Truth is the first casualty

[woodchip]

You do remember the Jews gave the Palestinian's fair warning. Did Hamas give fair warning to the Jews? Did the Jews force the-Palestinians not to leave or did Hamas. As it looks The Jews are not going to cleanse, so we can expect this again 10 years from now.

OK, where do you expect the Palestinians to go? Flee into the ocean? No country wants them. We don't want them. Europe doesn't want them. None of the surrounding countries wants them. Personally, since Iran has been fighting Israel using Hamas as terrorist proxies, THEY should take them as a gesture of goodwill since they're creating the problem by exporting terrorism and just accept that Israel has a right to exist, the U.S. Will protect them and live with it. It's either that or constant war and genocide. Of course, the harder and more peaceful choice is never picked.

I don't care where they go. After Hamas "fighters" killed and raped women and children in the most barbaric manner, I want Hamas gone. Never able to promote their Nazis like extermination plans again. If they can't find a country to take them in, then they can feed the fishes for all I care. Just don't care to see this happen in 10 years when Iran gets nukes and gives them to Hamas. Or do you think the Neville Chamberlain method will save you.

[woodchip]

I agree 100%. Its been repeated throughout human history and we never learn. People with the best of motives and intentions invariably turn into the very enemy they're against. The "End's Justify the Means" is the usual outcome. Its almost as if humans LIKE war as a solution they seem to fall back on it so much through history. Revenge was never listed as a Seven Deadly Sin, but it really needs to be listed as number 8, but Wraith is close enough.

Meanwhile, the fury is ramping up against anyone or any institution who supports Palestinian civilians. To the Jews, ANY support for Palestinian civilians is support for Hamas and is outright antisemitism. They want their revenge as well and are using their pocketbooks as weapons.

https://www.businessinsider.com/wealthy ... 23-10?op=1

Did our response to Pearl Harbor justify the means? Our would you have preferred we did nothing

[Top Gun]

I don't care where they go. After Hamas "fighters" killed and raped women and children in the most barbaric manner, I want Hamas gone. Never able to promote their Nazis like extermination plans again. If they can't find a country to take them in, then they can feed the fishes for all I care. Just don't care to see this happen in 10 years when Iran gets nukes and gives them to Hamas. Or do you think the Neville Chamberlain method will save you.

"Palestinians" and "Hamas" are two entirely different groups of people, you pathetic piece of garbage.

[Vander]

"Palestinians" and "Hamas" are two entirely different groups of people

The genocide is easier to swallow if you believe there are 2 million villains in Gaza.

[Darth Wang]

"Palestinians" and "Hamas" are two entirely different groups of people

The genocide is easier to swallow if you believe there are 2 million villains in Gaza.

It's ironic that he mentioned 9/11, because that was motivated by the exact same kind of thinking that he's demonstrating here. Al-Qaeda held every American citizen responsible for the actions of their government, so they saw no issue with indiscriminately killing civilians. I wonder if he realizes how similar his reasoning is to that of Bin Laden.

[Tunnelcat]

Did our response to Pearl Harbor justify the means? Our would you have preferred we did nothing

It was a act of war. One of our military installations was targeted in an unprovoked attack and we declared war against Japan and fought against their military targets and soldiers, initially I might add. Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, the only country to have done so in the modern era. Of course, our fire bombing of Dresden, Germany wasn't so civilized of a war action either.

Some history of killing civilians. Don't forget the Hague and Geneva Conventions either.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/whom_1.shtml

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1345

[Tunnelcat]

"Palestinians" and "Hamas" are two entirely different groups of people

The genocide is easier to swallow if you believe there are 2 million villains in Gaza.

It's ironic that he mentioned 9/11, because that was motivated by the exact same kind of thinking that he's demonstrating here. Al-Qaeda held every American citizen responsible for the actions of their government, so they saw no issue with indiscriminately killing civilians. I wonder if he realizes how similar his reasoning is to that of Bin Laden.

We didn't even go after Al-Qaeda in retribution either. Bush first did his little half-assed Afghanistan joke war, didn't finish what he started and left it to the local warlords who didn't even get the main culprit, Bin Laden (a Saudi national by the way) and decided to attack Iraq instead, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 but everything to do with Saddam embarrassing daddy Bush senior a few years earlier .

[Spidey]

OMG, did someone mention civilized and war in the same sentence.

