Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

U.S. invasion of Iraq?

124

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Actually, I prefer allowing you to dig your own hole, which you are doing very well.

    Tell me, what happened when the "Palestinians" were in Jordan? How about in Egypt?

    Can you kindly identify for me exactly what the source of the "Palestinian" people is?

    How do you suggest that murdering terrorists be dealt with? Hold their hands? Does Munich 1972 mean anything to you?

    So, I guess you feel that it would be OK to call the Royal Marines "Tony's Marines" or the Paras "Blair's Paratroops"? And the US Army is "Bush's Army", right?

    LMAO. Have you bothered to research anything else as well as you did Jenin?

    Do you have any idea of how the Israeli government functions?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin, do you know why Sharon got elected?
    Let me just refresh some stuff in the sense of facts and reality...

    The whole cycle didn't start as a result of Sharon going to the temple mountain and "provoking" the begging Palestinians on purpose in the fall of 2000. This was a planned and annual trip, which the Likud party held. Palestinian sources have confirmed that they knew about the visit, and that they had given an A-OK for the security. Also has it been confirmed that rocks were ready- the riot was planned.

    Barak got elected, and he failed. Sharon got elected, and now he is trying. And let me remind -yet again- that after the "operation Defence Wall" (or the Jenin Massacre as you would probably prefer calling it :rolleyes: ), the number of attacks on civilian Israelis has taken a drastic fall from what it was before.

    It is sad that Sharon is forced to take the steps he does. But they are necessary in order to keep the population alive, and not bombed into shreds.
    There is a limit to what people can take. A limit to how many worries and stress a person can have on top of all his/her problems.
    I don't know your history, and what you have experienced, but let me just tell you that it is fucking heartbreaking to hear people in your circle telling about loved ones getting hurt and killed in heartless ways. Heartbreaking to see psychologists being brought to kids shows, telling how to cope with the situation. Heartbreaking seeing Palestinian kids in the same age-group being encouraged to violence. Heartbreaking to know that people you know are supposed to be in that same area as were a bomb has just been blown. Heartbreaking not being able to reach those same people, due to the phone lines crashing when everyone else is trying do the same as yourself. Heartbreaking actually hearing your loved ones telling how they have seen bombs go off in front of their eyes, and human parts getting thrown away in the air to all kinds of different directions, or been in danger in other forms of attacks. Heartbreaking to be standing in the middle of all the chaos and thinking, "where is my brother", or actually imagining your own funeral.
    All this is just inhumane!
    And I personally, refuse to accept the fact that these situations are given. That it "just is", and that it is something we should get used to.

    What we would normally consider as "the line", has been FAR from crossed. You can't imagine an entire population to sit back, after experiencing this (at least not in the world I live in)!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    Barak got elected, and he failed. Sharon got elected, and now he is trying. And let me remind -yet again- that after the "operation Defence Wall" (or the Jenin Massacre as you would probably prefer calling it :rolleyes: ), the number of attacks on civilian Israelis has taken a drastic fall from what it was before.

    If "defence wall" has been such a success, why are the current series of attacks perhaps one of the worst and most sustained inflicted on Israel by the Palestinian Militias since at least the start of this intifada?
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    There is a limit to what people can take. A limit to how many worries and stress a person can have on top of all his/her problems.

    I'm willing to bet all the money in my pockets against all the money in yours that the current situation is more stressful for the Palestinians living in refugee camps with strictly limited access to basic services, including medical care, and subject to unwarrented arrest and interrogation by Iraeli forces than it is for the Israelis living in their relative luxury. I'm not saying the Israelis aren't affected, they most certainly are, but there are realistic differences in the degree of discomfort.

