRS which most of the western world have a version of, so by your logic every single modern army is guilty as they all have it!
What Hamas fire is not accurate in the remotest and I quote some info for you: "The system has lower precision than classical artillery and cannot be used in situations that call for pinpoint precision. It relies on a large number of shells dissipating over an area for a certain hit rate on specific targets." A Grad is a 1960 vintage piece of equipment more on a par with what was used in WW2 for volley fire whilst the Qassam is about as accurate as a V1, in fact slightly less!
Oh an no, not any weapon can be a terror weapon. Words are a weapon, propaganda is a weapon, the media is a weapon! What Hamas fire is. Not my opinion but rather that of the Human Rights Watch:
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/12/24/gaza-palestinia...
I also quote the Amnesty International report on it because according to a public document (July 2014) Amnesty International "has documented that Palestinian armed groups have stored munitions in and fired indiscriminate rockets from residential areas in the Gaza Strip, and available evidence indicates that they continue to do both during the current hostilities, in violation of international humanitarian law".
Grumfutock said:
You are obsessed with cluster munitions. There was no international law governing them or legislating their use until 2008 so it was not illegal for Israel to use them and I fail to see why you keep banging on about them.
They're disgusting. If you want to see how disgusting, watch Remnants of a War which details Israel's use and the consequences, together with the de-mining operation. Israel's use of them seems to have been purely to punish the Lebanese -- it was done when the IDF was in full withdrawal mode. Grumfutock said:
I would also suggest that if they could get hold of them that Hamas would sure as hell use them.
So, your logic is that terrorists would use them, so Israel should? Rock on, Einstein! Grumfutock said:
Oh an no, not any weapon can be a terror weapon. Words are a weapon, propaganda is a weapon, the media is a weapon!
The sophistry of a fool. If someone takes a automatic rifle to a shopping arcade, isn't it a terror weapon? But, then, context is something the military mind finds difficult.
Really? No reference what so ever to the UK or USA use of them? We are just going to skate over that bit are we?
So to clarify, cluster munitions are perfectly legal until the Convention of Cluster Munitions was signed in Dec 2008. Israel never signed it so are not bound by it (FYI neither has America, Egypt, Syria, Iran, China and a whole host of others). The last known use of them by Israel was in 2006, 2 years before the convention but the same time that the USA used them in Iraq and both Russia and Georgia used them in their war. And yet we condemn Israel? Yep, keep closing your eye as your lack of vision is exquisite.
So to clarify, cluster munitions are perfectly legal until the Convention of Cluster Munitions was signed in Dec 2008. Israel never signed it so are not bound by it (FYI neither has America, Egypt, Syria, Iran, China and a whole host of others). The last known use of them by Israel was in 2006, 2 years before the convention but the same time that the USA used them in Iraq and both Russia and Georgia used them in their war. And yet we condemn Israel? Yep, keep closing your eye as your lack of vision is exquisite.
TheRealFingers99 said:
The sophistry of a fool. If someone takes a automatic rifle to a shopping arcade, isn't it a terror weapon?
But, then, context is something the military mind finds difficult.
No it is not, it is a rifle in a shopping centre!!! So if we follow that nugget of logic then a machine gun in a shopping centre is a weapon of mass destruction. But, then, context is something the military mind finds difficult.
Do you employ a comedy writer or do you come up with this stuff yourself?
Grumfutock said:
Really? No reference what so ever to the UK or USA use of them? We are just going to skate over that bit are we?
So to clarify, cluster munitions are perfectly legal until the Convention of Cluster Munitions was signed in Dec 2008. Israel never signed it so are not bound by it (FYI neither has America, Egypt, Syria, Iran, China and a whole host of others). The last known use of them by Israel was in 2006, 2 years before the convention but the same time that the USA used them in Iraq and both Russia and Georgia used them in their war. And yet we condemn Israel? Yep, keep closing your eye as your lack of vision is exquisite.
I'd condemn their use -- even their existence -- whoever used them. But we're talking about Israel (again, context, duh). So to clarify, cluster munitions are perfectly legal until the Convention of Cluster Munitions was signed in Dec 2008. Israel never signed it so are not bound by it (FYI neither has America, Egypt, Syria, Iran, China and a whole host of others). The last known use of them by Israel was in 2006, 2 years before the convention but the same time that the USA used them in Iraq and both Russia and Georgia used them in their war. And yet we condemn Israel? Yep, keep closing your eye as your lack of vision is exquisite.
And, once again, as you never get the point, Israel's use of them was, it seems, without any military justification. They used them to make homes, villages, and fields unsafe so the civilian population could not return. Rather like this barbaric nonsense of killing a terrorist and then destroying his family's home.
