Israel declares war on Hamas

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by blankall

The problem is this talk of a way forward doesn't recognize the very large elephant in the room. Hamas is literally the organization that derailed and has prevented all peace talks. The Israelis and Palestinians were likely on the very of a comprehensive peace deal until Hamas, who's stated goal is to prevent that from happening took over.

Once again, if anyone can show how this supposed way forward works with Hamas in control, I'd like to hear it.

Exactly.

It’s like talking about the colour you should paint your walls while your house is on fire.

“So I’m thinking of an olive accent wall here in the living room, maybe we start after the kitchen stops burning”

Some people love talking about two things at once. Just have no idea what they are talking about.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Now ask Bagor why he thinks denouncing the attacks on Gaza as genocide for a 60th or 70th or 80th time in this thread will add anything at all to the discussion.

To which the same group feels the need to argue it’s not. Has anyone argued that Hamas shouldn’t be removed or eliminated? Feel free to quote the posts.

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Exactly.

It’s like talking about the colour you should paint your walls while your house is on fire.

“So I’m thinking of an olive accent wall here in the living room, maybe we start after the kitchen stops burning”

Some people love talking about two things at once. Just have no idea what they are talking about.

If you actually think that’s an even remotely logical comparable, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Imagine discussing how to secure long term peace going forward while a country is approaching short term peace in a way that makes long term peace less and less possible by the day.

[Harry Lime]

A few posters have made this thread unreadable. It's one of the few subjects where I can't get a quick overview of what's happening by coming to CP.

Or maybe this is what's happening. Entrenched sides that won't budge until everyone is dead and buried.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Now ask Bagor why he thinks denouncing the attacks on Gaza as genocide for a 60th or 70th or 80th time in this thread will add anything at all to the discussion.

Because it is.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

A few posters have made this thread unreadable. It's one of the few subjects where I can't get a quick overview of what's happening by coming to CP.

Or maybe this is what's happening. Entrenched sides that won't budge until everyone is dead and buried.

Define what you mean by sides.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Define what you mean by sides.

Side of bacon. Side of eggs.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Side of bacon. Side of eggs.

No. Don't deflect.
What do you consider to be the sides that you speak of?

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Bagor

No. Don't deflect.
What do you consider to be the sides that you speak of?

Deflect? You're the angriest person I've ever seen on here. I would say that you are on a side. The other side gets mushy, as there are people who are taking a hardline stance against Hamas, mixed in with people that know history and have seen this sort of thing before. The latter sort of people aren't even arguing against you, but there is no traction because history is unemotional, and the reaction in real time is emotion. They are just not compatible.

That's why this thread is unreadable. Arguments are occurring with no possibility of resolution, and in circles we go.

[Manhattanboy]

Saw this and thought it was funny: Rather than the Academy we should say it was Hamas that snubbed Margot Robbie for an Oscar so that feminists would condemn them.

[ignite09]

....

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Deflect? You're the angriest person I've ever seen on here. I would say that you are on a side. The other side gets mushy, as there are people who are taking a hardline stance against Hamas, mixed in with people that know history and have seen this sort of thing before. The latter sort of people aren't even arguing against you, but there is no traction because history is unemotional, and the reaction in real time is emotion. They are just not compatible.

That's why this thread is unreadable. Arguments are occurring with no possibility of resolution, and in circles we go.

Yes. Deflect. I'm simply asking you to describe the "sides" as you see it. But that appears to have triggered you.

Third time of asking. Are you able to describe the side that you believe me to be on? And the other side you speak of?

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Imagine discussing how to secure long term peace going forward while a country is approaching short term peace in a way that makes long term peace less and less possible by the day.

Please, lay out what you think would work, given the current situation.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Please, lay out what you think would work, given the current situation.

To be honest, you’re really not worth the time.

You think giving Palestinians a state is equivalent to choosing what wallpaper you want to put in your house and respond to serious questions with answers like “math.” You’re not a serious person and it would be probably better if you just took interest in the topic outside of this thread and just looked into what some scholars and experts have to say on the subject.

Even if they agree or disagree with what I think, I don’t care, just read something intelligent and come back with an opinion informed by something actually worthwhile so that you have something to add to the discussion.

[Doctorfever]

That’s what I thought you would say.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

That’s what I thought you would say.

See, I was actually expecting you to follow up with “You could just answer the question” or something like that, so this isn’t exactly how I thought you would respond, but it’s pretty close.

Thanks for proving my point.

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Yes. Deflect. I'm simply asking you to describe the "sides" as you see it. But that appears to have triggered you.

Third time of asking. Are you able to describe the side that you believe me to be on? And the other side you speak of?

I was trying to be nice to you. You are confrontational on every single post. If anyone says anything you don't like, you yell genocide and babies. You sir, are trolling this page, and it makes it unreadable.

This may not be intentional, as I think that you are genuinely upset by what it going on in Israel and Gaza, but you always shut down conversation.

I'm on the side of a readable thread, and you are on the other side. Perhaps change your posting style.

[Bagor]

Why are you getting so defensive over a simple request to clafify your post and define what you mean by sides? You talk about the quality of the thread but you've derailed it yourself by simply refusing to answer a simple question .

Yes I will continue to state the fact that babies are being slaughtered at a daily rate of circa 100/day. That genocide and ethnic cleansing is happening. Too bad that this triggers a few of you.

Lol. I'm trolling. And your response to a simple request for you to clarify your post is side of eggs. Sure?

Now. Are you going to stay on track and simply answer the question and explain what you consider the two sides that you state of to be? No idea what your issue is with that question.

[Southside403]

https://youtu.be/KRUv4dS7NLQ?si=CcJeSvdvP7-tOR-k
Female Israeli soldier raped

[Snuffleupagus]

Sides?

I'm on the side that says kill all savage religious terrorists at all costs before they get their lunatic hands on a nuke and screw the whole world up.

What side are you on Bagor?

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Sides?

I'm on the side that says kill all savage religious terrorists at all costs before they get their lunatic hands on a nuke and screw the whole world up.

What side are you on Bagor?

Thank you for taking the time to articulate your side.

I'm on half your side. Absolutely eliminate all savage religious or non religious terrorists. But absolutely not at all costs.

Not at the cost of hundreds of civilians being killed a day from deliberate indiscriminate bombing of innocents including children and infants. Not by the deliberate execution of innocents waving flags. Not by the killing of innocents through deliberate deprivation of basic human essentials such as food, water, medical supplies and shelter. Not by the deliberate destruction of schools, hospitals. places of worship, universities, cemeteries etc.
Basically. Not genocide. I'm sorry that this word triggers people but it's simply stating what is.

Basically I'm on the side of the ICJ ruling.

Take all measures to prevent acts of genocide. Far thing from at all costs