How is Israel Going to Retaliate Against Hamas?

[webfusion]

Bibi will be begging them to not tare up the Camp David Accords.

Bibi is engaged in a rather serious war, and the Egyptians are OK with him succeeding!
Sisi wants Hamas sidelined in Gaza no less than the Israelis.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

From the looks of things in the posting provided by shemp, the IDF is killing more Hamas guys.If they're in any way associated with Hamas, they will be sought and killed. No matter if surrounded by their families,or trying to lay low.
Israel knows who needs to be targeted, and Hamas knows not to reveal how successful the war has been for IDF, with no mention of their guys getting eliminated.
The Hamas' only hope at this late date is to get TheWorld™ to intervene on their behalf and bring about a cessation of the onslaught.

Oren Shaul & Hadar Goldin.
Start with them, work our way outwards from that starting point.

So six year old children and paramedics are Hamas operatives now. There are some people that will say anything to excuse genocide.

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

Gaza is not a country; it is a controlled territory lacking full sovereignty, effectively permanently occupied, as is the West Bank. Hamas is an organization, Palestinians are a people, the two are not synonymous.

No two situations are made "exactly the same" by using ALL CAPS as argument.

It is the territory of the Palestinian state, a nation that according to UN statute should have been accorded full sovreignty back in 1968. This state is currently under illegal occupation by Israel, an occupation mirroring that of Poland during WW2.

In those terms Hamas were fully justified in carrying out attacks on Israeli military and occupation installations on October 7th last year.

 

[Ziggurat]

"FAFO." **** Around, Find Out. Israel is in the **** Around stage.

What stage is Hamas in?

They will drive away all of the sympathy for them and all of their remaining allies.

Did the oct. 7 massacres drive away sympathy for the Palestinians? Apparently not. Sympathy can suck my dick. Sympathy that only exists when you are a victim, and dries up when you fight back, is a sham, a farce.

They will be a pariah, and they will suffer economically greatly.

They have always been a pariah, and always will be, because antisemitism is eternal.

Then one day, when they are attacked by their neighbors, no one will come to their defense, even the U.S. will abandon them due to their own weakness and problems. They can fire some nukes, but in the end, the Middle East will be a burned out hellhole, and Israel will finally Find Out.

And no one else will have any culpability. I’ve heard it all before.

 

[webfusion]

So six year old children and paramedics are Hamas operatives now. There are some people that will say anything to excuse genocide.

I'm going to just say, it can be honestly claimed that their fathers,uncles, even older brothers, are indeed Hamas operatives.
In the Hospitals. In the Ambulances. In the UNRWA facilities. In the Mosques. In the BoyScout camps. In the Schools. In the Police.

Genocide is not occuring.
Neither is Ethnic Cleansing.

What is occurring, without question, revolves around focused and intelligent IDF commanders who are taking this fight right into the living rooms (and bedrooms) of Hamas apartments.
If you doubt this, just take a look at the rescue mission today, whereby the effort was successful and very impressive, under the circumstances.

 

[webfusion]

Ziggurat, I totally agree. We Israelis are not seeking any sympathy.
Especially from the USA. We see exactly what is going on in the streets.
There is a widespread attitude of "**** Israel" that has NOTHING to do with this war, or the events of this war.

Where is Kfir Bibas?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Interesting. Almost as interesting as dropping 2,000 lb bombs on Israeli-declared safe zones, or being forced to drink sea water, or having no place at all to return to, or even to turn to. What was the plan for Palestinians before Oct 7, again? "More of the same, only less space and more killings"? I believe that was the official policy, as revealed by law enforcement practices and the absence of any other plan, except creeping occupation, for decades.

 

[webfusion]

Those bombs are dropped right into the bedrooms of Hamas leaders.
Sorry (not sorry).

Nobody is drinking seawater. It's not suitable for consumption. The salt content in seawater is much higher than what can be processed by the human body.
You must employ reverse osmosis or distillation technology to desalinate seawater safely.
And if the Gazans are using that method, then it's fine to drink.
Has anyone investigated this and discovered the facts of this claim?
Where's AlJazeera's professional reporting team?
(Never mind, I know the answer) -- https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/isr...st-of-moonlighting-as-hamas-commander-5041680

 

[webfusion]

...the absence of any other plan...

All 'plans' that do not include the dissolution of Israel are void, in Hamas' eyes.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

For those that think Israel's approach is fine I have a few questions.

First, what is your rough estimate for the fraction of innocent Palestinians in Gaza? Are there any?

