Has Israel weakened Hamas enough to win the war on Gaza?

[Horta]

13 hours ago, Unusual Tournament said:

You haven’t even mentioned the 1400 October 7th victims that started this. 

The story didn't start on Oct 7, it started with European colonial occupation and the 1948 nakba (before that actually). It has always seemed strange that a terribly persecuted minority group in Europe sought to remedy that with their own occupation and violent persecution of people in the middle east. Stranger still that the world allowed it.

This particular chapter started in 2006 with the blockade of the Gaza concentration camp (including starvation via control of the "calories" allowed into the place) and various other monstrosities, such "cast lead" aka the Gaza massacre (where Israel broke a truce) which forms part of the periodic slaughters they refer to as "mowing the lawn", or the sniper fire reaction to the (peaceful) "great march of return" demonstration against the blockade itself.

A lot of the young men who broke out of their concentration camp on Oct 7 were born in Gaza and lived their entire lives under illegal occupation and or blockade with that being the first time they would have been outside of its walls. When all else fails against oppression (which is what happened) armed struggle is legitimate.

If there were human rights violations on Oct 7, which there obviously were, those responsible (from either side) should be punished, but not based on Israel's atrocity propaganda, only after an impartial investigation (which Israel will never allow). A lot of the damage was unlikely to have been inflicted with the rifles and rpg's hamas were using. Particularly the strafing and level of incineration. Friendly fire is understandable under the circumstances, it's also well known that Israeli forces will attack their own (the "hannibal directive") to take out the enemy and they most definitely did on that day, but the numbers are unclear. 

The right to resist occupation and fight for self determination (including armed struggle) is inalienable and enshrined under various human rights laws and charters such as at the UN.

The Israeli (effective) occupation and blockade of Gaza is illegal as noted by many HR Orgs and UN Rapporteurs and the Palestinians are within their rights to resist by all means necessary (again, including armed resistance) under UN and humanitarian law. They even have rights as combatants under the Geneva Convention. Conversely Israel, as the occupying power can do what they need only to restore order, but they can never use "self defense" against such resistance as a pretext for breaking Humanitarian law themselves (which they most definitely are doing and have been for 75 years).

For some context and Human Rights law explanation.

 

[Horta]

16 hours ago, Unusual Tournament said:

 

But let’s be honest and judge Hamas in the same way. All they have to do is disarm and hand over the organisers of 10/7 and the retaliatory strikes against the Palestinians stops.

 

Lest be further honest.....all Israel has to do is grant equal rights to everyone (and allow the refugees back) and groups like hamas would be unnecessary. They would disappear.

 

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, Horta said:

A lot of the young men who broke out of their concentration camp on Oct 7 were born in Gaza and lived their entire lives under illegal occupation and or blockade with that being the first time they would have been outside of its walls. When all else fails against oppression (which is what happened) armed struggle is legitimate.

At least you're honest that you don't care what they did to unarmed civilians.  You really are a piece of work, huh?  Here are some of your innocent civilians.  Enjoy, I think you'll probably get a dopamine bump.  For everyone else, remember this when you're wailing about the numbers of dead "civilians":

The only reason I don't go into detail about what I think about these demons and those who support them is that I'd likely be banned.  As it is, I'll just use the ignore feature.  Hope Karma pays you a call really soon.  Enjoy dealing with the hell you so casually agree on for others.

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Horta said:

The story didn't start on Oct 7, it started with European colonial occupation and the 1948 nakba (before that actually). It has always seemed strange that a terribly persecuted minority group in Europe sought to remedy that with their own occupation and violent persecution of people in the middle east. Stranger still that the world allowed it.

This particular chapter started in 2006 with the blockade of the Gaza concentration camp (including starvation via control of the "calories" allowed into the place) and various other monstrosities, such "cast lead" aka the Gaza massacre (where Israel broke a truce) which forms part of the periodic slaughters they refer to as "mowing the lawn", or the sniper fire reaction to the (peaceful) "great march of return" demonstration against the blockade itself.

A lot of the young men who broke out of their concentration camp on Oct 7 were born in Gaza and lived their entire lives under illegal occupation and or blockade with that being the first time they would have been outside of its walls. When all else fails against oppression (which is what happened) armed struggle is legitimate.

If there were human rights violations on Oct 7, which there obviously were, those responsible (from either side) should be punished, but not based on Israel's atrocity propaganda, only after an impartial investigation (which Israel will never allow). A lot of the damage was unlikely to have been inflicted with the rifles and rpg's hamas were using. Particularly the strafing and level of incineration. Friendly fire is understandable under the circumstances, it's also well known that Israeli forces will attack their own (the "hannibal directive") to take out the enemy and they most definitely did on that day, but the numbers are unclear. 

The right to resist occupation and fight for self determination (including armed struggle) is inalienable and enshrined under various human rights laws and charters such as at the UN.

The Israeli (effective) occupation and blockade of Gaza is illegal as noted by many HR Orgs and UN Rapporteurs and the Palestinians are within their rights to resist by all means necessary (again, including armed resistance) under UN and humanitarian law. They even have rights as combatants under the Geneva Convention. Conversely Israel, as the occupying power can do what they need only to restore order, but they can never use "self defense" against such resistance as a pretext for breaking Humanitarian law themselves (which they most definitely are doing and have been for 75 years).

For some context and Human Rights law explanation.

 

It makes no difference when it started. The trigger was October 7th and the killings and rape against 1400 young Israelis. It’s still going on. 
 

As much as the Palestinian cause is sorrow filled the fact is the Creation of the State of Israel in the area it is located is their ancestral homeland and more to the point their identity also. There was a peace deal with Arafat that he didn’t accept. The Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim countries make it impossible for any other religion to live side by side. So Israel has carved out its own homeland using political cunning and force. 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Horta said:

Lest be further honest.....all Israel has to do is grant equal rights to everyone (and allow the refugees back) and groups like hamas would be unnecessary. They would disappear.

 

One quarter of the population of Israel is Palestinian. You just wanna change the demographics. Not gonna happen.  Look at Europe and see how Muslim and Arab “culture” enrichment is coming along. 
 

Your suggestion of “sharing “ has nothing to do with peace just forcing the Jews out

[+and-then]

10 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

One quarter of the population of Israel is Palestinian. You just wanna change the demographics. Not gonna happen.  Look at Europe and see how Muslim and Arab “culture” enrichment is coming along. 
 

Your suggestion of “sharing “ has nothing to do with peace just forcing the Jews out

I can't tell if the guy is that naive or if he's lying through his teeth.  These people have shown ABSOLUTELY ZERO intention of EVER making peace and living side by side.  This situation will never end until one or the other is removed from that land permanently and I have no doubt who Mr Roman-lover intends for it to be.  Well, he's in for a lot of disappointment if he lives far enough into the future.  Oh, a day is coming when he'll be ecstatic in believing that those Jews are finally going to be ended and removed, but shortly after that tantalizing prospect becomes mainstream, all hell is going to break loose there and his beloved, downtrodden innocents in keffiyehs are going to utterly uprooted and removed, never to bother anyone again.  And the worst part?  It will be their own doing because they refused to try to live together in peace.

[Unusual Tournament]

2 minutes ago, and-then said:

I can't tell if the guy is that naive or if he's lying through his teeth.  These people have shown ABSOLUTELY ZERO intention of EVER making peace and living side by side.  This situation will never end until one or the other is removed from that land permanently and I have no doubt who Mr Roman-lover intends for it to be.  Well, he's in for a lot of disappointment if he lives far enough into the future.  Oh, a day is coming when he'll be ecstatic in believing that those Jews are finally going to be ended and removed, but shortly after that tantalizing prospect becomes mainstream, all hell is going to break loose there and his beloved, downtrodden innocents in keffiyehs are going to utterly uprooted and removed, never to bother anyone again.  And the worst part?  It will be their own doing because they refused to try to live together in peace.

Without risking repeating myself (and you) there is no peace by living side by side. That ship has sailed. The last port of call was October 7th. Horta and the rest can pound sand all they like. 

[Antigonos]

25 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Without risking repeating myself (and you) there is no peace by living side by side. That ship has sailed. The last port of call was October 7th.

I think the last port was long before Oct 7.

And although having a two state solution sounds ideal on the surface, I don’t believe it would have been logistically workable in the long term.

[docyabut2]

Hamas would never want a two state solution they want all the land

Edited January 1 by docyabut2

[Antigonos]

18 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

Hamas would never want a two state solution they want all the land

I’m not talking about what Hamas wants. 

[docyabut2]

1 hour ago, Antigonos said:

I’m not talking about what Hamas wants. but what  about what they for want a one state ?"  

1. Before Israel there was a British Mandate, not a Palestinian state
2. Before the British Mandate, it was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state. 
3. Before the Ottoman Empire Was the Islamic State of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state. 
4. Before the Islamic State of the Mamluks from Egypt, the Arab-Kurdish Empire was the Ayyubid, not a Palestinian state. 
5. Before the Ayyubid Empire was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
6. Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem was the Umayyad and Fatimid empire, not a Palestinian state.
7. Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, the Byzantine Empire was not a Palestinian state.
8. Before the Byzantine Empire, there were Sassanids, not a Palestinian state. 9. Before the Sassanid Empire was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
10. Before the Byzantine Empire was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
11. Before the Roman Empire it was a Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state. 
12. Before the Hasmonean state was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state. 
13. Before the Seleucid Empire was the Empire of Alexander, not a Palestinian state.
14. Before Alexander's empire it was the Persian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
15. Before the Persian Empire was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state. 
16. Before the Babylonian Empire were the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state. 
17. Before the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was no kingdom of Israel in the kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state. 
18. Before the Kingdom of Israel, the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel was not a Palestinian state. 
19. Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an accumulation of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state. 20. In fact, in this plot of land kingdoms fell and fell .. But there was never a Palestinian state or a people/

Edited January 1 by docyabut2

[docyabut2]

Israel  is going to win this war  ")

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "many more months," Netanyahu says

 

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "many more months," Netanyahu says

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "many more months," Netanyahu says

many more months," Netanyahu says

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "many more months," Netanyahu says

 

WORLD 

Israel-Hamas war will go on for "many more months," Netanyahu says

Edited January 1 by docyabut2

[Antigonos]

13 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

1. Before Israel there was a British Mandate, not a Palestinian state
2. Before the British Mandate, it was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state. 
3. Before the Ottoman Empire Was the Islamic State of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state. 
4. Before the Islamic State of the Mamluks from Egypt, the Arab-Kurdish Empire was the Ayyubid, not a Palestinian state. 
5. Before the Ayyubid Empire was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
6. Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem was the Umayyad and Fatimid empire, not a Palestinian state.
7. Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, the Byzantine Empire was not a Palestinian state.
8. Before the Byzantine Empire, there were Sassanids, not a Palestinian state. 9. Before the Sassanid Empire was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
10. Before the Byzantine Empire was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
11. Before the Roman Empire it was a Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state. 
12. Before the Hasmonean state was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state. 
13. Before the Seleucid Empire was the Empire of Alexander, not a Palestinian state.
14. Before Alexander's empire it was the Persian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
15. Before the Persian Empire was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state. 
16. Before the Babylonian Empire were the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state. 
17. Before the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was no kingdom of Israel in the kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state. 
18. Before the Kingdom of Israel, the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel was not a Palestinian state. 
19. Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an accumulation of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state. 20. In fact, in this plot of land kingdoms fell and fell .. But there was never a Palestinian state or a people/

When you quote what someone wrote don’t add on something they didn’t say.

[docyabut2]

 

[docyabut2]

Israel  is going to win this war  ") to share the land

Edited January 1 by docyabut2

[Horta]

4 hours ago, Unusual Tournament said:

One quarter of the population of Israel is Palestinian. You just wanna change the demographics. Not gonna happen.  Look at Europe and see how Muslim and Arab “culture” enrichment is coming along. 
 

Your suggestion of “sharing “ has nothing to do with peace just forcing the Jews out

Based on your favouritism, that might appear so. I just want to allow the oppressed and displaced back on their rightful lands. It's the only hope for a just and peaceful solution that could last. It probably will mean that the Jewish colonists and migrants will become a minority group in Palestine. That's really why Israel will not allow it, that would be the end of a state violently dedicated to Jewish supremacy.

The whole idea of a "Jewish democracy" in Palestine is about as coherent as a the idea of a "married bachelor". It can only ever result in displacement and ethnic cleansing, and now attempts at genocide, of the indigenous people.

