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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    Israel can flatten Gaza in 5 minutes and turn it into a glass parking lot. Clearly (and unfortunately) the IDF of today doesnt care about winning, they seem to just want to get rid of the tunnels and weaken (but not overthrow) Hamas. Even in 2009 during Operation Cast Lead with only 13 Israeli deaths (4 from friendly fire) and a severely weakened Hamas, Israel still didnt invade Gaza or get rid of Hamas.
    So they want no end to the conflict?

    There's a reason why I mentioned Sharon and Begin and Moshe Dayan. If they were in charge they would have flattened Gaza and built hundreds of settlements on top of it.
    Good thing or bad thing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    I have said on countless occasions and I will say it again on this thread, highlight the morally wrong actions of Hamas and I will happily admit to the faults of Israel in this conflict. Too often we have criticised Israel and on some instances rightly so but in no way should Hamas walk away clean as they too have blood on their hands. This whole thread has been one sided.

    Regarding the "Fight against terrorism" statement please do not be naive. It is a universally used statement to illustrate the global struggle against Islamic extremists. It has been used on the media, NGO and governmental stage. Pointing out stupid technicalities within my literacy is masking the real debate here.

    I assume you side with Israel because very few pro Palestinian supporters on here acknowledge the fact that most of the world and even Hamas themselves(how ironic) identify it as a terrorist organisation.

    Did you know not once have I asked for a source of information from you guys as I am old enough and able enough to search it for myself. However if you need me to find it for you and waste a portion of this day so be it but at least specify a legitimate source in your books, are we talking governmental data, NGO data, UN data, EU data...give me an idea because something tells me you are likely to disregard anything I post in an instance if it does not fit the criteria.
    That's not how it works. If you assert something like "Hamas uses human shields" then the burden of responsibility is on you to support that statement with credible evidence. It is not anybody else's responsibility. If you cannot provide such evidence then nobody has any reason to believe what you are saying, and so has no reason to go and do your job for you.

    "It is a universally used statement to illustrate the global struggle against Islamic extremists" - No it isn't 'universally used'. I don't use it. That proves it isn't 'universally used'.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    In which case, why would they offer a ceasefire?
    international pressure , humanitarian reasons for aid to reach casualties for regular palestinians.

    why would hamas repeatedly refuse /breach ceasefires??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    I studied it at high school, with wider reading here and there. Its all very fascinating, but irrelevant to solving the current situation.
    But apparently quite relevant for the substantiation of the State of Israel in Arabia, it seems...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meenglishnogood)
    international pressure , humanitarian reasons for aid to reach casualties for regular palestinians.
    But I thought Israel doesn't care about "international pressure", judging by some of the posts here by pro-Israeli's...

    why would hamas repeatedly refuse /breach ceasefires??
    I don't think they have actually breached any ceasefires.

    If you want to know why they "refuse them", then why don't you ask them?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    I have no idea, pretty stupid though to spend all this money to weaken but not destroy Hamas, when its pretty obvious in a couple years Hamas will rearm and another conflict will once again happen.
    Well, Israel seems to like it like that.

    Personally I'm a big fan of settlements, but that's just my opinion
    An opinion, I'm sure many of your compatriots would also share...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    I did not fully go through much previous conversations here, lol. Was in the office most of today
    I meant, the BD is quite relevant to Israeli's as they feel it substantiates their claim to a Jewish State in the middle of Arabia.

    The situation is quite ironic...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    [/B]
    Wow just wow LMFAO you really have no argument in this debate and once again instead of focusing on the issue you have talked a load of bull****. No point wasting my time with you.

    Was the bold highlighted quote there to annoy me or just be a troll because seriously WTF
    No, it's simply meant to illustrate that saying that "Fight against terrorism" is 'universally used', in response to my point that you can't fight against terrorism (which is a tactic), means absolutely nothing. It is not 'universally' used, and my not using it quite clearly demonstrates that. In fact, a large number of educated people would - and do - find fault with such a concept.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sic semper erat)
    I don't live far from the West Bank, but never bothered to visit. Much nicer places to see.
    I agree. I hear Haifa and Eliat are not too bad this time of the year...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    IDF "completes" tunnel objective.