Second, if you do think there are some innocent Palestinians in Gaza, what fraction of them is it acceptable for Israel to kill either directly (because Hamas are among them and possibly/probably using them as "shields"), or indirectly through disease and malnutrition?

Finally, what is the definition of a military defeat of Hamas? Or is it like porn and we'll only know it when we see it?

I asking because it would be good to get an idea of what (if any) boundaries you think Israel should have in its execution of this war. Reading some posts it comes across as though so long as one more member of Hamas dies pretty much anything would be justifiable.

 

[lionking]

All I will say is that if Israel is waging a genocide, it’s doing a piss poor job. With a massive arsenal including nukes and a large airforce there have been around 30,000 deaths, and that is according to Hamas controlled bodies, and they, of course, couldn’t possibly exaggerate.

Many of the deaths are a direct consequence of Hamas’ use of civilians as human shields (and nobody can deny this).


Yes, war is terrible, but deaths are inevitable and always include civilians. As I said at the start of this thread, Hamas sowed the wind and reaped a whirlwind. It’s all on them.

 

[lionking]

Dupe. Bloody forum.

 

[theprestige]

Germany was militarily defeated in WW1. Military defeat does not bring peace. The only way is a political solution that removes the support for Hamas or its successors.

This is ahistorical.

After WW1, Germany turned from peace back to war in the way it did because a genocidal madman co-opted a nationalist and anti-communist political party, turned it into his own personal army, and used it to take over the country. That, not military defeat, is a fitting analogy to how Gaza got to be the way that it is.

Nobody else in Germany wanted to go back to war. Not the citizenry. Not the generals. Not the Kaiser. Not the communists.* Remove Hitler from the equation, and WW2 doesn't happen.**

---
*Okay, the communists did want war, but not the war Hitler wanted.

**Or maybe a different WW2 happens, where Germany gets overrun by the USSR, and Western Europe forms an alliance to repel the Soviets. But that's neither here nor there.

 

[lobosrul5]

This is ahistorical.

After WW1, Germany turned from peace back to war in the way it did because a genocidal madman co-opted a nationalist and anti-communist political party, turned it into his own personal army, and used it to take over the country. That, not military defeat, is a fitting analogy to how Gaza got to be the way that it is.

Nobody else in Germany wanted to go back to war. Not the citizenry. Not the generals. Not the Kaiser. Not the communists.* Remove Hitler from the equation, and WW2 doesn't happen.**

---
*Okay, the communists did want war, but not the war Hitler wanted.

**Or maybe a different WW2 happens, where Germany gets overrun by the USSR, and Western Europe forms an alliance to repel the Soviets. But that's neither here nor there.

Ohhh but some of them did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth

Anyways, maybe we need a different thread on that subject. One of my pet peeves is the "ohhhhhh the allies were too harsh and they made Germany start WW2"/Versailles treaty revisionist BS. Germany was let off too easy after WW1. Not the other way around.

 

[theprestige]

Ohhh but some of them did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth

Thinking they were done dirty at Versailles and feeling betrayed over it isn't the same as desiring and plotting a war of imperialist aggression. In the event, the generals were extremely reluctant to adopt Hitler's war plans, and needed quite a bit of convincing (browbeating? strong-arming?) to come around to the "plan so crazy it just might work" position. And even then... some of them didn't.

Anyways, maybe we need a different thread on that subject. One of my pet peeves is the "ohhhhhh the allies were too harsh and they made Germany start WW2"/Versailles treaty revisionist BS. Germany was let off too easy after WW1. Not the other way around.

I think the subject has utility in this thread, as long as people are going to try to make analogies, or compare and contrast the two situations and see if that tells us anything about the current situation.

 

[lobosrul5]

Thinking they were done dirty at Versailles and feeling betrayed over it isn't the same as desiring and plotting a war of imperialist aggression. In the event, the generals were extremely reluctant to adopt Hitler's war plans, and needed quite a bit of convincing (browbeating? strong-arming?) to come around to the "plan so crazy it just might work" position. And even then... some of them didn't.


I think the subject has utility in this thread, as long as people are going to try to make analogies, or compare and contrast the two situations and see if that tells us anything about the current situation.

Hmm, I've never seen much evidence of that per se. More like they believed the Panzer force was not yet ready.

 

[Planigale]

Those bombs are dropped right into the bedrooms of Hamas leaders.
Sorry (not sorry).

