It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hamas Breaks peace deal-Fires Rockets

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Yes, we all knew that THE Hamas are not trustworthy and would do this.

We all know they only wanted a break so they could get more terrorists and bombs/rockets to murder innocents with.

As I stated before, Israel should NOT have stopped but redoubled their efforts as they were working.

The delusion that peace is possible with murdering terrorists is not possible, but still a worthwhile goal. So should the truce end or should


Should Israel fire a few mortors and missiles at the terrorists and start fresh again???


LINK


LINK2
LINK3






[edit on 6/24/2008 by mrmonsoon]




posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Yes, we all knew that THE Hamas are not trustworthy and would do this.

We all know they only wanted a break so they could get more terrorists and bombs/rockets to murder innocents with.

As I stated before, Israel should NOT have stopped but redoubled their efforts as they were working.

The delusion that peace is possible with murdering terrorists is not possible, but still a worthwhile goal. So should the truce end or should


Should Israel fire a few mortors and missiles at the terrorists and start fresh again???


LINK


LINK2
LINK3






[edit on 6/24/2008 by mrmonsoon]


You should read what you have linked, it was not Hamas, it was Islamic Jihad.


Just before midnight, Palestinian militants fired a mortar shell into an empty area in southern Israel. And in a pre-dawn raid, Israeli troops killed two Palestinians in the West Bank city of Nablus.

Islamic Jihad, a small armed group backed by Syria and Iran, claimed responsibility for the rocket fire. Although the West Bank is not included in the truce, the group said the Nablus raid had soured the atmosphere of calm.


If you read the entire article, you will note this happened in the West Bank, and like the article points out, West Bank is not part of the ceasefire, just Gaza. It would also help if you weren't just random hate mongering. None of your articles mention Hamas did anything. You should change the thread title to something that contains actual facts.

Edit to add:
I am still unsure where you got Hamas form, the only mention they get in any article is that they said they were committed to the truce.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by Rook1545]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Reasons why HAMAS would take credence for the attacks even if it was orchestrated by low-level members:

1) They are acknowledged as a terrorist group by many, as such they have the backing of many terrorist groups.

If they did not claim for the attack, someone else would and there would be a territorial dispute.

2) Denying involvement may cause a schism in the ranks of HAMAS, which would reduce their political capability.

3) They get to be the ones who stuck it to the jews while actually doing nothing.

I'm not saying HAMAS didn't do it, but i am saying that it's very likely there's a lot more than meets the eye with terrorism.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
Lets not kid ourselves, it's not like Hamas EVER tried to stop terrorism, but they do provide terrorist bombs and training.

Or, if they cannot control their own population, why should they be delt with, no seriously.

As for war mongering, lets look at the musliums who clearly don't want peace.

The muslim terrorist need to be delt with the same way Germany was when it sent unguided rockets into London.

[edit on 6/24/2008 by mrmonsoon]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
why should they be delt with, no seriously.


Seriously?

Because they are harbouring terrorists.

Of course, if we were to go after HAMAS because of this, then we could probably go after any country in the world.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


No, you misunderstand-clearly.

Since they claim to be the representive government of them, they are resposible for keeping control of their people.

If they won't or can't, they are a useless enity to deal with.

In that case, the need to be ignored and the terrorists removed by other means.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Since the "HAMAS" is the elected government of these people, they are directly responsible for all actions coming from their people.

Lets not kid ourselves, it's not like Hamas EVER tried to stop terrorism.

Or, if they cannot control their own population, why should they be delt with, no seriously.


You have got to be joking right? So does this mean that we can now hold every single government responsible for it's people do?

