Liberal Forum

Vegas » 27 Oct 2023, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 10:52 am

How the hell should I know? You are asking a hypothetical. The point is that going door to door targets the scumbags. Bombing the whole damn building ensures that everyone would die.

So, are you admitting the approach you propose may actually result in the deaths of more women and children?

Assume I have to take out a major terrorist camp in order to protect my citizens and have two options.  One option is a missile/smart bomb that will kill some civilians (depending on how many are home at the time).  The other option is a incursion by troops and my intelligence estimates significantly more civilian deaths than the number of people living in building.  Which option should I choose? Just looking for your opinion.

Vegas » 27 Oct 2023, 11:02 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 11:02 am

Not true. Only a minority of militant extremists want that. It seems that they all want it because we have heard, for the past 3 decades, about the rockets being fired at Israel. But it's mostly the extremists. 


 

Apparently you missed this part of the story in the link;

Given a choice among three options for “ending the occupation and building an independent state,” 21 percent prefer “negotiations,” 22 percent “peaceful popular resistance” and 52 percent select “armed conflict.”   

Z09 » 27 Oct 2023, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 11:10 am

Good point

Yep...makes you want to ask "How's that working for you?"
 

Vegas » 26 Oct 2023, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

26 Oct 2023, 12:05 pm

Or is was that another Israel lie?

**** you Muslim swine

FJB » 27 Oct 2023, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 12:57 pm

**** you Muslim swine

I loved when Muzzie Swine chased MurKan trannies and ***

outta Afghanistan.....Skirt *** on heels...screaming with pussies on fire...asses whipped!!    


 
 

Sumela » 27 Oct 2023, 1:02 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:02 pm

I loved when Muzzie Swine chased MurKan trannies and ***

outta Afghanistan.....Skirt *** on heels...screaming with pussies on fire...asses whipped!!    

Heard your momma sucked a lot of dick.

FJB » 27 Oct 2023, 1:10 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:10 pm

Heard your momma sucked a lot of dick.

      ^^^^^TRIGGERED
 

ConsRule » 27 Oct 2023, 11:06 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 11:06 am

Apparently you missed this part of the story in the link;

Given a choice among three options for “ending the occupation and building an independent state,” 21 percent prefer “negotiations,” 22 percent “peaceful popular resistance” and 52 percent select “armed conflict.”   

It appears they have been driven to that point. Here is a good summation of the conflict between the two. Not just the most recent one, but in their history. 

Assume that some dude, more powerful than you, rapes you. He decides to rape you daily. He gets away with it because he has friends in high places. So finally you decide to fight back. To no avail. However, you keep trying to fight back. Then the dude decides to compromise and negotiate. He says he will agree to rape you only 4 days a week. Thereby giving you a free 3 days to yourself. You said **** that, you don't want to be raped at all on any day for the rest of your life. Then he turns around and says that he tried to have a peaceful negotiation, but you wouldn't have it. Of course he acts like he is the victim since you wouldn't negotiate. 

Repeat ^^^

Z09 » 27 Oct 2023, 11:04 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 11:04 am

The Palestinians have supported Hamas for quite awhile...

Hamas cannot secure liberty through actions like October 7

Israel has been raping them for decades.  Violence is how we got our liberty from Britain. Do you really think Israel would ever give them their liberty under any diplomatic circumstance? 

ConsRule » 27 Oct 2023, 11:04 am » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 11:04 am

So, are you admitting the approach you propose may actually result in the deaths of more women and children?

 

When did I ever claim that there couldn't be civilian deaths? I said their deaths should never be deliberate.

Assume I have to take out a major terrorist camp in order to protect my citizens and have two options.  One option is a missile/smart bomb that will kill some civilians (depending on how many are home at the time).  The other option is a incursion by troops and my intelligence estimates significantly more civilian deaths than the number of people living in building.  Which option should I choose? Just looking for your opinion.

Obviously the second. Clearly this doesn't apply to Israel/Hamas. You can't honestly think that bombing buildings full of civilians would result in less civilian casualties than troops going door to door. Yes, it's unsafe for military men. We did it though. Our troops went on the ground, kicked in doors, and shot the scum. Some civilians died, but compared to bombing the whole place? You can't even compare the two. 

Vegas » 27 Oct 2023, 1:36 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:36 pm

It appears they have been driven to that point. Here is a good summation of the conflict between the two. Not just the most recent one, but in their history. 

Assume that some dude, more powerful than you, rapes you. He decides to rape you daily. He gets away with it because he has friends in high places. So finally you decide to fight back. To no avail. However, you keep trying to fight back. Then the dude decides to compromise and negotiate. He says he will agree to rape you only 4 days a week. Thereby giving you a free 3 days to yourself. You said **** that, you don't want to be raped at all on any day for the rest of your life. Then he turns around and says that he tried to have a peaceful negotiation, but you wouldn't have it. Of course he acts like he is the victim since you wouldn't negotiate. 

Repeat ^^^

All of which could have been avoided if the Palestinians had accepted the British proposal in 1947 (two independent states with Jerusalem having special status as the capital of both).  Jewish leaders agreed...Palestinian leaders vehemently opposed the plan.  Remember, Palestine refers to a region of land...NOT A COUNTRY.  That region was part of the Ottoman Empire until WWI.  If you put any credence in the Old Testament, Israel was a country in that area since 1000 years before the birth of Jesus.

Until Palestinians agree to accept that Israel has a right to exist...there will be no peace.
 

Vegas » 27 Oct 2023, 1:45 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:45 pm

You can't honestly think that bombing buildings full of civilians would result in less civilian casualties than troops going door to door. Yes, it's unsafe for military men.
 

You appear to be assuming Hamas is simply going to stand by and let the IDF waltz in (remember, they hide behind the women and children) or simply stand down until the IDF kicks in their door.  Personally, I think either reaction option has a probability of 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%.

ConsRule » 27 Oct 2023, 1:48 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:48 pm

All of which could have been avoided if the Palestinians had accepted the British proposal in 1947 (two independent states with Jerusalem having special status as the capital of both).  Jewish leaders agreed...Palestinian leaders vehemently opposed the plan.  Remember, Palestine refers to a region of land...NOT A COUNTRY.  That region was part of the Ottoman Empire until WWI.  If you put any credence in the Old Testament, Israel was a country in that area since 1000 years before the birth of Jesus.

Until Palestinians agree to accept that Israel has a right to exist...there will be no peace.

True. Actually, they have had multiple opportunities offered to them...with unacceptable conditions. Which goes back to my analogy of being raped with conditions:

Rape conditions of the 1947 proposal:

1. 30% chunk of ripe agriculture being favored toward Israel
2. More than half of Palestinian's land would have to be handed over to Israel.
3. One of the most vital ports in Palestinian land was part of that land. The Jaffa. It was a major economic artery for their population. 

These conditions would sink their economy to nothing. 
Then Israel turns around and calls themselves victims because they didn't want to concede to specific rape conditions. 

ConsRule » 27 Oct 2023, 1:52 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 1:52 pm

You appear to be assuming Hamas is simply going to stand by and let the IDF waltz in (remember, they hide behind the women and children) or simply stand down until the IDF kicks in their door.  Personally, I think either reaction option has a probability of 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%.

The Taliban and Al Queda did the same thing. Yet, we did it and it we minimized civilian casualties. 

Vegas » 27 Oct 2023, 2:05 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Oct 2023, 2:05 pm

The Taliban and Al Queda did the same thing. Yet, we did it and it we minimized civilian casualties.

Did 52% of the Afghan people want the elimination of the US?