It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Hamas and human shields

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 09:30 PM
A lot of people have attacked Isreal for defending itself. Everytime they "kill" a civilian the world cries out in anger, but nobody seems to care about Isreal though they are the victims. Now I know that many people will say, "Well it was Palestines land first" but, that is historically inaccurate to a degree and the world runs on, one group taking from the other. To complain about the land issue is to say, "California was part of Mexico so we should give it back to them, or give Alaska back to Russia, or this Indian tribe took from that Indian tribe, ect"... It's the samething no different (Oh and no we shouldnt give anything to Mexico they take enough). This whole thing is laughable. Hamas is bad and that's that people.
Why it's the worlds concern is beyond me there are far worse things going on. We (America) used disproportionate force on Iraq who didn't even attack us, but nobody seems to bring that issue up. Anyway here is a link to an article, talking about Hamas using poor children as human shields for the soul purpose of making Isreal look bad to the rest of the world. An amazing act of outside the box thinking and almost worthy of some minor respect, but evil to the core none the less.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 09:34 PM
Jews don't count. You'll find that they have been persecuted and hated since time began.

You'll note the disproportional number of posters on this site who are likewise anti-Israel. They'll often say Israel to be politically correct, but they mean anti-Jewish.

Jews or Jewish Israelis, or Israelis get killed, no big deal.

They fight back and kill civilians on the other side, the world screams bloody murder.

The way it is.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:10 PM
reply to post by dooper

You'll note the disproportional number of Americans who are likewise anti-terrorism. They'll often say terrorism to be politically correct, but they mean anti-Arab and anti-Muslim.

Muslim Arabs or Muslim Persians, or Syrians, Jordanians, Iraqis, Iranians, Lebanese, Afghans, Pakistanis get killed, no big deal.

They fight back and kill American soldiers and civilians, the West screams bloody murder.

You see the double standard? The news media uses labels and neuro-linguistic programming to put a group of people in one boat and paint them all with the very same broad stroke to create a common and easily identifiable enemy.

You just did the same with your biased post. You painted all that question Israel with the very same broad stroke to create the illusion that any one who questions the policies and actions of the Israeli government is somehow against the Jewish religion and more than likely shaves their head and gives an old salute in the German language.

If you read history, you'll find that nearly all groups have been persecuted and hated at some point. That doesn't mean we steal land to create countries for them, and that doesn't mean we excuse them dealing out the same genocidal behavior that they received to others.

[edit on 1/11/09 by NovusOrdoMundi]

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:14 PM
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi

I'm down with your first two paragraphs.

And no, it isn't the same as what the Jews have gone through.

Not even close.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:37 PM
reply to post by dooper

You are an embarressment to the jewish people.
Not all think as you do.You cant keep hanging on to the same old crap about the past.
Nor should the palestinians about the land.
By leaving it where it belongs in the past,then peace could be attained.

By the way.13 Israelies killed in the present conflict.As to over 800 palestinians.
Since 2001 including the 13 mentioned,28 Israelies have been killed.
Well over a thousand palestinians including as mentioned above have been killed since 2001.

Now where have I heard before of a greater killing by one side in a conflict?

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:39 PM
reply to post by gallifreyan medic

That would be the Holocaust where somewhere between 1 million and 6 million Jews and millions of other creeds died on one side of the conflict.

Oh, right.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:20 PM
reply to post by gallifreyan medic

I'm not Jewish. I'm of Nordic descent. So you're not even close.

Your assumption for the purpose of insult was therefore inaccurate, making it invalid, therefore it missed me, missed the Jewish people, and if anyone was shamed, it should be your ancestors.

As a former military man, I find your mistaken assumption that one's response should be of equal or similar proportionality.

I searched the rules of warfare for the past 3,500 years, and not once did I find any indication of swapping like kind, blow for blow.

Such a concept is a fool's errand, and a concept that has never, ever, been practiced in any battle, conflict, campaign, or war since 1479 BC.

This very recent concept of proportional response is only touted by losers.

And those who never, ever do any fighting themselves, and are seeking to somehow limit the degrees of any potential ass-kicking that may arrive at some point in the future.

In fact, this concept of proportional response in kind, is only presented by the unknowing, in direct proportion to the shrinking of testes in certain regions from adverse environmental or nutritional shortcomings.

