Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merrill)
    No. No IDF soldier is forced to kill a civilian. They do so under their own will, or by accident.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Okay fair enough, but the former does not engage in any wars even when threatened with sanctions ect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    When did Israel "withdraw from Gaza"? They clearly haven't!
    2005. Try and keep up.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shahbaz)
    Dude, they are much worse off in Gaza you know how many people died in their homes?

    Do you think Hamas can do anything is wants it is the under dog here and what if I told you hamas would agree to a cease fire if the blockade on Gaza was lifted.
    Right now it sucks to be in Gaza. No argument there. But are they really trying to kill people? Look at the destruction wrought on Syria when that went down recently - just opened up without any regard whatsoever as who was there, and the number of people killed was a hundred times what it is in Gaza. And where were all the trouble-makers then? All trying to somehow blame the "West" rather than just be realistic - that people are getting killed when there's conflict, and it's not "worse" when it's Israel doing it.

    And when there is no war, the laws of the PA notwithstanding, you're so much better off in Gaza than Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi, Iraq or Iran.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by merrill)
    I am neutral, I said I don't have the figures. Down to a mixture of laziness and probability of them not being published till after the conflict is over. Its worth noting that 30 000 missiles were fired BEFORE the most recent outbreak of conflict, not during. So actually, I don't have figures for either side on the ammunition expenditure of the current conflict. But they will be published at some point.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Let's try this another way:

    How many shells/missiles were fired by Israel on Gaza prior to the start of this conflict? (You have said that they publish after the conflict so I'm asking you for the last updated figures)...

    Oh, and judging by what I have seen in the Israel/Palestine megathread, you are most definitely not as you claim, "a neutral"...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    2005. Try and keep up.
    That wasn't a withdrawal. It was a redeployment of the IDF to Gaza's borders.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    That wasn't a withdrawal. It was a redeployment of the IDF to Gaza's borders.
    Ah, I see - you're a troll.

    Goodbye.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    Let's try this another way:

    How many shells/missiles were fired by Israel on Gaza prior to the start of this conflict? (You have said that they publish after the conflict so I'm asking you for the last updated figures)...

    Oh, and judging by what I have seen in the Israel/Palestine megathread, you are most definitely not as you claim, "a neutral"...
    No idea, if you could quote me the figures I would be grateful because I don't actually know. They will be there, but probably hidden somewhere (proganda purposes obviously). An educated guess would be that Israel fires more artillery shells and bullets (certainly more bullets) whilst Hamas fires more mortar rounds and rockets.

    And im more pro Israel, than pro Hamas, but this has been explained. Im certainly not pro killing civilians or anti Palestine.

    This does not mean I wont be critical of Israel.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    If you're referring to the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, its Christian Lebanese militias who did that, as revenge for the killing of PM Gamayel. Sharon had nothing to do with that, and its hypocritical that people still blame him for a case of Christians killing Muslims.
    Let's not forget that the palestinain scum invaded Lebanon and slaughtered Christians there. They sparked off the civil war which killed 100,000+

    Scum.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    Ah, I see - you're a troll.

    Goodbye.
    No. I'm not a troll. It was labeled a unilateral withdrawal by the Israelis, but given the IDF remained in control of Gaza's borders and water passages, the consensus of virtually every disinterested actor maintained that Gaza remained under Israeli occupation. Hence, not a withdrawal by any objective standard.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    Carry on for a little longer and it will become the norm. Nearly half of Gaza's population is under 14.

    Is it not? Do prisoners not get food and medicine reluctantly?
    It doesn't matter how old they are. The fact remains that the number of dead Palestinians in Gaza is so small relative to the population that it has no effect on the life expectancy.

    People earlier in this thread claimed that the people of Gaza are not allowed food or basic medical supplies. Having established that this is not true, in what way is Gaza like a prison?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shahbaz)
    Okay fair enough, but the former does not engage in any wars even when threatened with sanctions ect.
    No, not at all.

    Only the million-killing Iran-Iraq war, and getting heavily involved in Iraq and Syria in recent years.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    If you're referring to the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, its Christian Lebanese militias who did that, as revenge for the killing of PM Gamayel. Sharon had nothing to do with that, and its hypocritical that people still blame him for a case of Christians killing Muslims.
    Given that Sharon was forced to resign by his own colleagues because of his role in that massacre, your assertion that he "had nothing to do" with it is completely groundless.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    By protecting those who support Hitler's actions, you too are supporting the genocide of millions of Jews.

