|
Post by marsatax on Apr 28, 2024 17:57:50 GMT
Take your insults and shove them up your ass. As I said above, there is a difference between APPROVING of Israel's actions, and PERFORMING those actions. If you are incapable of understanding that, then maybe YOU are autistic, and maybe YOU have only a few working brain cells. I will decide what I mean whether approving or performing, not some G-- D----- idiot on an anonymous discussion board. How is it possible you cannot see that? What makes you think you should decide what I mean? I explained to you that I cannot know exactly who performed the actions anyway, most people cannot, even you cannot, so I must mean who approves the actions, and that is what anyone with any sense would mean. You are a complete idiot if you still cannot understand that. That is the least insulting thing I can say about you. That is probably the reason you harp on the internet for excessive response by the IDF. They can only get idiots to do that.
When you harangue all day on the internet for some policy and I criticize that policy, I not only mean you too, in addition to the IDF, I mean you especially. Do you get the meaning now? You are speaking at great length for problematic policies and I wish you, especially, would stuff it.
Since you repeatedly misuse language, after having been repeatedly called on it, YOU are the one who is a Goddamn idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Olaf Plunket on Apr 28, 2024 19:08:44 GMT
I will decide what I mean whether approving or performing, not some G-- D----- idiot on an anonymous discussion board. How is it possible you cannot see that? What makes you think you should decide what I mean? I explained to you that I cannot know exactly who performed the actions anyway, most people cannot, even you cannot, so I must mean who approves the actions, and that is what anyone with any sense would mean. You are a complete idiot if you still cannot understand that. That is the least insulting thing I can say about you. That is probably the reason you harp on the internet for excessive response by the IDF. They can only get idiots to do that.
When you harangue all day on the internet for some policy and I criticize that policy, I not only mean you too, in addition to the IDF, I mean you especially. Do you get the meaning now? You are speaking at great length for problematic policies and I wish you, especially, would stuff it.
Since you repeatedly misuse language, after having been repeatedly called on it, YOU are the one who is a Goddamn idiot. So you're a troll now as well as an idiot? I guess that happens a lot. Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument. When I say "you" I mean G-- D----- you. You don't correct me on that.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Apr 28, 2024 19:51:51 GMT
Since you repeatedly misuse language, after having been repeatedly called on it, YOU are the one who is a Goddamn idiot. So you're a troll now as well as an idiot? I guess that happens a lot. Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument. When I say "you" I mean G-- D----- you. You don't correct me on that. Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument.
You can believe that all you want. It does not make it true. I think deep down you know that you are abusing language.
|
|
|
Post by Olaf Plunket on Apr 28, 2024 20:13:18 GMT
So you're a troll now as well as an idiot? I guess that happens a lot. Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument. When I say "you" I mean G-- D----- you. You don't correct me on that. Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument.
You can believe that all you want. It does not make it true. I think deep down you know that you are abusing language.
The IDF is not here. Netanyahu is not here. You are here. They didn't say anything here. You did. When I say "you" I am speaking to you about what you said here. You have some sort of serious brain defect that makes you say I can't mean you because you are not Jewish. I don't care if you worship toads. I am speaking to you about what you said here. I doubt anyone knows or cares what you believe. I doubt even you know what you believe. I doubt you can help Jews in any way. I suspect you will only make people hate Jews more. Was that your plan all along? If so, it's working.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Apr 28, 2024 20:30:22 GMT
Whether you will admit it or not I won this argument.
You can believe that all you want. It does not make it true. I think deep down you know that you are abusing language.
The IDF is not here. Netanyahu is not here. You are here. They didn't say anything here. You did. When I say "you" I am speaking to you about what you said here. You have some sort of serious brain defect that makes you say I can't mean you because you are not Jewish. I don't care if you worship toads. I am speaking to you about what you said here. I doubt anyone knows or cares what you believe. I doubt even you know what you believe. I doubt you can help Jews in any way. I suspect you will only make people hate Jews more. Was that your plan all along? If so, it's working.
