Israel war

[tw]1840526252584657186[/tw]

Turns out fuck around an find out goes both ways.

[tw]1841176065747886230[/tw]

Cameron wrote:[tw]1841176065747886230[/tw]

Confused...

CNN is saying human shields, so seems like the complaint about the media is stupid.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:[tw]1841176065747886230[/tw]

Confused...

CNN is saying human shields, so seems like the complaint about the media is stupid.

Did you actually watch the video clip before you commented on it? The guy in the video did not say "human shields," the tweet about it did, and the tweet wasn't from or by CNN.

Think before you post and you will be less confused.

Cameron wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Confused...

CNN is saying human shields, so seems like the complaint about the media is stupid.

Did you actually watch the video clip before you commented on it? The guy in the video did not say "human shields," the tweet about it did, and the tweet wasn't from or by CNN.

Think before you post and you will be less confused.

I seldom watch videos, one because Hughes givens me limited download bytes and two because videos are one of the most misused and misinforming methods of telling the story.  If you want the real news read a news article, do not watch the TeeVee or other video sources.  Someday, when you are older and wiser you will realize that.

So CNN reported the facts without using your favorite term, cry me a river...

How often have you called the collateral damage in Gaza a genocide?

kingstonlake wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Iran? No. It was an Imperial US aligned state headed by the Shah of Iran. The main reason they're not "flourishing" now is because they're not US aligned. It's actually a global apartheid system. If you don't bow to the US, you get sanctioned into poverty. And we wonder where the radicalization and hatred comes from.

Maybe I was thinking Iraq? I’m probably misinterpreting “westernized” as flourishing.

no you basically have it right. Granted i'm not sure about the history there but i distinctly remember reading about and seeing pictures of what life used to be like mid 20th century, it looked a lot like here actually what you might see in some suburban towns.

Cameron wrote:[tw]1841155314306998282[/tw]

Way to go, Genocide Joe! Great job on the de-escalation! What a statesman!

blaming joe for other people's holy wars is hilarious. We aren't world police and joe isn't the chief of the world police.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Did you actually watch the video clip before you commented on it? The guy in the video did not say "human shields," the tweet about it did, and the tweet wasn't from or by CNN.

Think before you post and you will be less confused.

I seldom watch videos, one because Hughes givens me limited download bytes and two because videos are one of the most misused and misinforming methods of telling the story.  If you want the real news read a news article, do not watch the TeeVee or other video sources.  Someday, when you are older and wiser you will realize that.

So CNN reported the facts without using your favorite term, cry me a river...

How often have you called the collateral damage in Gaza a genocide?

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Iran? No. It was an Imperial US aligned state headed by the Shah of Iran. The main reason they're not "flourishing" now is because they're not US aligned. It's actually a global apartheid system. If you don't bow to the US, you get sanctioned into poverty. And we wonder where the radicalization and hatred comes from.

Maybe I was thinking Iraq? I’m probably misinterpreting “westernized” as flourishing.

no you basically have it right. Granted i'm not sure about the history there but i distinctly remember reading about and seeing pictures of what life used to be like mid 20th century, it looked a lot like here actually what you might see in some suburban towns.

You can certainly debate whether Iran was "flourishing" or not, but it was nowhere near a democracy.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Did you actually watch the video clip before you commented on it? The guy in the video did not say "human shields," the tweet about it did, and the tweet wasn't from or by CNN.

Think before you post and you will be less confused.

I seldom watch videos, one because Hughes givens me limited download bytes and two because videos are one of the most misused and misinforming methods of telling the story.  If you want the real news read a news article, do not watch the TeeVee or other video sources.  Someday, when you are older and wiser you will realize that.

So CNN reported the facts without using your favorite term, cry me a river...

How often have you called the collateral damage in Gaza a genocide?

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

If you wait until after it's finished to call it a genocide, that kind of makes it hard to stop it.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

If you wait until after it's finished to call it a genocide, that kind of makes it hard to stop it.

Nobody said wait, just call a spade a spade. The moment someone fights back does not make a genocide. If Israel starts lining people up and executing them, building mass graves, go ahead and call it a genocide

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

If you wait until after it's finished to call it a genocide, that kind of makes it hard to stop it.

Nobody said wait, just call a spade a spade. The moment someone fights back does not make a genocide. If Israel starts lining people up and executing them, building mass graves, go ahead and call it a genocide

Mass bombing is much more efficient. And Gaza is basically a modern day Warsaw ghetto.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

If you wait until after it's finished to call it a genocide, that kind of makes it hard to stop it.

