Israel declares war on Hamas

[blankall]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

it will keep Bibi in power so the cost in blood is irrelevant

That guy needs to go. He's managed to stay at least a decade past his expiry date.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Unfortunately it’s looking ever more likely that all out war with Hezbollah is on the horizon, regardless if a ceasefire with Hamas is brokered. All out war between Israel and Hezbollah would have major implications for the entire region, notwithstanding it being extremely bloody. Grim days ahead.

Yes unfortunately.

Breaking news of a Hezbollah missile landing in a soccer field in a Druze town of northern Israel, several injuries.

It seems inevitable that there will be a large IDF response to the ongoing attacks from Lebanon. No one wants this.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by btimbit

....

No, 'an embarrassing letdown' is his reply to manhattanboy saying 'you know what they say about first times'

It's a joke. Relax.

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Son you’re a sack of hammers aren’t ya. That was a first time sex joke cmon

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Fuzz responded to my post and I am quite certain he was making a joke about the "first time".....

Give him a break, guys. He’s still waiting for his first time.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Give him a break, guys. He’s still waiting for his first time.

Pretty sure the guy is definitely a 17 year old virgin now, maybe he cracked his dad’s password. Only explanation for the join date.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by blankall

I've not mentioned religious scripture once. My argument for Israel's claim to existence is:

1. The Jews there have a historical, genetic, and cultural link to the land.

And I've got a genetic, historical link to East Africa. How do I go get my hut back?

[Pointman]

Apparently some confusion about what is Gaza. Is it a nation, a state, a piece of land, whatever.

Gaza is an exclave of Palestinian state. Palestinian state consists of West Bank and Gaza, with West Bank being 15 times bigger in territory, but only 1.5 times bigger in population. Geographically, Gaza is loosely similar to Alaska in that Alaska is likewise cut off from the mainland USA by another country.

Gazans held local elections where they elected Hamas to run the exclave. Still, they were under Palestinian authorities, including the president of Palestine. So they had a rebellion led by Hamas, during which they killed or exiled all representatives of mainland Palestinian authorities. Since then they are de facto independent state, that is run by their local government. De jure they are an exclave of Palestinian state.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

And I've got a genetic, historical link to East Africa. How do I go get my hut back?

Easy. Buy it. Like Jews bought Israel land

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

None of this is legitimate. "Regained control"? When? It's an occupied territory, they don't have the right to do that. They have made up the rules of the game, and you just accept that, despite the rest of the world and every honest court in the land disagreeing with them.

And they are correct. Read the pdf I posted(please, please!), you'll get a good overview of all the ways Israel is committing war crimes, contravening the Geneva convention, and generally being awful to people while trampling on their rights, along with a history of the land.

Once again you are confusing ownership of a house by a person with ownership of a land by a state. And, regardless, Palestinians in question never OWNED the home. They rented it. And then stopped paying rent.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Once again you are confusing ownership of a house by a person with ownership of a land by a state. And, regardless, Palestinians in question never OWNED the home. They rented it. And then stopped paying rent.

Citation needed.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

Citation needed.

It is literally on the Al Jazeera - the pro-palestine tabloid - article :

the homes were built in exchange for a revocation of their refugee status and the promise that these families would own the homes after three years.

The promise was never fulfilled

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.alj...h-settler-says

So they never OWNED those homes. Yet they claim THEFT. And they were not even kicked out of the homes. They were only forced to pay rent to live in the house that they don't own. I guess, forcing to pay rent for living in a house that you don't own amounts to WAR CRIME AND GENOCIDE. So they refused and were then ordered to vacate the home since they don't own it and refuse to pay rent.

And I'm going strictly by pro-palestine sources here.

[Zary's-Mustache]

You claimed they rented the home and rent wasn't paid.

Again, citation needed. Another blatant lie from you. It's amazing how much you guys like to lie and make things up. Almost as if you learn from the best, the Israeli government.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Zary's-Mustache

You claimed they rented the home and rent wasn't paid.

Again, citation needed. Another blatant lie from you. It's amazing how much you guys like to lie and make things up. Almost as if you learn from the best, the Israeli government.

I claimed that they were living in a house that they don't own and didn't pay the rent. Which is literally what is written in the article. I understand it hurts that pro-palestine crowd posted a link to a pro-palestine source, that actually proves Israel point. So you are scrambling to get out of this embarrassment.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It is literally on the Al Jazeera - the pro-palestine tabloid - article :

the homes were built in exchange for a revocation of their refugee status and the promise that these families would own the homes after three years.