Nobody is drinking seawater. It's not suitable for consumption. The salt content in seawater is much higher than what can be processed by the human body.
You must employ reverse osmosis or distillation technology to desalinate seawater safely.
And if the Gazans are using that method, then it's fine to drink.
Has anyone investigated this and discovered the facts of this claim?
Where's AlJazeera's professional reporting team?
(Never mind, I know the answer) -- https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/isr...st-of-moonlighting-as-hamas-commander-5041680

Really? How many leaders does Hamas have? How many bombs have been dropped. I always find it amazing how intelligent people (and most posting here are) can not do simple arithmetic. This statement is obvious nonsense if you have any mathematical sense.

 

[Planigale]

Thinking they were done dirty at Versailles and feeling betrayed over it isn't the same as desiring and plotting a war of imperialist aggression. In the event, the generals were extremely reluctant to adopt Hitler's war plans, and needed quite a bit of convincing (browbeating? strong-arming?) to come around to the "plan so crazy it just might work" position. And even then... some of them didn't.


I think the subject has utility in this thread, as long as people are going to try to make analogies, or compare and contrast the two situations and see if that tells us anything about the current situation.

Thank you for supporting my case. Hitler was actually voted into power (a bit like Hamas), and stayed in power because the German people felt exploited? punished? They went through great suffering with the economic collapse post WW1 (though nothing like the suffering of the Gazans under Israeli occupation) that resulted in anger and resentment leading to Hitler gaining power. I think none of those voting for Hitler realised the consequences any more than those who voted for Hamas predicted the consequences, The difference was that the allies commited to rebuilding a democratic Germany and they did an excellent job. The current Israeli government is committed to the destruction of the Palestinian state. The alies recognised the political failings of the post WW1 settlement and made sure they did not repeat the mistake. The present Israeli government seems committed to repeating failed policies.

 

[lobosrul5]

Thank you for supporting my case. Hitler was actually voted into power (a bit like Hamas), and stayed in power because the German people felt exploited? punished? They went through great suffering with the economic collapse post WW1 (though nothing like the suffering of the Gazans under Israeli occupation) that resulted in anger and resentment leading to Hitler gaining power. I think none of those voting for Hitler realised the consequences any more than those who voted for Hamas predicted the consequences, The difference was that the allies commited to rebuilding a democratic Germany and they did an excellent job. The current Israeli government is committed to the destruction of the Palestinian state. The alies recognised the political failings of the post WW1 settlement and made sure they did not repeat the mistake. The present Israeli government seems committed to repeating failed policies.

Only after Germany's near total ruin and the unconditional surrender by the Nazi Party remnant under Doenitz. And then the hangings began and a multi year occupation.

ETA: the parallels between post Versailles treaty Germany and post 2005 Gaza are actually quite startling. Just not in the way you think they are. The allies after WW1 made a mistake by not occupying more than a small part of Germany and more or less leaving them to their own devices. And then failing to even enforce the Versailles treaty conditions. Kind of like Israel just "peacing out" of Gaza after Hamas took over. Both were horrible mistakes, but not because they were too harsh. They were too weak. Where the analogy fails is Iran supporting Hamas.

 

[theprestige]

Thank you for supporting my case. Hitler was actually voted into power (a bit like Hamas),

Hitler's NASDAP received about 30% of the vote. They enjoyed a plurality in government not least because they used political violence to suppress competing voters at the polls. To be fair, most of the voters they were trying to suppress were Communist, who were also using political violence to try to suppress the fascist voters. Imagine two jihadist cults at war with each other over which one gets to oppress everyone else. Shouldn't take much imagination, since recent history shows it happening pretty much everywhere that jihadism is allowed to take root.

and stayed in power because the German people felt exploited? punished?

Because Hitler's paramilitary goons aggressively and violently suppressed any dissent, exploited bigotry in the population, and carried out their worst programs in secret.

They went through great suffering with the economic collapse post WW1 (though nothing like the suffering of the Gazans under Israeli occupation) that resulted in anger and resentment leading to Hitler gaining power.

This sounds like you're excusing terrorist lashing-out. The Navajo suffered greatly at the hands of the US government. Why have they not chosen Navajihad?

I think none of those voting for Hitler realised the consequences any more than those who voted for Hamas predicted the consequences,

Whereas Hamas was already a known anti-Semitic terrorist organization before they were elected. I think the Germans probably knew better than you're giving them credit for. I'm sure the voters in Gaza knew even better than that what they were voting into power.