I hate being the bearer of bad news, but the goal in battle, conflict, campaign, or war is to kill as many as you can, with the greatest efficiency, in the greatest concentrations, in the least amount of time. Fighting is just that simple.

Anytime, militarily speaking, that you can obtain an advantage on a battlefield and not take maximum advantage of it, then you are your own worst enemy.

Militarily speaking, the casualties optimally will be completely one sided.

The more you kill of the other side without losing any of your own, the smarter you just fought. Militarily speaking.

Militarily speaking, you kill them from behind, from above, while they bathe, or while they sleep, ideally. It minimizes your own casualties.

One sided casualty figures are absolute proof of success. The more staggering the ratio, the greater success.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:20 PM
reply to post by dooper

Since time began? What are you a fantasy writer? And when we mean "Israel" we mean "ISRAEL." Most of the posters on this forum are well aware of the seperation, and you'll notice very seldom sentiments that are actually attacking the religion or the religous peoples in itself. So if you would, please spare us.

In 2008, eight Israelis were killed by rocket and mortar fire. This was the "straw that broke the camels back" and Israel was "forced" to act after continued rocket fire. Entirely understandable.

Though, as the 4th strongest military force in the world and one of the premier intel programs in the world, the resources for covert operations to implode Hamas from within are readily on hand.

I (we) condem Israel, as it is ultimately responsible for this incredible loss of life, it's targeting of medical personnel, and it's indiscriminate slaughter of civilians.

This isn't a religious issue.

This is a military issue.

Right now the Israeli military is enganged in one of the most criminal military campaigns sinces Russia's unmarked "intervention" in Grozny in the mid 90's, which to me bears the most resemblance; ethnic issues, careless ariel bombardment on a nation that has no such response, and the incredible loss of civilian life due to heavy handed or careless tactics. Though, some might draw their own comparisons to numerous conflicts ongoing or not.

I've seen enough extreme generalizations from you about what other people think. Others may be angry at your attempt at demonizing the opposing view with polarizations like "When they say anti-Israel, they mean anti-jew," but for what it's worth, you barely get a scoff out of me.

We're more intelligent than that. I would love for you to have a little more respect for that intelligence.

[edit on 11-1-2009 by DeadFlagBlues]

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:29 PM
reply to post by gallifreyan medic

The kill ratio is irrelevant.

The fact that human beings are turning a blind eye to one another's humanity is the most disgusting part. Followed in short order by the idiots defending the actions of Hamas or the Israeli miltary, and the social and religious rift in related faiths. Israel has disgraced it's people by its show of excessive force and it's barbaric incursions into the remnants of Palestinian land. I have great sympathy for the people who want no part of this grudge and struggle, and nothing but contempt for the defenders of Israeli actions or those of Hamas.

And the "human shield" excuse gets an extra eye roll. Deservingly.

[edit on 11-1-2009 by DeadFlagBlues]

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:34 PM
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

You too, are mistaken on the military element.

If you wish to speak on a purely militarily principle, then one side should begin destroying the opposing side, until one side is unable to kill further, or unwilling to die further.

That, my friend, is a purely military concept for victory.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:38 PM
I can't seem to find where anyone said they were Jewish?
To be honest with everyone I have choosen a side and it's pro Israel, but that's me being honest in life you back one side and fight the other, it's not socially acceptable to do that anymore but it's what people do. There is a right and there is a wrong and one side is more right and the other more wrong, just pick a team grab pop corn and watch your team go for it. I don't see why other countries have to get invovled let them fight it out, I don't see the problem with that. They don't like eachother peace is not the answer and isn't going to fix this.
I have to agree with "dooper" what the Jews have gone through is not to be compared to anything else, no other group has tasted a fraction of what the Jews have.
800 Palestinians killed, I wonder how many were killed by other Palestinians?
I don't see how the numbers prove anything other then what a mircle it is that more Jews haven't died, considering the CONSTANT rocket attacks they face. here are some numbers.
Israeli population centers in southern Israel have been the target of over 4,000 rockets, as well as thousands of mortar shells, fired by Hamas and other organizations since 2001. The majority of those attacks were launched after Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip in August 2005. Indeed, rocket attacks increased by 500 percent (from 179 to 946) from 2005 to 2006.
Now on to the idea of "Disproportionate Force". As the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Rosalyn Higgins, has noted, proportionality "cannot be in relation to any specific prior injury - it has to be in relation to the overall legitimate objective of ending the aggression." In other words, if a state, like Israel, is facing aggression, then proportionality addresses whether force was specifically used by Israel to bring an end to the armed attack against it. By implication, force becomes excessive if it is employed for another purpose, like causing unnecessary harm to civilians. Now according to international law. Israel is doing nothing wrong.
The fact that Hamas has intentionaly placed it's military force close to highly populated civilian territory, places Hamas soley responsible for the high civilian deaths. Israel even warned the civilians in the area even though this would place any military incursion in great jeopardy.
Most armies seek to win by defeating the military capacity of an adversary, as efficiently as possible. There clearly is no international expectation that military losses in war should be on a one to one basis, most armies seek to decisively eliminate as many enemy forces as possible while minimizing their own losses. There are NATO members who have been critical of "Israel's disproportionate use of force," while NATO armies take pride in their kill ratios against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
To say that Isreal should stop fighting now is simply ridiculous.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:40 PM
Why do you feel compelled to "choose a side?"

