IDF STATEMENT "No malice in the killing of the 3 hostages"

Thanks for the links. I don't see anything in either of them that convinces me Nettanyahu actively pushed Hamas into power over the PLO.
But I did find the below from your second link above and it makes pefect sense and echoes what I wrote above:

This is how both Nettanyahu and Hamas maintain power, whether they plan it or not. Both need to go.

 

Like I've said all along, both Hamas and Bibi is to blame. It does not in ANY way justify Israeli oppression of civilians, and their current slaughter of them. Unlike you, I am not rooting for either side, except for the innocent civilians being killed. Stopping the killing of civilians is infinitely more important than killing hamas. If killing Hamas is the only way to get to Hamas, it is better that Hamas is removed from power politically and through diplomacy rather than military means.

A military solution is literally impossible, as the more bombs that fall, the more radicalized muslims there will be, not to mention bring in more and more foreign fighters. That should be obvious by now, both through Israel's history, and the history of our own wars after WW2. Some morons seem to think we can defeat insurgent groups through WW2 tactics, which is why we have lost every war since WW2. Those tactics simply do not work when you are dealing with indigenous insurgencies and similar conflicts.

 

I totally agree. Good find.

 

Note, that this is also what AFM has been doing in this thread, pointing at the hardline politics of Hamas, and using it to excuse the bad behaviours towards Palestinian Civilians of Nettanyahu's regime.
Yes, AFM, the nasty parts of the Hamas charter can and have been used as Israeli propaganda, by many, including yourself here in this thread.

 

The nasty parts of the Hamas charter? You call genocidal directives and destruction of Israel nasty parts? Or hardline politcs?

Hamas has been adhering to irs charter of death and destruction. That is the truth.

 

BS on your part without documentation.

 

why not?

 

Not if they're all dead

 

Because we are not murderous a**holes. I know, I know, you've said multiple times you are fine with genocide. Most people are not, myself included.

 

I have never heard anyone say that they are fine with genocide except for Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas.

 

Most of us are not murderous sociopaths. Nor would I ever want to be.

 

Admitting that you believe FDR, Truman, Churchill, Stalin, and their military high commands should have been executed as war criminals is an extreme point of view.
Would you care to reconsider?

 

Sounds like Dayton3 is perfectly fine with it.

 

Based on what that he has said?

 

So, is it your position that FDR, Truman, Churchill, Stalin, and their military high commands should have been executed as war criminals?

 

Yes.

 

So, why did you say we won, when clearly we did not? It doesn't matter one bit who was in charge when we lost. The bottom line is we gained nothing from our invasion and occupation of Iraq. Iraq had no interest in what we wanted to turn them into. What they wanted was to be left the hell alone.

 

Correction:

Anyone who thinks that the political and military leaders who defeated Nazi Germany, the Empire of Japan and Fascist Italy to end World War II should have been executed for war crimes is on the very extreme end of the spectrum. It certainly undermines their credibility as critics of Israel's war against Hamas terrorists.

 

Wow! You're defending the murderous ******* Stalin and his Katyn Massacre?

Care to reconsider?

 

There has been a lot about self determination with regard to the British Mandate region which was partitioned by the United Nations in 1947. First election in Israel was held in 1949. Recall that in 1948 a civil war initiated by the Arabs living in the new state of Israel was followed by an attack on Israel by five Arab countries. This war was lost by those Arab countries and a new partitioning of the area was agreed to as part of the 1949 armistice. Recall also that many original Arab residents of 1947 Israel left being assured by the five Arab countries that they could return after the Arabs had won the 1948 war.


The first election in Israel was held in 1949 after the armistice. Approximately 438 thousand votes were cast resulting in the Mapei party winning 46 seats. In 1947 the population of Israel consisted of 630,000 Jews and 1.3 million non Jews. After the 1948 war and exodus of Arabs from Israel the population of Israel consisted of 717 thousand Jews and 156 thousand non Jews. Thus by Arabs starting a civil war and then Arab nations starting an attack on Israel and the simultaneous exodus of 1.15 million non Jews from Israel Arabs in Israel in 1947 lost any chance of self determination in the resulting Israel of 1949. As Alanis Morisette famously said “Isn’t it ironic”.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israeli-electoral-history

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.or...h-population-of-israel-palestine-1517-present

 

For example ......

 

590, 592, and comments in other conversations that I will not search for right now, basically saying that he would be just fine and even prefer it if every man, woman and child Palestinian was wiped out or removed from Gaza and Israel take the whole place over. He favors such an outcome.

 

That’s not what was stated in those posts.

 

Ok. He'd probably disagree with you.

 

That is not an excuse for Israel to starve out, indiscriminately kill or otherwise abuse civilians, no matter how many times you point at it.