Hezbollah launch attack on Israeli troops

[Abd-ar-Rahman III]

So you admit that the Ultra Orthodox Jews are to be blamed for the increase of the birth rate. Fine.

The sources that I have seen do not show any decrease in the number of Israeli Arabs.

Anyway can you answer me why you do not think that Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace when countless of other people have had much worse relations and much bloodier conflicts, yet today they are doing fine?

If it was this bad, there would not be Israeli Arabs in Israel for instance.

Could anyone ever imagine that Egypt and Israel would not be mortal enemies for the foreseeable future?

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

It's not about deaths alone but this plays a huge role. Everyone knows that a few rockets fired from Gaza pose no existential threat to Israel and at most will kill a few unlucky civilians as those rockets are not that accurate. Not to forget the Iron Dome. If you think about this, the conclusion should be simple. It was disproportional hence why Israel suffered from so much criticism even from the West. Especially among the public.

Each individual living in Southern Israel had their life threatened multiple times per day,
and had to run for cover.
That is not acceptable, so I disagree. The missiles have to stop.
As long as focus is on military targets, I have no problem.

Don't forget that Hamas did not exactly go out of their way to stop the conflict.
It is THEIR job to protect their civilians, but their stategy and tactics does not
take civilian deaths into account.

That said, I would support a law banning Urban Warfare as Crime vs Humanity.

 

[Natan]

So you admit that the Ultra Orthodox Jews are to be blamed for the increase of the birth rate. Fine.

The sources that I have seen do not show any decrease in the number of Israeli Arabs.

Anyway can you answer me why you do not think that Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace when countless of other people have had much worse relations and much bloodier conflicts, yet today they are doing fine?

If it was this bad, there would not be Israeli Arabs in Israel for instance.

Could anyone ever imagine that Egypt and Israel would not be mortal enemies for the foreseeable future?

I will not repeat. The answers are one post above.

 

[SALMAN F]

In 1975, the Iraqis launched an offensive into Iran using tanks, though the Iranians defeated them.[43] Several other attacks took place; however, Iran had the world's fifth most powerful military at the time and easily defeated the Iraqis with its air force. As a result, Iraq decided against continuing the war, choosing instead to make concessions toTehran to end the Kurdish rebellion.[53][57]

In the 1975 Algiers Agreement, Iraq made territorial concessions—including the Shatt al-Arab waterway—in exchange for normalised relations.[53] In return for Iraq recognising that the frontier on the waterway ran along the entire thalweg, Iran ended its support of Iraq's Kurdish guerrillas.[53] Iraqis viewed the Algiers Agreement as humiliating.[53][58]:260 However, the agreement meant the end of Iranian and American support for the Peshmerga, who were defeated by Iraq's government in a short campaign that claimed 20,000 lives.[58]:298 The British journalist Patrick Brogan wrote that "...the Iraqis celebrated their victory in the usual manner, by executing as many of the rebels as they could lay their hands on."[58]

The relationship between the governments of Iran and Iraq briefly improved in 1978, when Iranian agents in Iraq discovered plans for a pro-Soviet coup d'état against Iraq's government. When informed of this plot, Saddam ordered the execution of dozens of his army's officers and in a sign of reconciliation, expelled Ruhollah Khomeini, an exiled leader of clerical opposition to the Shah, from Iraq. Despite this, Saddam merely considered the Algiers Agreement to be a truce, rather than a definite settlement, and waited for an opportunity to contest it.

Just a typical backstabbers throughout their history just how they attacked the Sassanid empire when it was weak in shapur II time and yezdagerd time but shapur was not weak

Just how the Abbasids used ummyya weakness and attacked them or salahdin did to the fatimates

That's animal that he could invade iran while its in her revolution but in reality he got beaten back even when iran lost its generals and weapons supplies from the US thats why the arabs and Americans saved him from iran but they destroyed him later in 1991

 

[The SiLent crY]

now when Israel reply they will cry and say look barbaric Israel bombing poor Lebanon . what a logic

Stop acting like those Sunni states that call themselves rightful Muslims but get laid with Israel and give their soils to the West .

Hezbollah forces have been attacked by Zionists inside Syria and Hezbollah has taken revenge to be even .

God bless Hezbollah , The true Muslims who have humiliated several hundred millions of so called Muslims and their Israeli allies by their sacrifices and bravery .

While Sunni states like Turkey , Saudi Arabia , Qatar , UAE , Kuwait , Egypt , Jordan etc and their terrorists are cooperating and drinking with Israelis , Hezbollah is fighting them and gifting martyrs yet bunch of people like you are either complaining or cheering for their death .

 

[Abd-ar-Rahman III]

Each individual living in Southern Israel had their life threatened multiple times per day,
and had to run for cover.
That is not acceptable, so I disagree. The missiles have to stop.
As long as focus is on military targets, I have no problem.

