Israel, Palestine and Iran

[OutByEaster?]

It's becoming increasingly clear that there is no situation in which any amount of loss of human life would prevent Israel from attacking a location where it believes one of its targets is present.

15,000 bombs dropped on an area that at it's longest stretches a length from Walsall to Coventry, 560 bombs per mile in an area that's twice as populated as Birmingham - if you can tell me a way to avoid civilian casualties while you do that then you're a smarter man than me - they aren't trying, they don't care.

It seems the people of Gaza are no longer able to count the dead, just trying not to join them is hard enough - but if it helps, Israel have now 'accidentally' murdered enough children to fill the Lower Doug Ellis Stand.

[Chindie]

Don't worry, someone will be along in a minute to let you know that nobody has actually counted how many dead kids there are, so we can't know how many there are, and for some reason that is important when presented with a really big pile of dead kids.

[Thug]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Do you have any evidence to help anyone come to their own conclusion? Or do you just believe one side of the narrative regardless then assume that to be true, as that doesn't appear to be a very objective. Poster is correct in saying it's almost impossible to determine what is the actual truth. Calling someone out for saying he's finding it really hard to work out what is truth from lies seems a bit daft if you ask me. It's not conducive to an intelligent discussion really is it?

You’re missing the point.

poster is indeed correct about it being almost impossible to know the truth, except where both sides report the same things.

IDF have accepted that they did indeed bomb this site.  (I can see that the term refugee camp is being disputed so I shall not use that, as it is irrelevant to my point.) 

evidence:

approx 1 minute: ‘can you confirm it was an Israeli attack…’ ‘yes I can’

Not disputed, right? Ok.

Now to my point in my response to OP.

Imagine op’s neighbours are drug dealers.

Lets even say the neighbour pops over to visit op sometimes.

On what planet would it be ‘ok’ to kill op, his family, his dog, destroy all his property because the neighbour decided to be next to op at the time?

Its irrelevant.

Thats why I said I hope that he is never a victim of collateral damage.  I sincerely hope I never have to read about how op was in a bank when a bank robbery was taking pace and the police bomb the entire bank to get the robbers.

I dread the thought of op and his family being blown to bits and us discussing on Villatalk whether the police were justified in bombing the bank and asking each other for evidence of what was the bank robber thinking.

Does that make it clearer?

 

 

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, Thug said:

You’re missing the point.

Nope, I was missing the invisible ink. None of that is what you said in response to the poster

[bickster]

26 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

wikileaks

Likely Russian intelligence asset, treat with caution.

[Thug]

3 minutes ago, bickster said:

Nope, I was missing the invisible ink. None of that is what you said in response to the poster

All of that was implied by my response.  Doesn’t take a lot of thought to work that out to be honest.

‘I’m trying to work out if mass murder was collateral damage or not’

’Well, I hope you’re never collateral damage.’

Im still not sure what part of that you took offence to.

[Thug]

9 minutes ago, bickster said:

Likely Russian intelligence asset, treat with caution.

Yh, stick to US sources.
Proper legit stuff.

 

[Stevo985]

46 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

15,000 bombs dropped on an area that at it's longest stretches a length from Walsall to Coventry, 560 bombs per mile in an area that's twice as populated as Birmingham - if you can tell me a way to avoid civilian casualties while you do that then you're a smarter man than me - they aren't trying, they don't care.

As J'oB said the other day, would Israel do this if Hamas were hiding in Israel as opposed to Gaza?

The inevitable collateral damage argument falls down when you think of it like that

[OutByEaster?]

35 minutes ago, bickster said:

Likely Russian intelligence asset, treat with caution.

The Israeli's have accepted the document is genuine and real - but describe it as a "concept paper".

Seems to be a concept they like.

[The Fun Factory]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's becoming increasingly clear that there is no situation in which any amount of loss of human life would prevent Israel from attacking a location where it believes one of its targets is present.

15,000 bombs dropped on an area that at it's longest stretches a length from Walsall to Coventry, 560 bombs per mile in an area that's twice as populated as Birmingham - if you can tell me a way to avoid civilian casualties while you do that then you're a smarter man than me - they aren't trying, they don't care.

