AlKardai
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2022
- Messages
- 2,205
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
whilst they don't, it is good to remember that those who stood by neglectfully will receive their rightful recompenseYou think they care?
LMAO.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
whilst they don't, it is good to remember that those who stood by neglectfully will receive their rightful recompenseYou think they care?
LMAO.
Honestly, some of the language used in this thread is helpful to nothing and no one.
Half this topic is just diversions and people taking the bait of others. No discipline.
whilst they don't, it is good to remember that those who stood by neglectfully will receive their rightful recompense
Come on where is insult in the word homosexual?@LeGenD Here we go again.
Listen,at first your insults were kind of entertaining. I ignored them. But you progressively started insult me and others worse and worse. And in your weird posts,you keep mumbling insults all the time,becoming annoying.Come on where is insult in the word homosexual?
Those are respected citizens, you have the whole month to celebrate it.
Don't be Homo phobic.
Places picko
The same response as they would get if they stated that the sun goes up in the East instead of going up in the West, if they stated the latter for 45 years.In 1993 the PLO not only recognised Israel, but also the invented concept of the "right to exist". What did they get in return?
Are the Camp David Accords, or the aspirations for a sovereign Palestinian state, "respected" by Likud and its far right coalition? By the way do you know the origins of Likud?
You know exactly how you presented a few facts in order to promote a half truth, Either that or you are uninformed.Which part of what I said are you asserting is incorrect? Posting the link to a Wikipedia article without further elucidation or substantiation of your assertion is not exactly how a debate or serious conversation ought to be conducted.
A slightly different statement from your initial Nazi-esque dehumanising rhetoric against Palestinians writ large.
Yes, here trolls are allowed full freedom of speech, even though no Indian, Israeli, neo-Nazi, Zionist etc. forum would give Muslims or Pakistanis the same sort of freedom. But here we allow them to spread disinformation, abuse Islam, make fun of dead children, threaten, gloat or do anything they want. It ends up that 90% of the posts are fighting with trolls or refuting the junk they're posting,.
What are they? And can you give an example of my progressive increase of the insults?Listen,at first your insults were kind of entertaining. I ignored them. But you progressively started insult me and others worse and worse. And in your weird posts,you keep mumbling insults all the time,becoming annoying.
You are hiding bare facts and realities behind your flowery expose. The argument here is whether YOU believe ALL Palestinian civilians are "Human Shields" and I use the word "You" in singular not third person. I believe most Americans have humanity and know the difference between an oppressor and oppressed and a criminal and a victim of crime but being a Zion supporter you are turning black and white into shades of grey and clouding what are clear violations of internataional law and crimes against humanity into self degrading support of Israel.I think you have a misunderstanding of the concept of 'human shield'. Am going to use as neutral language as much as possible, and if I use 'you', I mean the word in the generic, not personal, sense. Let us see if whoever is behind the forum handle 'khansaheeb' is capable of the same courtesy. But I would not let my hopes up.
In wars, the concept of 'human shield' exists only if one side works somehow to avoid non-combatant casualties. The 'non-combatant' is the proper phrase to denote those who DO NOT want to engage in combat but since the phrase is commonly associated with 'civilian', I will use the common vernacular. If you chose not to respect that idea, then immediately the concept of 'human shield' comes into play. Whether you actually divert civilians into your battle calculus or not, is not yet the point. So if I am aware that you do not respect the idea of a 'non-combatant', I am immediately at risk in killing civilians in the course of combat. I do not know whether you will chose to use 'human shields' at point A or B or wherever, I just know that from point to point, I have to consider the possibility of civilians IN THE WAY of combat.
Now, how old is the understanding that soldiers and civilians are not the same and that there are conducts in war? Quite old. Here is one example:
...both Euripides and Thucydides were able to write of the "common customs (koina nomima) of the Hellenes," which,in regard to the law of war, may be summarized as follows:1. The state of war should be officially declared before commencing hostilities against an appropriate foe; sworn treaties and alliances should be regarded as binding.2. Hostilities are sometimes inappropriate; sacred truces, especially those declared for the celebration of the Olympic games, should be observed.3. Hostilities against certain persons and in certain places are inappropriate; the inviolability of sacred places and persons under protection of the gods, especially heralds and suppliants, should be respected.4. Erecting a battlefield trophy indicates victory; such trophies should be respected.5. After a battle it is right to return enemy dead when asked; to request the return of one's dead is tantamount to admitting defeat.6. A battle is properly prefaced by a ritual challenge and acceptance of the challenge.
It should be understood that what conduct was considered 'acceptable' then maybe 'unacceptable' today, but the main point is that across time, cultures, and continents, there is a consistency that some conducts are considered 'honorable' and 'dishonorable' for soldiers.
Note item 3: Hostilities against certain persons... What could be those 'certain persons'? Every culture sophisticated enough to separate soldiers apart from everyone else, that 'certain persons' class is obvious: non-combatants or civilians.
Israel charged that Hamas divert civilians into their battle calculus. Is that charge valid? If yes, then any civilian death is morally upon Hamas, even if the civilians were killed by Israeli soldiers in the course of battle. If no, then any civilian death is morally upon Israel. Simple as that.
How many ways could you divert civilians into your battle calculus? Many. From literally putting a civilian in front of you, to using a civilian's home to store weapons, to having bivouacs within sight of civilians. In any of these examples, there are ZERO degrees of moral separation between you and the civilian(s).
Soldiers have the right and the moral obligation to responds to attacks upon them, and if you use 'human shields', the tragedy of their deaths are on you. Simple as that.
US Delta Force will oversee “large quantities of nerve gas being pumped into Hamas tunnels, capable of paralyzing the bodily movement for a period of time between six and 12 hours"Delayed ground invasion part of campaign to obtain element of surprise in multi-pronged attack, source tells Middle East Eye
Delayed ground invasion part of campaign to keep element of surprise in multi-pronged attack, source tells Middle East Eyet.co
The difference is someone firing an assault rifle at civilian participants of a concert can be judged a war crime by any watcher of the event.Stop watching horror movies man. And how is it any different from airplanes bombarding civilian towers where children are crushed? Just because you can word up wild fantasies doesn't make the human suffering any less for people you're genociding.
New Recruit