"Even war has rules"

No, it doesn't, as soon as you have rules in war, war becomes something civilized people do. (IE: it becomes acceptable as long as you play by the rules)

[woodchip]

Did our response to Pearl Harbor justify the means? Our would you have preferred we did nothing

It was a act of war. One of our military installations was targeted in an unprovoked attack and we declared war against Japan and fought against their military targets and soldiers, initially I might add. Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, the only country to have done so in the modern era. Of course, our fire bombing of Dresden, Germany wasn't so civilized of a war action either.

Some history of killing civilians. Don't forget the Hague and Geneva Conventions either.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/whom_1.shtml

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/1345

Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, Let me ask you TC, You proclaim you're a male in a female body. You ever been in the military? I suspect you would use the F on your birth certificate to keep from being drafted. So it is easy for you to think we "chickened out" to keep a million + troops from dying. Well screw you, glad to see your hate for those who served as nothing but disposable items to make your liberal conscience feel better. Hiroshima was first bombed in hopes the japs would surrender. They didn't and so Nagasaki was nuked. That did the tricked. So we killed 120,000 to save a million troops. And how many japs would of died from a ground attack? Don't forget the softening up program by B29 super fortress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress and the 16" battleships. How many thousands of civilians would died. Oh snap! You would prefer to not use them either. You're just sad TC. Don't want your civilian's killed? Don't attack your neighbor.

[Vander]

neighbor

There are words that more accurately describe the reality on the ground. Like "captor." Or "jailer."

[Top Gun]

Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, Let me ask you TC, You proclaim you're a male in a female body. You ever been in the military? I suspect you would use the F on your birth certificate to keep from being drafted. So it is easy for you to think we "chickened out" to keep a million + troops from dying. Well screw you, glad to see your hate for those who served as nothing but disposable items to make your liberal conscience feel better. Hiroshima was first bombed in hopes the japs would surrender. They didn't and so Nagasaki was nuked. That did the tricked. So we killed 120,000 to save a million troops. And how many japs would of died from a ground attack? Don't forget the softening up program by B29 super fortress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress and the 16" battleships. How many thousands of civilians would died. Oh snap! You would prefer to not use them either. You're just sad TC. Don't want your civilian's killed? Don't attack your neighbor.

Or hey, maybe we could have instituted a naval blockade against Japan's at that point essentially-destroyed navy and waited them out. It was a proposal by the Navy at the time, but we'll never know either way how it would have worked.

Regardless, even if you reason that the atomic bombings were "necessary," that does not make them any less horrifically, inexcusably evil.

[woodchip]

Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, Let me ask you TC, You proclaim you're a male in a female body. You ever been in the military? I suspect you would use the F on your birth certificate to keep from being drafted. So it is easy for you to think we "chickened out" to keep a million + troops from dying. Well screw you, glad to see your hate for those who served as nothing but disposable items to make your liberal conscience feel better. Hiroshima was first bombed in hopes the japs would surrender. They didn't and so Nagasaki was nuked. That did the tricked. So we killed 120,000 to save a million troops. And how many japs would of died from a ground attack? Don't forget the softening up program by B29 super fortress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress and the 16" battleships. How many thousands of civilians would died. Oh snap! You would prefer to not use them either. You're just sad TC. Don't want your civilian's killed? Don't attack your neighbor.

Or hey, maybe we could have instituted a naval blockade against Japan's at that point essentially-destroyed navy and waited them out. It was a proposal by the Navy at the time, but we'll never know either way how it would have worked.

Regardless, even if you reason that the atomic bombings were "necessary," that does not make them any less horrifically, inexcusably evil.

First I suggest you read up on the Kamikaze attacks at Okinawa and then tell how passive the Japs would of been with a navel blockade. Second, Yes the atomic bombing were horrific, but still it took 2 of them to convince the evil people in control of Japan that it was better to surrender. That we do know.

[Top Gun]

Yes, there probably would have been American casualties, but far fewer than any attempt at a ground invasion. And the Japanese could only manage so many air strikes before they would have been entirely out of planes. The Soviets declaring war against Japan was arguably every bit as effective as the atomic bombings at forcing Japan's hand. And the fact that the US only offered "unconditional surrender" terms to Japan before the bombings, without any guarantees for the preservation of the emperor, could be argued as a misstep, especially since we wound up essentially leaving him alone anyway.

