Zobel said:

---

There is a false equivalence being made between correctly noting there is an ongoing cycle of violence and suggesting moral equivalence between IDF activity in Gaza and Hamas' terror attack. Perhaps if you were a deep, sophisticated thinker such an elementary linguistic slight of hand wouldn't have slipped past you so easily.

---

Very bold, principled neutrality via word salad with a side of condescension, without any substance. Perfect orthodox Sunday.

Don't ever take a side.

You can't cry about me repeating your own insult word for word.

Did I use too many syllables? I can try to rewrite it in one beat words.

It is not right to say that right now fight with Jew and bad brown guys is the same thing as the big old and new and now fight with Jew and bad brown guys. All the fights with both sides do not solve the big fight with both sides. Each new fight is just the next fight in the big fight. You can say the new fight is bad and also say the big fight is bad, and all fights that don't fix the big fight are bad.

Right. Principled neutrality is a straw man, and that straw man says that IDF attacks in Gaza are the same as Hamas terror attacks - a point literally no one is making.

I was just on YouTube looking at satellite photos of thousands of Palestinians lined up waiting at the border to be let out. They are in a desperate situation.
Many fled from the north of Gaza when the Israelis attacked Hamas there, and as of this last Thursday received warning from the Israelis that an attack on Hamas in south Gaza is starting.
I would suggest that Hamas could offer to surrender, including giving up all hostages, but I do not think they want anything more than martyrdom.

Rongagin71 said:

---

I was just on YouTube looking at satellite photos of thousands of Palestinians lined up waiting at the border to be let out. They are in a desperate situation.
Many fled from the north of Gaza when the Israelis attacked Hamas there, and as of this last Thursday received warning from the Israelis that an attack on Hamas in south Gaza is starting.
I would suggest that Hamas could offer to surrender, including giving up all hostages, but I do not think they want anything more than martyrdom.

---

There is no reason to impute some sort of extrinsic humanitarian interest to Hamas, outside of message board apologists. They are still, to this second, holding women/children/elderly as hostages to barter with.

Zobel said:

---

There are people in this thread saying that any Palestinian who supports Hamas is a valid target and who have advocated for ethnic cleansing and soft danced around genocide using the Amalekites as an example. -> motte

Everyone agrees that civilian causalities occur as collateral damage in war. It is a tragic reality. No one is arguing that point. No one here supports Hamas or terrorism -> Bailey

The side I choose to respect is the basic principles of the value of all human life as created in the image of God and the teaching of the Church with regard to warfare. Including, incidentally, the law given for war in the Torah that ostensibly the Jewish people in Israel also hold as sacred.

I don't support either side in this conflict. The whole thing is evil.

---

So principled and brave.

And you've conveniently ignored all of the war crimes documented at length in the thread by moslems, as well as candiaggie's unsurprising assertions relative to this somehow being related to the crusades/constantinople.

Hilarious.

So… nobody has imputed extrinsic humanitarian interest to Hamas? Can you even explain what you think that means?

You keep conflating the events of the past few weeks with the conflict as a whole. They're not the same thing.

Zobel said:

---

So… nobody has imputed extrinsic humanitarian interest to Hamas? Can you even explain what you think that means?

You keep conflating the events of the past few weeks with the conflict as a whole. They're not the same thing.

---

What are you so stuck on about my response earlier, even? I think it's clear that a suggestion Hamas surrender in the (humanitarian) interest of the population of Gaza to avoid bloodshed is not in their DNA, and implies some sort of set of values/calculus that is logical to an external viewer, as a suggestion, but in reality is not their own.

You seem to not like having your banal 'neutrality' in the conflict pointed out as clearly immoral/wrong, while objecting to any such criticism as stupid, or needing 'context' in the 'conflict as a whole,' which most of us see as good vs. evil, simply put, and taking Hamas/Gazan's actions at…their own words, as repeated so many times, without a need to provide 'context' to O7 or the response since.

Touchy, touchy. But you do you, and keep deflecting/seeking 'context' to excuse "Palestinian" violence and hatred, behind some sort of veil of intellectual arrogance.

I'm not stuck on your response, you posted a phrase that didn't have any clear meaning. And even so - I never did that, so it is another bit of nonsense.

Gazans and Hamas, Palestinians and Hamas, are not the same thing, any more than Israelis and Likud or Americans and Democrats are the same thing.

I don't support Hamas, and at this point you are either unwilling or unable to accept that. The post you quoted it outlined it clearly.