Since you are obviously an Israeli apologist, I would like to know what gives Israel the right to treat these people like cattle for the last 60 years? Why shouldn't they be fighting back for the freedom that they had forcibly taken away from them? They have more right to that land than the Zionists do. If you can give me two VERY good reasons as to why the Israelis are allowed to conduct these land grabs, and force their will onto another people, I might take you seriously. Until then you are nothing more than another one of the sheep, who bleat out poor Israel without giving any thought as to why the Palestinians are fighting back.

edit to add:
I REALLY hope you are not suggesting that since every government has a problem with radicals that it means that the rest of the world can go in and "take care of it"

[edit on 24-6-2008 by Rook1545]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rook1545

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Since the "HAMAS" is the elected government of these people, they are directly responsible for all actions coming from their people.

Lets not kid ourselves, it's not like Hamas EVER tried to stop terrorism.

Or, if they cannot control their own population, why should they be delt with, no seriously.


You have got to be joking right? So does this mean that we can now hold every single government responsible for it's people do?

Since you are obviously an Israeli apologist, I would like to know what gives Israel the right to treat these people like cattle for the last 60 years? Why shouldn't they be fighting back for the freedom that they had forcibly taken away from them? They have more right to that land than the Zionists do. If you can give me two VERY good reasons as to why the Israelis are allowed to conduct these land grans, and force their will onto another people, I might take you seriously. Until then you are nothing more than another one of the sheep, who bleat out poor Israel without giving any thought as to why the Palestinians are fighting back.


"Since you are obviously an Israeli apologist,"-personal attack, ignored.


"They have more right to that land than the Zionists do. "- no, they don't.
It was Israel before the nomads wandered in.

You used he term Zionist, can you define what it means, or are you simply using insulting terms of which you have no understanding???

One might question YOUR objectiveness, since you seem to say the the murdering terrorism the musliums do is ok. (Freedom fighter, one who fights against others freedom-:lol



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


No, you misunderstand-clearly.

Since they claim to be the representive government of them, they are resposible for keeping control of their people.

If they won't or can't, they are a useless enity to deal with.

In that case, the need to be ignored and the terrorists removed by other means.


'Responsible' carries the implication of "Harbouring Terrorists".

'removing them by other means' carries the implication of going in there and doing their job for them.

I understood quite clearly, mrmonsoon, perhaps even clearer than you yourself.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


No, you misunderstand-clearly.

Since they claim to be the representive government of them, they are resposible for keeping control of their people.

If they won't or can't, they are a useless enity to deal with.

In that case, the need to be ignored and the terrorists removed by other means.


'Responsible' carries the implication of "Harbouring Terrorists".

'removing them by other means' carries the implication of going in there and doing their job for them.

I understood quite clearly, mrmonsoon, perhaps even clearer than you yourself.



If someone understands the issue of needing to remove the terrorists and realizes that the local government won't/can't, it becomes Israels responsibility to do so.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mrmonsoon
 


And where then?

Do we go into Pakistan to remove the gun-runners, or Russia to take out the dissident members of the dead soviet organisation?

Really now, you're playing your part quite well.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


You mean like the preditor UMAV shooting missiles and taking out terrorits. in ME and Pakistan?

Some peoples problem is since "THEY" or their country is not being attacked almost everyday, they don't see the need to stop the low level warfare.

It seems very simple to me.

If they maintain, their purpose in life is to murder every man woman and child in a country, then it seems perfectly fine to do the same to them-to bad that is not the case.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
If they maintain, their purpose in life is to murder every man woman and child in a country, then it seems perfectly fine to do the same to them-to bad that is not the case.



I'm sorry, do you have a point then?

Are you implying that we are wrong to respect other people's borders and governments, that we should be more than happy to conquer everything in sight?

You should learn to make your point clear.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon

"Since you are obviously an Israeli apologist,"-personal attack, ignored.



Not really a personal attack, if you were a christain, and I called you one, that is not an attack, it is pointing out the truth.



"They have more right to that land than the Zionists do. "- no, they don't.
It was Israel before the nomads wandered in.


I would like to show me proof of that. There was never any state there at anytime called Israel until 1948.



You used he term Zionist, can you define what it means, or are you simply using insulting terms of which you have no understanding???