[Tunnelcat]

Where we chickened out was resorting using nukes to wipe out 2 Japanese cites and their civilian populations just to save our own soldiers from city to city fighting, Let me ask you TC, You proclaim you're a male in a female body. You ever been in the military? I suspect you would use the F on your birth certificate to keep from being drafted. So it is easy for you to think we "chickened out" to keep a million + troops from dying. Well screw you, glad to see your hate for those who served as nothing but disposable items to make your liberal conscience feel better. Hiroshima was first bombed in hopes the japs would surrender. They didn't and so Nagasaki was nuked. That did the tricked. So we killed 120,000 to save a million troops. And how many japs would of died from a ground attack? Don't forget the softening up program by B29 super fortress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress and the 16" battleships. How many thousands of civilians would died. Oh snap! You would prefer to not use them either. You're just sad TC. Don't want your civilian's killed? Don't attack your neighbor.

That's what soldiers are for, killing the enemy who's trying to kill you. Using bombs on civilians is a lazy chickenshit tactic and shows us a military who doesn't want to do the hard, dangerous and deadly work of killing combatants and winning the war like men. Why? Because at home, all those dead soldiers are sob stories and bad publicity and grieving people will protest en masse for an end to the war in a way the government doesn't like. Freedom isn't cheap and sometimes we have to pay for it in our own blood, not in fan mail or protest flowers. Currently, Israel has bombed and killed over 4000 Palestinian civilians. I don't know how many of those were Hamas and the dirty secret is we'll probably never know. Frankly, I'd like to know because I'd like to see each and every Hamas terrorist eviscerated and hung on a pike for what they did to unarmed Jewish civilians. They're not human. They're animals.

As for Japan, we were in a hurry and did the most expedient thing possible to end the war fast, blow up and irradiate 2 entire cities to beat them into submission. We could've saved our million troops just by blockading the island and letting them stew in their losing misery. They would've eventually surrendered due to lack of food, resources and civilian anger. But I think what the military really wanted was to try out their new little nuke toys and Japan was the testing ground. Yay for us.

And screw you. I'M NOT A LIBERAL. But I'm not a far right war monger either. I don't hate the military or our vets (well, you maybe). They have a job to do or already did that job, defend(ed) our country, repelled or kill(ed) the enemy and protect(ed) our allies. We need them given the hateful or greedy predilection of most dictators and terrorist supporters around the world. I'd say you're pretty selective in who's your enemy too, since you don't seem to support Ukraine's freedom from Russian invasion. So what's the difference between Vladimir Putin and the Ayatollah of Iran? Absolutely NOTHING, SQUAT, ZIPPO. They're both trying to invade someone else's land or wipe out another nation for gain or hate. Both their hands are dirty since they've already killed thousands of civilians right and left during their illegal aggression and acts of war. If we stand for freedom for Israel and not Ukraine, we're hypocrites to our own cause of freedom. Every Republican that can't see it to support Ukraine can go ★■◆● themselves. Maybe we should send them over to fight with Ukraine against Russia and make real men out of them, instead of them sitting here fighting amongst themselves like a bunch of girls on the rag, loving Putin as a strong leader while kissing the ass of a moronic infantile traitor like Trump. You say I don't like vets? Start looking at who you worship as the best president ever, not me. Out of his own pie hole during a trip to Paris in 2018:

In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, "Why should I go to that cemetery? It's filled with losers." In a separate conversation on the same trip, Trump referred to the more than 1,800 marines who lost their lives at Belleau Wood as "suckers" for getting killed.

As for my gender, the physical F wouldn't make a damn bit of difference. Give me a good weapon and tell me to kill the enemy by any means possible. I would be happy to do it without hesitation. I'd enjoy being a sniper too. Nail the bastards in the head when they pop up. In Ukraine, women are fighting as soldiers and paying for it with their lives. If I was younger, I'd do the same thing for our country, take up arms against an enemy. So don't presume you know me, because obviously you don't.

[Darth Wang]

And screw you. I'M NOT A LIBERAL.

Anyone to the left of Mussolini is a liberal in his eyes.

[Tunnelcat]

Or Hitler.

[Top Gun]

B-but Hitler was a socialist, don't you know?

[Darth Wang]

B-but Hitler was a socialist, don't you know?

Just like North Korea is a "Democratic Republic"

[woodchip]

Yes, there probably would have been American casualties, but far fewer than any attempt at a ground invasion. And the Japanese could only manage so many air strikes before they would have been entirely out of planes. The Soviets declaring war against Japan was arguably every bit as effective as the atomic bombings at forcing Japan's hand. And the fact that the US only offered "unconditional surrender" terms to Japan before the bombings, without any guarantees for the preservation of the emperor, could be argued as a misstep, especially since we wound up essentially leaving him alone anyway.

Hardly left alone as we occupied them for 7 years. I don't think many from that era thought "Unconditional Surrender" was a misstep.

[woodchip]

Meanwhile, the fury is ramping up against anyone or any institution who supports Palestinian civilians.

https://www.businessinsider.com/wealthy ... 23-10?op=1

from your link, "Wealthy donors are slamming elite US colleges for their responses to the Israel-Hamas war.
Funny I didn't see anything about Palestinian civilians. Since you seem to have the time, look up and see who makes up these protesting groups.

[Tunnelcat]

One of those Pro-Palestinian anti-Zionist protest groups, called If Not Now, is made up of Progressive American Jews who dislike the aggressive Israeli government and their treatment of their Palestinian neighbors in Gaza, if you took the time to look. Not all of them are anti-Jewish. Of course, PROGRESSIVE is a poison word in your vocabulary. They claim Israel's apartheid towards Gaza is to blame for the violence. It's true that hate begets hate and violence begets violence and creates a vicious cycle. If you think it's OK for Neo Nazis to protest Drag Queen Shows, it's OK for Americans to protest Israeli Zionism.

https://www.newsweek.com/progressive-je ... ce-1834293

"We're reckoning with the fact that the Israeli government has failed Israelis and Palestinians by perpetuating a system of apartheid for decades, without concern for the consequences to their citizens. That's what's led us here," If Not Now said in another post. "As Israeli leaders advocate for genocide and ethnic cleansing, it is reckless and unconscionable for the US government to be sending additional military aid to Israel, especially offensive weapons. Deescalation will save lives."

By now, over 6000 Palestinians civilians have been slaughtered by Israeli airstrikes and incursions. I'd say that the Israelis have long since gotten their pound of flesh for the original Hamas terrorist attack many times over in civilian lives. They're not exactly the proper Hamas target are they, unless you ascribe to revenge killings, which is what Israel is doing now. It's like burning down your house just to kill all the termites. Sure, you got rid of the termites, but now you're homeless.

[Top Gun]

Hardly left alone as we occupied them for 7 years. I don't think many from that era thought "Unconditional Surrender" was a misstep.

Him (the emperor) alone, not Japan alone. There were many who called for Hirohito and other members of the imperial family to be tried for war crimes, but General MacArthur arranged things so that there was never evidence brought against him at the tribunals, because he figured that having a cooperative Hirohito would be crucial for Japan's postwar reconstruction and democratic transition. I did some fascinating Wiki-diving into the debates over just how much direct control and approval Hirohito exerted over wartime decisions, as well as his evolving views on surrender over the final months of the war. My main point is that it's interesting retrospect how concerned the Japanese were about Hirohito's role after a theoretical surrender, only for him to be actively propped up by the US and allowed to remain head of state. About the only concession made was his release of a statement that he was not a divine figure, which apparently went largely unnoticed in Japan due to the language used and was a much bigger deal overseas.

[woodchip]

Good post Top Gun. Back to the original premise of this post I see the NYT has seen the light and retracted their assertions that it was the Israeli's that bombed the hospital in Gaza:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/24/media/ga ... index.html

[Vander]

This is really good:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v45/n21 ... athologies

[vision]

This is really good:

Excellent journalism. Too many good and clear minded points to reiterate, but one thing I hadn't considered is, when speaking of Western policy, that "the abandonment of neutrality regarding Israel’s conduct places Jews in the diaspora at increasing risk of antisemitic violence". There needs to be more acknowledgement that Israel is on the wrong path. I will say this is the first event where I've seen greater attention to the plight of Palestinians, not just in traditional social media channels, but acknowledgement from friends who were either ambivalent or sheepish about making any kind of judgement regarding Israel and Palestine. There will be no resolution without massive international pressure on Israel so maybe the tide is turning in that direction finally?

[Krom]

My first thought after hearing about the October 7th attack was that the Israeli response would be worse. It seems basically nobody on this side of the conflict has learned anything from the US response to 9/11 and history is just repeating itself. And with more and more of the US leaning to the right-wing media silo's propaganda I fear at some point an attack against America could easily set off even worse responses. Right-wing media is already screaming about Muslim terrorists crossing the southern border in an obvious attempt to drum up enough tension that springing it will lead to more costly and pointless wars.

