BREAKING: Gaza Under Attack 

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

That is precisely the kind of foul attitude which is destroying our world. Do you see me referring to all Israelis or Jews as “savages” or “terrorists”? No, of course you won’t find me doing anything of the sort. In fact, I’d find it hard to even imagine that Palestinians automatically talk like that, instead they most probably know a great deal more about compassion than the most of us. Sorry, but the Israel government creates its own enemies, and it’s sad that I have to say that their worst enemy is their own shadow.

a reply to: ketsuko

Israel would have a lot of work to do to get on the right side of me before I would even consider leading it. Sheesh, I’m having a hard enough time with England, thanks.

a reply to: ugmold

Well, either the shield is crap or they let the rocket hit so as to get an excuse to deploy the F-35.

a reply to: IllegalName

As I said earlier..... I am glad that when the west came across head hunters..... they exterminated them. I am also glad when the west came across cannibals.... they and their chosen religious practices were exterminated.
It pleases me that when the west arrived in South America and came across a people whose religion believed it was ok to throw children into volcanoes that they too were exterminated....... same goes for the group of people who thought doing things like scalping people and wearing their victims scalp like a boyscout badge are also no longer with us. I will be equally glad to see islam go the way of the a fore mentioned

a reply to: StallionDuck

Israel could have prevented this by properly utilising their Iron Dome defence systems, which will stop everything from a bullet to a bomb from passing a given border line, if active and set up for full coverage.

They do not set it for full coverage, because otherwise they would not be able to justify the occasional and piece by piece genocide of Palestinians. Also, they know as well as anyone, that air strikes kill more civilians than combatants, which makes the problem worse not better. They also have snipers and access to some of the best firearms available anywhere on the face of earth. The fact that they did not decide to remove ONLY the combatants, that they elected NOT to utilise the incredible anti-projectile capabilities they poses, leads me to believe that this retaliation is unjustifiable.

Serious question..

It seems that a large issue is that Gaza is completely annexed and separated from Palestine...

I have a solution

Gaza is a poor #tyou place right?

Why doesnt Israel just evacuate all the Palestinians and Hamas.. out of Gaza.my and take them.to Palestine and.drop them off.my then.recognize Palestine



That solves the problem.. Israel gain the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians gain unity, and recognition

OR is that too trail of tearsish

Wow a lot of ignorance in this thread.

One thing Israel could do and could have done since it's inception is follow the damn rules set forth for them. If they recognised Palestine as a nation (the original deal was a 2 state solution) then they could demand extradition of criminals... It's that simple.

On another note, England met Irish republicans with fury every time they attacked, just like Israel my nation used special forces on militants and civilians alike. Now, Ireland lives in relative peace because we shared political power and amnesty was given for those putting their weapons down.

Israel is actively igniting this situation, they ARE stealing lands, they DO commit crimes against humanity and they have WILLFULLY ignore the rest of the world. Palestine can share a lot of comparison to the Irish republican struggle, one being nobody will touch them with a barge pole and it isn't down to their terrorist ways (Ulster loyalists weren't exactly a nice bunch) it's down to the fact of who is involved. Nobody dared condemn the English and with Palestine nobody dares offend Israelis backers.

Arabs have lived in peace with the Jew for ages before Israel's inception, it's not anti-Semitism that's the problem it's anti-Zionism. Even Israeli's recognise that issue. They could have settled Ethiopia, they could actually offer the olive branch once or twice in honesty too.

a reply to: Lucidparadox

Sounds like more non-Israeli lands going to Israel again to me. Probably no room anyway, something to do with an ongoing siege to stop weapons entering Israeli borders. No cement to build with.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: StallionDuck

Israel could have prevented this by properly utilising their Iron Dome defence systems, which will stop everything from a bullet to a bomb from passing a given border line, if active and set up for full coverage.

They do not set it for full coverage, because otherwise they would not be able to justify the occasional and piece by piece genocide of Palestinians. Also, they know as well as anyone, that air strikes kill more civilians than combatants, which makes the problem worse not better. They also have snipers and access to some of the best firearms available anywhere on the face of earth. The fact that they did not decide to remove ONLY the combatants, that they elected NOT to utilise the incredible anti-projectile capabilities they poses, leads me to believe that this retaliation is unjustifiable.

I would think that would be a counter productive tactic. You're not taking into account how much each of those cost to use every time. Besides, that's not exactly a strategy to fix the problem. It's kind of like staying on your side of the fence with a tennis racket while your neighbor keeps tossing rocks into your yard. Eventually you're going to miss a few or just get damn tired of doing it. Lets also pretend that every time you swing with that racket, you have to buy new strings. Make any sense? Yeah, neither does relying on this Iron Dome to make the actions stop. They're there for a purpose, yes... But it doesn't solve anything and it certainly doesn't stop that bully from tossing rocks in your yard.

I don't know of any point in any war where countries didn't attack because civilians were in the way. It's how it's always been. Why is now any different? I get it... It's sad. It's horrible. I hate the loss of human life, period. But what can you do? Do you think that we worried about the poor innocent civilians when we dropped an atom bomb on Japan twice? We dropped leaflets because we wanted the civilians to know what was coming. The same is true there. Those people know. It's not like their clueless. Also.. Consider what's going on. Compare it with something here in the US.

In certain locations in the US, high crime areas to boot... People do not rat out other people to the law, even if those bad guys are murdering, stealing or whatever against them. Follow me so far? But the right thing to do is either:
- Fess up and show the law where the bad guys are.
- Take out/do something about the bad guys themselves if they don't believe in talking to the cops.

If they don't talk to the cops and they don't do something themselves, are these people responsible for their own malady? Be honest... What should happen? Where is the problem? I mean, you have all these witnesses but no one wants to do anything about it. So is it the people's problem or the law's problem?

Compare this the same way to the issue we're discussing. It's the same thing.

It's simply not ok to blow stuff up on one side if those people are trying their best to blow stuff up on yours? The solution is just to let it happen and be totally ok with it? They should just keep pouring money in a defense that they shouldn't need in the first place?

It reminds me of a scenario where this monkey was trying to raid this storehouse but was repelled by an electric fence. One day he discovered that if he kept grounding out the electric fence with a tree limb, the power would go out for a short amount of time. One day the monkey over saturated the fence with a lot of limbs and shorted out the power to the storehouse. The next day, the farmer came back and found his storehouse decimated all because the monkey found a loophole around his defenses.

a reply to: StallionDuck

The people at most threat cannot even escape without being killed by both armed factions.

This is utterly ridiculous.

And the idea of being inactive under threat, is of course ridiculous. But I have the same problem with fragging an entire city block to hit five men in Palestine, that I have with droning fifty people in a market to take out five men in Pakistan, or Afghanistan.

a reply to: TrueBrit

It's a double edged sword brother. I suppose in this case it is well to agree to disagree. I do understand your point. Without solutions, it's just an uncomprisable situation.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
They do not set it for full coverage, because otherwise they would not be able to justify the occasional and piece by piece genocide of Palestinians.

There is no such thing as an "occasional" genocide. Either you are systematically trying to eradicate a certain group of people or you are not. And more importantly, how can a nation be accused of genocide when the overall population increases since the beginning of the supposed genocide?

If Israel is attempting genocide on the Palestinians they are doing a terrible job. It's pretty common knowledge that Israel could wipe out the Palestinians if they truly desired to, so why have they not done so?