Forum Replies Created
-
Without Iarael, there’d still be issues with Iran and Saudi, along with the conflicts arising between dictators and the people, as seen in Syria, Egypt, Libya etc.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing that Israel came to fruition, especially given the Christian and Islamic world’s persecution of such. If other states have an issue with it existing, I don’t think that can be blamed on Israel.
I admit that I do not know the ‘right answer’, but don’t think I can blame Jews for wanting their own state, especially when they migrated or were persecuted to go there.
1 user thanked author for this post.
They should understand the necessity of a reaction if so. 64 seems to struggle with this.
Like I have suggested, if Hamas gave one ounce of care for their civilians, maybe they shouldn’t have launched this pogrom, nor embedded themselves in civilians, nor roadblocked those fleeing. Israel are not setting out to deliberately kill civilians, as the order to evacuate demonstrated, so I cannot see it as ‘genocide’ any more than the bombing of Germany was during WWII. It’s not ideal, but how does Israel free hostages and protect itself from Hamas, who have signalled its desire to destroy Israel, without the risk of civilian casualties? My point was less about the difficulty of removing Hamas, more about the difficulty of an idealistic solution.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I think in this debate many lose sight of what started this, which was that Hamas decided to launch a pogrom specifically to kill civilians. None of what has happened would have happened without that. Now many Israeli citizens are kept hostage by the extremists who committed this.
It’s easy to pontificate, but what should Israel do? Do nothing? That is a signal for Hamas that this can work and they can do it again without consequences. Never mind the pressure to save the hostages from concerned Israelis and family or friends of the victims. To do nothing is unpalatable.
Then what can Israel do? How do they rescue hostages and protect themselves from an Islamist fanatical cult without military action? How do they commit military actions without deaths of civilians? Hamas have deliberately embedded themselves within society, placing their related ammunition stores and infrastructure near schools and hospitals. If they are to be removed, how is that addressed without casualty? Again, to ignore this allows Hamas to use resources to target Jews. No other country would be expected to allow themselves to be at risk of death.
Genocide is a very emotive term, but it also has a specific definition which includes intent to murder another ethnicity because of their ethnicity. It’s not simply about large number of civilian deaths of one ethnicity or nationality. Otherwise events like the siege of Sarajevo, the Irish famine, 9/11 etc could be classified as genocide. I do not see an intent from Israel to kill Palestinians. They have specifically told them to escape in order to avoid getting caught up in the conflict. If Israel didn’t do this, they’d be accused of genocide for maximising civilian casualties, yet this isn’t good enough. Seemingly doing nothing in response to mass murder and hostage taking is the only acceptable outcome for some. Hamas won’t entertain diplomacy without massive concessions, and why should Israel make concessions to a fanatical cult which wants Jews dead?
I am saddened by it, because it will mean dead Palestinians and suffering of them. I cannot see how Israel cannot react though. What Hamas undertook over a week ago was an act of war. Maybe, if they didn’t want Israel to engage in a war, they shouldn’t have been the aggressor. I would like to see NGOs deliver aid, but it has to go to the people, not be handed over to Hamas for them to pocket as they often do. Previous attempts to give them water pipes were useless, because Hamas dug them up to use as rocket launchers for Israel.
I think there’s a lack of understanding from some quarters as to what Hamas is. There is some understanding that they’re not just your idealised freedom fighter, but there’s still this jaded view that they must be reacting to Israeli aggression all the time. Yet, they’re not just that. They’re an Islamist cult whose aims towards Jews are not hidden; their charter makes it clear what they want to do with Jews. From the river to the sea is an explicit signal of their intention to destroy Israel. Anyone who thinks there can be peace in Israel with Hamas’s existence is kidding themselves. Hamas won’t be happy until Israel and its Jews are destroyed.
