Good lads, got to love the IDF

[Heath]

“engaged reasonably in a detailed and robust manner”

By that, do you mean constant repetition in posts which are way too long.

“so I’m happy to comply with Heath’s diktat and ‘do one.”

But you keep coming back!!

It’s not just your opinions I disagree with. I also think you have a very high opinion of yourself and condescending.

Apologies for taking offence at supporters of mass murder.

[Gurnelista]

JI-hadi – just give over playing the victim and whining about how we’ll all miss you when you’re gone! You do give the impression you’ve had practice at this.

As for Bucksiron, he got so much stick and then cleared off because he was so obviously wrong and was shown to be wrong on every topic he posted about – Brexit, covid and herd immunity, privatization, the Daily Mail, the Tories in general, and of course global warming. The pomposity and humourlessness didn’t help, either!

If you can’t stand the heat… etc. etc.

[Siderite]

If only I was ambivalent or apathetic about the intentional mass murder of civilians by ways of pogroms, not the hugely sad case of war*. Then I might be a ‘goody’.

*And, no, that’s not cheering it on. However, no-one has given any reason as to how conflict could have been avoided, so I am left to assume that Israel should just accept a force trying to launch attacks on civilians with the intent of killing them.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Just Iron]

Had a secret bet that you’d turn up if there was a chance of scavenging a bit of cheap satisfaction, Gurney. What took you so long?
No need to press your point Heath. You’ve made sure that you’ve staked out the territory… either agree or be ridiculed and coerced. If Gurney or anyone else thinks this is ‘heat’ then, apart from making me laugh, it’s just a confirmation that presenting views that don’t chime with the mini consensus is a waste of time. Tolerance used to start where agreement ended. Not on this sight. Not in your world. You’re welcome to it.

[Deereyme66]

‘so I am left to assume that Israel should just accept a force trying to launch attacks on civilians with the intent of killing them.’

That’s the type of strawmanning you have frequently denounced over the years, and rightly so. No one has said that, no one is implying it, and I suspect no one thinks it. It’s a sad state of affairs when you and JI can’t simply accept indignation of a few posters on Bru, shared by many around the world, about the Israeli government’s and IDFs actions in response to an inexcusable and horrific act. And yes, I am fully aware of how much you have decried their approach.

[Siderite]

People might not see it that way, but it does come across that any opinion deviating from others just gets met with snide responses. Yes, I have responded that way, but it gets wearying after so long.

My position is that conflict was inevitable and justifiable after Oct 7th; I can’t see how it could be pretended that it could carry on with the previous norm after that. It would mean pogroms are acceptable, and no nation would accept that for its citizens, nor should it. Yes, this doesn’t mean that every military action by the IDF is justifiable and it hasn’t been. I have done a poor job in explaining that well before, but the sheer recognition of the justifiability (at least in my opinion) for conflict is enough. Still, there is a difference between unintended civilian casualties than an attempt to kill civilians; intent does matter. I have mentioned campaigns like the campaign against ISIS, because they did kill civilians, yet supporting such did not make people ‘cheering on mass murder’. The point of the comparison was to say it’s not inconsistent to say the US-UK-SDF-Kurd led actions against ISIS was justifiable despite civilian casualties, same with this. Of course it is bad, it is not ideal by a long stretch, but I don’t know what the alternative for reasons explained above. For that reason, I put the largest proportion of the blame on Hamas for the cause of this.

That said, I do agree that there needs to be a change in conduct from the IDF, especially since Hamas broke the last ‘pause’. There are fears of what Netanyahu will do with regards to a territorial grab, but international pressure (particularly from the USA) may well prevent that; I don’t think it’s room for complete pessimism in that regard. Though it’s no thanks to Netanyahu. I understand people will think differently and want the war to stop, I get it’s not all because of apologia for Hamas or whatever, I realise I could have previously explained that better. However, I do not see why differences in opinion need to be so snide. Yes, my posts can be long, yes, you may think JI is being condescending, but I think such charges are being made because there is a disagreement and I don’t think the comments from some are better than what they are charging against others. It’s just a messageboard, it’s not important, so I don’t see the need for snideness.

[Siderite]

Deereyme66 wrote:

‘so I am left to assume that Israel should just accept a force trying to launch attacks on civilians with the intent of killing them.’

That’s the type of strawmanning you have frequently denounced over the years, and rightly so. No one has said that, no one is implying it, and I suspect no one thinks it. It’s a sad state of affairs when you and JI can’t simply accept indignation of a few posters on Bru, shared by many around the world, about the Israeli government’s and IDFs actions in response to an inexcusable and horrific act. And yes, I am fully aware of how much you have decried their approach.

I do not detect such from Heath, and his own comments are bound to elicit a reaction, yet the finger wagging for overstepping the line is always one way. He was complaining about the conflict right from the off, even the need for such, whenever I tried to explain what the alternative was, I got no answer, only comments such as above about supporting mass murder. If he wants to make that incendiary charge, then I am not going to just be a sponge and accept it. Also, such incendiary charge is going to elicit an emotional reaction. It goes both ways and isn’t just about me having to react purely and perfectly every damn time, while everyone else gets to make whatever incendiary comment they like.

[Heath]

I have just read my first few posts on the bombing hospitals thread and don’t recognise any of what you claim in the past above.

[Siderite]

Just as I don’t recognise celebrating mass murder in any of mine. The deaths are all tragic, the IDF should do more, but it’s all been caused by Hamas. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if Hamas hadn’t tried to start something stupid on Oct 7th.

I am happy to be wrong. I am basing it on things like a lack of argument to what should have been done instead of conflict and blaming Israel for the ceasefire break, when that was already done by Hamas. It does come across to me as a bias. You have said the same to me, but fair’s fair in that I can give an opinion and such earlier comments will create the risk of a more emotional reply.

[Deereyme66]

Worth a watch

HARDtalk, Naftali Bennett – Former Prime Minister of Israel: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001tnjh via @bbciplayer

[Author]

Posts