It's about as sensible as giving southern California to the scientologists, which is their spiritual home after all (although at least we wouldn't have to steal the land for them, that was done long ago). Then they could move in from around the world under "right of return" and displace and ethnically cleanse enough locals into enclaves so as to allow for a "Scientologist State" to flourish with a demographic majority and pretend it is a democracy. Then the few locals that are left must swear allegiance to the ïdea of their state existing for the good of Scientology, with scrutiny applied to what they say and do to make sure this is enforced.

I simply don't care about religion or what anyone chooses to believe, it's not something I usually want to know because it's all nonsense to me. When you discriminate based on it though, that's a different thing. The very foundation of the state of Israel is based on such discrimination.

It's a strange world where requesting equal rights for people regardless of belief, colour or ethnicity is considered wrong. The only * claimed* genuine modern nation state pretending to be a democracy where that not only escapes scrutiny but seems to be both tolerated and encouraged in brutal fashion, is in occupied Palestine.

[Horta]

4 hours ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Without risking repeating myself (and you) there is no peace by living side by side. That ship has sailed. The last port of call was October 7th. Horta and the rest can pound sand all they like. 

It was never a genuine solution. As to Oct 7, it's worth listening again to what UN Sec Gen Antonio Guterres had to say on this. He is quite right when he says it "didn't happen in a vacuum".

My only disagreement with him is his thinking that a two state solution is viable. 

 

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2023-10-24/secretary-generals-remarks-the-security-council-the-middle-east 

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Antigonos said:

I think the last port was long before Oct 7.

And although having a two state solution sounds ideal on the surface, I don’t believe it would have been logistically workable in the long term.

The only way ANY solution would work would be for it to unfold over a prescribed period with "confidence building" measures and it would have to begin with the removal of all indoctrination in mosques and UNRWA schools or there will never be a change.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

Israel  is going to win this war  ") to share the land

Israel will prevail but scripture paints a painful picture of loss and destruction for Israel also.  Biden's handlers are actively beginning to work against Israel for political reasons.  That's why they pulled the Ford CSG from the Mediterranean Sea.  It's a signal to Israel and Iran and if Iran tries to take advantage, Israel should go full Roman on the region and end this threat once, for all time.

[Horta]

It's worth noting that the indigenous Palestinians Jews, Christians and Muslims seemed to share the place ok before Zionists started resorting to terrorism and eventually colonised it for Jewish European migrants who then took over by force.

Edited January 2 by Horta

[Antigonos]

6 minutes ago, Horta said:

It's worth noting that the indigenous Palestinians Jews, Christians and Muslims seemed to share the place ok before Zionists started resorting to terrorism and eventually colonised it for Jewish European migrants who then took over by force.

Excellent point. It was that way before the First Crusade as well. 

[+and-then]

5 minutes ago, Antigonos said:

Excellent point. It was that way before the First Crusade as well. 

The first Crusade was launched 400 years after Islam brought the sword to the ME.  Effectively, it was less an offensive than a defensive move.  As for everyone getting along prior to Zionists coming to the region:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmitude

Muslims get along just dandy with everyone who bends the knee and knows they are to be subservient.  As soon as Jews claimed their independence, Muslims went to war against them.  

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Horta said:

It was never a genuine solution. As to Oct 7, it's worth listening again to what UN Sec Gen Antonio Guterres had to say on this. He is quite right when he says it "didn't happen in a vacuum".

My only disagreement with him is his thinking that a two state solution is viable. 

 

https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/speeches/2023-10-24/secretary-generals-remarks-the-security-council-the-middle-east 

What didn’t happen in a vacuum. The killings and rapes were justified?

[docyabut2]

9 hours ago, Antigonos said:

When you quote what someone wrote don’t add on something they didn’t say.

I didn`t add to my post 

 

 

Edited January 2 by docyabut2

[Setton]

11 hours ago, and-then said:

Israel will prevail but scripture paints a painful picture of loss and destruction for Israel also.  Biden's handlers are actively beginning to work against Israel for political reasons.  That's why they pulled the Ford CSG from the Mediterranean Sea.  It's a signal to Israel and Iran and if Iran tries to take advantage, Israel should go full Roman on the region and end this threat once, for all time.

The Ford CSG is being brought back as it's at the end of its deployment. You know that, as you've been told twice already do you are only lying to try to justify your hatred of Biden.