user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Wait a second! Those places are already filled with innocent civilians . . .
I think the very fact that the palestinians used this tactic in the first place shows that even they realize that the Israelis are more civilized than they are. Human shields don't work against countries that openly practice genocide.
'cause they don't need 'em? They use superiour firepower, tanks, and whatnot supplied by the West to decimate the Palestinians.
by aya on Tue Nov 21, 06 4:02pm
[+]
Disagree herzog, the Israelis merely bowed to international pressure and decided not to target the civilians, don't think you're fooling anyone herzog, the Israelis regard the Palestinians as sub-human and would exterminate them all if they thought they could get away with it.
"Israelis regard the Palestinians as sub-human and would exterminate them all if they thought they could get away with it."
When you make idiotic comments like that it makes me seriously question whether you are clinically insane.
"'cause they don't need 'em? They use superiour firepower, tanks, and whatnot supplied by the West to decimate the Palestinians"
Took the letters out of my keyboard.
"'cause they don't need 'em? They use superiour firepower, tanks, and whatnot supplied by the West to decimate the Palestinians."
Aya, human shields aren't an offensive measure, they are a defensive tactic used to protect fixed targets. So the offensive capability of the nation involved isn't the issue, it's their defensive capabilities. And on that they are fairly well matched, palestine can't stop Israeli tanks or bombers and Israel can't stop palestinian terrorists.
So the only two issues that matter are A) do they want to stop their own people being killed and B) do they think it will be an effective tactic given their enemy.
"Disagree herzog, the Israelis merely bowed to international pressure and decided not to target the civilians, don't think you're fooling anyone herzog, the Israelis regard the Palestinians as sub-human and would exterminate them all if they thought they could get away with it."
Riiight. And they did 911, and the 1929 stock market crash, and they invented the holocaust.
Besides which, what genocide-driven nations give a damn about international opinion? Did international opinion stop the germans? How about the sudanese? Are the chinese still in tibet? Did japan go easy on the chinese during wwII because people were against their genocide? I can go on. Your comment is a contradiction of itself.
When you make idiotic comments like that Avigdor it makes me seriously question whether you are clinically insane.Hitler WAS insane - what's your excuse minister Avigdor?*
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD
*KFD
I think most rational users can see through kens irrational hatred of the jews.
If Israel wanted to wipe out the palestinians they would have by now. They have the power to do so and as sudan clearly illustrates the UN has no interest in breaking up an ongoing genocide.
Besides which, the muslim population in the region has been rapidly increasing since the creation of Israel.
What kind of genocide leads to an increase in the native population?
"Aya, human shields aren't an offensive measure, they are a defensive tactic used to protect fixed targets. So the offensive capability of the nation involved isn't the issue, it's their defensive capabilities. And on that they are fairly well matched, palestine can't stop Israeli tanks or bombers and Israel can't stop palestinian terrorists"
Its a lot easier to stop a suicide bomber than a missile from an Apache helicopter.
Do you think people would be creating human shields if they thought they could fight Israel conventionally? Do you think anyone but THE very maddest fundamentalist WANTS to blow themselves up? Whats easier, firing a missile from a helicopter, or pressing a button to end your life in a massive explosion?
Shoe, other foot.
" Its a lot easier to stop a suicide bomber than a missile from an Apache helicopter. "
I wouldn't say either are easy to stop. For reference just look at all the successful suicide strikes in Israel.
Besides, obviously Israeli strikes are easy to stop: just line up a bunch of civilians and they'll back off. Do you believe the Israelis could use this same tactic with success?
" Do you think people would be creating human shields if they thought they could fight Israel conventionally? "
If they could fight Israel in a fair fight they would exterminate the Israelis. Do you think targeting civilians is a justified tactic if your side is weaker than your enemy?
"Do you think anyone but THE very maddest fundamentalist WANTS to blow themselves up? "
Exactly, religious nuts are the problem. The Israelis act rationally, the palestinian response is anything but.
"Whats easier, firing a missile from a helicopter, or pressing a button to end your life in a massive explosion? "
How about firing from a building filled with civilians, hoping that if the Israelis retaliate some of your countrymen will be killed so the western media can get some good shots of dead palestinians?
" Shoe, other foot. "
Not really. There is no comparing the two sides.
Israel is strong right now, and palestine still exists. If the show were on the other foot (as you put it), and palestine were made strong, and Israel were put at their mercy, there wouldn't be a single jew left alive in the territory within a week.
And of course the UN would say nothing about that genocide.
"Besides, obviously Israeli strikes are easy to stop: just line up a bunch of civilians and they'll back off. Do you believe the Israelis could use this same tactic with success?"
Well, no. Mainly because the Palestinians dont have the technology to AIM their missiles at a specific building'person, let alone warn the Israeli's in advance.
