Originally posted by Surtur
Ahh I see you edited to toss in an insult. Angry?
Originally posted by Surtur
So you're so angry now you feign ignorance? Dude, control that anger.
Originally posted by ESB -1138
Dude. Calm down. No reason to get pissed
Originally posted by ESB -1138
Holy crap. Calm down. Take that anger level down a few notches.
Originally posted by Surtur
Dude CHILL OUT.
Originally posted by ESB -1138😆
Ego much?? It's okay to admit everything doesn't revolve around you.
looks like surt's found a new buddy to ass slap. 🙁
Originally posted by Surtur
I'm all for this, after Hamas makes the switch to nothing but rubber bullets and water cannons first. And we go a year without a single incident from them that has anything but those things used. Then, sure.
Should people
A. Refrain from killing
B. Kill people because someone else, who isn't one of the people being killed, kills people
Choose b.
What Surt doesn't get, aside from Israel lowering itself to the level of terrorists, choosing B also plays right in the hands of terrorists who canuse this kind of action to inspire action based on the justified rage of Palestinians.
Thankfully, Surt isn't president.
Not so thankfully, someone who thinks like surt, is.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
What Surt doesn't get, aside from Israel lowering itself to the level of terrorists, choosing B also plays right in the hands of terrorists who canuse this kind of action to inspire action based on the justified rage of Palestinians.
The problem with this logic is that you would and always will "play in the hands of terrorists". Terrorists have the flexibility of approach and the initiative. Hell, the media and counties that sympathize with the Palestinians are playing into their hands as well.
Be firm and they use/manipulate/coerce innocents to be used as fodder, to garner sympathy for their side.
Be lenient and the terrorists will just send bombers at you while you are busy determining threats from decoys from innocents.
Israel, sadly, is doing the only play they have here without endangering their own soldiers/people.
It's the land grabbing that I don't agree with. But I do not disagree with their defensive policy.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
But I do not disagree with their defensive policy.
I'm all for this, after Hamas makes the switch to nothing but rubber bullets and water cannons first. And we go a year without a single incident from them that has anything but those things used. Then, sure.
Be lenient and the terrorists will just send bombers at you while you are busy determining threats from decoys from innocents.
The problem with this logic is that you would and always will "play in the hands of terrorists".
A. Killing protesters and giving reason for civilians to want revenge via terrorism
B. Incapacitating protesters, giving people less reason to want revenge via terrorism.
I assume you're not going to try and argue option 2 pisses people as much as option one does.
they have here without endangering their own soldiers/people
If you are going to use special privileges to kill others for your personal interest, then you shouldn't have those privileges. If a solider isn't willing to risk his life, then he shouldn't have the power to take another life.
Frankly, I'm disappointed in how many people on this thread are willing to side with figures who abuse their authority over those who protest against them, but I guess principles don't mean anything if they aren't convenient for the narratives we want to push.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Frankly, I'm disappointed in how many people on this thread are willing to side with figures who abuse their authority over those who protest against them, but I guess principles don't mean anything if they aren't convenient for the narratives we want to push.
I'm disappointed in people that believe protesting should include violence such as pipe bombs, fire bombs, burning tires to create a cover to rush and break border defenses, (lulz) attempting to hurl rocks at people with the intent to kill.
If Palestinians just walked to the border and held hands and sang you might have a different narrative but really you don't so stop.
The narrative you want to push is that the victims of this are the ones that carried out violent acts and were treated violently through deadly military force.
Snowman, you should consider reading what you respond to.
What I said:
You shouldn't kill when you can incapacitate
Snow's translation:
I'm disappointed in people that believe protesting should include violence
When you can form a relevant response, I'll consider responding.
Also, maybe you should respond to the actual argument, then my afterthoughts. Because the argument is what leads me to post the last sentences. You should also consider reading the posts making up this conversation so you understand the context of what you're jumping into.
Or you can just pull a surt, that works too.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Snowman, you should consider reading what you respond to.What I said:
Snow's translation:
When you can form a relevant response, I'll consider responding.
Did you know that many of the violent protesters were shot in the leg and are now crippled? Most of the shots were crippling shots, look at the casualties vs dead.
Don't respond with the intent of being a condescending dick unless you think that's how people really talk about issues in real life. So far you have failed.
Also, maybe you should respond to the actual argument, then my afterthoughts. Because the argument is what leads me to post the last sentences. You should also consider reading the posts making up this conversation so you understand the context of what you're jumping into.Or you can just pull a surt, that works too.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Surt logic:Should people
A. Refrain from killing
B. Kill people because someone else, who isn't one of the people being killed, kills peopleChoose b.
What Surt doesn't get, aside from Israel lowering itself to the level of terrorists, choosing B also plays right in the hands of terrorists who canuse this kind of action to inspire action based on the justified rage of Palestinians.
Thankfully, Surt isn't president.
Not so thankfully, someone who thinks like surt, is.
Okay, so kiddo now you're just trolling. Fighting back against people throwing molotov cocktails, planting landmines, getting physically violent, and trying to illegally breach your border is not lowering yourself to the level of terrorists.
Why do you even post?