It’s easy for the hard left, like Rivkah Brown, Michael Walker, Aaron Bastani et al., to go gooey eyed over Hamas thugs spilling over the border to massacre civilians as part of some ‘resistance’ of the virtuous oppressed. However, this is a position of privilege which does not match with the reality of Hamas’s beliefs and actions. They are no better than the Nazis and have led Palestine to oblivion. For too long many in the Palestinian movement has apologised, obfuscated and dismissed concerns about them. They have allied with sympathetic speakers for years under the guise of resistance, swallowing their propaganda. What they have done is destroy any chance of Palestinian sovereignty, which I do support, because it has become entangled with Islamism.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I understand that a Christian will want others to share the same belief. From my perspective, I have considered the possibility of a god over time and I don’t consider it to be a hypothesis with evidence at the moment. I guess you could say it’s a scientific mindset, but that also means I cannot fully discount it. I agree with Dawkins in his assessment of there being a thing as an ‘agnostic atheist’, and that probably is the best fit for me in that it means that you don’t think there is a god, but would be open to one if the evidence appears. Just as with other ideas. I don’t think it’s a certainty in that I don’t think many can say they are 100% certain with no doubt from either side.
Atheism for me is just a description for my stance on gods. I have always ummed and arred over humanism, but recent events have made me set more trust in calling myself a humanist. It’s more important to me than setting my stall as an atheist, and don’t think that should be some steadfast position as some take (see the new atheism page on reddit for the people I am referring to).
I do suspect calling us friends will have bpg smirking away again.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The Iraqi guy i follow on IG who does funny nature videos in broken English just posted a more compassionate and well written statement then like 90% of activists and journalists I’ve seen. pic.twitter.com/z9S4GmW30C
— Danny Gold (@DGisSERIOUS) October 9, 2023
Going against the sick scenes from the displays, celebrating death and terror, I will share a more uplifting and humane message from an Iraqi. I hope people like him raise their voices in the coming days.
1 user thanked author for this post.
So do many players, but he had that pizzazz, skill and talent which made things memorable.
3 users thanked author for this post.
I agree that this was good and credit him for his effort. I think in terms of fan unity he can improve. It will probably ease off once the dust settles. There was anger towards Turnbull after his comments at the end of Swann, and I wasn’t happy about it, yet most have moved on now. Myself included. It will be the same with Simon if he knuckles down, doesn’t aggravate fans as before and does his job as director without fuss.
I don’t dislike him or think it’s beyond him. I understand that he has done some good. I realise that many supported Hilton. However, they weren’t so intertwined, and many have apologised and recognised the situation. Credit to MK Iron, and others, who have done this. There’s no point holding grudges for backing Hilton when fans thought it was in their best interest, and recognise that con men have a knack for fooling people. I just wish Elliott made some effort in saying sorry after shoring Hilton up with his presence and I do think it was for his own interests.
Anyway, that will be all. Nothing new to say. I move on and look forward to football under the new owners. I think, in time, these niggles will abate.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Players like him are what makes football. Quality. Already my favourite player. Biggest hero since King Kev.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I don’t know why we need to bring Hitler into it. My whole point has been that we are fans, no matter the view of those involved with the club. We can be united in respecting that fans have differing opinions, but want what’s best for the Iron. That was missing from one side, in particular, with Hilton and it wasn’t this site or Hilton sceptics, by and large.
As for Elliott; I have said more than once that I have no issue with him as director. He’s not immune from critique and critique doesn’t mean hyperbolic arguments about wanting him out.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I have no qualms against Elliott on the board, hope he succeeds and has learned his lesson in siding up to questionable figures. I think aggrieved feelings were somewhat inevitable after months of derision for so much as questioning Hilton, including from Elliott himself. In time it will probably fade away.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Some are really showing their agendas now:
“And as you might have seen, there was some sort of rave or desert party where they were having a great time, until the resistance came in electrified hang gliders and took at least several dozen hipsters” Speeches held at the ‘All Out For Palestine’ protest outside the Israeli… pic.twitter.com/JXLpPIvW6A
— Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) October 8, 2023
The claims that they are not anti-Semitic, just opposing Israel, look more hollow as they celebrate the deaths of civilians enjoying themselves.
1 user thanked author for this post.
It was Swann who caused the issue that necessiatated Sharp having to stump up the money in the first place.
That’s not really connected to my point. Awaywego is saying Sharp isn’t sharp for dealing with Swann and getting burned, yet he wasn’t burned by Swann in this.
2 users thanked author for this post.
It wasn’t Swann who caused the issue in Sharp not getting the money back.
1 user thanked author for this post.