    I really do understand that these people have the right to be angry, however they do not then have the right to preach hate speech in the street. Hitler was an evil human being and they are supporting him and therefore his actions.

    Do you think what Hitler did was a good thing?
    I wouldn't bother. She's failed to respond to pretty much every counter-argument lodged against her arguments in this entire thread.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lady Comstock)
    I wouldn't bother. She's failed to respond to pretty much every counter-argument lodged against her facile arguments in this entire thread.
    Yeah, I don't know why I bother sometimes. Some people are just retarded.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    No. I'm not a troll. It was labeled a unilateral withdrawal by the Israelis, but given the IDF remained in control of Gaza's borders and water passages, the consensus of virtually every disinterested actor maintained that Gaza remained under Israeli occupation. Hence, not a withdrawal by any objective standard.
    I think that anyone who tries to justify continual terrorism because the unilateral withdrawal did not quite tick all of their boxes (despite assurances that if the withdrawal was met with peace that the remaining contentious issues would be resolved) can be justifiably described as a sub-human.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    I think that anyone who tries to justify continual terrorism because the unilateral withdrawal did not quite tick all of their boxes (despite assurances that if the withdrawal was met with peace that the remaining contentious issues would be resolved) can be justifiably described as a sub-human.
    I haven't "justified continual terrorism". Find a single sentence that I've written above which can be at all considered a justification of anything, let alone this amorphous concept called "terrorism".
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    animals. Nothing to please these brainwashed dead beats.

    Go Israel!!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    Except, of course, that the Mufti of Jerusalem in the WW2 period, who was a general representative of the "Palestinian" (read Arab people of Palestine) people met with Hitler, and allied himself to Hitler, and many representatives of the Palestinian people have engaged in Holocaust denial
    That actions of the Mufti of Jerusalem do not apply now, just as we do not punish the current generation of German's for the Nazi's atrocities.

    I don't know much about what these "representatives of the palestinian people" have said, so I can't comment on that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    I haven't "justified continual terrorism". Find a single sentence that I've written above which can be at all considered a justification of anything, let alone this amorphous concept called "terrorism".
    You implied it by countering my point about Israeli withdrawal and terrorism continuing.

    Like all the vile apologists for terrorism, you look for any excuse to continue terrorism.

    Most humans would say "Hmmm, the conflict has been going on for decades, Israel made a unilateral withdrawal. It may not have been perfect but at least it was a big step in the right direction and they should be commended. palestinians replying with terrorism was completely unjustified. Had they replied positively, the remaining issues would have been resolved "


    The vile, despicable sub-human answer is "well they may have withdrawn, but they didn't open everything up straight away. They didn't allow palestinians to buy planes and open the airport on day 1. So you see it was really 100% withdrawal.


    Just in case you're confused, you fall into the latter category.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinzgauer)
    You implied it by countering my point about Israeli withdrawal and terrorism continuing.

    Like all the vile apologists for terrorism, you look for any excuse to continue terrorism.

    Most humans would say "Hmmm, the conflict has been going on for decades, Israel made a unilateral withdrawal. It may not have been perfect but at least it was a big step in the right direction and they should be commended. palestinians replying with terrorism was completely unjustified. Had they replied positively, the remaining issues would have been resolved "


    The vile, despicable sub-human answer is "well they may have withdrawn, but they didn't open everything up straight away. They didn't allow palestinians to buy planes and open the airport on day 1. So you see it was really 100% withdrawal.


    Just in case you're confused, you fall into the latter category.
    That doesn't show I "justified continual terrorism". Your point is completely bogus, regardless of what you think I "implied".

    Besides making hasty generalizations about what "most humans" would say, maybe you should consider why most of world opinion is firmly against this invasion, and why, say, the United Nations Secretary General has accused Israel of committing war crimes.

    And for what it's worth, Hamas rockets are completely unjustifiable, hence why I have never "justified" or "apologized" for them, despite your crazed rantings and straw man arguments suggesting otherwise.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.