Just a reminder of why Israel's is doing what they're doing....

⚠️ New footage from October 7 shows Hamas terrorists executing two Israeli women near Kibbutz Alumim.

Partygoers had arrived in the area after fleeing Hamas's attack on the rave near Re'im. The clip shows the terrorists surprising the Israelis after arriving from within Alumim.… pic.twitter.com/TLRKeVTIBN

— Jewish Breaking News (@JBreakingNews) November 20, 2023

This conflict has brought more media attention to how Palestinians in the West Bank are treated, where there is no Hamas. The settlers there are even trying to push out the non-Palestinians, such as the mostly Christian Armenians.

https://peacenow.org.il/en/attempt-for-the-establishment-of-a-new-settlement-in-the-armenian-quarter-of-the-old-city

There was video of an IDF soldiers throwing a flash bang grenade into a mosque. Oddly enough he was probably young and too stupid to know not to have your buddy film it, let alone put it on social media.



Radicalism -

Today, Monday, Biden said it may be possible to get 50 hostages released.
The Israelis are arguing among themselves if they should even talk to a man that many consider to be a psychopath.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/mastermind-behind-hamas-attacks-personally-handling-hostage-negotiations/ar-AA1kfxrX?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=fe6650be4c8c4dc8b660e9d6143c7a5b&ei=14

Do people really not know that everyone acknowledges that the the relevant land was called "Palestine" before 1948 under the British Mandate, and that both Jews and Arabs, but more often Jews, were referred to as "Palestinian" then? I keep seeing anti-Israel account pointing to… https://t.co/dJyZK1EkuJ

— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) November 21, 2023

Quote:

---

This conflict has brought more media attention to how Palestinians in the West Bank are treated, where there is no Hamas.

---

I guess they didn't get the memo.

#Hamas Threatens To Repeat #October7 Attack In Or From #WestBank – Audio of report here https://t.co/OGAOoD34uB #MEMRI pic.twitter.com/RIaFEUbbdl

— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 20, 2023

Initial video I posted on thread had one of them saying it was all justified and they will do it again. And a good part of the world and posters on this board thinks there should be a ceasefire.

You can't have a ceasefire with someone that has a single goal of annihilating you.

nortex97 said:

---

Quote:

---

This conflict has brought more media attention to how Palestinians in the West Bank are treated, where there is no Hamas.

---

I guess they didn't get the memo.

#Hamas Threatens To Repeat #October7 Attack In Or From #WestBank – Audio of report here https://t.co/OGAOoD34uB #MEMRI pic.twitter.com/RIaFEUbbdl

— MEMRI (@MEMRIReports) November 20, 2023

---

I don't get it. Hamas says lots of things. Doesn't mean it's true, or possible. Can supporters of Hamas pop up in the West Bank, sure. But they can pop up in Israel as well. They can pop up in Egypt, or Jordan. Maybe next thing they'll say they'll launch another Oct 7 from Antarctica.

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Do people really not know that everyone acknowledges that the the relevant land was called "Palestine" before 1948 under the British Mandate, and that both Jews and Arabs, but more often Jews, were referred to as "Palestinian" then? I keep seeing anti-Israel account pointing to… https://t.co/dJyZK1EkuJ

— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) November 21, 2023

---

Is this supposed to be a "gotcha" moment? I don't think it matters what was called what. Plenty of zionists argue that there was no such thing as Palestine, the point of posting that old picture is to show that it indeed was a place.

Doesn't really matter who was called what. Most Palestinians (whether they be Muslim, Christian, or Jew) are actually semites. In fact Palestinians that have lived there for generations are more semitic than most of the European Jews that migrated back to Israel after 1948. We still use the term anti-semitic to refer to bigotry against Jews, not actual semites.

Point being, we can call them whatever, but there are still two classes of people in Israel - Jews and non-Jews. And each class has different rights. And there is a constant effort to push more and more Jews out of the country, and eventually take all land that Palestinians currently live on.

---

The Zionist argument that I heard went like this...
The Romans knew that the Jews and Philistines were traditional enemies so after defeating the Jewish Rebellion, the Romans named the area Palestine as an insult to the Jews who were largely dispersed.
This Palestine name was not used after the Roman Empire fell, and almost forgotten until after WW1 when the British started using it to describe their area of control.
There were still, and always had been Jews in the area, so it was natural for European Jews looking for a country of their own to flock to the area after WW2.