    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    I don't know your history, and what you have experienced, but let me just tell you that it is fucking heartbreaking to hear people in your circle telling about loved ones getting hurt and killed in heartless ways. Heartbreaking to see psychologists being brought to kids shows, telling how to cope with the situation. Heartbreaking seeing Palestinian kids in the same age-group being encouraged to violence. Heartbreaking to know that people you know are supposed to be in that same area as were a bomb has just been blown. Heartbreaking not being able to reach those same people, due to the phone lines crashing when everyone else is trying do the same as yourself. Heartbreaking actually hearing your loved ones telling how they have seen bombs go off in front of their eyes, and human parts getting thrown away in the air to all kinds of different directions, or been in danger in other forms of attacks. Heartbreaking to be standing in the middle of all the chaos and thinking, "where is my brother", or actually imagining your own funeral.
    All this is just inhumane!

    How fucking heartbreaking do you think it is for the Palestinians, whose homes have been bulldozed, whose loved-ones who have been arrested if they're lucky, or assassinated by the Israeli army if they're not, who can't live their lives normally because of check points and curfews and tanks driving down their streets firing shells at them? Are you really so incapable of empathy to understand that what the Palestinians are going through is much worse? One would have thought that the Israelis especially would know what it was like to be an oppressed minority and perhaps to understand that it is completely wrong to inflict such pain on another group of people. Clearly that isn't the case.


    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    What we would normally consider as "the line", has been FAR from crossed. You can't imagine an entire population to sit back, after experiencing this (at least not in the world I live in)!

    Violence breeds violence.

    Noone is suggesting the Israelis sit back and do nothing, but time and again we have seen that responding violently simply causes more violence. Hamas has stated that its most recent attacks have been a direct response to the use of bombs in civilian areas, resulting in civilian deaths.

    Exactly how is it different when the Israelis bomb a civilian area from when the Palestinians do so, other that one can afford to do so safely from a plane whilst the other has to sacrifice himself in the process?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei

    Exactly how is it different when the Israelis bomb a civilian area from when the Palestinians do so, other that one can afford to do so safely from a plane whilst the other has to sacrifice himself in the process?

    It really is quite simple....Intent

    Lets take the recent assassination of the Hamas leader. His house was bombed and along with him, 15 civilians died as well(I think 15 is right?).

    Now we can all admit it was not a nice thing and should have been done better. It would be better if Israel used more accurate methods to take out these men. Unfortunately they are limited as to what they can and cant do. Would you rather they sent a column of tanks into the gaza strip to detain or kill this man? Unfortunately, not only would that mean inevitable battles with the hundreds of Palestinian gunmen in the area resulting in the deaths of gunmen, IDF troops and civilians, but it would also mean the target would have enough time to simply walk outside, get in his car and drive off. You cannot conduct secret raids on a persons home if the entire city is aware of you and can easily warn the target.

    The bombing of the house was the only available method of getting this man. Make no mistake about it, he was the target, not the 15 others killed.

    Now the suicide bombers..Well they choose their targets with the aim of causing maximum civilian casualties. They deliberately target areas filled with innocents where the shrapnel from their bombs can do maximum damage. They go for places so packed with human beings as to guarantee that their explosives cause the highest possible level of carnage.

    If you really cant see the difference between the two situations then I feel sorry for you.

    If Israel wanted to deliberately target civilians then Palestine wouldnt even exist anymore. They wouldnt have simply bombed that guys house, they would have flattened the entire city. Israel sent a column of One hundred tanks into Nablus in response to the university bombing and they killed three people. Have you the slightest comprehension of what those 100 tanks could have done if they were intent on mayhem? If there was no difference between their attacks and those of the Palestinians then they would have killed hundreds or more likely, thousands of Palestinians while in a crowded city with 100 tanks.

    Yes, I think Israel are heavy handed sometimes and probably could do things a little differently on occasion but to say their actions are identical to those of Palestinian suicide bombers is ridiculous.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Vox, I have never intended to imply in any way that the simple Palestinian people live under good conditions. I do feel sorry for those people, they are a result of corruption, and have been manipulated and used by arab leaders in order for these to achieve their own goals.
    Their condition is far from ideal, but lets face it, their way of praising violence, and teaching it to their kids, is not the way to achieve an independant state and a decent way of living. I just can't see the logics in Israel handing over the Westbank and Gaza, in a situation like this... They just can't afford it.

    For that last comment, I will adopt Baldie's reply, which just couldn't be better.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog
    It really is quite simple....Intent

    Lets take the recent assassination of the Hamas leader. His house was bombed and along with him, 15 civilians died as well(I think 15 is right?).

    Now we can all admit it was not a nice thing and should have been done better. It would be better if Israel used more accurate methods to take out these men. Unfortunately they are limited as to what they can and cant do. Would you rather they sent a column of tanks into the gaza strip to detain or kill this man? Unfortunately, not only would that mean inevitable battles with the hundreds of Palestinian gunmen in the area resulting in the deaths of gunmen, IDF troops and civilians, but it would also mean the target would have enough time to simply walk outside, get in his car and drive off. You cannot conduct secret raids on a persons home if the entire city is aware of you and can easily warn the target.

    The bombing of the house was the only available method of getting this man. Make no mistake about it, he was the target, not the 15 others killed.

    The Israelis knew that civilians would die as a result of their action. I saw an Israeli government spokesman interviewed on Newsnight and he admitted that. When the order was given to bomb the building, those giving the order knew they were about to kill civilians. Their goal was not to kill civilians, but they knew they would. If I walked into a room and started randomly shooting and 15 people died, I would be guilty of 15 murders. To callously allow 15 people, including nine children, to die in such a manner is criminal and is morally repugnant. No assassination target is worth the life of nine children in my opinion. Apart from anything else, from where does the IDF gain the authority to carry out what amount to gangster-style executions on terrorists without the due process of trial and conviction?

    <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4469805,00.html">Commentary on the incident and its legal implications by John Jones, a barrister specialising in war crimes.</a>

    I accept there is a level of difference between what the Israelis did and what suicide bombers do, in that the suicide bombers choose civilians as their specific targets. This is more morally repugnant, but both examples are so repugnant as to make comparison spurious. It's like the difference between being thrown into a furnace where the temperature is 5000K and one where the temperature is 6000K. (This comparison is bizarre, I agree, but it's the only way I could think of to express my point).
    Originally posted by Balddog
    If you really cant see the difference between the two situations then I feel sorry for you.

    Thank you for your sympathy. Please don't patronise me.
    Originally posted by Balddog

    If Israel wanted to deliberately target civilians then Palestine wouldnt even exist anymore. They wouldnt have simply bombed that guys house, they would have flattened the entire city. Israel sent a column of One hundred tanks into Nablus in response to the university bombing and they killed three people. Have you the slightest comprehension of what those 100 tanks could have done if they were intent on mayhem? If there was no difference between their attacks and those of the Palestinians then they would have killed hundreds or more likely, thousands of Palestinians while in a crowded city with 100 tanks.

    Yes, I think Israel are heavy handed sometimes and probably could do things a little differently on occasion but to say their actions are identical to those of Palestinian suicide bombers is ridiculous.

    The defence that we shouldn't criticise the Israelis because they could be doing much worse is absurd. Yes, they could kill every Palestinian if they wanted to. Why should they get congratulation for having the restraint to not do so, when they don't have the restraint to not willfully kill civilians? Returning to my above analogy, when I'm tried for the murder of those 15 people, does the defence that it's okay because I didn't kill 1500 people really wash?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei

    No assassination target is worth the life of nine children in my opinion.

    I wonder how many lives his death has spared...I wonder how many suicide bombers he has personally sent out to carry out their business. How many Israeli deaths is he responsible for? How many would he be responsible for had he been allowed to live for the sake of 15 people? On a different tac, how many palestinian deaths is he responsible for? How many suicide bombers has he sent off? How many attacks has he organised which have led to israeli reprisals?
    It's like the difference between being thrown into a furnace where the temperature is 5000K and one where the temperature is 6000K. (This comparison is bizarre, I agree, but it's the only way I could think of to express my point).

    Another good example is crime in this country. The difference between Murder and Manslaughter for example. One is horrific, the other less so and often unintended.
    The defence that we shouldn't criticise the Israelis because they could be doing much worse is absurd.

    Point out where ive ever said anything of the sort and ill give you a cookie.

    My statements were in direct reply to you stating that there was no difference between the terrorists and the IDF. I proved that the Israelis did not set out to cause the maximum civilian casualties and therefore showed that they are not the same. The statements about them having had the ability to kill more civilians than they did was to prove your assertion wrong, it was in no way an attempt to try and excuse the actions. I never claimed it was a 'defence' that would wash.

    If you think i was patronising, i apologise. I didnt intend to be.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog
    My statements were in direct reply to you stating that there was no difference between the terrorists and the IDF.
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei
    Exactly how is it different when the Israelis bomb a civilian area from when the Palestinians do so, other that one can afford to do so safely from a plane whilst the other has to sacrifice himself in the process?

    I didn't, just as you didn't defend their actions by claiming that they could just do far worse. It just looked like I did to you, just as it looked like you did to me. Let's move on. ;)
    Originally posted by Balddog
    I wonder how many lives his death has spared...I wonder how many suicide bombers he has personally sent out to carry out their business. How many Israeli deaths is he responsible for? How many would he be responsible for had he been allowed to live for the sake of 15 people? On a different tac, how many palestinian deaths is he responsible for? How many suicide bombers has he sent off? How many attacks has he organised which have led to israeli reprisals?

    Can I just ask how you'd feel if your family had been among the 15 innocent dead?

    I agree that he needed to be arrested, but I disagree with the method employed. Did they really need to blow him up? I don't think they did. We're talking about one of the most skilled close-quarter armies on Earth here, and definitely the most sophisticated in the region. I think there were methods available that wouldn't have resulted in the deaths. Yes, Israeli soldiers may have died in the process, but I'd prefer the death of a soldier to a civilian any day of the week.

    The Israelis were either criminally negligent or just criminals. They knew they were going to kill civilians. They didn't intend the civilians to die, but they came damn close to; they certainly didn't intend to keep them alive.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog
    My statements were in direct reply to you stating that there was no difference between the terrorists and the IDF.
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei
    Exactly how is it different when the Israelis bomb a civilian area from when the Palestinians do so, other that one can afford to do so safely from a plane whilst the other has to sacrifice himself in the process?

    I didn't, just as you didn't defend their actions by claiming that they could just do far worse. It just looked like I did to you, just as it looked like you did to me. Let's move on. ;)
    Originally posted by Balddog
    I wonder how many lives his death has spared...I wonder how many suicide bombers he has personally sent out to carry out their business. How many Israeli deaths is he responsible for? How many would he be responsible for had he been allowed to live for the sake of 15 people? On a different tac, how many palestinian deaths is he responsible for? How many suicide bombers has he sent off? How many attacks has he organised which have led to israeli reprisals?

    Can I just ask how you'd feel if your family had been among the 15 innocent dead?

    I agree that he needed to be arrested, but I disagree with the method employed. Did they really need to blow him up? I don't think they did. We're talking about one of the most skilled close-quarter armies on Earth here, and definitely the most sophisticated in the region. I think there were methods available that wouldn't have resulted in the deaths. Yes, Israeli soldiers may have died in the process, but I'd prefer the death of a soldier to a civilian any day of the week.

    The Israelis were either criminally negligent or just criminals. They knew they were going to kill civilians. They didn't intend the civilians to die, but they came damn close to; they certainly didn't intend to keep them alive.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei

    Can I just ask how you'd feel if your family had been among the 15 innocent dead?

    Well obviously i wouldnt be happy...Just like the Israeli families arent very happy when their children get blown to pieces.
    think there were methods available that wouldn't have resulted in the deaths.