The difference was that the allies commited to rebuilding a democratic Germany and they did an excellent job. The current Israeli government is committed to the destruction of the Palestinian state. The alies recognised the political failings of the post WW1 settlement and made sure they did not repeat the mistake. The present Israeli government seems committed to repeating failed policies.

The rehabilitation of Germany was predicated on destruction of their country through total industrialized warfare, military occupation, martial law, and a promise that the country would be returned to its citizens if and when the occupiers deemed them ready for such responsibility. As long as we're aptly comparing Hamas to Nazis, I wholeheartedly prescribe the same treatment for Gaza. The only thing I would change is that we have the UN now, so the UN could proactively commit to rebuilding Gaza, once the preparatory work is completed.

 

[webfusion]

Really? How many leaders does Hamas have? How many bombs have been dropped. I always find it amazing how intelligent people (and most posting here are) can not do simple arithmetic. This statement is obvious nonsense if you have any mathematical sense.

I've lost track, actually. This battle is not a war of arithmetic. Especially since we are never told by the Gaza Health Ministry (Hamas-controlled) how many Hamas guys are eviscerated.
When you have details of which leaders the bombs took out, get back to us and I'll discuss it.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/202...-idf-photo/06israel-hamas-idf-photo-jumbo.png

 

[theprestige]

Where the analogy fails is Iran supporting Hamas.

One way to address this is to zoom out the magnification on the analogy. Take a few steps back, and it's the same problem of incomplete occupation, and leaving the responsible government largely unmolested to perpetrate its shenanigans.

 

[Planigale]

One way to address this is to zoom out the magnification on the analogy. Take a few steps back, and it's the same problem of incomplete occupation, and leaving the responsible government largely unmolested to perpetrate its shenanigans.

But Israel did previously occupy and colonise Gaza as it does now in the West Bank, the difference is that the Allies wanted to create an independent German nation, Israel wants to prevent the creation of an Independent Palestinian nation, the promotion of a successful democracy in Palestine is not in the interests of the current Israeli government.

Since 7 October there have been more than 500 acts of terrorism in the West bank. Terrorist acts committed by extremist settlers against Palestinians. More Palestinians have been killed by Jewish terrorists in the West Bank than Israelis (including IDF) have been killed by Palestinians from the West Bank / East Jerusalem. That is not even counting those Palestinians including many children often shot in the back by the IDF. The Israeli government allows terrorists to act freely, when other countries start taking action against jewish terrorists, Israel complains.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

This thread is another example of Godwin's Law I see!

The analogy with Germany / Nazis / Hitler can only really be applied as far as the treatment of the Palestinians by Israel is somewhat like the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany: they take whatever they want and force them into ghettos. There are probably examples of Nazis pointing to the lawlessness and brutality in the ghettos and using it as an example of why the people in the ghettos have only got themselves to blame.

A better analogy is the British occupation of (Northern) Ireland and its battle with the IRA. By my estimation we're at about the stage of the Potato Famine, so only another 150-200 years and things will be making a turn for the better!

 

[lionking]

A better analogy is the British occupation of (Northern) Ireland and its battle with the IRA. By my estimation we're at about the stage of the Potato Famine, so only another 150-200 years and things will be making a turn for the better!

Oh god, not another one. NI is a pathetic analogy.

Tell me about how, after raining countless rockets on London, the IRA then decided to send a thousand terrorists to rape and murder over 1000 people and take 200 hostages. Followed closely with a counter attack on Belfast.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

But Israel did previously occupy and colonise Gaza as it does now in the West Bank, the difference is that the Allies wanted to create an independent German nation, Israel wants to prevent the creation of an Independent Palestinian nation, the promotion of a successful democracy in Palestine is not in the interests of the current Israeli government.

Since 7 October there have been more than 500 acts of terrorism in the West bank. Terrorist acts committed by extremist settlers against Palestinians. More Palestinians have been killed by Jewish terrorists in the West Bank than Israelis (including IDF) have been killed by Palestinians from the West Bank / East Jerusalem. That is not even counting those Palestinians including many children often shot in the back by the IDF. The Israeli government allows terrorists to act freely, when other countries start taking action against jewish terrorists, Israel complains.

I note that you are still ignoring the inconvenient parts of history, in order to cling to your beliefs. You can repeat these lies all you like, it will never make them true.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

So six year old children and paramedics are Hamas operatives now. There are some people that will say anything to excuse genocide.

Not what webfusion said, and you know it.
It is noticeable how often the defenders of Hamas have to resort to outright lies in order to support their positions.
Also, not genocide.