And to top it all off, Hamas is getting basically everything they want, bringing down a huge and deadly for Palestinians IDF war on Gaza as a response is absolutely one of the goals of the October 7th attack. It is playing straight into their hands.

[woodchip]

Depending on the Jews resolve, Hamas may regret this playing into their hands. I feel sorry for the Palestinian civilians who will bear the brunt of Hamas political hate

[Vander]

I feel sorry for the Palestinian civilians who will bear the brunt of Hamas political hate

Israel doing ethnic cleansing and genocide is on Israel. If they continue this path, I feel sorry for the Israeli citizens. It will not make them safer, and this stain will not go away.

[Isaac]

I feel sorry for the Palestinian civilians who will bear the brunt of Hamas political hate

Israel doing ethnic cleansing and genocide is on Israel. If they continue this path, I feel sorry for the Israeli citizens. It will not make them safer, and this stain will not go away.

Killing Hamas isn't genocide. You realize Israel is not trying to kill civilians. Hamas absolutely is, which I guess isn't the bigger problem for you.

[Top Gun]

Yeah, several thousand civilian deaths and counting sure as hell seems like "not trying."

[woodchip]

Yeah, several thousand civilian deaths and counting sure as hell seems like "not trying."

I guess the 1500 civilian the Palestinians killed counted "as trying" (note I used Palestinians instead of Hamas because Hamas are Palestinian).

[Vander]

Killing Hamas isn't genocide.

Cutting off food, water, power, and communications to an already captive population is certainly genocide. By many measures, Gaza was arguably subjected to genocidal conditions before Oct. 7. The threatened expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza is certainly ethnic cleansing. And this is all aside from what is happening in other parts of the country showing the "only Hamas" absurdity.

You realize Israel is not trying to kill civilians. Hamas absolutely is, which I guess isn't the bigger problem for you.

Do you think such dubious distinctions matter to the families and friends of those killed and wounded? I absolutely admit that when the bombs leveling neighborhoods have my flag on them, yes, I feel more connected to and implicated by those actions than the grisly massacre that preceded it. This isn't justice, just another massacre. And rather than preventing the next massacre, it's giving birth to it.

[Tunnelcat]

Yeah, several thousand civilian deaths and counting sure as hell seems like "not trying."

I guess the 1500 civilian the Palestinians killed counted "as trying" (note I used Palestinians instead of Hamas because Hamas are Palestinian).

Using your logic, I guess we should call ALL vets crazy murderers all because one vet went nuts, shot to death 18 people in a bowling alley and restaurant with a legally purchased assault rifle, then committed suicide. There's enough precedence to make a case that vets go crazy after war duty. Should we just kill all vets before they go out and murder civilians just to protect the public? You know, like murder all Palestinians because some are Hamas.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/link-veterans ... d=59057321

[woodchip]

If you can't see the distinction, I truly feel sorry for you TC.

[Tunnelcat]

No, it you who can't see the distinction. You lump Hamas together with the Palastinians as one big group to hate and wipe out. Everything is black to you. You can't see shades of gray or even 2 different colors. It won't take long for grieving Americans who've had their loved ones killed by crazy vets over and over again in a vicious cycle to begin to associate ALL vets with mass murderers. It's called labeling and you do it in spades.

[Top Gun]

I guess the 1500 civilian the Palestinians killed counted "as trying" (note I used Palestinians instead of Hamas because Hamas are Palestinian).

We already know you're full of ★■◆● Woody, you don't need to confirm it yet again.

[woodchip]

So TG, what am I full of ★■◆● about, the number of Israeli's killed or the fact they were civilians?

[Darth Wang]

Interesting article about this:

https://www.nplusonemag.com/online-only ... can-exist/

Not sure that I agree with everything the author is saying (in fact there's a lot I disagree with), but it's interesting to hear their perspective nonetheless.

[Top Gun]

So TG, what am I full of ★■◆● about, the number of Israeli's killed or the fact they were civilians?

The fact that you just labeled over 2 million people as terrorists. So kindly ★■◆● off with that disingenuous noise.

[woodchip]

So TG, what am I full of ★■◆● about, the number of Israeli's killed or the fact they were civilians?

The fact that you just labeled over 2 million people as terrorists. So kindly ★■◆● off with that disingenuous noise.

And you have no problem with the Palestinians labeling 9.5 million Israeli's as terrorists and wanting to exterminate them...how very white liberal of you. You teaching your students to be antisemitic?