What's new

UN: Israel is attacking 'sleeping children'

I will clearly say this: Both sides are in the wrong and committing grave errors. Neither will win. There has to be some other solution,
Of course, but that doesn't change the fact that most of what you said was complete bull.
 
Of course, but that doesn't change the fact that most of what you said was complete bull.

To which part of what I said do you refer and find bovine? My comments are fair and logical.

So what? What would you do if you had no army and your country was brutally occupied?

Are you claiming that people have no right to fight their brutal occupiers? They have no other options as they are blockaded and sanctioned. I would do the same and more.

So how well is this plan to fight working out for Hamas?
 
To which part of what I said do you refer and find bovine? My comments are fair and logical.
They're neither fair, nor logical. I've pointed out the flaws of those comments in my previous replies to them. If you didn't read them, then that's your problem, I shall not repeat myself.
 
Let's take a step back in history:

There was never such a thing as a Palestinian State. After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the British had administrative control over this area. They proposed a division plan according to the population. The Palestinian people rejected this plan, and sought to overturn it with the support of their Arab brethren. They were defeated, and the State of Israel came into being. There is no payment necessary for this land.

And, if you think that is wrong, please do note that after the fall of the Mughal Empire, the British had administrative control over the subcontinent too.They proposed a division plan according to the population. The people accepted this plan, and the States of Pakistan and India came into being.

Not accepting Israel's existence is the same as not accepting the Partition too, if one is being intellectually honest. You cannot pick and choose here.

I disagree. In partition, the british did not allow europeans to come into Pakistani and Indian territory and kill the local population and take their place. That happened in Palestine though. So since the invading european jewry were armed combatants (acts of terrorism included) and still are to this day (trained and maintained by IDF), should Israel be prosecuted for claiming civilian casualties for armed combatants?

Note: @anonymus Enjoy your ban! What an idiot. :lol:
 
I disagree. In partition, the british did not allow europeans to come into Pakistani and Indian territory and kill the local population and take their place. That happened in Palestine though. So since the invading european jewry were armed combatants (acts of terrorism included) and still are to this day (trained and maintained by IDF), should Israel be prosecuted for claiming civilian casualties for armed combatants?..........

The British were exercising their administrative authority over both areas. In fact, the first High Commissioner of Palestine, Herbert Samuel, restricted Jewish immigration “in the interests of the present population" to stop them from displacing the Arabs. Similarly, the British tried to stop the massacres during the Partition but were unsuccessful. What you should keep in mind is the very weakened British Empire after the conclusion of the Second World War. They had a huge Empire, but not the will or resources left to deal with it. Their hasty withdrawal from many areas contributed to the many issues we see persisting today.
 
The British were exercising their administrative authority over both areas. In fact, the first High Commissioner of Palestine, Herbert Samuel, restricted Jewish immigration “in the interests of the present population" to stop them from displacing the Arabs. Similarly, the British tried to stop the massacres during the Partition but were unsuccessful. What you should keep in mind is the very weakened British Empire after the conclusion of the Second World War. They had a huge Empire, but not the will or resources left to deal with it. Their hasty withdrawal from many areas contributed to the many issues we see persisting today.

So you are saying that the british tried to stop the armed zionist combatants (terrorism acts included) but were unsuccessful. So do you think Israel should stop claiming it's armed and trained combatant populous as civilians?
 
So you are saying that the british tried to stop the armed zionist combatants (terrorism acts included) but were unsuccessful. So do you think Israel should stop claiming it's armed and trained combatant populous as civilians?

I am saying that the British were trying to wrap up their Empire as fast as they possibly could.
 
I am saying that the British were trying to wrap up their Empire as fast as they possibly could.

So do you think Israel should stop claiming it's armed and trained combatant populous as civilians?
 
So do you think Israel should stop claiming it's armed and trained combatant populous as civilians?

The State of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens as best as it can. Civil defense programs are a part of such preparation. What is your point?
 
The State of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens as best as it can. Civil defense programs are a part of such preparation. What is your point?

Civil defense program? Dont make me laugh. :lol: Not the same as military service + combat training + armed forces membership. My point is my question. Should Israel be prosecuted for claiming it's combatants as civilians?
 
Civil defense program? Dont make me laugh. Not the same as military service + combat training + armed forces membership.

Please read up on the civil defense program of other countries for a comparison, for example Switzerland, or the Scandinavian countries.
 
If your Lord became a pig... i dont think you even have the right to use tht word as an insult .. unless you are an idiot.. apart from tht hindus,sikhs also eat swine... :lol:

Have you even read my post fully? your reply clearly indicates that either you have not understood my post or you just don't want to understand it. Few points here:
1) When we worship the Varaha avatar we worship Lord Vishnu, not a pig.
2) worshiping the Varaha avatar does not make a pig sacred because God remains divine no matter which incarnation he takes and hence he is worshiped, while pigs will always be filthy and will retain their lower characteristics and nature and hence cannot be revered. Just because God takes incarnation in the form of an animal (either fully or in part) it does not automatically make animals of that particular species divine and thus they are not worthy of reverence. it is the divinity that is worshiped/revered, not an animal.
3) Varaha avatar wasn't entirely a boar. He had the head of a Boar and the body of a human.
4) Your point about some Hindus, Sikhs eating pork proves what i have mentioned in points 1) and 2).

From the above points it can be easily concluded that a pig can be used to insult someone. Only an idiot would think otherwise :lol:
I will not argue with you further in this thread on this topic as it is not the appropriate thread for the said topic. if you want to argue on this matter then open a thread on Hinduism and i will counter all your arguments there.

on topic...it is the responsibility of the U.N. to ensure that any of its schools are not used for storing any weapons. Hamas is the culprit here for storing those rockets in a U.N. school which resulted in those deadly attacks and consequent deaths. It is Hamas strategy of using Palestinians as human shields to defame Israel which is causing so many civilian deaths. Poor Palestinians are suffering because of this strategy. shame on Hamas:sick: Also Israel should have taken up this matter with the U.N. before attacking a school to try to prevent such tragedies.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom