Skip to content

Amazin’ innit?

Time after time, I heard the claim that Israeli actions are justified by self-defence when no sane person can pretend that the disproportionate response to its own security failure can justify its offensive action in many countries.

Somehow it’s always the Joos at fault.

59 thoughts on “Amazin’ innit?”

  1. Amazing what fashion can do, isn’t it? The Left have decided, because they are always progressive, that rape, torture and murder are good things. The ultimate lunacy manifests itself in “Queers for Palestine” who don’t seem to understand the circumstances in which the Peaceniks will refrain from throwing you off tall buildings. The circumstances include being gay, renting the Prime Minister of the country that has imported you by paying him hundreds of thousands of pounds, and indulging in what even Guido won’t dare say…

  2. The consequences for Israel of that ‘security failure’ isn’t a great reason to expect good things of any ‘two state solution’, is it?

  3. There can never be any two state solution when one side of the two states has sworn for decades to eliminate every member of the other side, and not just in Israel but beyond as the Argentinian Jews, to name but one, can confirm.

    I did think for a very brief moment that October 7 might have convinced even more insane members of the Western left that they were backing the wrong horse, but obviously not.

    I speak not as a fan of Israel or even of many leading Jews, but if I have to choose between them and Islam it’s a pretty simple choice.

  4. Oh, the choice is simple. Which culture – Islamic or Jewish – has done more to promote material human thriving?

    Here’s a clue: Trinity College Cambridge, all by itself, has more Nobel laureates than the whole Islamic world.

  5. I watched some of the debate in parliament yesterday on the situation in Israel.

    I looked at quite a lot of other media on the issue.

    And most of what I saw was closed-mindedness and insular polarity.

    The issue was presented as if there were two sides to this issue. Either Israel or the various states opposing it are right, but in that case, the other cannot be. That seems to be the common argument.

    That is the argument from the Iranian side – there is no third side. Either Israel ceases to exist or they will continue to seek its complete destruction.

    I heard too many hints and suggestions that because of what Hamas did last October, which was a war crime, Palestinians must suffer, which is an utterly unjustifiable claim.

    Time after time, I heard the claim that Israeli actions are justified by self-defence when no sane person can pretend that the disproportionate response to its own security failure can justify its offensive action in many countries.

    So the argument here is that the Palestinians are innocent victims? – 80% plus voted for Hamas. indeed in the West Bank Fatah have resisted elections because they know they would lose. Hamas wants all Jews dead and Israel destroyed. Anyone voting for it is complicit in its savagery. Where I do agree is that if 2,000 UK citizens were killed the likes of this true paragon of evil would probably blame the victims for ‘neoliberalism’ or one of his other fashionable canards.

    And with honourable exceptions, I heard a few suggestions that the human suffering from this war is felt on all sides and that we have a duty to all those who are afflicted in whatever way that might be.

    Well at least I can agree with that to some extent.

    The reality is that the leaderships of Hamas, Hezbollah and Israel have all made hideous mistakes in the pursuit of their goals. All of them have blood on their hands. They should all be held responsible.

    You may want to check that with your colleagues in the Muslim Vote/ Block if you are angling for a peerage in the wake of the SNP collapses

    So, too, should all those who have enabled this situation by the supply of weapons, knowing what they might be used for, be held to account. That includes successive UK governments.

    Are we going to hold Russia or China to account for arming the Iranians, Hamas and Hezbollah or do we favour the unilateral disarmament of Israel?

    But it is as apparent that the polarisation of debate on this issue now serves no purpose at all.

    There is no right or wrong side here. There are sides with worries, concerns and claims, matched by counter-claims. These all require reconciliation to be resolved, not force. And the use of force by all sides in this dispute only prolongs it and makes it worse. ,

    Utter bollocks and a dangerous fiction. There is one side that will allow religious freedom, the consumption of bacon and alcohol. There is one side that will not. Which is right? – its a no brainer.

    To be insular – as too many are – can on only defer that reconciliation.

    Try saying that in Gaza or Hezbollah controlled territory i N Northern Lebanon – you might not be seen for a long time or indeed ever.

    In that case, a wise politician would not act as Starmer is doing. He defends Israel too readily when many of its actions are indefensible.

    He calls for ceasefires, knowing that they will not be delivered because the foundations for their success do not exist and are made harder to achieve by his own actions.

    And he refuses to acknowledge the suffering of the Palestinians, and now the Lebanese and others, who are the innocent victims of all this, when without that recognition, there can be no outcome to what is happening.