    May I ask what? Maybe one of our American friends can shed some light on this. Personally I cant see any other way they could of got to him without sealing up the entire city and then searching the entire city house by house. He was right in the middle of a city which was entirely hostile and filled with gunmen and packed with civilians.

    Im not a military tactician, so i dont know much but personally i cant think of a way they could have done it differently that would have resulted in fewer civilian deaths.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei

    Violence breeds violence.


    Really?

    So tell me, how violent is Germany? How violent is Japan?

    Both saw a hell of a lot more violence than Israel has.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei
    We're talking about one of the most skilled close-quarter armies on Earth here, and definitely the most sophisticated in the region.

    Ever done CQB? It doesn't sound like it. No guarantees. No liklihoods. Just a hell of a lot of risk.
    Originally posted by Balddog
    Im not a military tactician, so i dont know much but personally i cant think of a way they could have done it differently that would have resulted in fewer civilian deaths.

    In all liklihood, a manned raid would have resulted in more civilian deaths, more deaths of armed Palestinians, and Israeli deaths. And there would have been far less liklihood of getting the target.

    These people are at WAR. It's brutal. That's reality. That's survival.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just thought I'd throw in my two cents having just read over the whole post.

    1. Greenhat, Cuban revolution? Castro was fighting against a US sponsored dictator Batista, and the fact that US corporations owned 60% of Cuba and made huge profits from the sugar cane whilst the Cuban population lived in poverty. I'm not condoning Castro, but just showing the US influence.

    2. Is everyone missing the point about killing Saddam? In the X Files season 2 when Krychek asked the Cigarette Smoking Man why he doesn't just kill Mulder, he replies it would just make a martyr out of him. Same goes for why the Shadows didn't kill Sheridan in Babylon 5. And it will go for Saddam. The people don't care for him now, and as with all dictatorships, discontent ferments and eventually it's brought down because the people lose faith. If you kill Saddam however, elements in Iraq could manipulate this, and turn him into a demigod.

    3. Of course, it will be incredibly ironic that Iraq will fight The US and the UK using weapons that those respective countries sold to them.

    4. The same people who say that Palestinian civillian casulaties don't matter are probably the same who blasted the IRA's apology, saying what about all those civillians they killed.

    5. Has everyone just neglected the idea that killing is wrong?

    6. As for Israel/Palestine, any hope of peace died with Mr Rabin, which highlights the duality of blame in the region. A Palestinian shot him, but some right wing Israeli's utilized the death of a peacemaker to create more war. It's a deadly cycle, and it frustrates me greatly to see all these people who say it's terrible these Israeli's died, and then these Palestinians deserved to die.

    Oh an Greenhat the world has too many armchair generals like you, and all it does it create wars that kill millions a la World War One.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Citizen_Bertie

    Oh an Greenhat the world has too many armchair generals like you, and all it does it create wars that kill millions a la World War One.

    Maybe you should read a little more and find out what I do for a living.

    "killing is wrong"?

    Maybe you haven't noticed, but the only way people survive is by killing...plants and animals for food...bacteria with white blood cells..

    Speaking of armchairs, how about taking a trip over here to SE Asia and taking a turn at demining?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Urm dude, this is the real world, not the sci-fi channel...Would Saddam become a martyr if he were killed? Maybe. Would that be worse than the current situation? I dont see how...Despite what some people think, the people of Iraq arent stupid. They know what saddam is like and most of them probably dont particularly like him. Yes, of course there will be some who will go mad with grief if he dies but the majority of the country wont care if they see their lives getting better as a result. People have already lost faith in saddam but they cant do anything because he is a brutal dictator with the army behind him.

    Why will it be ironic? Was the last war ironic?
    Has everyone just neglected the idea that killing is wrong?

    Most of us live in the real world mate. Yes we all know that killing is 'wrong' but sometimes its necessary in this world of ours.