    *snorts*
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    No, it's simply meant to illustrate that saying that "Fight against terrorism" is 'universally used', in response to my point that you can't fight against terrorism (which is a tactic), means absolutely nothing. It is not 'universally' used, and my not using it quite clearly demonstrates that. In fact, a large number of educated people would - and do - find fault with such a concept.
    Why are you on this thread? To discus illiterate quotes, spelling mistakes and lack of punctuation. We are having a debate and you have contributed next to nothing about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    Why are you on this thread? To discus illiterate quotes, spelling mistakes and lack of punctuation. We are having a debate and you have contributed next to nothing about it.
    Ok, you don't know what "universal" means.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    But I thought Israel doesn't care about "international pressure", judging by some of the posts here by pro-Israeli's... ?
    of course they care about international pressure- almost everyone does, apart form islamist terrorists, and humanity too. otherwise, could not israel just bomb gaza into complete dust without any concern of international reaction?
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    I don't think they have actually breached any ceasefires ?
    they certainly did http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-s...re-breach.html

    as well as refusing various attmepts for ceasefire - why?.
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    If you want to know why they "refuse them", then why don't you ask them?
    im asking you, you are a self-proclaimed expert
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Suetonius)
    Ok, you don't know what "universal" means.
    Of course I know what "universal" means for gods sake. In my context it does not mean every single soul on the planet has to use the term. Would you prefer "widely used and accepted"? I was presenting an argument and instead of you presenting your argument all you could do was highlight a technicality. I have heard politicians use it, academics, professors, directors, public speakers, comedians and almost every reporter yet no one comes on and says "I don't do/say/eat/watch...whatever...so it can't be universal". I mean't the majority, 99.9% as it were or however you like me to put it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meenglishnogood)
    of course they care about international pressure- almost everyone does, apart form islamist terrorists, and humanity too. otherwise, could not israel just bomb gaza into complete dust without any concern of international reaction?


    they certainly did http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-s...re-breach.html

    as well as refusing various attmepts for ceasefire - why?.

    im asking you, you are a self-proclaimed expert
    Without me searching through the pages am I right in thinking that the TSR guy believes Hamas has not broken any ceasefires?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meenglishnogood)
    of course they care about international pressure- almost everyone does, apart form islamist terrorists, and humanity too. otherwise, could not israel just bomb gaza into complete dust without any concern of international reaction?
    So the pro-Israeli's who say that "Israeli does not care about international pressure" are all liars?

    they certainly did http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-s...re-breach.html

    as well as refusing various attmepts for ceasefire - why?.
    Yes, they also condemned HAMAS for "capturing an Israeli soldier" when all the time it turns out, they didn't.

    I mean, if the US are issuing condemnations based on Israeli information, I'd be very wary.

    Furthermore, I posted a link to an article which state the IAF bombed the strip a couple of minutes into the ceasefire. You can go and find it if you want...

    im asking you, you are a self-proclaimed expert
    No, I don't believe I've ever held myself out to be an "expert". Perhaps you'd like to direct me to such a post...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    Without me searching through the pages am I right in thinking that the TSR guy believes Hamas has not broken any ceasefires?
    I'm just asking him to substantiate his statements which coincidentally, a lot of pro-Israeli's have been unable to do.

    Perhaps you'd like to have a bash at it after meenglishisnogood capitulates?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    Without me searching through the pages am I right in thinking that the TSR guy believes Hamas has not broken any ceasefires?
    yes indeed but then this is the same sage that doesnt think hamas is a terrorist organisation either, so it was almost predictable from him
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks guys, it has cleared up some of my confusion! Although I will have to read a lot of news articles from various sources to form an opinion on who is 'more wrong' than the other (as in, who is worse, Israelis or Palestinians). If I understand correctly, most of the western media will support the Israelis? (Although the BBC seems to share both sides of the story).

    While there are conflicts in this post, it's clear that the suffering of innocent civilians needs to stop, regardless of who is 'right' and who is 'wrong'. Once again, thanks guys
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    Of course I know what "universal" means for gods sake. In my context it does not mean every single soul on the planet has to use the term. Would you prefer "widely used and accepted"? I was presenting an argument and instead of you presenting your argument all you could do was highlight a technicality. I have heard politicians use it, academics, professors, directors, public speakers, comedians and almost every reporter yet no one comes on and says "I don't do/say/eat/watch...whatever...so it can't be universal". I mean't the majority, 99.9% as it were or however you like me to put it.
    You don't get to use key concepts in whatever way you please simply because it is "in [your] context" (whatever that means), or because of your appeals to authority (politicians, academics, professors etc.). Your whole point rested on the claim that it is "universally used", and I was simply illustrating that this isn't so. If you wished to make a separate point that accurately reflected your view then you ought to have done so initially.

    If your point is that "fight against terrorism" is a valid concept because the majority (99.9%) use it then that is an argumentum ad populum and so is still meaningless/fallacious. You do actually have to argue for why you think it's a valid concept.
 
 
 
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.

  • What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    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.