I am not sure how "Zionist" is insulting. Lots of people call themselves that. Zionists are people that believe in the physical nation for the Jewish people, it has nothing to do with being Jewish, alot of Jews are actually against the Zionist created state, do not confuse Jew, Zionist, and Israeli, they are all different. Obviously you didn't know what it was, so I am glad to have imparted some knowledge.




One might question YOUR objectiveness, since you seem to say the the murdering terrorism the musliums do is ok. (Freedom fighter, one who fights against others freedom-:lol



Where did I ever say that their murdering was ok? No one's murdering is ok. You have a twisted take on freedom fighter, but I guess using YOUR definition, the Israelis are the freedom fighters.

You know things would go alot better if people like you, were capable of seeing both points of view. But, it would seem from your posts here, that you are incapable of seeing past your prejudice. This is not a personal attack, this is an observation. You have made no attempt to be objective at all, and could care less what happens to the Palestinian people. If that is true, then I feel very sorry for you.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
actually, it is an personal attack-how dare I present the other side of the issue from you.
.

To the point, you don't know I am an Isreali/Jewish. Also, I don't appoligise for their "RESPONCES" to Muslium terrorists.

Here is one of 100's of thousands of reference from google:
Link



or pick one of your choice:
LINK2

Here is link to the real definition:
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">LINK

Muslium freedom fighters target civillians in hopes of murdering men/women and children.
Proof is that they almost always attack civillians.

They launch their attacks from schools/childrens playgrounds/civillian homes and civillian crowds.

This is done on the terrorist hopes that when "RESPONCES" TO MUSLIUM TERRORISM comes, the musliums hope their civillians are hurt/killed for propaganda .

Again, you are seriously wrong.
I feel for those innocent civillians who are murdered bye the actions of the muslium terrorist.

I say all terrorits sould die and thus, protect the civillian population.

See, clearly I care more about the muslium civillians than the terrorists do.

I am saying that muslium terrorist do not respect countries borders, why should their borders be respected???

"But, it would seem from your posts here, that you are incapable of seeing past your prejudice. " Again, a personal attack-*shakes head*

I have noticed that when some people have no facts to back their point, they move to personal attacks.









[edit on 6/24/2008 by mrmonsoon]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon

See, clearly I care more about the muslium civillians than the terrorists do.


Actually, it's clear that you care more about killing terrorists than you do about protecting innocent 'muslim' civilians.

Again, you have failed to make your point clear.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant
 


Clearly, I care more about the civilian population more than the Muslim terrorists do.

I attack the sick point of the murderers launching attacks on civilian population from schools/playgrounds/homes and crowds of civilians.

Anyone with any sense of history knows that when the terrorists attack, the point of the attack will be "RESPONDED" TO.

If the terrorists did not attack a country, there would be no danger to the civilians.

Stop the terrorist attacks and the RESPONCES stop.

It is that simple. And if one thinks the terrorist attacks are ok/good then the responses are just as good.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
actually, it is an personal attack-how dare I present the other side of the issue from you.
.

To the point, you don't know I am an Isreali/Jewish. Also, I don't appoligise for their "RESPONCES" to Muslium terrorists.

Here is one of 100's of thousands of reference from google:
Link



or pick one of your choice:
LINK2

Here is link to the real definition:
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">LINK

Muslium freedom fighters target civillians in hopes of murdering men/women and children.
Proof is that they almost always attack civillians.

They launch their attacks from schools/childrens playgrounds/civillian homes and civillian crowds.

This is done on the terrorist hopes that when "RESPONCES" TO MUSLIUM TERRORISM comes, the musliums hope their civillians are hurt/killed for propaganda .

Again, you are seriously wrong.
I feel for those innocent civillians who are murdered bye the actions of the muslium terrorist.

I say all terrorits sould die and thus, protect the civillian population.

See, clearly I care more about the muslium civillians than the terrorists do.