It seems the people of Gaza are no longer able to count the dead, just trying not to join them is hard enough - but if it helps, Israel have now 'accidentally' murdered enough children to fill the Lower Doug Ellis Stand.

Isn't 40% of the population of Gaza children? Israel is giving Hamas more and more propaganda victories every time they carpet bomb the place.

[Jareth]

3 hours ago, Lichfield Dean said:

Sounds like this is another of those incidents that had multiple angles to it. The status of "refugee camp" is disputed by many because it's actually a city with buildings.

Then the Israelis are claiming they didn't strike the civilian areas, but an underground stronghold that unfortunately had lots of ammunition in it and blew up, collapsing the tunnels and taking down all those buildings, after having warned the citizens to leave.

Personally I haven't seen enough to work out what the truth really is here, but there definitely seems to be a bit more to it than simply "refugee camp blown up by Israel".

Is it actually a refugee camp? Did Israel give warning? Could the citizens have feasibly left even if so? Did Israel really target just a military installation and the rest was an accidental by-product? Did they know the destruction it would cause and do it anyway?

The propaganda and spin from both sides is almost impenetrable I'm finding.

I mean there's a huge crater, a shit load of dead Palestinians, and Israel are only firmly naming one high ranking Hamas terrorist that they've killed, apparantly a handful of henchmen were also killed - which sounds awfully fluffy coming as it does from the IDF and their world famous integrity on these matters.  But sure, lots to discuss after the event.

[ender4]

52 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

Isn't 40% of the population of Gaza children? Israel is giving Hamas more and more propaganda victories every time they carpet bomb the place.

That's a lot of kids!  Is that even possible to achieve?  Each adult couple are having like 8 kids each?  Is that just bad maths by me?

 

[Rodders]

3 minutes ago, ender4 said:

That's a lot of kids!  Is that even possible to achieve?  Each adult couple are having like 8 kids each?  Is that just bad maths by me?

 

Or just more adults generally deaded earlier than they should be too ofc. Or they've got to young adult level and escaped for better lives elsewhere as well I guess

[ender4]

There also seems to be a lot more foreign nationals and dual-passports holders in Gaza than i imagined.  

Why are there lots of Americans and Europeans in Gaza?  

[Chindie]

1 minute ago, ender4 said:

There also seems to be a lot more foreign nationals and dual-passports holders in Gaza than i imagined.  

Why are there lots of Americans and Europeans in Gaza?  

It happens a lot with diaspora populations.

Its also a population that's been the focus of humanitarian efforts for decades (despite Israel keeping killing them) so again you'll get a lot of international peoples and dual nationals there.

[Cizzler]

45 minutes ago, ender4 said:

That's a lot of kids!  Is that even possible to achieve?  Each adult couple are having like 8 kids each?  Is that just bad maths by me?

 

If there are 60 adults : 40 children, and each adult was in a couple - there would be 30 couples : 40 children, so 1.3 children per couple. 

Obviously some 18+ will be children of the adults - so above is over-simplified, but nowhere near 8 children per adult couple. 

Edited November 1, 2023 by Cizzler

[Thug]

3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said:

i've not seen the link to the amnesty report yesterday:

 

 

Amnesty international?  Meh. Who listens to these guys? Probably Russian/Iranian funded.

Just look at their previous damning reports about Israel.  Obviously biased.

Nothing to see here, move  along.

[ender4]

18 minutes ago, Cizzler said:

If there are 60 adults : 40 children, and each adult was in a couple - there would be 30 couples : 40 children, so 1.3 children per couple. 

I don't think that maths work but i can't work out why.  1.3 children per couple doesn't give you 40% of the population being children. 

The UK is around 2.0 children and we don't even have 25% of the population as children. 

[Rustibrooks]

The Rafah border has opened temporarily for the first time since October 7th

A bit of good news

 

 

Edited November 1, 2023 by Rustibrooks

[Xann]

Listen to the children. Listen to the bombs.