    What would be the foundations for a ceasefire? Interestingly I heard this from the Jordanian side. Apparently if the West Bank borders are opened and a Palestinian state set up it can all end tomorrow. I have not met a single Jew that trusts the bona fides of the Palestinian side on this and given their repeated failure to adhere to previous agreements, to take such a chance is literally playing Russian roulette. It’s beyond naive to suggest the Israelis would accept such an approach.

    Is it really so hard for a politician to realise that there can be both right and wrong on all sides in a dispute? Can they not look for good wherever it might be found? Can’t they see that doing so is what creates the basis for peace?

    What really makes me laugh is this cretin’s attitude to the ‘Far Right riots’ in the UK. There was no recognition that the rioters had legitimate grievances. No recognition that there were ‘two sides to the argument’. What does it say about someone that Islamic fanatics who would gladly slit the fat bastard’s throat are given the benefit of the doubt but actual indiginous working class people are treated as beyond the pale?

    Apparently not, seems to be the answer. And that is worthy of condemnation, because it means that those who cannot do so can contribute nothing to a successful outcome to the stress that afflicts the whole Middle East now

    It seems ‘Useful idiots’ wasn’t a term limited to the Cold War!!

  6. @Norman…. yeeeaahh… Mind.. that track record ended already before the millennium, with a post-mortem hiccup in 2009…

  7. “response to its own security failures” …
    As if it’s the IDF’s fault that Hamas decided to murder, kidnap, torture and murder kidnapped and tortured Israelis?

  8. “Trinity College Cambridge, all by itself, has more Nobel laureates than the whole Islamic world.”

    No need to cite Trinity: families I’ve known have had more Nobel laureates than the whole Islamic world. And that’s ignoring everyone I’ve met in Cambridge.

    Though I’m damned if I see the relevance. On those grounds Britain and Germany in 1939 should just have divided up all of Europe and Africa between them. And South America and North America. And Asia, Australia and Antarctica.

  9. The moslems love death more than we love life so let’s do everyone a favour and give them their wish (I know, i’m a monster…..).

    There has already been a two state solution. The arabs took what they wanted from it then asked for more.
    They have then rejected all subsequent two state solutions* that have been discussed, simply because a ‘two state solution’ means Israel will exist, and that will never be tolerated.

    *If they did accept a two state solution it would purely be for the purposes of re-grouping and re-arming, ready for another crack at wiping Israel off the map (ditto any ‘ceasefire’ they ever enter into).

  10. “the disproportionate response to its own security failure”

    Yeah, it’s their fault for momentarily forgetting that we live in a dog-eat-dog world of rape, massacre, sadism, abduction, and torture. And then it’s even more their fault for remembering it.

  11. Maybe the solution is two-fold?

    Declare the Chagos Islands “New Palestine” and move all the “Palestinians” there.

    Solves the 2 state solution and allows the “Palestinians” to develop their culture in peace in the Southern Indian Ocean.

  12. Bloke in North Dorset

    Time after time, I heard the claim that Israeli actions are justified by self-defence when no sane person can pretend that the disproportionate response to its own security failure can justify its offensive action in many countries.

    Perhaps he could tell us what a proportionate response would look like following Hama’s unprovoked attack on 7/10?

    For example, how many Gazan women should Israeli soldiers be allowed to rape? What proportion of them should be stabbed to death or have their breasts cut off while being raped? How many children be made to watch this happening to their mothers?

    etc, etc

    And in case he’s wondering, I have zero sympathy. With the force Hamas put together they could have set out to capture a small town, throw out all the Israeli inhabitants, move Palestinian families in top the homes and set up quite an impenetrable perimeter. That would have challenged Israel but instead Hamas chose the path it took knowing full well what would happen.

    And to make it worse, those brave Hamas leaders and soldiers hid behind civilians, in schools and mosques, denied civilians protection in tunnels and generally made it more likely civilians would be victims.

  13. The answer to the whole problem is for the Palestinians to convert to Judaism. They then have the right to return and can live legally in Israel.
    There you go, mass conversions and the job’s a good’un!

  14. Re: Interested

    “There can never be any two state solution when one side of the two states has sworn for decades to eliminate every member of the other side”

    Israeli politicians are openly calling for the extermination of all 2 million Gazans.

    Strangely enough, the western media is not reporting this.

  15. ‘disproportionate response’??

    No doubt he also feels that a global war was a disproportionate response to Adolfs’ claim to a corridor that’d cross the Polish Corridor.