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:45 PM
reply to post by dooper

I didnt say you were jewish.Just that you were an embarressment to them.
The first gulf war I was there.Grenadier guards.
So dont talk to me about the strategies of war,I know them.

You are so far somewhere else with your thinking.I take your word of being a former military man with a pinch of salt.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:46 PM
I am compelled to be honest with you all and to be honest there were far more important things I said in my last responce.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:50 PM
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

Militarily speaking: During war, humanity is not part of the equation. Humanity considerations occur before and afterwar but never during.

To be most merciful, one must be most ruthless.

To do less, and try to enter humanity during a conflict, is to extend the conflict without resolution. This extension negates resolution, which extends much more suffering on both sides.

Get in, close with, destroy the enemy, and the net count indicates in all wars that lives are saved.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:53 PM
reply to post by gallifreyan medic

I don't recall mentioning the strategies of war.

Thus, your confusion with the principles of war would indicate a certain lack of familiarity.

Congratulations of being part of the first Gulf War. What was it? Oh yes. You gentlemen did so well, they named it the 100-hour War.

Again, my sincere congratulations, and my personal thanks.

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 11:57 PM
reply to post by dooper

I am not speaking or wish to speak purely or simply about anything. My point is people like myself distinguish, and consciously so of Israel, the Israeli military, and the Jewish People. Where as to you have implied, we aren't taking that differentiation into account, and you even went to far as to say those of us who disagree with the unfortunate actions of Israel are somehow "anti-Semetic."

Israel can aquire the means to shoot down rockets and mortar rounds if they wished, it also has an extremly proficient intelligence agency that would make short work of a simple and infant political party. That's why I believe this isn't a war about rockets, 30 dead Israeli's in the past decade, or a clash of religious fundementalism. This is geopolitics. This is a demoralization of an entire peoples, innocent or not. The ethics of that are debatable and entirely subjective.

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:26 AM
Isreals anti missle defence shield is still not entirely opperational and is there to counter larger missles not so much rockets and while Israels intellegence agency is very good at what it does Hamas is also very good at what it does so it is not as easy to infiltrate as one may think.
I never said anyone was anti-semetic I did use the word "pro" which may have had that unfortunate effect of an insinuation, so for that I will apologize. To everyone that gets mad that I generalize large groups of people you just have to deal with it I really don't care enough to name every individual person in Palestine or Israel and what they feel or what they think. I would like to thank everyone for writing down good stuff on both sides it makes the conversation better so I thank you all for having minds and using them....Even if you are wrong.... Joking, joking don't lynch me just a joke.

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:29 AM
reply to post by dooper

Well I could bite.But I am not going to lower myself.
I would suggest though,to change your reading habits.
You're quoting from past war books with all that you write.
Try deep searching on the net and you will find the official and the real reason of what caused the missiles to be fired back into Israel ater the 2006 ceasefire.
If you're willing to keep an open mind while searching,you may(Long shot)see things abit differently.

[edit on 12/1/09 by gallifreyan medic]

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:40 AM
Isreal went into Gaza in 2006 because Hama was voted into power meaning that Hamas did, represent the people in Gaza meaning that they were actually all enemies of Israel. I mean if a group of people support a known terrorist orginization and put them in political places that does say something about the feelings of the people. To try to negotiate with people like that is a lesson in futility.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in