HeliX Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 1 minute ago, P.K. said: After the aid workers clusterfuck - everybody! Well if you want to lower the risk to everybody then a ceasefire seems a sensible approach to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 32 minutes ago, HeliX said: Well if you want to lower the risk to everybody then a ceasefire seems a sensible approach to it. Hama's surrender would be a sensible approach. Have you asked yourself why they don't just surrender, for the good of their people? Isn't that a sensible idea, because no way can they EVER win this war. No point in extinguishing 3/4 of a fire... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 7 minutes ago, quilp said: Hama's surrender would be a sensible approach. Have you asked yourself why they don't just surrender, for the good of their people? Isn't that a sensible idea, because no way can they EVER win this war. No point in extinguishing 3/4 of a fire... Do you believe that would stop Israel from oppressing Gaza and violently settling the West Bank? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 Hamas should surrender, and free the fucking hostages. That's inarguable. They won't surrender though, that's suicide. I remain baffled that Haniyeh and the other exiled leaders remain alive, the mossad should have assassinated those fucks months ago. Something else that is also inarguable is that the way the IDF have prosecuted this war is a fucking disgrace, and was always going to be. You can defend the stated motivations behind the Israeli approach but you cannot defend the approach itself. Israel is losing friends because of what it is doing, and especially because of how it is doing it. Bombing the Iranian embassy in Syria, for the second time in this round of conflict, seems needlessly provocative, looking for a fight. I haven't looked at what their justification was this time though, but it'll probably be lies anyway. I'll never think that isolating entire populations for years, putting them under international sanctions and refusing to negotiate is a good idea, doesn't matter who or where. Doing this will always generate anger, create risk. You've got to talk. I've been reading some stuff about Iran recently, 'we' (the west) need to get in there (not with tanks!!!!), we've got to talk to the women, there's hope there for a better future. The Islamists hold on power is possibly not as strong as they think it is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 42 minutes ago, HeliX said: Do you believe that would stop Israel from oppressing Gaza and violently settling the West Bank? Yes. It would be a start. Here's a thing, the islamists appear able to replenish its supply of millions of rounds of small-arms ammunition, replacement RPG's, grenades and other ordnance smuggled in from Iran and others, why then can't they do the same with food and essential medical supplies. It is well known that any humanitarian supplies like food and meds are distributed to the terrorists before the people of gaza... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 7 minutes ago, quilp said: Yes. It would be a start. Here's a thing, the islamists appear able to replenish its supply of millions of rounds of small-arms ammunition, replacement RPG's, grenades and other ordnance smuggled in from Iran and others, why then can't they do the same with food and essential medical supplies. It is well known that any humanitarian supplies like food and meds are distributed to the terrorists before the people of gaza... The history doesn't seem to support the view that it would end Israeli aggression if Hamas stopped existing. I don't disagree at all that Hamas prioritise war over the civilian population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 29 minutes ago, HeliX said: The history doesn't seem to support the view that it would end Israeli aggression if Hamas stopped existing. I don't disagree at all that Hamas prioritise war over the civilian population. So you must be assuming that "Israeli aggression" is gratuitous rather than reactionary, to the constant terroristic actions of the islamists. Since 2005 for instance, no fewer than 50,000 rockets have, and continue to fall on towns and cities in Israel, with mounting casualties, the threat has been a constant. As have been the bus and restaurant bombings, etc., specifically targetting Israeli civilians as they've never discriminated between the IDF and ordinary civilians because any dead Jew is a bonus to them. It's an unfortunate fact that even if hamas ceased to exist tomorrow there would be some other cell/faction ready and willing to take over and continue the fight in their place. It's the way of the islamist, martyrdom is in the blood. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 The war needs to stop (ceasefire), Netanyahu needs voting out and taken out the picture and the UN needs to be firm on a 2 state solution and land boundaries (including deploying UN troops to police it). Failure to do that, given all the suffering and acrimony, means Hamas will have recruited another 300,000 in 20 years (most of them just kids currently). And off they go again in 20 years. Plus other shit kicking off till then. Most people are not anti-semetic, they're anti-Netanyahu. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 29 minutes ago, quilp said: So you must be assuming that "Israeli aggression" is gratuitous rather than reactionary, to the constant terroristic actions of the islamists. Since 2005 for instance, no fewer than 50,000 rockets have, and continue to fall on towns and cities in Israel, with mounting casualties, the threat has been a constant. As have been the bus and restaurant bombings, etc., specifically targetting Israeli civilians as they've never discriminated between the IDF and ordinary civilians because any dead Jew is a bonus to them. It's an unfortunate fact that even if hamas ceased to exist tomorrow there would be some other cell/faction ready and willing to take over and continue the fight in their place. It's the way of the islamist, martyrdom is in the blood. "Rockets" is a bit of a generous way to describe what are usually closer to fireworks, but obviously Hamas still shouldn't be firing them. There has been constant oppression and violence against the Palestinian people for 75 years. And yes, there's been violence back the other way too. But I wouldn't suggest that's a surprising outcome if you subject 3 generations to the conditions the Palestinians have been subjected to, with absolutely no hope offered of any improvement or real self determination, or even negotiations leading in that direction. The Muslims in Israel are not firing rockets. People who are not being wronged generally do not become violent. People who are being wronged often do. I would suggest the solution is to stop the wrongdoing on both sides and see how that works out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 41 minutes ago, HeliX said: "Rockets" is a bit of a generous way to describe what are usually closer to fireworks, but obviously Hamas still shouldn't be firing them. Especially as they kill and injure folks... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 1 hour ago, HeliX said: "Rockets" is a bit of a generous way to describe what are usually closer to fireworks... The Qassam, Grad and Katyusha are effective weapons. Apart from being indiscriminate (cannot be aimed) they can be built to carry explosive loads equivalent to an artillery shell up to 144kg of explosive potential. That's quite a boom... So hardly "fireworks." Although very effective they are often poorly constructed meaning they regularly fail after launch, often falling to an area of ground close to where it's fired from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 3 hours ago, quilp said: It is well known that any humanitarian supplies like food and meds are distributed to the terrorists before the people of gaza... Billions in international aid was used to construct the Gaza tunnels for military use by Hamas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 2 hours ago, quilp said: The Qassam, Grad and Katyusha are effective weapons. Apart from being indiscriminate (cannot be aimed) they can be built to carry explosive loads equivalent to an artillery shell up to 144kg of explosive potential. That's quite a boom... So hardly "fireworks." Although very effective they are often poorly constructed meaning they regularly fail after launch, often falling to an area of ground close to where it's fired from. In 2014 Hamas fired 5,000 rockets and 2,000 mortar shells. One house was destroyed and there were single digit fatalities. Obviously they still shouldn't be doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 9 minutes ago, HeliX said: In 2014 Hamas fired 5,000 rockets and 2,000 mortar shells. One house was destroyed and there were single digit fatalities. Obviously they still shouldn't be doing it. The "Iron Dome" system is very effective. But now everyone knows it can be overwhelmed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.