  16. The answer to the whole problem is for the Palestinians to convert to Judaism.
    Unfortunately, Judaism, unlike Christianity or Islam, isn’t a proselytizing religion. And becoming a Jew (if that was easily possible) would not give you a “right to return”. However you are quite welcome to become an Israeli citizen, which gives you right of abode. There’s no requirement to be Jewish.

  17. Blaming them for “their own security failure”?

    You left the door unlocked, the rape is your fault!

    This also shows how evil he assumes the Palestinian/Hamas side is, you left a peace concert undefended, what did you expect?

    I’m with Israel here, this is war and they need to eliminate any future threat to the absolute greatest degree possible.

    Israel is trying to avoid innocent casualties, but Hamas seeks to maximize them.

  18. Flubber @ 10.35, the conversation between Kyle Reese and Sarah Connor comes to mind.

    So what do you suggest Israel does?

  19. Israeli politicians are openly calling for the extermination of all 2 million Gazans.

    All Israeli politicians? Is it government policy?

    Nope. Again dishonestly asserting moral equivalence.

  20. If I ever see him, I will punch him in the face.
    That I see him and punch him is his own fault, his security failure.
    He then may not retaliate by punching me back as that would be a disproportionate reaction to his own security failure.
    Golly I do hope I see him soon.

  21. Flubber

    Addolff has it – for your information the conversation (adapted is as follows)

    Listen, and understand!

    Those Palestinians are out there!

    They can’t be bargained with.

    They can’t be reasoned with.

    They don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear.

    And they absolutely will not stop… ever, until you are dead!

    It’s far from ideal but I do think the attitude of those Israeli politicians will need to be adopted more widely when it comes to ‘RoP’ adherents – at least if civilisation is to be preserved as we understand it.

  22. Is Ritchie blaming the Jews?

    There is no right or wrong side here. There are sides with worries, concerns and claims, matched by counter-claims. These all require reconciliation to be resolved, not force. And the use of force by all sides in this dispute only prolongs it and makes it worse.

    Or, they can massacre each other until Jesus Christ comes back.

  23. You realise there isn’t a solution to this? Neither moral nor legal. There was something was explained to me by a Persian mate.(Yes Persian never Iranian. He despises Iranians as religious maniac peasant goat fuckers from the boonies. He’s Persian aristocracy). When The Ottoman Empire ruled Palestine it was essentially a feudal system. Same as Persia & my mate’s family. So when they owned land they also “owned” the people on the land. In a feudal system the holders of land have moral & legal obligations like administering justice & welfare. His family “owned” whole villages Similar to medieval England. So the relatively small Jewish population in Ottoman Palestine had much the same rights as anyone else.
    Enter the Zionists, who were a creation of the Jewish diaspora, initially in Europe. Who wanted to create a Jewish nation in Palestine. So they started buying up land in Palestine from Ottoman absentee landlords. There was a lot of US money in this. But they were Europeans not Ottomans. And in Europe the land & the people have been separate for centuries. You don’t owe obligations to the people living on that land other than contractual. So they started pushing Palestinians off of their lands because they considered they had no right to live their. And replace them with Jews. The growing Jewish minority had influence with the British ( a European power) holding the Mandate so you get the Balfour Declaration etc.
    So you have two opposing views of this. A Eurocentric view of ownership. Which is essentially legal. (And legal is always might, not right Isn’t it?) And an Islamic view which is traditional & moral. I personally don’t think Israel has a moral right to exist. If you want take analogies, any more than the Welsh diaspora in Argentia would have setting up a Brythonic state In England or Anglo-Saxons having claims to southern Denmark & northern Germany. Would they have more rights if they’d preserved the old religions & not adopted Christianity?
    That said, I’m firmly a supporter of modern Israel & good luck to them. (Might trumps right) I don’t hold much stock with morals because people seem to choose the morals that suit them. (See 5 recently elected Westminster MPs)

  24. @Steve
    He is essentially correct there. The rights & wrongs depend on which side of the argument you’re looking from. As outlined above. Palestinians have no traditional moral right to self-determination. In 2000 years they’ve never had one. I’m not even sure the concept exists in Islam, does it? But this is all about a very Eurocentric concept of legal rights. And Eurcentric legal rights are derived from might not morals.
    Look at the current situation in the UK. Labour won the election so gets to make the laws. There’s nothing the least bit moral about it.

