|
Post by Varangian on Jul 20, 2014 4:37:22 GMT -5
This has been in the news for a long time now. Israel just started another attack into Gaza, bombing it in retaliation to Hamas rocket strikes. Hundreds of Palestinians are now dead, and more casualties to come.
What do you think of the conflict? Have you picked a side, or have you analyzed the situation or read analysis of it?
|
|
|
Post by Gadric on Jul 20, 2014 7:03:04 GMT -5
Why pick a side? It's their problem, in my opinion. Both sides have mentalities that are stuck in the medieval ages and should develop their culture better to modern day standards, but that seems to be particulary hard for these kind of countries and cultures.
My father had to cancel his flight (luckily) a week before he went on business trip to Israel.
And it's getting closer to home than you think, pro-Hamas and antisemtics are gathering in Amsterdam tomorrow to protest against Israel and Jews in general. I just can't see this going well if you recall what happened in Paris, mass vandalism, stoning Jews, and chanting 'Dead to all the Jews'. I'm sorry, why is this being tolerated again?
A limit has to be reached at one point, both sides have crossed it and Europe, being the pussy union it is, just sits their, twiddling their thumbs and hope it'll blow over our heads, meanwhile everyone gets to suffer from these religions' and cultures' petty squabbles.
To summarize it all up?
Pathetic. Both sides are idiots.
|
|
|
Post by Earendil on Jul 20, 2014 8:30:51 GMT -5
This has been in the news for a long time now. Israel just started another attack into Gaza, bombing it in retaliation to Hamas rocket strikes. Hundreds of Palestinians are now dead, and more casualties to come. What do you think of the conflict? Have you picked a side, or have you analyzed the situation or read analysis of it? Maybe Hamas is wrong,but there's no need to kill a lot civilian. Palestinians are alone.So topic's name wrong. Peace & Love.
|
|
|
Post by Some Random DoF Guy on Jul 20, 2014 8:33:44 GMT -5
War. War never changes
|
|
|
Post by William on Jul 20, 2014 9:14:07 GMT -5
In this conflict, or in conflicts like this in general, I have to agree with Gadric 100%.
However, I do feel bad for Palestine. They had "their" land practically taken from underneath them piece by piece for the last 70 years.
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Jul 20, 2014 10:21:27 GMT -5
I've always thought that showing passion is a good thing, and I agree with Gadric pretty much everywhere so that's a big plus too. I heard about that Paris riot though, and there have been several viewpoints I heard. Originally it was not meant to be a pro-Hamas rally, or then it was meant to be such, or then it was hijacked later on.
But still, lots of people appear to have same ideals as Hamas. Which is a pretty bad thing.
I agree though, Israel came to be due to religion. And now there are two incompatible religions having a war there.
I guess I named this topic because this is almost solely a war between religions. But Palestine-Israeli conflict is more accurate yeah.
Over 3000 wounded and more dead in just one night of bombing Gaza, were statistics in news today.
|
|
|
Post by Otttiger on Jul 20, 2014 11:17:58 GMT -5
But, their never was a Palestine. The Jews were kicked out of their homes, slaughtered by the Arabs, then the Arabs moved into their homes. Israel has been fighting a defensive war almost its entire existence.
If you look into the political records between Israel and the "Palestinians", Israel tried to offer peace to them. A couple of times now. Even agreeing to all the demands of the Palestinian leaders. The most blatant one in my mind is when George W. Bush was still in office. The Israeli prime minister and Palestinian leader met in the oval office to discus terms of peace. The Palestinian leader demanded ridiculous amounts of land, money, etc. and Israel agreed. The Palestinian was shocked and left the room, refusing to speak about peace further.
This is all stuff I learned while doing a 5 page report on Israel for one of my English classes.
|
|
|
Post by William on Jul 20, 2014 11:34:11 GMT -5
But, their never was a Palestine. The Jews were kicked out of their homes, slaughtered by the Arabs, then the Arabs moved into their homes. Israel has been fighting a defensive war almost its entire existence. If you look into the political records between Israel and the "Palestinians", Israel tried to offer peace to them. A couple of times now. Even agreeing to all the demands of the Palestinian leaders. The most blatant one in my mind is when George W. Bush was still in office. The Israeli prime minister and Palestinian leader met in the oval office to discus terms of peace. The Palestinian leader demanded ridiculous amounts of land, money, etc. and Israel agreed. The Palestinian was shocked and left the room, refusing to speak about peace further. This is all stuff I learned while doing a 5 page report on Israel for one of my English classes. Even if that information is true, it doesn't give Israel to openly attack and bomb citizens. That's the thing I hate about conflicts like this; everyone thinks Israel is a fucking saint, when they're obviously not.
|
|
|
Post by Darin on Jul 20, 2014 11:38:40 GMT -5
Have to agree with Gadric here. Also Otttiger, something you have to remember is that Israel wasn't a country for 100's of years until World War 2 when the allies MADE Israel a country again. By that logic the Native Americans should be trying to take back america because we stole it from them. Or the French should try and take back Canada, or the UK should take back New England cause it used to belong to them. There comes a point when it doesn't matter who owned the land 100 of years ago. That was then, this is now. You have to give up a claim to your land after several 100 years have gone by. Otherwise every country in the world would be at war with pretty much every other country. Now, I don't know much about what Israel tried to do for peace etc, so you could very possibly be right, and in which case then yes, Palestine was the aggressor. But remember, they are dealing with a country that shouldn't even exist. If it wasn't for the Zionist supporting leaders within the allied forces during and after WW2, Israel would never have been remade into a country. And the land that Israel now claims and is what the country is made up of, used to belong to other Middle Eastern countries (not sure how much was from what countries), so I can totally see it from Palatines point of view. A bunch of big and powerful countries come in, take a bunch of your land, make a new country out of it, and then say that they will protect this country if you try and mess with it. I think pretty much ANY country in the world would be pissed off if that happened to them. And rightfully so. Also Gadric, I agree with you, the European Union is just messing around instead of taking action. They shouldn't allow EITHER side to break the law, and should be punishing the "supporters" of both sides equally if they break the law. Anyway, I hope this will be resolved or blow over. Last thing America needs is another war we will force our way into. Edit: And well said William. Doesn't matter who is right or wrong, once a country starts attack civilians I can not support them *cough*Hiroshima and Nagasaki*cough*...