    There are a lot of armchair generals on this site, Greenhat, Thanatos and Diesel are most definately not in that number. Youve been here a week so i suggest you go back and read some of the old threads.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Citizen_Bertie
    3. Of course, it will be incredibly ironic that Iraq will fight The US and the UK using weapons that those respective countries sold to them...
    Oh an Greenhat the world has too many armchair generals like you, and all it does it create wars that kill millions a la World War One.

    A more definitive example of "irony" is that those as Greenhat have invested their lives to the support and defense of an ideal, whereby YOUR type gets to demean them with the "armchair general" bullshit.

    Better you should return to your science fiction: reality is by all indications an elusive concept for you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Citizen_Bertie
    1. Greenhat, Cuban revolution? Castro was fighting against a US sponsored dictator Batista, and the fact that US corporations owned 60% of Cuba and made huge profits from the sugar cane whilst the Cuban population lived in poverty. I'm not condoning Castro, but just showing the US influence.

    and now they are all poor except for their leaders.

    progress eh?
    2. Is everyone missing the point about killing Saddam? In the X Files season 2 when Krychek asked the Cigarette Smoking Man why he doesn't just kill Mulder, he replies it would just make a martyr out of him. Same goes for why the Shadows didn't kill Sheridan in Babylon 5. And it will go for Saddam. The people don't care for him now, and as with all dictatorships, discontent ferments and eventually it's brought down because the people lose faith. If you kill Saddam however, elements in Iraq could manipulate this, and turn him into a demigod.

    Hmmm, work of fiction opposed to reality.

    I'd rather he was a demigod than the person who started a nuclear conflict, or the man who ordered chemical, biological, "dirt" nuke attack on the US/UK.
    3. Of course, it will be incredibly ironic that Iraq will fight The US and the UK using weapons that those respective countries sold to them.

    Just like it was the last time we took them on.

    It's not just the equipment, but the operator you need to worry aout and a demoralised conscript army is no match for highly trained US/UK forces.

    Hell, our guns don't work but I'll bet we could still kick-ass :)
    4. The same people who say that Palestinian civillian casulaties don't matter are probably the same who blasted the IRA's apology, saying what about all those civillians they killed.

    No-one says the don't matter. But then we don't advocate using cicilians as targets.

    Unlike the IRA/Palestine bombers
    5. Has everyone just neglected the idea that killing is wrong?

    Nope, far from it. Just sometimes its a necessity.
    6. As for Israel/Palestine, any hope of peace died with Mr Rabin, which highlights the duality of blame in the region. A Palestinian shot him, but some right wing Israeli's utilized the death of a peacemaker to create more war. It's a deadly cycle, and it frustrates me greatly to see all these people who say it's terrible these Israeli's died, and then these Palestinians deserved to die.

    I thought it was a jew who shot Rabin :confused:
    Oh an Greenhat the world has too many armchair generals like you, and all it does it create wars that kill millions a la World War One.

    LOL

    "armchair general" :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
    Aladdin, do you know why Sharon got elected?
    Let me just refresh some stuff in the sense of facts and reality...

    The whole cycle didn't start as a result of Sharon going to the temple mountain and "provoking" the begging Palestinians on purpose in the fall of 2000. This was a planned and annual trip, which the Likud party held. Palestinian sources have confirmed that they knew about the visit, and that they had given an A-OK for the security. Also has it been confirmed that rocks were ready- the riot was planned.

    Barak got elected, and he failed. Sharon got elected, and now he is trying. And let me remind -yet again- that after the "operation Defence Wall" (or the Jenin Massacre as you would probably prefer calling it :rolleyes: ), the number of attacks on civilian Israelis has taken a drastic fall from what it was before.

    It is sad that Sharon is forced to take the steps he does. But they are necessary in order to keep the population alive, and not bombed into shreds.
    There is a limit to what people can take. A limit to how many worries and stress a person can have on top of all his/her problems.
    I don't know your history, and what you have experienced, but let me just tell you that it is fucking heartbreaking to hear people in your circle telling about loved ones getting hurt and killed in heartless ways. Heartbreaking to see psychologists being brought to kids shows, telling how to cope with the situation. Heartbreaking seeing Palestinian kids in the same age-group being encouraged to violence. Heartbreaking to know that people you know are supposed to be in that same area as were a bomb has just been blown. Heartbreaking not being able to reach those same people, due to the phone lines crashing when everyone else is trying do the same as yourself. Heartbreaking actually hearing your loved ones telling how they have seen bombs go off in front of their eyes, and human parts getting thrown away in the air to all kinds of different directions, or been in danger in other forms of attacks. Heartbreaking to be standing in the middle of all the chaos and thinking, "where is my brother", or actually imagining your own funeral.
    All this is just inhumane!
    And I personally, refuse to accept the fact that these situations are given. That it "just is", and that it is something we should get used to.

    What we would normally consider as "the line", has been FAR from crossed. You can't imagine an entire population to sit back, after experiencing this (at least not in the world I live in)!

    Jacqueline, I have always thought and said that what the Israeli civilians are going through is horrible, and that terrorist acts such as suicide bombings are disgusting and very very wrong. But it really bugs me that a few people in here will not condemn any act, however barbaric it might be, committed by the side they favour. One poster has persistently refused to make any comments on the events on Jenin, or other human right abuses committed by the Israeli army. I can only draw one conclusion about their refusal to comment. Speaking of Jenin, I have already withdrawn my description of it as a 'massacre' following the UN report. Serious crimes were still perpetrated, and if a person sees nothing wrong about soldiers attacking ambulance crews trying to assist the wounded, well, they are simply no better than the terrorists themselves.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Who are you talking about Aladdin?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog
    Who are you talking about Aladdin?

    Mr Greenhat.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin,

    You're a fool.

    Not making comment is not the same as condoning. You really need to spend some time learning to critically reason.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    So why have you avoided answering my question on the Jenin incident repeatidly? Do you think that attacking ambulance crews is wrong or not?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Who posted the link to the UN report that found fault with both sides?

    You continue to be a fool. When are you coming for some hands-on experience?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You posted the link to the BBC's story: "UN Says No Massacre in Jenin" together with a quote from one of my previous posts in which I had said there had been a massacre. We both know that the only reason you posted that link was to counter my accusations about the Israeli army's actions during the siege. In the meantime, you have refused for the 5th time in a row to say whether you disapprove or have any regrets over Israeli soldiers attacking medical staff, or obliterating a whole block of apartments with a one-tonne bomb to get at one man, for that matter.

    You are already resorting to insults so must be running really low on arguments. Just forget it the whole thing will you.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    or obliterating a whole block of apartments with a one-tonne bomb to get at one man

    Apartments are really important to you, huh? Planning on being a landlord when you grow up?

    When are you going to actually DO something?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry Greenhat, but I have to agree with Aladdin here - and that doesn't happen very often ;)

    He's asked you a perfectly straight forward question and you prevarication just supports his supposition.

    Why can't/won't you answer him?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat
    Apartments are really important to you, huh? Planning on being a landlord when you grow up?

    15 lives, including nine children, are important to me. I'd imagine they'd be important to Aladdin too.

    I'm not sure what the landlord comment was all about. Some bizarre attempt at humour? Or just saying anything to deflect attention from the fact that you're trapped in a corner here?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent

    Why can't/won't you answer him?

    An oath of office.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    An oath of office.

    Excludes you from expressing an opinion? You seem happy enough to speak about Palestinian actions, and those of US enemies...

    I can't see why you can't condemn/laud an action by Israel
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    "I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God."

    Integral to that concept is supporting, or at least not undermining, the orders and policies of those appointed above me.

    Brits are supposed to be masters of understanding what hasn't been said. I suggest applying the skill to my statements. Keep in mind that Aladdin is an idiot (in other words, he has not reached a valid conclusion). Might also consider that I could have posted a number of different links related to Jenin and it not being a massacre. I chose the one I posted.
This discussion has been closed.