Israel declares war on Hamas

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bagor

This is the mind that shamelessly and pathetically claims that it is is Hamas that is preventing aid getting to the starving people of Gaza.

Not to mention that he followed up this post by defending clearly dismissible misinformation with “the mob has decided the truth” because he couldn’t actually retort with anything other than that.

It’s too bad he’s too scared to engage.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Not to mention that he followed up this post by defending clearly dismissible misinformation with “the mob has decided the truth” because he couldn’t actually retort with anything other than that.

It’s too bad he’s too scared to engage.

It's not that he's scared it's just that for some weird reason he thought that if he went wah wah wah I've blocked you that this magically would prevent the other poster from continuing to challenge history depraved lies.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s too bad he’s too scared to engage.

That's the problem because he doesn't even engage in discussion just deflects and defends atrocities.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bagor

It's not that he's scared it's just that for some weird reason he thought that if he went wah wah wah I've blocked you that this magically would prevent the other poster from continuing to challenge history depraved lies.

Hey now, if he blocks a few more people he’ll finally get to live his fantasy where he’s the smartest person in the room because his own posts will end up being the only posts he can actually see.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Imagine reading a whole article where the IDF explains what happened, including the fact that all WCK workers involved were killed, why there was a gunman present, and the fact that the unit in question did this because they didn’t have the information that was just explained to you, and then asking the dead WCK workers to explain why there was a gunman present.

“Pointless debate” lol

And then the zinger.

There were 4 vehicles.
One of them had "gunmen, with weapons clearly visible". Heading north.
Three of them did not. Heading south in the opposite direction.
They decided not to attack the one with "gunmen, with weapons clearly visible".
Why? Because the most moral army in the world saw they were close to an aid facility.
They just let the clearly visible gunmen go.
And then decided to attack the other three vehicles.

Tldr: It was Hamas. Hamas made them do it. But they decided not to kill the Hamas clearly visible gunmen for fear of infrastructure damage. Because infrastructure preservation takes priority over taking out clear Hamas targets.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Bagor

We can agree to disagree on that Pepsi.

Presents himself as a promoter of good faith then throws out some cheap unfounded allegations in this thread that Hamas was being presented as victims.

When the reality is that he tried to represent Hamas and the Palestinian people as one and the same. Being on the same "side".

Now, when the world has expressed its disgust and revulsion with Israel and their reputation is in tatters it's different. Whereas Hamas and the Palestinians are one and the same Israel's behaviour is the result of some "extremist elements".

Sorry, maybe I didn't make my point clear: The Israeli government and the extremist elements within it including the PM and many cabinet ministers, need to be removed from power if there's any hope for peace.

I certainly never made the claim that Palestinians and Hamas were one and the same so it would be appreciated if you didn't put words in my mouth.

Or are you implying that Israelis are just monsters by nature and this has nothing to do with the fascists currently running the government propped up by extreme zionists that have immigrated to Israel over the last couple decades and pushed the government further and further right?

Any one who looks at this conflict as one side good/victims, other side bad/victimizers doesn't understand even the slightest bit of what's actually happening. There are victims on both sides of the this conflict and as far as I can tell, there are no good guys, just victims and victimizers on both sides.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

I certainly never made the claim that Palestinians and Hamas were one and the same so it would be appreciated if you didn't put words in my mouth.

Oh yes you did. Own your crap.

Your go to earlier in this thread when posters were expressing their disgust at the slaughter of innocents was to suggest that I was arguing in bad faith by painting one side as bad and the other as victims.

It was pointed out to you that the civilians of Gaza weren't a "side" and did not equate to Hamas. You were asked to explain it. You disappeared.

I'm using your benchmark.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Oh yes you did. Own your crap.

Please show your work.

The post you seem to take so much issue with was criticizing the Israeli government. And yet you found a way to somehow claim I was supporting their actions. Maybe consider taking a break or own your crap. Whichever.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Oh yes you did. Own your crap.

Your go to earlier in this thread when posters were expressing their disgust at the slaughter of innocents was to suggest that I was arguing in bad faith by painting one side as bad and the other as victims.

It was pointed out to you that the civilians of Gaza weren't a "side" and did not equate to Hamas. You were asked to explain it. You disappeared.

I'm using your benchmark.

Not to keep interjecting as you can both handle yourselves just fine, but I went back through the thread and Red Slinger did explain it, while also having been pretty clear that his views on the conflict have evolved since the beginning of it. I don’t think it’s fair to characterize his “sides” comment as equating Hamas with all Palestinians, and he’s said multiple times he does not believe them to be one and the same.

I don’t see any value in holding people accountable for what their position might have been 6 months ago when they’ve come out and explained how it’s shifted over the past few months. If they were holding the same position or pretending they never held a previous position, sure, but at the end of the day the best thing that can happen is for people to see what is happening and realize the damage the Israeli government is doing. If they didn’t entirely see that before but do now, it makes no sense to hold them over the fire for not having seen it before.