|
|
|
Post by William on Jul 20, 2014 14:51:22 GMT -5
Couldn't say it better myself :3
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Jul 20, 2014 16:18:03 GMT -5
Good comments, it's almost a shame we have so many reasonable and agreeable comments here! Very much unlike the TWC forums which is ridden by frustratingly obnoxious people and a couple of reasonable beacons of hope. It's the first time I've called a conservative my friend.
|
|
|
Post by Otttiger on Jul 20, 2014 16:35:52 GMT -5
Have to agree with Gadric here. Edit: And well said William. Doesn't matter who is right or wrong, once a country starts attack civilians I can not support them *cough*Hiroshima and Nagasaki*cough*... That's war though. The saying "War is hell" it's said for a reason. War is death, destruction, pestilence you name it. In any conflict their will be civilian casualties. Civilian casualties are a necessity to win a war. I am not saying that people should bomb civilians just to do so, but I am saying that to defeat an enemy, you must not only break their fighting power, you must break their will to fight. Lets say that tomorrow, North Korea invades South Korea and completely obliterates their standing armed forces. The remaining civilians will band together to fight gorilla tactics. Granted not all of them will, but I can guarantee that at least 10% of the civilian masses would put up resistance. On a similar note, if China invaded in 2 hours, what would you do? They invaded the east and west coast, and have enlisted the help of the Mexican and Cuban governments by promising Mexico the States, Utah, Colorado, Texas, and New Mexico. The Chinese government promised the Cubans Florida and Georgia. The Chinese have deployed ground forces in every major city withing a 200 mile swath of the Eastern, Western, and Southern borders and are beginning to march inland. Would you fight back as a civilian? Would you support those who would? Whether your answers are yes or no, their are those who would answer yes to both and rather die than be under communist Chinese rule. Remember 1776?There are very few solutions to the problems posed above. Swapping Sides here Put yourself in a Chinese leader's position. You have invaded America. You have captured major ports and infrastructure, but are facing major civilian resistance. Your soldiers have already killed masses of rioters in the large cities of New York, Washington D.C., Seattle, just to name a few. However, these Rebels continue to fight against your power. Do you try to use Propaganda and persuade the masses to your cause? Do you attempt to infiltrate each rebel unit one by one and kill them from the inside? Or do you bomb, mortar, shoot on sight any and all rebels and suspected rebel camps? If you chose propaganda, this choice is obviously the most time consuming and least effective. Congratulations, you have converted 1/10 Civilian rebel group back into the "docile" public. If you chose Infiltration, this choice is fairly effective and moderately expensive, from bribing known members of the rebels, to training and deploying spies. In doing this, you have eliminated 4/10 rebel groups in 5 months, BUT you have also given the remaining groups a larger need for security and secrecy. This makes it harder to remove the problem at hand, even though the short term effects may help. If you chose Destroy without restraint, this is the most effective method of 'Rebel Removal'. The only price you had to pay, was the cost of ammunition, and the lives of the soldiers you spent before you realized that this was the only solution. You have Eliminated 8/10 rebel groups and the remaining groups are terrified of your power. The remaining two groups may either disband or try to limp on until the inevitable. Civilians are strange people, because of the fact that they are people. What may turn a person into a Rebel hellbent on revenge may break another and return him/her to a non-hostile nature. The only way to defeat someone, whether it is one lone person, or an entire country, is to remove their will to fight. And the best(albeit, unfortunate) way to do this, is to kill and destroy the enemy and make any potential enemy recruits unwilling to fight because of the danger it would pose to them and their families. Obviously, my take on the hole Civilian target deal, is that it is a part of war. Their will be no avoiding it. One last thing I want you to take into account. I don't care who you are fighting, where you are fighting them, a bomb is a bomb. It EXPLODES. It KILLs things. In a pretty good sized area I might add. point being that it is hard to measure the blast radius so that you don't kill civilians when your own life is on the line. Most people would detonate that explosive device as close to the enemy as possible, whether or not their are civilians nearby.
|
|
|
Post by William on Feb 3, 2015 15:03:32 GMT -5
Seems no one commented on this for awhile, but I just have a quote that I thought was pretty funny but true:
"Israeli murderers are called commandos. Arab commandos are called terrorists." - George Carlin
|
|
|
Post by Darin on Feb 3, 2015 18:06:07 GMT -5
OK so, I saw this new post and I checked out this thread (not paying attention to the dates) and started reading. I was thinking all of this was current and just happened (cause again I don't pay attention to 90% of world events), so you can imagine my surprise when I scrolled down to MY post xD
I was like "WHAAAAA?!"
Anyway, adding to what you said William, in America 1776 they are called "patriots" but in current Afghanistan they are called "insurgents".
|
|
|
Post by jeep91 on Feb 4, 2015 2:46:46 GMT -5
@william @meade Both very true quotes, the side the soldiers fight on is always the one doing no wrong in the eyes of their own populace.
|
|