I am saying that muslium terrorist do not respect countries borders, why should their borders be respected???

"But, it would seem from your posts here, that you are incapable of seeing past your prejudice. " Again, a personal attack-*shakes head*

I have noticed that when some people have no facts to back their point, they move to personal attacks.









[edit on 6/24/2008 by mrmonsoon]


You can get off the high horse. I never once said you were Israeli, or Jewish, I said you were a Zionist, I pointed out there was a difference.

I guess that since you have read so much about this whole thing you would realize that the Israeli borders have grown substantially since 1948. Where did they get this land from? They took it. You can't refute that. How did they take it? By killing ordinary citizens, women and children, and by forced displacement. So I guess since the Israelis started the "terrorist" movement here, they should die. why should the Palestinians have to respect the artificially created Israeli borders? They are not part of the original agreement, and should not be enforceable.

You are the one with no facts. At all. You spout general information, without specifics. My first post I asked for 2 reasons we should support the Israelis, you have given me zero. You deflect and redirect. You say, and I quote:



I have noticed that when some people have no facts to back their point, they move to personal attacks.



Yet you are the one that has shown zero proof. You have no facts and just deflect the conversation. I have not taken any shots at you. I have pointed out that you cannot get beyond the fact the Muslim terrorists must die. You claim to "see the other side", yet you cannot understand why they do what they do. Israel has every right to exist, just not in it's current form. It has broken the treaty that created it, so it has nullified it's own right to exist.

edit to add:
If you want to talk about the history of Israel, bring something to the table that is actual history and not biblical.

[edit on 24-6-2008 by Rook1545]



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Rook1545
 


Where did Israel get more land, fair enough question.

Since 4 or more Muslim countries have attack Israel many times, and lost each time-
- they each lost some land.

Typically, the high ground, making serious military attacks from those countries much harder.

Displaced, so they moved civilians out of harms way when they went to war with several countries at once, how dare they put civilians out of harms way-


Ok, by your logic, If the Palestinians don't respect Israeli borders, then they should have their borders not respected either-seems fair to me.

“Have pointed out that you cannot get beyond the fact the Muslim terrorists must die."
Again, personal attack-come on, really, try sticking to the issue, please.


But, your point does have some merit.

Murdering terrorists need to die.

Civilians who don't commit terrorist acts need to be left alone to live (that means not having terrorists launch attacks that create responses that kill civilians)

"So it has nullified its own right to exist."
So, you, like the Muslim terrorist, believe Israel has no right to exist??--or did I misread that?

Do you, like Muslim terrorist, believe every man/woman and child in Israel should be killed too??-no, seriously.

Wouldn't we all like to see the killing stop, of course we do.

All that requires is for the terrorism to stop.



posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by mrmonsoon
 


There is a difference between taking land from those countries defeated in the those wars, I never said anything about that, I said taking from the Palestinians. They use the encroachment method. They send the "settlers" out, they make a settlement, then annex the land. They have been slowly pushing the Palestinian people into the sea. That has nothing to do with any war. If you look at the map of Israel when it was created and now, there is a huge discrepancy of the size, most of it has come at the expense of the Palestinian people.

You did not misread what I said, you ignored the point before it saying that I believe Israel does deserve to exist but in the state it was originally set up as.

I said that if Israel has shown such blatant disregard for the Palestinian people and their borders, why should the Palestinian people reciprocate? For 60 years Israel has been stealing from these people and forcing them into a ghetto situation, then cry to the western world when anything happens to them. Smacks completely of hipocracy doesn't it?

I am not sure where you got that I want every man woman and child of Israel to die, but of course not. I think they both have every right co-exist. But they have to respect each other. That means that the Palestinians need to respect the Israeli right to exist, and moreso, the Israelis need to respect the Palestinian claim the the land given to them under the original deal. This is not about Israel "granting" them the "right" to have sovereignty, it is about Israel acknowledging the Palestinian State's right to exist.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join