You really thing the US, beyond sending in the Marines, can stop this?  I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

edit - Iran under the Shaq may have been more in line with US interests, but for long term US interests we would have been better off with the elected government we overthrew

Trapper Gus wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

she and the palestinians were calling it genocide the minute israel fought back after palestinians attacked israel last year

If you wait until after it's finished to call it a genocide, that kind of makes it hard to stop it.

You really thing the US, beyond sending in the Marines, can stop this?  I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

edit - Iran under the Shaq may have been more in line with US interests, but for long term US interests we would have been better off with the elected government we overthrew

The US may or may not be able to stop it. But the US can certainly choose not to be complicit.

Heat Miser wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

You really thing the US, beyond sending in the Marines, can stop this?  I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

edit - Iran under the Shaq may have been more in line with US interests, but for long term US interests we would have been better off with the elected government we overthrew

The US may or may not be able to stop it. But the US can certainly choose not to be complicit.

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

You really thing the US, beyond sending in the Marines, can stop this?  I have some swamp land in Florida to sell you.

edit - Iran under the Shaq may have been more in line with US interests, but for long term US interests we would have been better off with the elected government we overthrew

The US may or may not be able to stop it. But the US can certainly choose not to be complicit.

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Good. Let's do that. No more US weapons or aid.

Heat Miser wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Good. Let's do that. No more US weapons or aid.

And less US influence in part of the globe where many of our allies, aka NATO, get thier energy.  Oh yes, that is real smart.

edit - honestly if you watched the history reels in this thread, the middle-east is still working through the safu from the end of the Great War.  The US as the globe police is trying to keep this from going nuclear.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Good. Let's do that. No more US weapons or aid.

And less US influence in part of the globe where many of our allies, aka NATO, get thier energy.  Oh yes, that is real smart.

edit - honestly if you watched the history reels in this thread, the middle-east is still working through the safu from the end of the Great War.  The US as the globe police is trying to keep this from going nuclear.

Doesn't seem like they're trying very hard because they're failing every step of the way.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

The US may or may not be able to stop it. But the US can certainly choose not to be complicit.

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Good. Let's do that. No more US weapons or aid.

And less US influence in part of the globe where many of our allies, aka NATO, get thier energy.  Oh yes, that is real smart.

edit - honestly if you watched the history reels in this thread, the middle-east is still working through the safu from the end of the Great War.  The US as the globe police is trying to keep this from going nuclear.

Your position seems to be that the US is currently doing everything right and our policy vis a vis Israel is perfect. Is that correct?

When a man died, there had to be blame. Jimmy Cross understood this. You could blame the war. You could blame the idiots who made the war. You could blame Kiowa for going to it. You could blame the rain. You could blame the river. You could blame the field, the mud, the climate. You could blame the enemy. You could blame the mortar rounds. You could blame people who were too lazy to read a newspaper, who were bored by the daily body counts, who switched channels at the mention of politics. You could blame whole nations. You could blame God. You could blame the munitions makers or Karl Marx or a trick of fate or an old man in Omaha who forgot to vote.

In the field, though, the causes were immediate. A moment of carelessness or bad judgement or plain stupidity carried consequences that lasted forever"



Tim O’Brien.






This shits going to engolf all of us. It’s nobody’s fault, it’s everybody’s fault.

There are certainly individuals who deserve more blame than others, and they ought to be held to account for their roles.

Cameron wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Oh gosh, you probably are talking about the US corporations being a supplier to Israel.

News Flash for you.

If the US wasn't doing this Israel would be their own supplier, and the US would have even less influance.

Trapper Gus wrote:

And less US influence in part of the globe where many of our allies, aka NATO, get thier energy.  Oh yes, that is real smart.

edit - honestly if you watched the history reels in this thread, the middle-east is still working through the safu from the end of the Great War.  The US as the globe police is trying to keep this from going nuclear.

Your position seems to be that the US is currently doing everything right and our policy vis a vis Israel is perfect. Is that correct?

No.

I counter your position that the US is doing everything wrong so it may sound like that to your simple everything is either "right" or "wrong" brain.

The US is doing the best it can in a complex situation.

There may be actions the US could have taken that would have improved the situation, though what they would be I have no idea.

Cutting off the weapon supply for Israel is not one of them.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Nobody said wait, just call a spade a spade. The moment someone fights back does not make a genocide. If Israel starts lining people up and executing them, building mass graves, go ahead and call it a genocide

Mass bombing is much more efficient. And Gaza is basically a modern day Warsaw ghetto.

You're leaving out the part where they terrifyingly broadly attacked, killed and abducted thousands to start the current war.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

no you basically have it right. Granted i'm not sure about the history there but i distinctly remember reading about and seeing pictures of what life used to be like mid 20th century, it looked a lot like here actually what you might see in some suburban towns.

