MovieChat Forums > RustyShacklefurd > Replies
RustyShacklefurd's Replies
You're just completely ignoring the actual issue I brought up here. After 5 months of war, tens of thousands dead, thousands of buildings destroyed or damaged and with Gaza mostly occupied by IDF troops, 71% of Gazans now believe the Hamas attack was all worth it. It disproves the claim that what they're going through is completely unbearable suffering. You claimed yourself here in an OP title that it's similar to the Holocaust. This poll proves that's total nonsense because no group of people could go through anything like the Holocaust and then be able to defeat in battle the perpetrator of such an enormous genocide. The poll proves the absurdity of people all over the world panicking over the situation in Gaza when 71% of Gazans believe that the action that directly led to this catastrophe was actually the right one. The people of Gaza are just insane.
Everything you tell me here is just the usual combination of Keelai lies and idiocy. Hamas is NOT fighting for justice or basic human rights. It's fighting for Islamism and the total subjugation of Jews. I already explained that to you numerous times. That you have to repeatedly ignore what I tell you about Hamas just shows that you damn well know you're completely wrong about what you say the Palestinians are fighting for.
Your comparison of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to Star Wars is completely idiotic. Star Wars is a sci-fi space opera. It's not reality and doesn't come anywhere close to approximating it. Everything that happens in Star Wars is determined by the Force, which doesn't exist in the real world. The Rebel Alliance won because of the Force. And the rebels' victory at the end of Return of the Jedi was just temporary. Eventually, the First Order came along and replaced the Empire. The First Order was eventually defeated but another evil military force involved with the Sith could one day come along to try to reconquer the galaxy, depending on if Disney does another sequel trilogy.
People fighting for a just cause don't always win. The initial Muslim empire is a perfect example. The non-Muslims who justly fought to resist the evil Muslim colonialist invaders in the Middle Ages nearly all lost. The Spaniards were an exception. The Native American tribes that resisted the Europeans and European-Americans all lost as well. Even if you were right about this then it means Israel will win. The Israelis are fighting for survival. They have nowhere to retreat to. On the other hand, the Palestinians can always just retreat to the surrounding Arab countries like they did in 1948.
Telling me I "don't understand basic history" just jinxes you. Every single time you've told me that you've just been completely moronic and completely wrong. Israel hasn't lost anything. The "2-state solution" is impossible unless the IDF completely defeats Hamas in Gaza. Even then the "2-state solution" would be nowhere close to "coming":
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/israel-middle-east/articles/two-state-delusion
The Al Aqsa Intifada just pushed the "2-state solution" further away instead of bringing it closer. Why the hell would the 10/7 attack be any different? International pushes for the "2-state solution" only help the political forces in Israel that vehemently oppose it:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/israel-middle-east/articles/biden-scheme-for-palestinian-state-strengthens-netanyahu
Stop being a lazy bum and actually read these articles. You'll actually learn a lot about the political realities in Israel.
You're talking about Syria Palaestina. That was just a Roman province. It ceased to exist centuries ago. It was never its own country. But since 1948, it's been the State of Israel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel#/media/File:Israel_-_Location_Map_(2012)_-_ISR_-_UNOCHA.svg
You <i>still</i> haven't answered my question. <i>In the context that there's only 32 Jews among the 4 Arab countries bordering Israel and next to one of those countries is Saudi Arabia, which is 830,000 square miles and completely bans non-Muslims</i>, why would it actually be so terrible if the Jews kept the entire land of Israel?
Remember, in order to properly answer my question you have to <b>actually address</b> the <b>important context</b> I included in the question.
Don't just be a total coward and run away from the question.
You really want me to leave you alone? Then you should stop lying about everything! You should stop completely distorting facts, stop completely ignoring the uncomfortable facts I tell you, stop being a complete moron, admit it when I prove you wrong about something and have some humility. Don't whine about me not leaving alone if you don't do those things.
You said that Israel is 'carpet bombing' Gaza. That's completely untrue. I can't help that. How do you know that Israel is bombing Gaza without any regard for civilians? It's not just randomly dropping bombs. It aims at specific targets one at a time with the intent of precisely hitting them. Did you know the number of bombs Israel has dropped in Gaza is more than the number of Gazans killed? What does that tell you? I can't tell you where Palestinians in refugee camps are supposed to go. Hamas didn't plan this war with the well-being of the civilian population in mind.