Learn the difference between APPROVING actions and PERFORMING actions.
|
|
|
Post by Olaf Plunket on Apr 28, 2024 20:53:08 GMT
The IDF is not here. Netanyahu is not here. You are here. They didn't say anything here. You did. When I say "you" I am speaking to you about what you said here. You have some sort of serious brain defect that makes you say I can't mean you because you are not Jewish. I don't care if you worship toads. I am speaking to you about what you said here. I doubt anyone knows or cares what you believe. I doubt even you know what you believe. I doubt you can help Jews in any way. I suspect you will only make people hate Jews more. Was that your plan all along? If so, it's working.
Learn the difference between APPROVING actions and PERFORMING actions. learn the difference between you and someone who isn't here. It also appears you need to learn the difference between approving and performing yourself. I am fully aware and never wavered. You don't need to learn to be belligerent or arrogant though, you already have that.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Apr 28, 2024 21:23:31 GMT
Learn the difference between APPROVING actions and PERFORMING actions. learn the difference between you and someone who isn't here. It also appears you need to learn the difference between approving and performing yourself. I am fully aware and never wavered. You don't need to learn to be belligerent or arrogant though, you already have that. Again with belligerence and arrogance? Look who's talking.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Apr 29, 2024 11:34:11 GMT
People are definitely not wrong when they say people have the right to resist foreign occupation. It's in fact enshrined in the Geneva conventions. Also no one in their right mind thinks that Israel ended the occupation of the Gaza strip given that Israel still controlled entry and exit from the area, their air and sea space. It's still is under occupation for all intents and purposes. Occupation is totally legal but and not annexation which Israel has done to the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank. And certainly not transferring part of the civilian population to the occupied territories. Something that the allies didn't do when it comes to Japan or Germany. It also means that Israel being the occupying power has duties of protecting the civilian population that is under occupation. Yes, I'm aware that Netanyahu's policies towards the Palestinians was a massive failure. Which is why if the man had any shame, he would resign. People are definitely not wrong when they say people have the right to resist foreign occupation. It's in fact enshrined in the Geneva conventions.
Germans and Japanese may have had the "right" to resist Allied occupation of their countries, but the Allies had the right to fight the resisters, and even kill them if necessary. Iraqis may have had the "right" to resist coalition occupation of their country during Desert Storm, but the coalition had the right to fight the resisters, and even kill them if necessary. Also no one in their right mind thinks that Israel ended the occupation of the Gaza strip given that Israel still controlled entry and exit from the area, their air and sea space. It's still is under occupation for all intents and purposes.Rubbish. If Israel were still occupying Gaza after 2005, it would not have allowed the endless rocket attacks, the digging of hundreds of miles of military tunnels, the repeated sending over of arson kites and balloons, or the October 7 atrocities. Occupation is totally legal but and not annexation which Israel has done to the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank.When Syria controlled the Golan Heights, it used them to repeatedly shoot down at Israeli towns in the valley below. Since Israel took control, that region has been relatively quiet. Any violence there has been from Lebanon (and Hezbollah), which Israel does not control. When Jordan controlled East Jerusalem, Jews were not permitted to visit their holiest sites, the Temple Mount and Western Wall. Why should the Israelis return to that situation? I am not aware of Israel annexing any of the West Bank. And certainly not transferring part of the civilian population to the occupied territories.
The League of Nations called for Jewish settlement on that land back in 1920 or so. The UN inherits League decisions. It also means that Israel being the occupying power has duties of protecting the civilian population that is under occupation.
Israel is doing that as best it can. But right now Gaza is a war zone, and because it is so densely populated, civilian casualties are inevitable. Yes, I'm aware that Netanyahu's policies towards the Palestinians was a massive failure. Which is why if the man had any shame, he would resign.Netanyahu is a typical politician. But even the Israelis who oppose him are united on the need to destroy Hamas. The allies "had the right to kill resisters" just like the Germans had the "right to kill" resisters and Russians had the right to "kill resisters". It's not rubbish. It's the truth. Gaza was and still is under occupation according to international law and several international organizations. The region being totally quiet under Israeli occupation is one thing, as it could've stayed until the Syrian government signed a peace treaty or something similar. Annexing it to Israel wasn't necessary and is illegal. Because annexing territory through conquest is illegal per international law? I certainly heard something from the US in regards to Russia annexing parts of eastern Ukraine. Israelis wanting to visit Holy sites doesn't really change that. And the UN can also make new decision. Also, the transfer of civilians to occupied territory is illegal per the 4th Geneva convention. Civilian casualties are unavoidable, I agree. Certain decisions taken by the Israeli government like preventing humanitarian aid from reaching civilians in Gaza are avoidable though.
|
|
|
Post by marsatax on Apr 29, 2024 15:11:03 GMT
People are definitely not wrong when they say people have the right to resist foreign occupation. It's in fact enshrined in the Geneva conventions.