The promise was never fulfilled

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.alj...h-settler-says

So they never OWNED those homes. Yet they claim THEFT. And they were not even kicked out of the homes. They were only forced to pay rent to live in the house that they don't own. I guess, forcing to pay rent for living in a house that you don't own amounts to WAR CRIME AND GENOCIDE. So they refused and were then ordered to vacate the home since they don't own it and refuse to pay rent.

And I'm going strictly by pro-palestine sources here.

That’s a bizarre reading of that article. Perhaps you should try again.

You can also read this if you actually want an education on the issue. Blankall refused, let’s see if you actually have an open mind or if you’re just another biased person uninterested in ever learning an ugly truth: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/16/m...-impunity.html

[Looch City]

This is like so easy.

Just claim they're Hamas and raid their homes or drop some bombs. Done! You now can occupy freely.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I claimed that they were living in a house that they don't own and didn't pay the rent. Which is literally what is written in the article. I understand it hurts that pro-palestine crowd posted a link to a pro-palestine source, that actually proves Israel point. So you are scrambling to get out of this embarrassment.

Oh stop, nobody is embarrassed because you don’t know how to read.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

That’s a bizarre reading of that article. Perhaps you should try again.

You can also read this if you actually want an education on the issue. Blankall refused, let’s see if you actually have an open mind or if you’re just another biased person uninterested in ever learning an ugly truth: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/16/m...-impunity.html

What's so bizarre. The article literally says that they didn't own the home. You now see that you made a blunder with that article so you desperately trying to substitute it with another article. And if it will also turn out to mean something else, if not yhe opposite, you will randomly grab yet another article hoping that something will stick

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Oh stop, nobody is embarrassed because you don’t know how to read.

So quote a sentence from that article that claims that thet did own the home.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Pointman

What's so bizarre. The article literally says that they didn't own the home. You now see that you made a blunder with that article so you desperately trying to substitute it with another article. And if it will also turn out to mean something else, if not yhe opposite, you will randomly grab yet another article hoping that something will stick

“Blunder” “desperate” what are you even talking about? That was my first read of the article, where did I “blunder”.” You ignored 90% of it because it didn’t fit your worldview and hilariously misinterpreted the importance of the one line, and now you’re waving your hands around with “see?? see?? they didn’t own it!!!” like an idiot.

It doesn’t matter if they have the papers, the homes were built for those families and they lived in them. They were their homes. East Jerusalem is occupied territory and it is illegal to displace people in occupied territory, and could constitute a war crime.

“Oh well they didn’t have the papers!” is the dumbest possible way to excuse that. A literal child could understand the issue better than you have.

Now, read the NY Times article and prove you’re better than you’ve shown.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

“Blunder” “desperate” what are you even talking about? That was my first read of the article, where did I “blunder”.” You ignored 90% of it because it didn’t fit your worldview and hilariously misinterpreted the importance of the one line, and now you’re waving your hands around with “see?? see?? they didn’t own it!!!” like an idiot.

It doesn’t matter if they have the papers, the homes were built for those families and they lived in them. They were their homes. East Jerusalem is occupied territory and it is illegal to displace people in occupied territory, and could constitute a war crime.

“Oh well they didn’t have the papers!” is the dumbest possible way to excuse that. A literal child could understand the issue better than you have.

Now, read the NY Times article and prove you’re better than you’ve shown.

I'm still waiting for a quote from the original Al Jazeera article that claims - let alone proves - that they owned that house. If not, how can you call it a theft? How can you claim an "illegal displacement" if they were asked to either pay the rent or move out? Isn't it legal practice in all countries? It's not about papers and technicalities, they in fact never owned it. All they have is that they were allegedly promised to own it "after three years"and that alleged promise was made before 1967. I will not move to read another article until we are done discussing the first one.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I claimed that they were living in a house that they don't own and didn't pay the rent. Which is literally what is written in the article. I understand it hurts that pro-palestine crowd posted a link to a pro-palestine source, that actually proves Israel point. So you are scrambling to get out of this embarrassment.

You literally said stopped paying the rent. Stopped means someone started paying rent and then stopped.

You were making it seem like it was a landlord tenant dispute which is just total BS and u know it.