I doubt that the average person knows the difference between Hamas and Palestinians. Or cares. There are a lot of more pressing problems in the world.
If you don’t believe that the historic and current use of sporadic vengeance weapons being launched into Israel is going to help Hamas destroy Israel, you might want to pass your concerns along to Hamas. Maybe they’ll listen to you
and stop the rocket attacks against Israel?
The Israelis will then stop their current self-defense air-strikes and Whack-a-Mole tunnel hunt.
Without a doubt, using human shields. Because that is always and without exception an act of evil (yes, that is true when Israeli soldiers do it, as they on occasion do).
Whether killing human shields is justified depends on circumstances - that is, whether such killing is necessary and proportional response to a legitimate military aim.
To give an example - say a combatant chains civilians to a howitzer that they then use to bombard your city. Is their chaining of civilians to the howitzer “worse” than your blowing the howitzer up, chained civilians and all?
Odd focus? The word “united” is the adjective. It’s more that a simple issue of capitalization but using the German protocol, the representatives of the 13 colonies used “United Colonies” and “States of America” as the nouns, the chosen names of the 13 united Colonies. Using the same protocol, “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America”, suggests that the 13 States of America were united in a common cause. In 1776.
The Articles of Confederation were agreed to by Congress Nov 15, 1777 and ratified Mar 1, 1781. It mentions “the United States of America” as well as “the united States in congress assembled”.
The Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783 and ratified in 1784. Ratified by the appointed representatives of the 13 colonies united. Since the 13 Colonies had not yet created a central government to represent them, the 13 governments still governed the 13 States.
There was no need for the 13 states to separately ratify the treaty because the representatives attending the Continental Congress had been authorized to act for the individual Colonies in this matter.
Kidnapping, capturing, forcing people to stand in front of you (not “you” BrainGlutton) while you continue to endanger the lives of others means that you are responsible for their deaths as well as your own.
Without the Supreme Court, there’s a fair chance parts of AMERICA would still look like South African Apartheid. The fact that the judiciary defends minority rights–and that the nation listens–is a sign that Israel places a high value on civility and decency (even if they do not always live up to their own standards)
I think they are inextricably linked. You can’t say that history begins when Hamas does something bad. We could just as easily say that history started when Israel invaded Gaza.
You think there isn’t settlement activity anywhere? Or are you saying that Palestinians outside the west bank don’t really care about settlement activity in the west bank?:rolleyes:
You said “Israel doesn’t treat all Palestinians like shit because of what Hamas does.”
I was giving you one example of how Israel does in fact treat Palestinians like shit because of what Hamas does. It is one example out of many and if it wasn’t for the Israeli supreme court, Israel would be an apartheid state. But they are not an absolute bar to mistreatment of Palestinians and non-Jewish Israelis.
But I would have thought that Israel would know the difference between the two.
The Palestinians don’t listen to me. If I could get the Palestinians do what I wanted, I would have every Palestinian try to walk into Israel as the world watched to see what the IDF would do to millions of Palestinians men, women and children. Then I’d have everyone walk back to the west bank and gaza and then do it all over the next day and the next until the borders became meaningless or the IDF opened fire on unarmed civilians
I don’t think that’s true. America was ready for change when we got rid of segregation. We weren’t passing racist laws at the federal level and the nation was forcing its will on a racist subset.
First, yes, Egyptians are friendlier - Egypt has a peace treaty with Israel, for one.
Second, Egypt is an Arab country–or at least, moreso than (say) Pakistan (yes, I know that Egyptians sometimes dispute exactly how “Arab” they are). It would be a passing strange way to keep “Arabs” out of the country, to allow in Egyptians (and Jordanians!) but not Pakistanis.
The countries listed in your cite not all are Arab:
Of the 9 countries listed, three are not “Arab” - namely, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. [I throw in Libya as “Arab” even though it is a mix of berber and arab - as I am throwing in Egypt as “Arab”).
Yet several Arab countries are not on the list - such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the gulf states, and most notably, Jordan.
So if the accusation is that these measures are aimed at “Arabs”, they are going about it in a very strange manner.
Hell, is he saying that Israeli Arabs can’t get busy with other Israeli Arabs and instead their population has to dwindle without outside marriage?? There have been a lot of WTF moments with Damuri Ajashi in this thread, but that one was worth a chuckle considering that the number of Israelis who self identify as Arab have gone up over time (though their percentage of the population as a whole has gone down, mostly because of Jewish immigration).
There is a certain level of ignorance about a topic under discussion that is understandable, and there is a point at which ignorance of basic facts becomes damning. Egypt was expelled from the Arab League in 1979 for signing a peace treaty with Israel and recognizing its right to exist.
There have been a lot of WTF moments with Damuri Ajashi in this thread, but that one was worth a chuckle considering that the number of Israelis who self identify as Arab have gone up over time (though their percentage of the population as a whole has gone down, mostly because of Jewish immigration).