I never denied that civilians are dying in Gaza. I merely doubt the number of civilians that have reportedly died and the reported demographic distribution of men, women and children among the civilians that have died. And as far as I know, the claim that babies were purposely beheaded by Hamas on October 7th hasn't been definitely proven false. Dead babies were found after the attack who were missing heads. It's not known in any instance whether the heads were removed before or after death or how they were removed, whether intentionally or incidentally:
https://themedialine.org/top-stories/evidence-on-display-at-israels-forensic-pathology-center-confirms-hamas-atrocities/
And what has Boromir actually done wrong in Gaza? You don't know. You're just making assumptions. So what the hell does it even mean for this other Israeli soldier to oppose what Boromir "does" in Gaza?
Huh? I'm confused. The article you link to says the opposite of your title.
After all the terrible things you blame Christians for, why do you care if Christians are persecuted?
<blockquote>Christians killed 6 million Jews, created the Atlantic slave trade, committed genocide against indigenous Americans and lynched thousands. Most persecution by Christians against Jews, Blacks, Natives, women, etc. continues today. Google Tree of Life and Buffalo store massacres. White Christian Nationalists force 13-year-old rape victims to have babies.</blockquote>
<blockquote>Holocaust. Spanish Inquisition. Crusades. Slavery and land theft against non-believers. Numerous religious wars throughout Europe. Systemic religious persecution throughout Europe. Forced conversions. Multitude of sex abuse against children and women.</blockquote>
Even those measly 2 paragraphs were too long for you to read? You've responded to posts of mine that were longer than that. Do you realize that you're just showing that you know I'm right about all these issues but just don't want to admit it? Stop replying with "TL:DR". It makes you look worse than not responding at all.
Bullshit! You just don't want to have to admit that I'm right about everything. Your arrogantly presumed correctness on all these issues is pure fiction. You claim the JCPA essay I showed you is a joke but the real joke is your claim that it's wrong about the legality of the blockade of Gaza. You never even tried to explain why it was actually illegal. If you just give up like this then I'm going declare victory and assert that I was right about everything.
If you're too lazy to even read a long post then you shouldn't openly say that it's "TL:DR". You just shouldn't respond at all. That would be a lot less embarrassing.
Who the hell do you think you are to try to delegitimize my pro-Israel arguments because I never criticized Israel on any specific thing when YOU never criticized the Palestinians on any specific thing either? More than that, you openly defended the 10/7 attack on the merits. You've also never criticized any of the surrounding Arab countries for their intolerant Islamosupremacy that's eliminated the presence of Jews. You've never criticized the 4 Arab countries bordering Israel for reducing their collective number of Jews from 100,000 80 years ago to a mere 32 today. You've never criticized Saudi Arabia, an 830,00 square mile country, for banning all non-Muslims from citizenship.
My argument defending Israel doesn't depend on me criticizing at least one thing Israel has done. Criticizing at least one Israeli action doesn't magically legitimize my defense of Israel. My defense of Israel stands entirely on its own merits. As I said before, I don't agree with every single thing Israel has ever done to Palestinians. For now, I will say that I completely disagree with the Baruch Goldstein massacre. Can you think of anything done by the Palestinians or any of the Arab countries that you would be willing to criticize? Anything at all?
I do NOT believe that each and every civilian in Gaza deserves to suffer and die. The war simply makes in inevitable that many of them will suffer and die. It's not just a question of what they deserve. That's just the way war is. And as I told you before, it's completely absurd for you to claim that Hamas are the Gazans' "only hope of any protection" against the IDF. Hamas isn't actually doing anything to protect Gazan civilians. Hamas hasn't stopped thousands of Palestinian civilians from being killed nor does it even seem to be trying to stop civilians from being killed. Hamas is mostly just hiding in their tunnels and fighting the IDF when it comes to them. Your claim is especially absurd because of the 10/7 attack itself. Hamas launched that attack knowing exactly what would happen to Gaza afterwards. Hamas knew this would happen. Clearly, protecting Palestinian civilians in Gaza isn't their priority.
What Volker Turk said doesn't prove anything. I was talking about the Israeli blockade of Gaza prior to the Hamas attack. He was talking about the new blockade of Gaza that began after the attack. You obviously can't use the Israeli response to the Hamas attack to justify the Hamas attack. And the "total siege" of Gaza that Volker Turk was talking about was lifted after a few days.
If you're so certain that the blockade at the time of the Hamas attack was illegal then why are you asking me to provide a non-biased source proving otherwise? If you're so certain that the blockade was illegal then you obviously assume that such an explanation proving otherwise is completely impossible. Why are you so certain that the blockade was illegal when you can't even explain to me why that is? I can explain to you why it was legal.
