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 ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Erm, are you still avoiding the question?
Yes, until I feel that I am not made to feel inferior.
Yes. The debate gets hard when you have to acknowledge the indignity and injustice of daily Palestinian existence ........
Answer the question. At least have the decency to admit that you think four Israeli lives is "worse" than 70 Palestinian lives.
It's also the wrong one.
The reality is that it's 74 deaths, not 70 vs 4. You cannot separate the two, nor will you be able to separate the next death that occurs. They are forever interwoved and both sides are equally to blame for all 74 deaths.
Jesus people, you sound like the US in Vietnam giving body counts.
Do you really think that either side is looking at the body count saying "well you killed more of us than we did of you..."
Do you remember why the Palestinian deaths were brought into the discussion?
FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?
I've got a few years on you.
Now that you've had your little ageist outburst would you like to grow up and deal with the issue at hand?
Which is that the point made a long time ago is that ALL the deaths matter, and that the ones who aren't prepared to acknowledge that are quoted above.
Thankyou.
Ageist? Please explain how that comment was ageist...
I don't think that it was they who made the comparison... who asked which was worse...
When you can work out how "FFS, WetThePants, how old are you?" is ageist., get back to me.
I obviously gave you far more credit for intelligence than you deserve.
I see no reason to answer your questions in return for a load of abuse.
OMG I suggested that you were behaving like a toddler and toddlers also sometimes wet their pants. FFS What is ageist about that?
You made the accusation, now back it up or withdraw it.
AgeistDiscrimination based on age, especially prejudice against the elderly.
Attempting to call posters children on a site which exists as part of a charity which serves young people.
If anyone is behaving badly here, it is yourself.
Now, anyway heres the clarification.
Firstly, kermit's original point:
And, it doesn't, btw take very much intelligence to work out that 70 bereaved families is worse than 4 - BUT kermit isn't actually saying that either!! Even 1 is too many.
The question was about exploring why there is such an emotional response to the 4 deaths, and yet a complete refusal even to DISCUSS the 70 deaths.
Now stop acting like our recently departed friend, it doesn't suit you.....
i agree, it's all about who's percieved as good and who's percieved as evil, now Israel can easily kill 70 people because it's got ties with the US, therefore making it a democracy, therefore 70 deaths is acceptable as it's protecting democracy, but 4 deaths from a terrorist, the world is under siege and the Palestinians don't deserve a peace process :rolleyes: grow up jacq or wendy or whatever you are and you to dissillusioned.
Any death is a bad death, especially in such a pointless and brutal manner, but my question was why the Israeli apologists on this board are wailing and gnashing teeth about four lives, but are strangely silent over the seventy deaths suffered by "the enemy".
All I'm pulling these people up for is their lack of consistency: Palestine are "evil" for murdering four people (assumg a Palestinian did it), but Israel are "good" for murdering seventy people and destroying over one hundred more lives. Why do Israeli lives matter when Palestinian lives so clearly do not.
Both sides are as bad as each other, I've been quite consistent in that comment. I am attacking the Israeli murderers' apologists for believing that one brutal murder of an innocent civilian is worse than another.
And where, precisely, did I discriminate against you?
Or is it wrong to suggest that toddlers are immature and wet themselves occasionally?
No shit sherlock, and if it was a competition that would be relevant.
Indeed, suggesting that the posters didn't actually care about anyone else, when it was as much a case of bring about some balance here. If you read the start of this thread it was suggested that the peace process was being derailed because of Isreali actions. Poorly timed for two reasons, a) because the story has been denied b) because it was followed by a bomb.
The thread started without reference to the 70 people you now claim to be so concerned about.
had they really been so important, why didn't you mention them before.
Simple, because their deaths only became an issue for you to compare them with the number of Israeli deaths.
One civilian murdered is one too many.
You are comparing casualty figures because you are an apologist for terror.
You don't care about civilians being murdered, you are unable to see that any individual murdered is a tragedy, irrespective of whether they were Israeli or Palestinian. Disgusting.
70 divided by 4 is 17.5, not eighteen. Anyway, keep on apologising for terror.
Can we at least agree that murder is wrong, and should not be apologised for by looking at the other people, pointing and saying "look how bad they are! This guy only murdered 4 people!"?
If its numbers you care about, why not so much about 20,000 children killed in chechnya 1994-present day or 50,000-80,000 killed in darfur? By your sick logic, the 3000 palestinians and 1000 israelis killed during the אינתיפדת אל-אקצא نتفاضة فلسطين is small potatoes compared to these atrocities, they are "worse".
I hope you get over whaever the hell has taken you over today, You're as unpleasant as can be.
In fact, I can't be arsed to have the discussion with you.
What's the matter, not getting your way?
Sorry, whats my way?
What I'd like is a debate that doesn't pretend that black is white!!!
Your knee-jerk protection of Israel doesn't change the fact that there have been transgressions on BOTH sides.
Jacq and dis and their ilk have always come to these discussions with feigned concern for the plight of the Palestinians which drove them to violent resistant in the first place, all whilst compartmentalising only palestinian militants as "terrorists", never Israelis.
And one wonders why I hope these history revising liars come to expereince firsthand the sort of degradation, dehumanisation and oppression suffered by Palestinians since the Irgun, Stern Gang and Haganah first launched their murderous land clearances well in advance of the international legitimisation of THEIR terroristic acts which came with statehood.
Maybe when these apologists experience the suffering and desperation of being herded into bantustans and labelled "terrorist" for revisiting upon their oppressors a small taste of the pain they are handed daily (without knee jerk international media coverage) will they realise how deeply the militant, apartheid colonial era ideology of Zionism has betrayed all notions of social justice enshrined in Judaic teaching. It was, is and ever shall be an ideology steeped in a will to power and domination every bit as evil as any ideology which oppressed Jews in past generations.
Evil is evil, oppression is oppression and Israel has shown itself every bit as capable of perpatrating such evil against a weaker people from its very inception.
Until Israel repudiates the false history it has tried to pander to cover its atrocities and excuse itself as somehow justified and seeks conciliation and atonement no lasting peace will be found. Until then, I say once again, you can expect to grow old watching this conflict continue. Jacq however will never admit the truth, not to herself and even more so to anyone who dares expose the historic myths with which each successive generation in Israel (and those of its ardent external apologists) is indoctrinated.
Smears don't work with me, do they?
You still haven't justified why you called me ageist, why you suggested I was disrciminating...
Whenever your smears are challenged, you turn tail.
Fucking hypocrite. This comes from someone who was defending a bombing on the basis that 70 other people had died.
Perhaps you need to read what I said, when I pointed out that it was a cycle, and that each contributed to the other.
Be so very kind as to quote the exact place where I defended the bombing would you?
Just after you explain why I am ageist.
Quid pro quo.
Because you belittle children on a site aimed at young people.
As I already explained,
I tell you what. I completely withdraw the allegation without reservation.
Over to you.
Looks like Exhibit A for the defence.
"Honestly, you honour, the Palestinians had to act, when considering these shootings of civilians."
And, how is that question a defence of bombing?
By suggesting that toddlers are immature and sometimes wet themselves?
I was right, you really do need to grow up.
No ..... by calling a poster a child.
Try sticking to the topic. How is that question a defence?
And, even more to the point, what is your answer to the question?