Germans and Japanese may have had the "right" to resist Allied occupation of their countries, but the Allies had the right to fight the resisters, and even kill them if necessary. Iraqis may have had the "right" to resist coalition occupation of their country during Desert Storm, but the coalition had the right to fight the resisters, and even kill them if necessary. Also no one in their right mind thinks that Israel ended the occupation of the Gaza strip given that Israel still controlled entry and exit from the area, their air and sea space. It's still is under occupation for all intents and purposes.Rubbish. If Israel were still occupying Gaza after 2005, it would not have allowed the endless rocket attacks, the digging of hundreds of miles of military tunnels, the repeated sending over of arson kites and balloons, or the October 7 atrocities. Occupation is totally legal but and not annexation which Israel has done to the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank.When Syria controlled the Golan Heights, it used them to repeatedly shoot down at Israeli towns in the valley below. Since Israel took control, that region has been relatively quiet. Any violence there has been from Lebanon (and Hezbollah), which Israel does not control. When Jordan controlled East Jerusalem, Jews were not permitted to visit their holiest sites, the Temple Mount and Western Wall. Why should the Israelis return to that situation? I am not aware of Israel annexing any of the West Bank. And certainly not transferring part of the civilian population to the occupied territories.
The League of Nations called for Jewish settlement on that land back in 1920 or so. The UN inherits League decisions. It also means that Israel being the occupying power has duties of protecting the civilian population that is under occupation.
Israel is doing that as best it can. But right now Gaza is a war zone, and because it is so densely populated, civilian casualties are inevitable. Yes, I'm aware that Netanyahu's policies towards the Palestinians was a massive failure. Which is why if the man had any shame, he would resign.Netanyahu is a typical politician. But even the Israelis who oppose him are united on the need to destroy Hamas. The allies "had the right to kill resisters" just like the Germans had the "right to kill" resisters and Russians had the right to "kill resisters". It's not rubbish. It's the truth. Gaza was and still is under occupation according to international law and several international organizations. The region being totally quiet under Israeli occupation is one thing, as it could've stayed until the Syrian government signed a peace treaty or something similar. Annexing it to Israel wasn't necessary and is illegal. Because annexing territory through conquest is illegal per international law? I certainly heard something from the US in regards to Russia annexing parts of eastern Ukraine. Israelis wanting to visit Holy sites doesn't really change that. And the UN can also make new decision. Also, the transfer of civilians to occupied territory is illegal per the 4th Geneva convention. Civilian casualties are unavoidable, I agree. Certain decisions taken by the Israeli government like preventing humanitarian aid from reaching civilians in Gaza are avoidable though. The allies "had the right to kill resisters" just like the Germans had the "right to kill" resisters
Oh, so the Germans crushing the Warsaw Ghetto uprising and destroying the cities of Oradour-sur-Glane and Lidice (and murdering all their inhabitants) were actually legal acts? Fascinating. It's not rubbish. It's the truth. Gaza was and still is under occupation according to international law and several international organizations.
When international organizations become so biased against Israel that it is a caricature, what they have to say about Israel should not be taken as valid. Because annexing territory through conquest is illegal per international law? I certainly heard something from the US in regards to Russia annexing parts of eastern Ukraine. Israelis wanting to visit Holy sites doesn't really change that. Yes, it really does. When East Jerusalem was under Arab (specifically, Jordanian) control, Jews were not allowed to visit their holy sites. That was an injustice, and the only way to prevent a repetition of that injustice is for all of Jerusalem to be under Israeli control. And the UN can also make new decision. Also, the transfer of civilians to occupied territory is illegal per the 4th Geneva convention.
Israel has not "transferred" Israelis to the West Bank, like cattle. Instead, as the power controlling the region, it has control of immigration, and has ALLOWED Israelis to move to the West Bank.
|
|