Spiteful, cynical, and plain brutish.
Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
The sophistry of a fool. If someone takes a automatic rifle to a shopping arcade, isn't it a terror weapon?
But, then, context is something the military mind finds difficult.
No it is not, it is a rifle in a shopping centre!!! So if we follow that nugget of logic then a machine gun in a shopping centre is a weapon of mass destruction. But, then, context is something the military mind finds difficult.
Do you employ a comedy writer or do you come up with this stuff yourself?
Ask your mates in the IDF about weapons of mass destruction. They have more than a few, all undeclared, IIRC.
Grumfutock said:
No it is not, it is a rifle in a shopping centre!!! So if we follow that nugget of logic then a machine gun in a shopping centre is a weapon of mass destruction.
Do you employ a comedy writer or do you come up with this stuff yourself?
Realise that this is getting a bit pedantic, but anything can be described as a "weapon of terror." The term is a grammatical modifier (in this case describing a noun [the "weapon"]) It depends on the context....Do you employ a comedy writer or do you come up with this stuff yourself?
"The car, being used as a weapon of terror, ploughed into the Israeli pedestrians."
"The car, being used as a weapon of terror, was cleaned by the car wash attendant."
Get it? One works because of the context and one doesn't. You really shouldn't argue the toss at every single opportunity you have as more often than not - you talk b
ks.I really wish my thought process was as simple as yours - I would have a much easier life I'll tell you that much!
Edited by zuby84 on Sunday 16th November 10:06
TheRealFingers99 said:
I'd condemn their use -- even their existence -- whoever used them. But we're talking about Israel (again, context, duh).
And yet you make no reference to them? Context? OK well the Israeli war on terrorism isn't just based there is it. It also involves the US as they arm Israel (to keep you up to speed, the Americans built and supplied the cluster monition launcher). It also involves the entire arab world as they fund and arm the terrorists. So context? Yes in context I think it does include a far wider area don't you?TheRealFingers99 said:
And, once again, as you never get the point, Israel's use of them was, it seems, without any military justification. They used them to make homes, villages, and fields unsafe so the civilian population could not return. unsafe for the terrorist to fire rockets from. Rather like this barbaric nonsense of killing a terrorist and then destroying his family's home.
Fixed that for you.TheRealFingers99 said:
Spiteful, cynical, and plain brutish.
Whilst driving a car into a pram is such a kind, sweet and considerate thing to do.Edited by Grumfutock on Sunday 16th November 10:40
zuby84 said:
Realise that this is getting a bit pedantic, but anything can be described as a "weapon of terror." The term is a grammatical modifier (in this case describing a noun [the "weapon"]) It depends on the context....
"The car, being used as a weapon of terror, ploughed into the Israeli pedestrians."
"The car, being used as a weapon of terror, was cleaned by the car wash attendant."
Get it? One works because of the context and one doesn't. You really shouldn't argue the toss at every single opportunity you have as more often than not - you talk bks.
I really wish my thought process was as simple as yours - I would have a much easier life I'll tell you that much!
Simple. What an apt word."The car, being used as a weapon of terror, ploughed into the Israeli pedestrians."
"The car, being used as a weapon of terror, was cleaned by the car wash attendant."
Get it? One works because of the context and one doesn't. You really shouldn't argue the toss at every single opportunity you have as more often than not - you talk b
ks.I really wish my thought process was as simple as yours - I would have a much easier life I'll tell you that much!
Edited by zuby84 on Sunday 16th November 10:06
Grumfutock said:
And yet you make no reference to them? Context? OK well the Israeli war on terrorism isn't just based their is it. It also involves the US as they arm Israel (to keep you up to speed, the Americans built and supplied the cluster monition launcher). It also involves the entire arab world as they fund and arm the terrorists. So context? Yes in context I think it does include a far wider area don't you?
I really don't understand this bit. Have you started drinking already? Why the hell should I talk about the US or the Arab world whenever I make any point? Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
And, once again, as you never get the point, Israel's use of them was, it seems, without any military justification. They used them to make homes, villages, and fields [-]unsafe so the civilian population could not return. [/I] unsafe for the terrorist to fire rockets from. Rather like this barbaric nonsense of killing a terrorist and then destroying his family's home.
Fixed that for you.Hezbollah are probably one of two groups to have significantly impacted the IDF. If you've the balls to get as close to a Merkava as they had to to do any damage, you're not going to be put off by a few bits of unexploded ordinance some spiteful little man has left lying about.
In any event, I think Israel withdrew to the south, out of Lebanon, Hezbollah toward the north, up the Bekaa valley.
Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
Spiteful, cynical, and plain brutish.
Whilst driving a car into a pram is such a kind, sweet and considerate thing to do.Edited by TheRealFingers99 on Sunday 16th November 10:36
TheRealFingers99 said:
I really don't understand this bit. Have you started drinking already? Why the hell should I talk about the US or the Arab world whenever I make any point?
Yes, when the subject matter is far greater than the local area then yes you should. You highlighted the 2006 Israel use of cluster munitions and condemned them. Yet you make no reference to America that also used them in 2006, built them and supplied them to Israel. Surely if we are to climb aboard the old moral indignation then we must include the manufacturer, supplier and fellow user?TheRealFingers99 said:
If you start pulling that asinine stunt of using the quotation tags to misquote me I will contact the moderators. It really is beyond the pale. What are you, a 5 year old? Grow up.
My, we are a touchy this morning. Did somebody get out of bed on the wrong side? My error was to use a "I" instead of an "-" in the 2nd brackets thereby crossing out your entry. However I suspect you knew that. TheRealFingers99 said:
Hezbollah are probably one of two groups to have significantly impacted the IDF. If you've the balls to get as close to a Merkava as they had to to do any damage, you're not going to be put off by a few bits of unexploded ordinance some spiteful little man has left lying about.
The iron dome hasn't stopped the terrorists firing rockets. Maybe the IDF should scrap that as well then.TheRealFingers99 said:
Whoever said it was? They killed the guy. What do his mother or younger brother or sister have to do with it? If you murder someone, do I make your family homeless? Only if I'm a brutal colonialist occupying power.
So what! It is a deterrent. No point having a deterrent if you don't follow through with the threat. Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
I really don't understand this bit. Have you started drinking already? Why the hell should I talk about the US or the Arab world whenever I make any point?
Yes, when the subject matter is far greater than the local area then yes you should. You highlighted the 2006 Israel use of cluster munitions and condemned them. Yet you make no reference to America that also used them in 2006, built them and supplied them to Israel. Surely if we are to climb aboard the old moral indignation then we must include the manufacturer, supplier and fellow user?Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
If you start pulling that asinine stunt of using the quotation tags to misquote me I will contact the moderators. It really is beyond the pale. What are you, a 5 year old? Grow up.
My, we are a touchy this morning. Did somebody get out of bed on the wrong side? My error was to use a "I" instead of an "-" in the 2nd brackets thereby crossing out your entry. However I suspect you knew that. Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
Hezbollah are probably one of two groups to have significantly impacted the IDF. If you've the balls to get as close to a Merkava as they had to to do any damage, you're not going to be put off by a few bits of unexploded ordinance some spiteful little man has left lying about.
The iron dome hasn't stopped the terrorists firing rockets. Maybe the IDF should scrap that as well then.Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
Whoever said it was? They killed the guy. What do his mother or younger brother or sister have to do with it? If you murder someone, do I make your family homeless? Only if I'm a brutal colonialist occupying power.
So what! It is a deterrent. No point having a deterrent if you don't follow through with the threat. TheRealFingers99 said:
As I pointed out, I condemn their use and existence. What part of that do you not get?
TheRealFingers99 said:
Do it properly. Defacing stuff in quotations is not how adults do it.
LMFAO! TheRealFingers99 said:
Iron dome doesn't seem to be causing collateral damage to innocent civilians. As I point out, Hezbollah were withdrawing in the opposite direction! The terrorism here was on Israel's part -- Hezbollah hurt us, let's hurt the Lebanese.
Is that not called a consequence of action?TheRealFingers99 said:
Who are you going to deter? It's back to the tactics the Americans used against the American Indians, the Brits against the "fuzzy wuzzies", the US against the Vietnamese. It doesn't work, never did. All you do is create more enemies and, in the modern world, attract more criticism. The US are already criticising it. Dumb, stupid, brutal and pointless. Bibi to a tee.
Really? And how many more attacks would there be without this deterrent? We will never know.Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
Iron dome doesn't seem to be causing collateral damage to innocent civilians. As I point out, Hezbollah were withdrawing in the opposite direction! The terrorism here was on Israel's part -- Hezbollah hurt us, let's hurt the Lebanese.
Is that not called a consequence of action?Grumfutock said:
TheRealFingers99 said:
Who are you going to deter? It's back to the tactics the Americans used against the American Indians, the Brits against the "fuzzy wuzzies", the US against the Vietnamese. It doesn't work, never did. All you do is create more enemies and, in the modern world, attract more criticism. The US are already criticising it. Dumb, stupid, brutal and pointless. Bibi to a tee.
Really? And how many more attacks would there be without this deterrent? We will never know.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff