I have not taken a side, but I think what the Israelis are doing right now is worse than what the Palestinian are doing right now.
That's pretty much my take on it.
I have not taken a side, but I think what the Israelis are doing right now is worse than what the Palestinian are doing right now.
That's exactly what the Israelis claim about the IDF.Is their stated intent to murder, or do they state that they are prepared to kill (and die) to achieve their aims? Does that difference mean nothing to you?
But doesn't it really come down to what does the IDF actually do vs what do the Palestinian groups actually do?That's exactly what the Israelis claim about the IDF.
Since spoil sport editor ruined my good thread.
Seems to me that this forum is mostly pro-Palestinian. Please explain why one should chose one side over the other?
As far as I can see both sides are acting rationally given their aims and the status quo. And so far as I can see neither side has any real 'claim' to the land other than the status quo - which at present favours Israel.
But doesn't it really come down to what does the IDF actually do vs what do the Palestinian groups actually do?
By 'sides', do you mean Israel & Gaza, or Kadima & Hamas, or something else?Neither side are killing as many as they could kill, but I think both sides are killing as many as they think they can get away with.
Which?Palestinian groups
Consensus is that what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians is disproportionate then, making them worse, amirite?
So can anyone explain to me why they should respond in a proportionate manner? If I were them I'd react in a highly disproportionate manner, that way you win better, surely!
Consensus is that what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians is disproportionate then, making them worse, amirite?
So can anyone explain to me why they should respond in a proportionate manner? If I were them I'd react in a highly disproportionate manner, that way you win better, surely!
Yes, it's a bitch that.
But doesn't mean that there's anything morally worse about an action just because it's bigger and has better explosions.

Which?
Those ones.... what do the Palestinian groups actually do ...

Well, if that was a standard response to gently hitting people in the street then there wouldn't be much casual hitting in the street![]()
So what you're saying is that every Palestinian is "killing as many as they think they can get away with" or supports a group that is "killing as many as they think they can get away with"? Wow.Those ones..
Oh look, David Copeland's got himself on the internet.But doesn't mean that there's anything morally worse about an action just because it's bigger and has better explosions.
We may not think it morally right to lauch free flight rockets indiscriminately, but Hamas don't have a great deal of choice. They don't have sophisticated weapons, they can't engage the IDF on anything like equal terms, the rockets are relatively easy to manufacture from heavily restricted supplies. I agree that the IDF have totally gone OTT over the whole issue. BUT I also believe that Hamas have deliberately used the tactic of indiscrimate rocket attacks to antagonise the Israelis into the actions that they have taken, irrespective of civilian casualties that would cause.I don't think it's morally right to launch RANDOM rocket attacks as Hamas are doing. I also don't see they have much other choice though, given the position they are in, I may well do the same.
Israel (goverment / IDF) is morally devoid. How can launching a few crappy home-made attacks by people in a desperate oppressed situation by "no worse morally" then the oppressors committing mass murder and destruction on an unbelievably horrific scale.
The logic your using suggests that if someone was to gently hit a guy in the street to tell him to back off, then the guy who was hit would not be "morally worse" if he pulled out a gun who blew the head off the guy and then went on to kill the guys family.
We may not think it morally right to lauch free flight rockets indiscriminately, but Hamas don't have a great deal of choice. They don't have sophisticated weapons, they can't engage the IDF on anything like equal terms, the rockets are relatively easy to manufacture from heavily restricted supplies. I agree that the IDF have totally gone OTT over the whole issue. BUT I also believe that Hamas have deliberately used the tactic of indiscrimate rocket attacks to antagonise the Israelis into the actions that they have taken, irrespective of civilian casualties that would cause.
Hamas as an institution is a symptom of the situation that the Gazan Palestinians are in. They came about because of the excesses of the IDF and the Israeli Government. The Israelis make a big thing about how Hamas is the root cause of the problem in Gaza, yet they only came into being because of Israeli strategy.
(not having a direct dig at you, just needing to let off steam and your post provides a convienient comment to respond)Yes, it's a bitch that.
But doesn't mean that there's anything morally worse about an action just because it's bigger and has better explosions.
Their strategy of offering to negotiate a ceasefire? Yes....and the Israelis are only attacking because of Hamas's strategy, yes?
What do you see as the other tactics they could have used?I also believe that Hamas have deliberately used the tactic of indiscrimate rocket attacks to antagonise the Israelis into the actions that they have taken, irrespective of civilian casualties that would cause.
As I pointed out at the beginning of that post, they don't have much choice. The only way they can inflict any serious casualties to the IDF is to draw them into the towns and cities.What do you see as the other tactics they could have used?

BUT I also believe that Hamas have deliberately used the tactic of indiscrimate rocket attacks to antagonise the Israelis into the actions that they have taken, irrespective of civilian casualties that would cause.
I agree, which is why I don't understand your 'BUT...'.As I pointed out at the beginning of that post, they don't have much choice.