Rongagin71 said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Do people really not know that everyone acknowledges that the the relevant land was called "Palestine" before 1948 under the British Mandate, and that both Jews and Arabs, but more often Jews, were referred to as "Palestinian" then? I keep seeing anti-Israel account pointing to… https://t.co/dJyZK1EkuJ

— David Bernstein (@ProfDBernstein) November 21, 2023

---

Is this supposed to be a "gotcha" moment? I don't think it matters what was called what. Plenty of zionists argue that there was no such thing as Palestine, the point of posting that old picture is to show that it indeed was a place.

Doesn't really matter who was called what. Most Palestinians (whether they be Muslim, Christian, or Jew) are actually semites. In fact Palestinians that have lived there for generations are more semitic than most of the European Jews that migrated back to Israel after 1948. We still use the term anti-semitic to refer to bigotry against Jews, not actual semites.

Point being, we can call them whatever, but there are still two classes of people in Israel - Jews and non-Jews. And each class has different rights. And there is a constant effort to push more and more Jews out of the country, and eventually take all land that Palestinians currently live on.

---

The Zionist argument that I heard went like this...
The Romans knew that the Jews and Philistines were traditional enemies so after defeating the Jewish Rebellion, the Romans named the area Palestine as an insult to the Jews who were largely dispersed.
This Palestine name was not used after the Roman Empire fell, and almost forgotten until after WW1 when the British started using it to describe their area of control.
There were still, and always had been Jews in the area, so it was natural for European Jews looking for a country to be their own to flock to the area after WW2.

---

That is true. In the Bible the land is referred to Israel or Judea or a region. I have never seen Palestine. But if your Bible has a map of biblical times I have always seen it labeled Palestine. That is just my personal observation and have not done a big review on all biblical publications.

I dunno, I always learned that it was a term used to refer to semitic peoples, which originate from that area.

" a member of any of the peoples mentioned in Genesis 10:2131 as descended from Shem, one of the sons of Noah, traditionally interpreted as including the Hebrews, Aramaeans, Assyrians, and Arabs. Subsequently also: a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language."

"Semitic people or Semites is an obsolete term for an ethnic, cultural or racial group[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people#cite_note-FOOTNOTELiverani1995392-2][2][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people#cite_note-Lutz-3][3][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people#cite_note-Pope-4][4][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_people#cite_note-Gl%C3%B6cknerFireberg2015-5][5][/url] associated with people of the Middle East, including Arabs, Jews, Akkadians, and Phoenicians. The terminology is now largely unused outside the grouping "Semitic languages" in linguistics."


Right. It's not a denying of the existence of a Palestine, they say there neve existed a Palestine like we would refer to in modern terms as a country. Which is true. But if you just google "Palestine never existed" or something like that, you'll have plenty of people arguing that the concept of Palestine is new, as if there was never a Palestinian territory at all. The US has multiple territories, some of which were always countries, some of which never have been, and some of which became countries at some point. Doesn't mean they didn't exist. If that makes sense.

Really, the issue isn't as you posited at all;

Quote:

---

Right. It's not a denying of the existence of a Palestine, they say there neve existed a Palestine like we would refer to in modern terms as a country. Which is true. But if you just google "Palestine never existed" or something like that, you'll have plenty of people arguing that the concept of Palestine is new, as if there was never a Palestinian territory at all.

---

First, google always will return whatever query supports the left.

Second, the historical creation of a "Phillistine" land for a people long gone is just an artifact of Roman history of subjugation. Why we should pretend some notional combined land including jews and Arabs should be ruled jointly is a mystery just as why we shouldn't look to when the Jews conquered Jaffa in the 800 BC era.



Ultimately, the jews though lost the final battle for the temple, were expelled for a time again, and today there is the 'al aqsa mosque' built on it. Israel was lawfully established after the Holocaust, and paid for the land sold to them, and have a right to exist on that small plot of land in the Middle East from which they have not been exterminated by muslims, imho. It's not based on genetics, or anything but what seems like a 'rightful' cause.

Macarthur said:

---

chap said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

You don't have to convince anyone here that Hamas is bad.

---

I think there are some folks here that need convincing.

Plenty of examples of people going on and on about how bad Israel is. Then finally at the end of a post they might throw in "well uh, you know, Hamas is bad too".

---

no, some of us don't equate all palestiiians w Hamas

---

Not sure what that had to do with my post?

Show me anyone here that has supported Hamas.

If anyone posted outright support of terrorism here it would have been deleted,
but I do not believe it has happened.