 

[Planigale]

I note that you are still ignoring the inconvenient parts of history, in order to cling to your beliefs. You can repeat these lies all you like, it will never make them true.

It is not history it is current affairs. Likud, Netanyahu policy is that there will never be an independent Palestinian Nation, they are committed to a greater Israel 'from the sea to the river'. These are not even the most extreme members of the Israeli government.

 

[jt512]

There is a widespread attitude of "**** Israel" that has NOTHING to do with this war, or the events of this war.

The reaction in the West (especially on college campuses) to the war has opened my eyes to how deeply antisemitic today's far left is. Antisemitism is baked into woke ideology. In every conflict there must be an oppressor, who is vilified, and an oppressed, who is sanctified. In this conflict, the Palestinians are deemed to be the oppressed, and the Jews are deemed to be the oppressors. Therefore, the Palestinians are sanctified and the Jews vilified.

The irony that Jews, one of the most oppressed populations in history, are deemed oppressors shows how morally bankrupt woke ideology is.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

For those that think Israel's approach is fine I have a few questions.

I don't agree that all of what Israel is doing in Gaza is fine, but I'll answer your questions anyway.

First, what is your rough estimate for the fraction of innocent Palestinians in Gaza? Are there any?

Define 'innocent'. Does supporting terrorism qualify as being innocent? How about active participation in terrorist attacks? Are those people innocent too? There is a saying about making your bed that seems apt here.
My own definition would be, Palestinian civilians that do not support Hamas. The fraction of the population that meets that definition is a minority, and one that is still decreasing: support for Hamas rose in Gaza after the October attack.

Second, if you do think there are some innocent Palestinians in Gaza, what fraction of them is it acceptable for Israel to kill either directly (because Hamas are among them and possibly/probably using them as "shields"), or indirectly through disease and malnutrition?

Define 'kill directly'. Do you mean kill intentionally, or kill because that's the only way to get to the Hamas fighters who have surrounded themselves with innocents that they are willing to sacrifice in order to save their own skins and gain a propaganda advantage?
My own take: deliberately killing civilians and only civilians is a war crime. I do not believe that the IDF is doing this. Civilian casualties, as collateral damage, are unavoidable in any war situation. There will contine to be civilian casualties as long as Hamas refuses to surrender, and as long as Hamas continues to use human shields. I think, then, a better question would be, what fraction of its own people is Hamas prepared to let die?

Finally, what is the definition of a military defeat of Hamas? Or is it like porn and we'll only know it when we see it?

I would say that, when Hamas no longer exerts control over Gaza, either through attrition of its numbers, or through surrender, then that would qualify as a defeat.

I asking because it would be good to get an idea of what (if any) boundaries you think Israel should have in its execution of this war. Reading some posts it comes across as though so long as one more member of Hamas dies pretty much anything would be justifiable.

I note you make no mention of any boundaries Hamas should have. Is there a reason for that omission?

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Oh god, not another one. NI is a pathetic analogy.

Tell me about how, after raining countless rockets on London, the IRA then decided to send a thousand terrorists to rape and murder over 1000 people and take 200 hostages. Followed closely with a counter attack on Belfast.

I don't think there's any telling you anything. You already know that if someone expresses a thought different to your own then they're wrong. Must make life very simple for you.

However, if others would like to see where I'm coming from, this piece in the Independent from 2021 outlines the similarities (and the differences) of the conflicts.

An important parallel between Northern Ireland then and Israel/Gaza today is that, in both cases, grossly excessive military force was and is used to try to solve political problems that it only succeeds in exacerbating. In the case of the Ballymurphy shootings, which took place during the introduction of internment without trial, the British government managed only to delegitimise itself, to spread hatred against itself and to act as the recruiting sergeant for the Provisional IRA.

As in Northern Ireland half a century ago, the Israeli security services keep announcing that they are winning famous victories and killing enemy commanders, as if local leaders of the rag-tag paramilitary forces of Hamas and Islamic Jihad were irreplaceable military technicians. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that Hamas and Islamic Jihad “will pay a heavy price for their belligerence.” No doubt they will, but the heaviest price will be paid by civilians in Gaza, like in the last such conflict in 2014 when 2,000 Palestinians and 73 Israelis were killed in a ‘war’ lasting 67 days.

Israel is not Nazi Germany and they've never had a leader anywhere near as deranged as Hilter, but if people what to keep going with the hyperbole I'll sit and watch.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I don't agree that all of what Israel is doing in Gaza is fine, but I'll answer your questions anyway.



