Blair and World against Hamas despite Gaza death toll

reply to post by pieman


let me make it easy for you. 200 dead and out of the 200 dead 15 civilians which leaves 185 militants = 8%

The world is against Hamas in this instance because it is bent on the annihilation of all the Jews and the complete dissolution of the state of Israel, which they maintain is theirs.

Hamas has refused or sabotaged every effort at a fair and peaceful resolution of the conflict. It will not be satisfied unless it can have everything--and I do mean everything--it demands. Reason and negotiation have failed.

Yes, the response is disproportionate, but that is the "Powell doctrine" (put forth by Gen. Colin Powell)-- e.g. when a country must fight it should use "overwhelming force."

Originally posted by Dracula23
reply to post by pieman

 

let me make it easy for you. 200 dead and out of the 200 dead 15 civilians which leaves 185 militants = 8%

185 militants = 8% of what exactly?
185 is not 8% of 200
15 is not 8% of 200
what exactly are you on about and what has that got to do with the 75% figure quoted in the first place?

So far, Hammas hasn't been able to deliver on their threats and that Israel 'as if' retaliated just from these threats against their children and 'as if' Hammas was asking and or begging Israel to martyr these people and their children?

Thousands more people died in Iraq and recent other wars. Wouldn't these figures be even higher? Wars in the past wouldn't have been so cautious about these civilian death tolls.

The one fact is that this war was caused by Hammas and continues most likely because of them trying to drag others into it.(typical?) I can only sympathize to a degree when it comes to wars like this. Didn't these people vote for Hammas democratically? What else did they expect......shopping malls and theaters? (it's theater now)


Isn't using civilians as shields a major war crime?

reply to post by Sestias


Once more...Israel stopped the ceasefire reached by attacking Hamas members on Palestine territory.

Please stop claiming it is the other way around.

reply to post by StevenDye


well the UN, england and the US think that Hamas broke the truce. but im sure you know better right?
give me a break, dont post facts when you dont have any...

Originally posted by Dracula23
reply to post by StevenDye

 

well the UN, england and the US think that Hamas broke the truce. but im sure you know better right?
give me a break, dont post facts when you dont have any...

Ok, here are some facts about what the UN thinks. From their own mouths.




Bear in mind you have to consider that the question the reporter asks is leading. He is assuming in his question, and attempting to lead the UN spokesperson into validating, that Hamas did indeed break the treaty first. Note that what the spokes person actually says is the agreement was that Hamas would stop firing rockets and then Israel would open the borders and in fact, Israel never did hold up their end of the agreement even though Hamas did for four months. AND Israel launched an incursion prior to Hamas ever firing any rockets, AND Hamas tried again to observe the truce to "get things back into control."

Facts.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Those above, about Israels incursions, were the facts I was talking about, truth be told I didn't even realise about the rest.

There are threads and numerous posts containing the source I speak of though.


Thread

That is the thread I spoke of, though I believe there is a newer one also in the general conspiracies area.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by StevenDye]

Sestias
The world is against Hamas in this instance because it is bent on the annihilation of all the Jews and the complete dissolution of the state of Israel, which they maintain is theirs.

Sorry but you can't make assumptions like that, simply because you don't speak for all of humanity. Last time I checked, we all have a voice of our own. As far as I'm concerned I'm not taking sides, as they are both as bad as each other.

reply to post by StevenDye


Yes, well I was troubled by the assumption some were making that because the US and Blair are saying that Hamas is the one who started it that they really believe that to be the case.

Apparently, some people do not realize that politicians lie to the people in order to forward their political positions. Such as when the US insisted that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to the US and justified our unprovoked attack.

Labeling a group or a person "terrorist" is a political ploy to justify any action taken by the "victim" of that terrorism. This is not to say that there are in fact no actual wrongdoers, or instigators of aggression, but rather to say that in today's political climate, any cry of "terrorist" should be examined closely to see if it is being used as an excuse to forward an existing agenda.

After all, "terrorism" is a point of view only. American revolutionaries would have been considered "terrorists" by the British monarchy at the time, would they not? And yet we consider them heros. And I am quite certain the in the minds of the Palestinians, they are being terrorized by Israel, and vice versa.

It is a political ploy to apply a label, so that people only look at the label and not at the actual circumstances, at who did what to whom first, and what circumstances historical and otherwise led up to those actions.

Historically, both sides have committed wrongs against each other. In this particular instance, it seems pretty clear that Israel is the provocateur if what the UN spokesperson is saying is reliable.