You can certainly debate whether Iran was "flourishing" or not, but it was nowhere near a democracy.

Indeed, I can't speak to the political state of the country at the time, just saying how remarkably similar they looked to us at the time. The chasm is wide now for sure but there was a time when Iran appeared to be on a more "westernized" path which would have probably been good for the region. We may have had a hand in stopping that progress, but it might have been for good reasons. My guess is we simply preferred that another country be stronger, like Saudi Arabia or something. Again, guessing on this as I don't care to educate myself much on the topic.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Nobody said wait, just call a spade a spade.  The moment someone fights back does not make a genocide.  If Israel starts lining people up and executing them, building mass graves, go ahead and call it a genocide

Mass bombing is much more efficient. And Gaza is basically a modern day Warsaw ghetto.

You're leaving out the part where they terrifyingly broadly attacked, killed and abducted thousands to start the current war.

Do you think Gaza was a paradise prior to 10/7?

You do know Israel is holding thousands of Palestinian "detainees" in "camps"? Some might even call them hostages.

Israel must end mass incommunicado detention and torture of Palestinians from Gaza

Harrowing torture testimony from 27 former detainees, including a 14-year-old boy

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

You can certainly debate whether Iran was "flourishing" or not, but it was nowhere near a democracy.

Indeed, I can't speak to the political state of the country at the time, just saying how remarkably similar they looked to us at the time.  The chasm is wide now for sure but there was a time when Iran appeared to be on a more "westernized" path which would have probably been good for the region.  We may have had a hand in stopping that progress, but it might have been for good reasons.  My guess is we simply preferred that another country be stronger, like Saudi Arabia or something.  Again, guessing on this as I don't care to educate myself much on the topic.

Under the rule of the US installed Shaq Iran was a westernized society with a strong Muslim religious element from 195(1/2/3) until 1979.

That's at least twice now, on separate days in separate posts.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:



Your position seems to be that the US is currently doing everything right and our policy vis a vis Israel is perfect. Is that correct?

No.

I counter your position that the US is doing everything wrong so it may sound like that to your simple everything is either "right" or "wrong" brain.

The US is doing the best it can in a complex situation.

There may be actions the US could have taken that would have improved the situation, though what they would be I have no idea.

Cutting off the weapon supply for Israel is not one of them.

Those two thoughts are incompatible with one another. If there are actions that the US could have taken that would have made things better, then not having taken those actions means that the US is not doing the best it can.

Cameron wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

No.

I counter your position that the US is doing everything wrong so it may sound like that to your simple everything is either "right" or "wrong" brain.

The US is doing the best it can in a complex situation.

There may be actions the US could have taken that would have improved the situation, though what they would be I have no idea.

Cutting off the weapon supply for Israel is not one of them.

Those two thoughts are incompatible with one another. If there are actions that the US could have taken that would have made things better, then not having taken those actions means that the US is not doing the best it can.

Maybe he's saying the US's best isn't very good?

Cameron wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

No.

I counter your position that the US is doing everything wrong so it may sound like that to your simple everything is either "right" or "wrong" brain.

The US is doing the best it can in a complex situation.

There may be actions the US could have taken that would have improved the situation, though what they would be I have no idea.

Cutting off the weapon supply for Israel is not one of them.

Those two thoughts are incompatible with one another. If there are actions that the US could have taken that would have made things better, then not having taken those actions means that the US is not doing the best it can.

That assumes that the US knew those actions would make things better.

I am trying to say that the US did what it thought was best, and that there may be better things we could have done, in hindsight. I am not saying the US deliberately didn't do what it thought was best.

TravelinMan wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Those two thoughts are incompatible with one another. If there are actions that the US could have taken that would have made things better, then not having taken those actions means that the US is not doing the best it can.

Maybe he's saying the US's best isn't very good?  

My opinion is that the US has limited options, and it has always been that the best of those options cannot achieve the results the US desires, due to the other players in the "game".  

However, I reserve the idea that the US is getting exactly what it wants but knows these results are poison politically in the US and thus is pretending to want something else. (This is way to Machiavellian to get across on a message board)

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Those two thoughts are incompatible with one another. If there are actions that the US could have taken that would have made things better, then not having taken those actions means that the US is not doing the best it can.

That assumes that the US knew those actions would make things better.

I am trying to say that the US did what it thought was best, and that there may be better things we could have done, in hindsight. I am not saying the US deliberately didn't do what it thought was best.

So it is your contention that the US should not at any point have done anything differently vis a vis Israel based on the information we had at the time? That only hindsight could have predicted all the myriad failures of the last 12 months of Israel policy?