Anyways, Red Slinger doesn’t need me to defend him, but regardless of your interactions with him I know him to be a good and fair poster and I think you’re pointing your ire in the wrong direction on this one. My two cents anyway. But will agree to disagree if you still feel differently.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

Please show your work.

The post you seem to take so much issue with was criticizing the Israeli government. And yet you found a way to somehow claim I was supporting their actions. Maybe consider taking a break or own your crap. Whichever.

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3915

There ya go. Notable that what triggered your intervention was that this was when blankall was being asked to explain his multiple lies regarding al shifa hospital. Why didn't you interject there? Did you you had no issue of any of his seven lies? You didn't feel any of that was in bad faith?

The early sick tactic of trying to equate anyone that expressed disgust for the genocide as being a Hamas sympathiser.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The fact that they have fired 2 officers and Israel is generally grovelingly saying they will do better in future tends to completely debunk any talk of gunmen

I disagree. This is a huge incident. Various protocols were not followed. The gunman did not get into the vehicle, and the vehicles would not have been fired upon if protocols were followed.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Given that they didn't strike that vehicle, it isn't really. The sequence of events based on current information was:

1) IDF spots a gunman riding on an aid truck. They try to contact the WCF to see if it's theirs, but cannot.

2) They track the convoy with that truck to an aid warehouse, but don't fire on it because of it's proximity to an aid facility.

3) IDF then spots a guy with a bag leave the aid warehouse and get into a totally different vehicle; they claim it was misidentified as a gun, which may or may not be true.

4) IDF strikes that vehicle, killing several people.

5)2 people surive that strike and get into another car to get to safety. IDF strikes that.

6) Survivors from the 2nd strike then get into a 3rd vehicle to try to get to safety and the IDF strikes that too, killing everyone.

So the guy with the gun on top of the aid vehicle may have been why they were tracking it all, but he had nothing really to do with them striking 3 separate vehicles that had just left an aid facility. They never claimed it was the same person getting into the vehicle, nor did they even provide footage of the bag they claim they mistook to be a gun.

Based on the evidence, it sounds like a trigger happy army that has little to no regard towards preventing collateral damage. They see a guy with a bag get into a car from what they knew was an aid warehouse where some other guy had had a gun earlier on, and that's enough to justify blowing up 3 separate vehicles.

There was obviously some kind of major communication and protocol breakdown. There was more going on there than just a gunman. It was night. The aid company was driving different vehicles than normal, that more closely resembled civilian vehicles used by Hamas. The markings on the vehicles couldn't be seen. The aid vehicle did not respond to attempts to communicate.

We don't know how the policies, that the soldiers were dismissed for not following, were followed by the rest of the army.

[Fuzz]

Ok, now rationalize the other 30 000+ killings.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Leondros

The "mob" succinctly put out all of the facts and made a conclusion based on those facts. What world do you live in?

Did those facts include acknowledging a gunman was shooting from the roof of one of the vehicles.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by blankall

Did those facts include acknowledging a gunman was shooting from the roof of one of the vehicles.

Is there any independent proof of that?
Who acknowledged it?

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Ok, now rationalize the other 30 000+ killings.

Don't go there!
Because he will try to.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by blankall

Did those facts include acknowledging a gunman was shooting from the roof of one of the vehicles.

Yes, that was point number 1 on open’s post. I don’t think that fact is as important as you make it out to be since the gunmen are in a fourth vehicle that goes in a completely different direction than the vehicles that were blown up.

I can’t tell if you are being deliberately obtuse or if your reading comprehension is that poor that you can’t make sense of the full story or fact pattern. Either way it is alarming.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

There was obviously some kind of major communication and protocol breakdown. There was more going on there than just a gunman. It was night. The aid company was driving different vehicles than normal, that more closely resembled civilian vehicles used by Hamas. The markings on the vehicles couldn't be seen. The aid vehicle did not respond to attempts to communicate.

We don't know how the policies, that the soldiers were dismissed for not following, were followed by the rest of the army.

Some of this is made up out of thin air, some of this was explained in the article.

Trying to turn this into some kind of mystery and cast doubt on the WCK is one thing, but doing it when the investigation itself has already explained or contradicted your made up misinformation? That’s pretty unbelievable.

[PepsiFree]

Reporters:

“Here’s what we know.”

IDF investigation:

“Here’s what actually happened.”

Blankall

“No… there is more to this. The WCK must explain themselves.”

I’m going with deliberately obtuse on this one. It’s actually better when he pretends he’s above this conversation, because at least then we don’t have to watch him spitting out a constant stream of easily refuted bull#### and acting like he’s some intelligent, unbiased observer and preserver of “fact.”

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Reporters:

“Here’s what we know.”

IDF investigation:

“Here’s what actually happened.”

Blankall

“No… there is more to this. The WCK must explain themselves.”

I’m going with deliberately obtuse on this one. It’s actually better when he pretends he’s above this conversation, because at least then we don’t have to watch him spitting out a constant stream of easily refuted bull#### and acting like he’s some intelligent, unbiased observer and preserver of “fact.”

I literally quoted a reporter.