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

Deliberately targeting civilians, which the atomic bombs did, is a war crime

 

of course they don't agree
Nobody chooses to be a human shield

 

How were the atomic bombs deliberately targeted on civilians?

 

See here:

https://www.businessinsider.com/isr...e-siege-gaza-no-electricity-food-fuel-2023-10

I believe the "human animals " may be taken out of context and may have meant Hamas (some argue that). Nobody disputes that Israel was intentionally starving out Gaza though from what I can tell, though some are trying to make excuses for it:

See this thread here on the topic:

http://politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/do-you-defend-starvation-as-a-weapon-in-gaza.616519/

 

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were/are cities.
The US war planners deliberately targeted the cities, not military facilities nearby.

You could argue that the US war planners thought the Emperor of Japan was beholden to the people and would care about their destruction enough to surrender as they are destroyed (unlike Hamas), so they felt this was a horrifying but effective strategy (and it did work). Or you could argue that any demonstration of the powerful weapon, on any remote barely populated Japanese occupied territory would have sufficed.

 

Old news. Those restrictions were given immediately after October 7 and were rescinded ~ 10 days later. Been through that bogus argument many times before.

 

Something be done and then no longer done doesn't mean it wasn't done. Do you condemn it and applaud it being stopped?

 

There was no crisis. Hamas has plenty of food, fuel, and water stored in their underground facilities.

I condemn Hamas for their actions since 2007 and specifically Oct 7 2023 in this case.

 

Hamas may have. The Palestinian civilians didn't.

What was the purpose of blocking food and water from entering Gaza? If Hamas had plenty, then it wouldn't hurt them and would only hurt the civilians who are not Hamas. So was the intent to hurt those people?

Me too.

But you won't condemn Israel for blocking food and water? Why not? Does it really hurt your case against Hamas to do so?

 

Hundreds? You have no evidence for this.

 

The year is 2024. Ashkenazi Jews have been in Israel since the 1600s.

There have notable migrations of Jews from Europe to Palestine for hundreds of years:

Some Ukrainian Jewish refugees fleeing the pogroms of the Khmelnytsky Uprising of the mid-17th century also settled in the Holy Land. Then the immigration in the 18th and early 19th centuries of thousands of followers of various Kabbalist and Hassidic rabbis, as well as the disciples of the Vilna Gaon and the disciples of the Chattam Sofer, added considerably to the Jewish populations in Jerusalem, Tiberias, Hebron, and Safed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah#Pre-modern_aliyah

 

Liberal Zionists notably scoff at this observation while secretly wanting the genocide in gaza to continue so they can move to Israel, carefree

 

That's a lot closer to 100 years ago than 4000 lmao.

Duly noted that you didn't correct that ridiculous 4000 comment, no doubt because you want the myth of it being true to prevail but alas, iAm here, the truth seeker, to set the record straight and crush all deceivers with the power of the word

 

Soooo...you have no evidence. Its just a baseless claim, unsupported by any facts, news, etc.

 

Sooo, about liberal Zionists, what do you think about their support of genocide ?

Israelis are silent

 

How can I deny a baseless, nonsense claim with no evidence???

Do I also need to deny the claim that the Earth is flat and the sun is made of cheese?

 

You actually believe liberal Zionists support palestinians?!?!?!

Smh, prove it

 

When did I make that claim? I only have to support claims that I make.

 

So liberal Zionists don't support palestinians?!?!

Which is it?

 

"Most Zionists don't believe that God exists but they do believe that he promised them Palestine."

 

I never said a word about Liberal Zionists, either way.

 

Liberal Zionists believe that racism in America is wrong but perfectly ok in Israel.

Sound familiar?

Right, right, left

 

Prove it

 

This board is ample proof enough.

 

Seems you don't know #### about Liberal Zionism:

Kadima, the main centrist party during the 2000s that split from Likud and is now defunct, however, did identify with many of the fundamental policies of Liberal Zionist ideology, advocating among other things the need for Palestinian statehood in order to form a more democratic society in Israel, affirming the free market, and calling for equal rights for Arab citizens of Israel. In 2013, Ari Shavit suggested that the success of the then-new Yesh Atid party (representing secular, middle-class interests) embodied the success of "the new General Zionists."[194][better source needed]

Dror Zeigerman writes that the traditional positions of the General Zionists—"liberal positions based on social justice, on law and order, on pluralism in matters of State and Religion, and on moderation and flexibility in the domain of foreign policy and security"—are still favored by important circles and currents within certain active political parties.[195]

Philosopher Carlo Strenger describes a modern-day version of Liberal Zionism (supporting his vision of "Knowledge-Nation Israel"), rooted in the original ideology of Herzl and Ahad Ha'am, that stands in contrast to both the romantic nationalism of the right and the Netzah Yisrael of the ultra-Orthodox. It is marked by a concern for democratic values and human rights, freedom to criticize government policies without accusations of disloyalty, and rejection of excessive religious influence in public life. "Liberal Zionism celebrates the most authentic traits of the Jewish tradition: the willingness for incisive debate; the contrarian spirit of davka; the refusal to bow to authoritarianism."[196][197] Liberal Zionists see that "Jewish history shows that Jews need and are entitled to a nation-state of their own. But they also think that this state must be a liberal democracy, which means that there must be strict equality before the law independent of religion, ethnicity or gender.