Because I can think of some people who were predicting that the US policies would cause shit to spiral and escalate before it happened...

Trapper, when a Republican is president, for sure- “I am trying to say that the US did what it thought was best, and that there may be better things we could have done, in hindsight.”


It’s okay to say something that suggests that Biden is less than perfect. He’s not running for anything, and no one is reading. It’s okay.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

You're leaving out the part where they terrifyingly broadly attacked, killed and abducted thousands to start the current war.

Do you think Gaza was a paradise prior to 10/7?

You do know Israel is holding thousands of Palestinian "detainees" in "camps"? Some might even call them hostages.

Israel must end mass incommunicado detention and torture of Palestinians from Gaza

Harrowing torture testimony from 27 former detainees, including a 14-year-old boy

Ok but we could go back and forth all day with tit for tat things, it doesn't prove what you think it proves. It was still a massive and provocative terrorist attack last year

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

You're leaving out the part where they terrifyingly broadly attacked, killed and abducted thousands to start the current war.

Do you think Gaza was a paradise prior to 10/7?

You do know Israel is holding thousands of Palestinian "detainees" in "camps"? Some might even call them hostages.

Israel must end mass incommunicado detention and torture of Palestinians from Gaza

Harrowing torture testimony from 27 former detainees, including a 14-year-old boy

Ok but we could go back and forth all day with tit for tat things, it doesn't prove what you think it proves. It was still a massive and provocative terrorist attack last year

The point is that one side is supposed to be the good guys. They're supposed to play by the rules even when the other side doesn't. You know...the moral high ground.

When you persecute a segment of the population systematically for 75 years, don't be surprised when they go to extreme lengths to resist.

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Ok but we could go back and forth all day with tit for tat things, it doesn't prove what you think it proves. It was still a massive and provocative terrorist attack last year

The point is that one side is supposed to be the good guys. They're supposed to play by the rules even when the other side doesn't. You know...the moral high ground.

When you persecute a segment of the population systematically for 75 years, don't be surprised when they go to extreme lengths to resist.

Where on Earth did you get that dumb idea?

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Ok but we could go back and forth all day with tit for tat things, it doesn't prove what you think it proves.  It was still a massive and provocative terrorist attack last year

The point is that one side is supposed to be the good guys. They're supposed to play by the rules even when the other side doesn't. You know...the moral high ground.

When you persecute a segment of the population systematically for 75 years, don't be surprised when they go to extreme lengths to resist.

Israel is there.  They aren't going away.  The only acceptable outcome to Palestinians and many here would be for Israel to GTFO.  Not happening. Is it ideal? Absolutely not. We live in a terrible world. Before those 75 years it was the Jews getting evicted from their homes and straight up rounded up and murdered like vermin.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Ok but we could go back and forth all day with tit for tat things, it doesn't prove what you think it proves.  It was still a massive and provocative terrorist attack last year

The point is that one side is supposed to be the good guys. They're supposed to play by the rules even when the other side doesn't. You know...the moral high ground.

When you persecute a segment of the population systematically for 75 years, don't be surprised when they go to extreme lengths to resist.

Israel is there.  They aren't going away.  The only acceptable outcome to Palestinians and many here would be for Israel to GTFO.  Not happening.  Is it ideal?  Absolutely not.  We live in a terrible world.  Before those 75 years it was the Jews getting evicted from their homes and straight up rounded up and murdered like vermin.

And they've been the ones doing the evicting ever since. Shocking that the Palestinians and others object to that.

It's interesting that you interpret ANY criticism of Israel as GTFO. That is not the case. How about stop sending "settlers" into territory beyond the borders and illegally annexing territory? How about not engaging in an apartheid state?

It's also interesting how you use history to justify the same cruelty. Irony.

Cameron wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

That assumes that the US knew those actions would make things better.  

I am trying to say that the US did what it thought was best, and that there may be better things we could have done, in hindsight.  I am not saying the US deliberately didn't do what it thought was best.

So it is your contention that the US should not at any point have done anything differently vis a vis Israel based on the information we had at the time? That only hindsight could have predicted all the myriad failures of the last 12 months of Israel policy?

Because I can think of some people who were predicting that the US policies would cause shit to spiral and escalate before it happened...

As best as I can remember your only solution was to cut Israel off from more military aid in the form of weapons.

It was pointed out that would not work for a number of reasons and would be counter productive.

What else did you suggest that I am ignoring?

Also, FWIW, with or without US weapon sales, as you put it "the shit was likely to spiral and escalate".

The weapons Israel is using are already in Israel.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/15/biden-israel-weapons-policy-00158210