During the blockade, Israel allowed the flow of basic humanitarian supplies such as food, medicine and water to Gaza. Article 23 of the 4th Geneva Convention requires parties to certain conflicts to permit transit to enemy civilian populations of a limited number of items and under a limited set of conditions. However, the fighting in and around the Gaza Strip is not covered by the 4th Geneva Convention because the conflict is not one between state parties to the Convention and Gaza was not occupied territory. Therefore, Israel is not bound by Article 23.
Even if it were bound by the 4th Geneva Convention, Israel would be acting in full compliance with international law. Article 23 of the 4th Geneva Convention permits states such as Israel to cut off fuel supplies and electricity to territories such as Gaza. Article 23 only requires a party to permit passage of food, clothing and medicines intended for children under 15, expectant mothers and maternity cases. Were Article 23 to apply, Israel would still be under no obligation to permit the passage of electricity, fuel or any items other than food, clothing or medicine. Moreover, under Article 23, Israel would be under no obligation to provide anything itself. Israel would only be required not to interfere with consignments of food and so forth sent by others for the benefit of children under age 15, mothers of newborns and pregnant women. Finally, under Article 23, a party can block passage even of food, clothing and medicine even for these population groups if it has serious grounds for suspecting that the items will be intercepted before reaching their destination or that the items may benefit the enemy’s economy by substitution.
Article 70 of the 1st Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1977 creates a slightly broader duty regarding the provision of food, medical supplies, clothing, bedding, means of shelter and "other supplies essential to the survival of the civilian population." Israel, however, is not a party to the 1st Protocol and is therefore not bound by the provisions of Article 70.
If you're so sure that the blockade was illegal then that must mean that you can easily explain to me why everything I just said is completely wrong. The 2 authors of the JCPA article, Justus Reid Weiner and Avi Bell, are both legal scholars. They are NOT “amateurs” or “laymen”. If you read the article you would know they did extensive study to reach their conclusion about the blockade. You never told me why you think they're biased and you never told me why you think the JCPA itself is biased. How do you know it's biased? Can you actually explain that to me?
You talk about the United Nations and Amnesty International as if they're not totally biased. That's the biggest joke of all. The UN is notorious for its anti-Israel bias. In 2006, the UN Human Rights Council made a review of the "human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories" a permanent feature of every council session. No other country in the world has its human rights situation reviewed at every council session. In 2022, the UN General Assembly passed more resolutions against Israel than against all other countries combined! And that was the year that Russia invaded Ukraine! The UN is unavoidably biased. It's nothing more than the sum of the biases of all its members, who all have their own political agendas. And Amnesty International has its own well-documented anti-Israel biases. In 2013 the Amnesty International Secretary General falsely accused Israel of murdering Yasser Arafat. Last year the Amnesty International USA director said the organization is opposed to the very existence of Israel.
Calling the blockade illegal is completely asinine because your whole point in doing so is to justify the 10/7 attack. That argument doesn't work because the attack didn't end the blockade and wasn't even <i>designed</i> to do so. That argument also doesn't work because Hamas <i>wants to completely destroy Israel</i>, meaning that ending the blockade would clearly NOT have ended the conflict between Hamas and Israel.
Did you actually read the article I showed you? You're not addressing its claims. I don't dispute that civilians have been killed in Gaza. But you can't be sure how many of those killed are civilians. The Lancet study only looked at the total number of dead. It didn't examine how many of those killed were really civilians or examine the distribution of men, women and children among the civilians.
For some strange reason you talk about the war as if the IDF hasn't in fact occupied Gaza. Israeli soldiers have been in Gaza now for several months. And you absurdly claim that the IDF is carpet bombing Gaza, proving that you don't know what the term 'carpet bombing' really means. 'Carpet bombing' means that an entire 'carpet' of bombs is laid down over a certain area, guaranteeing that nearly everything within that area is destroyed. Israel has clearly NOT 'carpet bombed' Gaza because doing so would certainly have killed over a million people.
You don't need to assume anything about Boromir's service. He actually told this forum that he served in Gaza during the current war:
https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/657c4e2b528d1756a914f454/I-came-back-from-war
And Boromir never claimed that he killed terrorists that weren't really terrorists but actually civilians.
When has Israel actually defined civilians in Gaza as terrorists? When did Boromir claim that he killed terrorists that weren't really terrorists but actually civilians?