[edit on 6-1-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]

reply to post by StevenDye


a few facts about hamas who is considered a terror group and why they are:
Many thought that Gaza and the West Bank were inseparable entities until Hamas’s bloody takeover of the Strip in the summer of 2007 damaged that notion. Their 18-month rule is marred by lawlessness, extra-judicial public killings and gang warfare that is more reminiscent of Somalia than a civilised state.

Time magazine reported on the violence that followed the takeover then: “Gangs have tossed enemies alive off 15-storey buildings, shot one another’s children and burst into hospitals to finish off wounded foes lying helplessly in bed.”

Additionally, on the first anniversary of Hamas’s takeover of the Gaza Strip, the Christian Science Monitor found a lack of medicines in hospitals as well as of clean drinking water in the territory, and raw sewage streaming into the sea. And this isn’t because Hamas’s dignity prevents it from meeting the enemy.

Hamas’s vast propaganda machine around the Arab world mysteriously fails to report on the meetings between its members and Israeli government representatives. For example, after a 90-minute meeting with an official from the Israeli state electricity company in order to sort out the town’s electricity needs, the Hamas-affiliated mayor of Qalqilya told the BBC about the meeting: “It was civil, without any problem between him and I.”

By any standards Hamas has failed miserably. It has failed in peace, failed in governance, and moreover failed in war. In addition to Hamas’s ambiguous political agenda, their goal seems to be resistance for the sake of resistance, a quagmire where the journey really is the destination. It is time for Hamas to step down and allow more competent leaders to emerge before he causes even more damage to thier cause.

reply to post by Dracula23


And this justifies slaughter of innocents by Israel?

I have not claimed to side with Hamas, but right now, they are all that is defending Palestine, right or wrong.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by StevenDye]

reply to post by StevenDye


really? read this report that just came out might change your mind:
www.ynetnews.com...

reply to post by Dracula23


Hiding in civillian homes??? Oh my, well....what should we ever do? A house is relatively good cover, so of course it will be used...plenty ofarmies hvae used houses and public buildings for cover, sometimes with people still in them.


Stealing supplies for themselves...supplies are limited, and they are currently in a war...yes the army does have to take a larger cut...ever hear about the rations in Britain during world war 2?

Selling supplies for profit, nothing is free I'm afraid...and these are desparate measures...

I do not have to agree, to see the reasons behind it... and once more, that does not make killing innocents acceptable for Israel...or Hamas.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by Dracula23


I have seen reports of Israel doing exactly the same... Once more...How does that make killing civillians acceptable for Israel?

Not that I have seen actuall proof for either side, I saw a picture of israelis using a child, but these things can be faked relatively easily...

I don't support Hamas....I have never claimed to support Hamas...please stop posting as if I do...



Youre source is also dubious at best, as is being pointed out in the thread you posted it in.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by StevenDye]

reply to post by StevenDye


An Army Avatar and you claim all missiles fired and aimed hit what they are aimed at? Just curious because your post implies that very thing. Hamas does target civilians in the fact that its rockets could hit anywhere including in Gaza...

reply to post by theindependentjournal


dont even answer him, he is a kid with no clue what he is talking about and keeps changing his arguments. once its ok at war, then he talks about innocent civillians. not worth your time to answer him...

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by StevenDye

 

An Army Avatar and you claim all missiles fired and aimed hit what they are aimed at? Just curious because your post implies that very thing. Hamas does target civilians in the fact that its rockets could hit anywhere including in Gaza...

The avatar is me dressed in uniform for an A level media project I did...nothing more. Ebay and an old silly string gun is all you see.

It does no 'target' civillians...by targeting something you intend to hit it, the simple fact that Hamas does not know where its rockets will lanbd means they can't target much more than the general direction thery are fired in.

I'm not claiming all missiles hit what they aim at no...sorry if you feel I implied that. It was not my intention.


I don't see my arguments have changed any more than your own...but okay, do not reply I don't mind.

[edit on 6-1-2009 by StevenDye]

reply to post by StevenDye


I wouldnt take it personally, he wont respond to my posts either.

Some people pretend that they want to discuss an issue objectively, and consider facts, but what they really want is to espouse their own opinion and have others agree with them. If facts are inconvenient to their argument, they are discarded or ignored.

If someone disagrees with them, rather than take the time to present a considered and logical argument to counter, an ad hominem attack is made.

You cannot counter an emotional position with reason, though sometimes it is interesting to try.