Define 'innocent'. Does supporting terrorism qualify as being innocent? How about active participation in terrorist attacks? Are those people innocent too? There is a saying about making your bed that seems apt here.
My own definition would be, Palestinian civilians that do not support Hamas. The fraction of the population that meets that definition is a minority, and one that is still decreasing: support for Hamas rose in Gaza after the October attack.

So lots of Catholics in Northern Ireland were fair game for British soldiers in the 70's and 80's?

Given their historic and current situation, who should and can oppressed Palestinians support? What other options do they have?

Define 'kill directly'. Do you mean kill intentionally, or kill because that's the only way to get to the Hamas fighters who have surrounded themselves with innocents that they are willing to sacrifice in order to save their own skins and gain a propaganda advantage?
My own take: deliberately killing civilians and only civilians is a war crime. I do not believe that the IDF is doing this. Civilian casualties, as collateral damage, are unavoidable in any war situation. There will contine to be civilian casualties as long as Hamas refuses to surrender, and as long as Hamas continues to use human shields. I think, then, a better question would be, what fraction of its own people is Hamas prepared to let die?

By kill directly I mean go after members of Hamas in a way you know significant numbers of civilians are going to be hurt and killed.

I would say that, when Hamas no longer exerts control over Gaza, either through attrition of its numbers, or through surrender, then that would qualify as a defeat.

Okay, so that sounds like you think Israel should occupy Gaza (and the West Bank) indefinitely because the Palestinians are never going to accept subordination and Hamas or another group of fanatics will take control once Israel leaves.

I note you make no mention of any boundaries Hamas should have. Is there a reason for that omission?

Hamas are a brutal terrorist group. They are not the government of a country. What boundaries should the IRA have had?

 

[Manger Douse]

So lots of Catholics in Northern Ireland were fair game for British soldiers in the 70's and 80's?

I don't know - did these Catholics support and encourage the rape, mutilation and murder of Protestant civilians? Because if they didn't, I don't understand why you are bringing Catholics into this

 

[Manger Douse]

Another quick question Ivor the Engine - was it ever IRA doctrine to cause as many Irish civilian casualties by using suicide bombers and human shields the way Palestinians regularly do, to try and make the UK loose intentional support? Because again, if not given these salent points I fail to see why once again the IRA has been brought up in this conversation

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

I don't know - did these Catholics support and encourage the rape, mutilation and murder of Protestant civilians? Because if they didn't, I don't understand why you are bringing Catholics into this

I think it's that you don't want to understand and instead want to dehumanise the people that are currently being killed.

To answer your question, yes Catholics did physically assault Protestants and vice versa in numerous ways. I believe kneecapping was popular. The situation was so bad we built peace walls separating one community from another.

Not that Israel - Palestine has any walls dividing communities. Oh wait...

 

[Manger Douse]

To answer your question, yes Catholics did physically assault Protestants and vice versa in numerous ways. I believe

Catholics supported the kneecapping (and far, far worse)of the entire British population did they? You got some evidence for that have you?

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Another quick question Ivor the Engine - was it ever IRA doctrine to cause as many Irish civilian casualties by using suicide bombers and human shields the way Palestinians regularly do, to try and make the UK loose intentional support? Because again, if not given these salent points I fail to see why once again the IRA has been brought up in this conversation

You seem very obsessed with the precise modus operandi of Hamas vs. IRA, as if pointing out differences in the violence between the two groups negates the broader social and political similarities. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

ETA: Should have made clear: "the broader social and political similarities between the Palestinian and Israel conflict and the British occupation of (Northern) Ireland".

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Catholics supported the kneecapping (and far, far worse)of the entire British population did they? You got some evidence for that have you?

Do you realise how stupid a question that is? Clearly you are very emotional and cannot think straight. Come back to me if/when you can.

 

[Manger Douse]

Do you realise how stupid a question that is? Clearly you are very emotional and cannot think straight. Come back to me if/when you can.

It was sarcasm directed as someone who apparently can't see the difference between inter-gang violence and calling for all civilians to be raped, mutilated and murdered. Catholics never did the second bit - that's why talking about the IRA is nonsense

 

[Manger Douse]

You seem very obsessed with the precise modus operandi of Hamas vs. IRA, as if pointing out differences in the violence between the two groups negates the broader social and political similarities. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

ETA: Should have made clear: "the broader social and political similarities between the Palestinian and Israel conflict and the British occupation of (Northern) Ireland".

Only if you squint and ignore the whole genocide, rape, mutilate and murder bit