It's completely false that the IDF has killed 30,000 civilians in Gaza. That's just the total number of people killed in Gaza according to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry. You forget that the IDF has also killed thousands of Hamas fighters in Gaza. As many as half of all those killed in Gaza could be Hamas fighters. You can't be sure that the publicly available statistics on the number of children killed in Gaza are accurate:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers
You have a lot to learn about World War II. 300,000-600,000 civilians were killed by the Allies carpet bombing German cities. Another half million were killed in the brutal ethnic cleansing of 14 million Germans from eastern Europe after the war. Over 1 million German women were raped by Soviet soldiers (of whom over 200,000 died) at the end of the war. In 1940, the Soviets massacred 22,000 Poles in the Katyn Forest.
Don't be so quick to judge Israel.
I can't believe you're defending China! You denied defending China when I called you out on it a month ago. China is committing all kinds of evil. It commits genocide against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, occupies Tibet and persecutes the Falon Gong. China caused <i>15-55 million</i> of its own people to starve to death in the Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961.
You're clearly being completely facetious. You know damn well that the Russians and Chinese aren't going to send any forces to Gaza. Russia and China certainly don't care enough about Arabs halfway around the world to actually go there. Both countries have their own history of killing millions of their own people. They care that much less about Arabs. And you know the UN certainly won't send troops either.
Your criticism of the U.S. is ironic because it's done far more to protect Gazans during this war than it did to protect Germans during World War II. The U.S. didn't stop supporting Britain after it killed 34,000-40,000 German civilians by carpet bombing Hamburg in the summer of 1943. The U.S. didn't do anything to try to stop the Soviets from invading Berlin in 1945, resulting in the deaths of 125,000 civilians. The U.S. was fine with that as long as no American soldiers were killed.
The surge in violence in the West Bank doesn't just go one way. There was a large increase in Palestinian violence in the West Bank after October 7th. There's been 295 Palestinian terrorist attacks in the West Bank since then:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/israel-middle-east/articles/fraudulent-case-against-violent-settlers
You're the one who went off topic. You're the one who commented on me complaining about Islamosupremacy. You then went further off topic by telling me about something that happened in Hebron.
If it bothers you so much when other people go off topic then <i>why do you constantly go off topic yourself?</i> Do you plan to ever discuss anything on this forum with honesty and sincerity?
That wasn't a state. That was just the British Mandate. In 1948, the British left and most of that territory then became the State of Israel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1949_Armistice_Agreements#/media/File:United_Nations_Palestine_map_showing_Armistice_Agreements_between_Israel_&_Lebanon,_Syria,_Jordan_&_Egypt_1949-1950.jpg
100% of the 630,000 Jews living in the land of Israel in 1948 wanted to stay there. Hundreds of thousands of Jews were expelled from Arab countries after Israel's establishment and they don't have a right of return. Neither do the millions of Germans expelled from eastern Europe after World War II or the millions of Hindus and Sikhs expelled from what became Pakistan and the millions of Muslims expelled from what became India after the partition of India in 1947. A right of return for refugees is very rare, even for those who still hold deeds to homes and land.
Why are you changing the subject? Why are you so afraid to discuss Islamosupremacy? It's the reason that there are no Jews in Jordan or Syria. A Muslim who wanted to do anything to a Jew in a shop in Jordan wouldn't even be able to find a Jew in any shops in Jordan <i>because there are no Jews in Jordan</i>. The problems between Israelis and Palestinians in Hebron are <i>a result of the tolerance Israelis have but that doesn't exist in the surrounding Arab countries</i>.
Oh my god! You are an absolute <b>moron!!!</b> You have no idea of the enormous level of utter ignorance and stupidity you just revealed. Jews invading the land of Canaan without a Messiah is NOT the reason God punished them. We know this because <b><i>God actually commanded the Jews</i></b> to invade Canaan. God obviously didn't punish the Jews for doing what he commanded them to do. This is what it says in the Book of Joshua, chapter 1, verses 2-3:
<blockquote>2. Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them—to the Israelites. 3. I will give you every place where you set your foot, as I promised Moses.</blockquote>
Note the use of the word "give". It wasn't stealing according to God himself. You then proceed to reveal more of your idiocy. There is no rule in the Torah that says you can't "covert" your neighbor's belongings. What does the verb form of the word "covert" even mean? And the commandment is not to <i>murder</i> rather than not to kill. If the commandment were not to kill then God would never have commanded the Jews to go to war and Judaism would never have had the death penalty for anything.
Haven't you now subjected this forum to enough of your utter idiocy? Will your utter idiocy ever stop? Don't you have any shame or embarrassment over your repeated idiocy? Why doesn't the repeated exposure of your utter idiocy cause you to have any humility?