"If they could fight Israel in a fair fight they would exterminate the Israelis. Do you think targeting civilians is a justified tactic if your side is weaker than your enemy?"
If foreigners came into America and declared that they were splitting it in to two pieces, whether you liked it or not, and they had a hopelessly suprior army, dont you think YOU might attack the people who were inhabiting the lands that had been taken from you?
"Exactly, religious nuts are the problem. The Israelis act rationally, the palestinian response is anything but."
As you know full well, my point was that they dont WANT to do it, not that they are all religious fundamentalists. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and theres nothing more desperate than blowing yourself up to strike a blow against your enemy.
"How about firing from a building filled with civilians, hoping that if the Israelis retaliate some of your countrymen will be killed so the western media can get some good shots of dead palestinians?"
Well, what about it? I asked you about suicide bombing versus firing missiles, not about firing crudely made missiles from within a civilian building in the hope that you wouldnt be killed.
ken.... what you so blatantly ignore is the obvious. If Israel wanted to do that they would have done it long ago. Usually, most people who don't have a flat line EEG realize that.
Instead of addressing the ballot question, you spam it with your hate and ridiculous propaganda photos.
To be honest, I do not know why this use of human shields is done. This isn't the first time. Its been used in Iraq (by Saddam Hussein and the insurgents) and other places many times. There seems to be a group of people that don't seem to value life.
Im partly playing devils adocate here, Im not necessarily defending the actions of Palestinian "freedom fighters", Im just trying to encourage you NOT to depersonalise yourself to the desperate reality of what many Palestinians MUST be going through to take their own lives. Strange as it may seem, I dont imagine many Palestinian suicide bombers actually ENJOY the thought of blowing themselves up, or killing non-military Israeli citizens. Why are they willing to go to such desperate measures? They are still human, so why are they acting so -IN-human? These are the questions you also need to ask.
uh, because they got missiles and nukes?
by LCD on Tue Nov 21, 06 6:03pm
[+]
And I really think you need to get away from this idea that the U.N are "out to get" Israel in some way.
The fact that the U.N condemns Israels actions more than Palestines is a COMPLIMENT, because it shows they expect BETTER. If a child and an adult start fighting, who do you chastise, regardless of who started it? The adult of course, because they should know better than to lash out seeking revenge.
Voted : Wait a second! Those places are already filled with innocent civilians . . .
Doctordraw - but addressing the ballot question, doesn't it seem that the Palestinans are more willing to intentionally target civillians than Israel? When herzog asked about 'Israeli human shields' in schools, discos, etc it was sarcastic. The issue here is not why Israel doesn't use human shields. The real issue of the ballot is why Palestine so openly targets civillian areas, whereas Israel has shown restraint?
"If foreigners came into America and declared that they were splitting it in to two pieces, whether you liked it or not, and they had a hopelessly suprior army, dont you think YOU might attack the people who were inhabiting the lands that had been taken from you?"
- Firstly, the one-state solution failed partly because of the Palestinians. The one state would require sharing power with Jews and they didn't like that idea. Secondly, the Jews were not foreigners, they were immigrants. Thirdly, no such comparison can be made to the US because there are no warring regional factions- so such a comparison is not compatible at all. A better comparison may be Canada- French Canadians and English Canadians- and the idea of splitting it in two (along the regional demographic lines). However, even this comparison would be imcompatible as well because French and English Canadians, although divided, do not attack and kill one another on a regular basis at all. You seem to be grasping at straws by calling for a comparison with the US. A comparison to the US or any other Western nation is not compatible.
At the time of the international decision to endorse a two state solution, the Palestinians were constantly waging violence against the Jews. The Palestinian elite wanted a specific one state solution in which the Arabs would be dominant. That's why the one-state solution couldn't work. The Arabs wanted to completely dominate it, and they would have probably have used persecution and force to do so, as the Jews had the better creditentials and experience for the better employment positions. The Palestinian elite rejected the one state plan in which power would be shared. And the Jews were immigrants and natives- they were not foreigners.
"The fact that the U.N condemns Israels actions more than Palestines is a COMPLIMENT, because it shows they expect BETTER. If a child and an adult start fighting, who do you chastise, regardless of who started it? The adult of course, because they should know better than to lash out seeking revenge."
- Whatever their reason for being biased, the point nonetheless is that they are biased regardless of what their intention is. That is not helpful at all.
Isreal has more respect for their people.
At least the Israelis make some pretence of being restrained
(until provoked by endless Hizbollah rockets)
- and TRY to be civil!
Do you ever see masses of frantic Israelis in the streets,
AK47s held high,chanting 'Death To The Palestinians'???
while they pop off a magazine or 2?
Well? DO YOU?
|
|
