3 ms·

===> Security considerations and guarantees for Palestine and Israel from each other don't come until after that goal [of stopping ongoing civilian casualties h

by nec4b 3y ago

===> Security considerations and guarantees for Palestine and Israel from each other don't come until after that goal [of stopping ongoing civilian casualties happening as we speak] is achieved. <=== You have no proof of that. This is also pretty much ahistorical model of the world. Wishful thinking won't bring peace. >>How could 2 sentences contain a thoughtful response? In this case, they don't. If you read the whole post, your reply will contain 2 yes-or-no answers. If not, it won't. Please read the whole post before reflexively responding again. Because you are dodging my question by replying with questions.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
> You have no proof of that. This is also pretty much ahistorical model of the world. Wishful thinking won't bring peace. This makes no sense. I am stating the consensus of the world. Ignoring for a moment that israel's terror bombing of palestinian civilians is even less likely to bring peace, the primary goal in the first place is not to "bring peace", it is to stop the ongoing killing of civilians happening as we speak. Your personal goal of "peace" is lower priority, and we (the world) may be willing to discuss it after the aforementioned higher-priority goal is achieved. But I see no reason to reward terror-bombing of palestinian civilians, especially while the terror-bombing of palestinian civilians is still ongoing. You are free to try to convince the world otherwise, as is israel, but thusfar, you have both failed at the task. You can disagree, but righteousness is defined by the majority here, and the majority of the world says israel needs to stop its terror bombing campaign against palestinian civilians, regardless of any questions you or israel may have for what comes next. Indeed, whatever your answer to your question (what should israel or palestine do when attacked by the other), "continuing to terror-bomb civilians in palestine" isn't an acceptable answer, as judged by the world. You will have to come up with a new one if you wish to no longer be a villain in this story, according to the world. >you are dodging my question by replying with questions. In order to answer your question, I'm first asking clarifying questions which you yourself are dodging. Your dodging of clarifying questions, combined with your history of short, combative posts, illustrates that you aren't interested in clarity, or an answer, or even honest discussion, but rather just to argue. Well, you can continue arguing with yourself, frothing with rage at the fact that the world rejects israel's shallow excuses for terror-bombing palestinian civilians and executing israeli civilian hostages found in gaza. I'll no longer be a party to your bad faith attacks and arguments.
- nec4b 3y ago
  >> Your personal goal of "peace" is lower priority, and we (the world) may be willing to discuss it after the aforementioned higher-priority goal is achieved. How gracious of you. Where did you (the world) had that meeting where you decided which goals are more important? >> But I see no reason to reward terror-bombing of palestinian civilians, especially while the terror-bombing of palestinian civilians is still ongoing. But indiscriminate bombing of Israeli cities is reasonable and kidnapping, raping, mutilating, torturing of Israeli civilians is fine? The moment Israel stops before Hamas is destroyed all that will immediately resume. >> In order to answer your question, I'm first asking clarifying questions which you yourself are dodging. Your dodging of clarifying questions, combined with your history of short, combative posts, illustrates that you aren't interested in clarity, or an answer, or even honest discussion, but rather just to argue. Well, you can continue arguing with yourself, frothing with rage at the fact that the world rejects israel's shallow excuses for terror-bombing palestinian civilians and executing israeli civilian hostages found in gaza. I'll no longer be a party to your bad faith attacks and arguments. Nice ad hominem and straw man building.
  - ignoramous 3y ago
    > The moment Israel stops before Hamas is destroyed all that will immediately resume. Without Hamas, all that was in Hebron / E Jerusalem will promptly resume, including apartheid and ethnic cleansing. The latter looks increasingly likely. > But indiscriminate bombing of Israeli cities Ceasefire agreements are put in place for a purpose. If pursued earnestly, it can lead to permanent peace (see: Israel-Egypt). Otherwise, if the costs of the on-going war are okay, countries should have at it. Having lived through wars, the costs to me appear rarely justifiable.
    - nec4b 3y ago
      >>Without Hamas, all that was in Hebron / E Jerusalem will promptly resume, including apartheid and ethnic cleansing. The latter looks increasingly likely. Hamas controls Gaza and not the West bank.

by nec4b 3y ago

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago

> You have no proof of that. This is also pretty much ahistorical model of the world. Wishful thinking won't bring peace. This makes no sense. I am stating the consensus of the world. Ignoring for a moment that israel's terror bombing of palestinian civilians is even less likely to bring peace, the primary goal in the first place is not to "bring peace", it is to stop the ongoing killing of civilians happening as we speak. Your personal goal of "peace" is lower priority, and we (the world) may be willing to discuss it after the aforementioned higher-priority goal is achieved. But I see no reason to reward terror-bombing of palestinian civilians, especially while the terror-bombing of palestinian civilians is still ongoing. You are free to try to convince the world otherwise, as is israel, but thusfar, you have both failed at the task. You can disagree, but righteousness is defined by the majority here, and the majority of the world says israel needs to stop its terror bombing campaign against palestinian civilians, regardless of any questions you or israel may have for what comes next. Indeed, whatever your answer to your question (what should israel or palestine do when attacked by the other), "continuing to terror-bomb civilians in palestine" isn't an acceptable answer, as judged by the world. You will have to come up with a new one if you wish to no longer be a villain in this story, according to the world. >you are dodging my question by replying with questions. In order to answer your question, I'm first asking clarifying questions which you yourself are dodging. Your dodging of clarifying questions, combined with your history of short, combative posts, illustrates that you aren't interested in clarity, or an answer, or even honest discussion, but rather just to argue. Well, you can continue arguing with yourself, frothing with rage at the fact that the world rejects israel's shallow excuses for terror-bombing palestinian civilians and executing israeli civilian hostages found in gaza. I'll no longer be a party to your bad faith attacks and arguments.

nec4b 3y ago
>> Your personal goal of "peace" is lower priority, and we (the world) may be willing to discuss it after the aforementioned higher-priority goal is achieved. How gracious of you. Where did you (the world) had that meeting where you decided which goals are more important? >> But I see no reason to reward terror-bombing of palestinian civilians, especially while the terror-bombing of palestinian civilians is still ongoing. But indiscriminate bombing of Israeli cities is reasonable and kidnapping, raping, mutilating, torturing of Israeli civilians is fine? The moment Israel stops before Hamas is destroyed all that will immediately resume. >> In order to answer your question, I'm first asking clarifying questions which you yourself are dodging. Your dodging of clarifying questions, combined with your history of short, combative posts, illustrates that you aren't interested in clarity, or an answer, or even honest discussion, but rather just to argue. Well, you can continue arguing with yourself, frothing with rage at the fact that the world rejects israel's shallow excuses for terror-bombing palestinian civilians and executing israeli civilian hostages found in gaza. I'll no longer be a party to your bad faith attacks and arguments. Nice ad hominem and straw man building.
- ignoramous 3y ago
  > The moment Israel stops before Hamas is destroyed all that will immediately resume. Without Hamas, all that was in Hebron / E Jerusalem will promptly resume, including apartheid and ethnic cleansing. The latter looks increasingly likely. > But indiscriminate bombing of Israeli cities Ceasefire agreements are put in place for a purpose. If pursued earnestly, it can lead to permanent peace (see: Israel-Egypt). Otherwise, if the costs of the on-going war are okay, countries should have at it. Having lived through wars, the costs to me appear rarely justifiable.
  - nec4b 3y ago
    >>Without Hamas, all that was in Hebron / E Jerusalem will promptly resume, including apartheid and ethnic cleansing. The latter looks increasingly likely. Hamas controls Gaza and not the West bank.