Don't forget that Hamas did not exactly go out of their way to stop the conflict.
It is THEIR job to protect their civilians, but their stategy and tactics does not
take civilian deaths into account.

That said, I would support a law banning Urban Warfare as Crime vs Humanity.

I don't believe so. Not with the Iron Dome around or the low quality rockets that Hamas have.

Yes, the missiles should stop but so should Israel's embargo on Gaza and the illegal settlements (according to the same international law that you argue from) in the West Bank.

I won't go into details as I am not a lawyer but it's clear to me that something is wrong when killing well over 1000 civilians in return of 5 civilian casualties can be considered "legal". Especially as Hamas nor those rockets pose any existential threat to Israel or their citizens outside of few settlements who already are under the protection of the Iron Dome etc.

I will not repeat. The answers are one post above.

With all due respect, you omitted many of my questions including the most important ones. I want to know why you think that there can be no peace when much bloodier conflicts between neighbors have ended now. Just use Egypt as an example. We are the ones that caused you the most destruction of all Muslim states (most of the others can only bark) while today we have somewhat neutral relations. At least we can talk as adult people and neighbors.

 

[Natan]

With all due respect, you omitted many of my questions including the most important ones. I want to know why you think that there can be no peace when much bloodier conflicts between neighbors have ended now. Just use Egypt as an example. We are the ones that caused you the most destruction of all Muslim states (most of the others can only bark) while today we have somewhat neutral relations. At least we can talk as adult people and neighbors.

Well, if this is the most important one: there are countless examples of bloody conflicts that have ended naturally when one side became too powerful and took what it wanted, while the other side eventually lost the ambition to reclaim it even when got enough power to try. There are also countless examples of former enemies unite against common enemy (i.e. France, West Germany against Warsaw Pact). Israel and Egypt have eventually returned to status quo ante bellum. Israel never had any claims on mainland Egyptian territory including Sinai, but Egypt eventually had to accept Israel's right to exist - something that wasn't obvious for Egypt before the wars. Neither of this applies on us and the 'Palestinians'. We can't defeat them one time that would last for generations without killing too many of them, and they obviously cannot even pose a threat to our existence. We have no common enemy, unless we are all suddenly invaded by aliens. We can't just give them N square kilometers of desert so they would leave us alone, because they also demand Jerusalem, and refugees, and cannot live on their own (like Egypt was living before the wars with Israel, during the wars, and after the wars, or like any other normal country lives) without their epic struggle against 'bloody Zionists'.

 

[Barmin]

I'm a secular atheist Jew.

Link:

52 percent of Jews do NOT believe in God

 

[Abd-ar-Rahman III]

Well, if this is the most important one: there are countless examples of bloody conflicts that have ended naturally when one side became too powerful and took what it wanted, while the other side eventually lost the ambition to reclaim it even when got enough power to try. There are also countless examples of former enemies unite against common enemy (i.e. France, West Germany against Warsaw Pact). Israel and Egypt have eventually returned to status quo ante bellum. Israel never had any claims on mainland Egyptian territory including Sinai, but Egypt eventually had to accept Israel's right to exist - something that wasn't obvious for Egypt before the wars. Neither of this applies on us and the 'Palestinians'. We can't defeat them one time that would last for generations without killing too many of them, and they obviously cannot even pose a threat to our existence. We have no common enemy, unless we are all suddenly invaded by aliens. We can't just give them N square kilometers of desert so they would leave us alone, because they also demand Jerusalem, and refugees, and cannot live on their own (like Egypt was living before the wars with Israel, during the wars, and after the wars, or like any other normal country lives) without their epic struggle against 'bloody Zionists'.

Well, my examples (Germans vs. French and Germans vs. Poles) which were 100 times more bloody conflicts than the Israeli-Palestinian hostilities, did not exterminate either party. Not even close. Yet those neighbors exist side by side and today have more than good relations.
So what prevents Jews and Israelis from doing the same? I don't remember such hostilities between Arabs and Jews of the region prior to the foundation of Israel.
The solution is simple on paper. A two-state solution would solve most of the problems. Reaching such a deal will be the hardest achievement as we can see.
I think that it is too simplistic to think that nothing will change. People need to change such attitudes. They are part of the problem IMO.
Anyway thanks for the talk. I have to leave soon.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I don't believe so. Not with the Iron Dome around or the low quality rockets that Hamas have.

Yes, the missiles should stop but so should Israel's embargo on Gaza and the illegal settlements (according to the same international law that you argue from) in the West Bank.

I won't go into details as I am not a lawyer but it's clear to me that something is wrong when killing well over 1000 civilians in return of 5 civilian casualties can be considered "legal". Especially as Hamas nor those rockets pose any existential threat to Israel or their citizens outside of few settlements who already are under the protection of the Iron Dome etc.

Truth is that International law gives very little protection for civilians,
and Hamas is not doing anything to reduce the civilian casualties.

International Law has special clauses to handle war in the vicinity of major population centers.

Hamas can declare part of the Gaza strip as an "Open City".

This means that Hamas declares that they will not defend this part,
and Israeli troops can pass through it without harm,
and the civilians should then not be attacked in return.
If Hamas applied separation between civilians and military as they are required
then civilian casualties would drop,dramatically, but Hamas weakness
would be exposed, and they would be eliminated.

Have not seen Hamas trying to protect the citizens of Gaza this way.

But why would they, it is pretty clear that the life of Palestinian civilians
has little value to their leaders. They are just cannon fodder in a propaganda war.

If Israel had killed only a handful, it would have been a strategic defeat for Hamas
in the propaganda war.

 

[Hasbara Buster]

Brave and honorable men, as always.

 

[Stannis Baratheon]

You obviously don't know what carpet bombing is.
Maybe You should look it up in a dictionary.
Only U.S. Air Force (and maybe Russia) has bombers capable of carpet bombing.

Carpet bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have the perfect knowledge of it. Carpet bombing isn't something sophisticated or special that only U.S and Russia can do. You can use multiple fighters to go and bomb neighbourhoods.

I am guessing this isn't carpet bombing. Whole neighbourhood being bombed to the ground.

 

[Falcon29]

Truth is that International law gives very little protection for civilians,
and Hamas is not doing anything to reduce the civilian casualties.

International Law has special clauses to handle war in the vicinity of major population centers.

Hamas can declare part of the Gaza strip as an "Open City".

This means that Hamas declares that they will not defend this part,
and Israeli troops can pass through it without harm,
and the civilians should then not be attacked in return.
If Hamas applied separation between civilians and military as they are required
then civilian casualties would drop,dramatically, but Hamas weakness
would be exposed, and they would be eliminated.

Have not seen Hamas trying to protect the citizens of Gaza this way.

But why would they, it is pretty clear that the life of Palestinian civilians
has little value to their leaders. They are just cannon fodder in a propaganda war.

If Israel had killed only a handful, it would have been a strategic defeat for Hamas
in the propaganda war.

I don't see where he brought up 'protection' of civilians. He is emphasizing international law regarding targeting of civilians/collective punishment. There's not much 'protection' that can be done in a small strip of land with extremely high population in proportion to landmass. When there are thousand pound plus missiles being dropped. Israeli F16's take off from underground in Tel Aviv. By your logic we can fire missiles at Tel Aviv because Israel is embedding its military within civilian population.

Your assumptions are just false assumptions that Israeli's spout. Hamas did a good job of preventing an Israeli massacre inside Gaza city center. They prevented IDF from advancing even on the outskirts of the strip. Of course Israel was upset it couldn't conquer Gaza and began targeting civilians/civilian infrastructure without military reason.

Here are several cases:

Indiscriminate excessive shelling with no military purpose(Israeli battalion commander said it was to punish the population for the 13 Israeli soldiers killed upon invading Gaza's eastern entrance):

.....

Bombardment near hospital and on ambulances to warn Palestinians from getting treatment for life threatening injuries:

....

Civilians are sent into shelters and coordinates given to Israel, nevertheless Israel bombs civilians:
U.N. says Israel violated international law, after shells hit school in Gaza - The Washington Post
......
Israel bombed civilian apartments(civilians evacuated) to try forcing Palestinians into surrendering and damaging economy, there are no 'command centers' in buildings, Hamas has advanced command/communication underground:

.....

I have the perfect knowledge of it. Carpet bombing isn't something sophisticated or special that only U.S and Russia can do. You can use multiple fighters to go and bomb neighbourhoods.

I am guessing this isn't carpet bombing. Whole neighbourhood being bombed to the ground.

This is 'mowing the lawn', carpet bombers not needed for carpet bombing. He will tell you this is legitimate act by Israel. He supports targeting Palestinian civilians but complains if Israeli civilians are targeted. The funny part is he thinks his rhetoric is tantamount to making legal case for Israel.

Israeli's can't give us any footage of on ground combat with Palestinian militants. Because their military doctrine isn't based off routing enemy ground forces. It is all about using firepower at disposal against the civilian population to try forcing enemy surrender. Hamas meanwhile has numerous videos of face to face combat with Israeli forces.

 

[Hussein]

You do realise we're talking about an Iranian terrorist group operating in Lebanon and firing on Israel, right?

Hezbollah is Lebanese
don't show too much your hatred about Iranians

 

[Providence]

Israel is not a state & Pakistan never excepted it. . . So Israel also have to return palestinians land back.

You joined in 2009 and in 2016 all you could come up is something like this ..