  25. Having to pick a side is “polarising”. Well I never!

    Personally I wouldn’t shed a tear if Israel did to Gaza what we did to Dresden. But they are being so careful to minimise civilian casualties, despite the human sacrifice policy of Hamas, that military types from all over are in awe and trying to learn how it’s done.

  26. BiS @ 12.53
    “In a feudal system the holders of land have moral & legal obligations like administering justice & welfare.”

    A medieval welfare state is an interesting concept. No doubt the peasants got benefits for mental health issues supplied by the absentee landlords.

  27. BiS

    Interestingly that was the take of the Late, Great Peter Simple who summarized it in exactly the way you did. With the caveat that to talk of peace was ultimately an exercise in futility. He used to point out as well that other states with a ‘right to exist’ (In those days the three Baltic states living under a similar tyranny to the one White people face in the UK today) had proclaimed such a right only to find their extinction not only thought, but promptly done.

    A challenge for sure – however, as I said earlier, two of my favourite things are bacon and beer. They are legal in Israel and not in Palestine. For that reason I am on the side of the Israelis. Frankly anyone who would ban either is someone who has forfeited their right to exist.

  28. Philip – Personally I wouldn’t shed a tear if Israel did to Gaza what we did to Dresden. But they are being so careful to minimise civilian casualties,

    Are you joking? Sorry, sometimes I don’t get sarcasm.

    BiS – the Middle East has been a blood and shithole since the Kingdom of Jerusalem ended.

    If we want peace, we must first put together a successful Crusade.

  29. BIS,

    Yeah, ultimately who killed the other bloke gets the land. The whole thing of religion is to justify the killing. This is our land, because a Sky Fairy says we’re the chosen people There are no righteous people of the land. The native Americans who lost land were the people who had killed others before them and taken their land. And only started whining about the white man because they lost.

    My only reason for supporting Israel is that they seem like more civilised, industrial, advanced people. Gaza seems to be knuckle-dragging chavs.

  30. @Flubber

    Re: Interested
    “There can never be any two state solution when one side of the two states has sworn for decades to eliminate every member of the other side”
    Israeli politicians are openly calling for the extermination of all 2 million Gazans.
    Strangely enough, the western media is not reporting this.

    Can you put up some links so we can assess how influential they are?

    I suspect you know very well that – while the reverse is the expressed, open and deliberate policy of Hamas, Hezbollah and their Iranian sponsors – the genocide of the Palestinians is not and never has been Israeli government policy, and never would be.

    One proof of this particular pudding is that if Israel wanted to kill all Palestinians it could do so in an afternoon, and has been able to do so for about thirty years. And yet it hasn’t.

    Contrariwise, if Hamas could kill all Jews it would – cheered on by the Guardian and the BBC and most other leftists, I suspect. Luckily for Israel and the Jewish diaspora, they’re largely inbred mental incompetents.

    If Hamas returned the hostages they have spent the last year raping and torturing and sometimes murdering, along with the evil filth who masterminded and carried out October 7 (if any are still alive), the whole thing would end the same day.

  31. You know I find it amazing the combination of brainwashing and ignorance among my fellow citizens.

    You almost all seem to think that the Israelis are peaceful, and the mussies are irredeemable scum.

    The Pally’s were living peacefully until the Zionists turned up. Israel was created in a whirlwind of violence. Hell they were suicide bombing British soldiers ffs.

    Ever since they have been beating the living shit out of the Pally’s. Why wouldn’t they fight back?

    You lot just sit there absorbing the “most moral army int he world” fucking bollocks and getting steamed about the Muz.

    Ever wondered why the West has been infested with Muzzies? Those same Zionists are funding open borders organisations that are ferrying muz across the MEd as fast as humanely possible.

    You’re being played by the biggest cunts on the planet. And you’re just too fucking stupid to realise it.

  32. the Middle East has been a blood and shithole since the Kingdom of Jerusalem ended

    So you’re saying this is all the fault of Henry II of Cyprus?

    Interesting viewpoint.

    Deus Vult!

  33. “Ever wondered why the West has been infested with Muzzies? Those same Zionists are funding open borders organisations that are ferrying muz across the MEd as fast as humanely possible.”

    I spy an example of scratch an antizionist, watch an antisemite bleed.

  34. JG – also the Mamaluks.

    In hoc signo vinces: ☩

    Daniel – is that really what’s going on here?

    You could probably get 5 billion Google results for “antisemitism”, but what’s the word for Jews who don’t like gentiles?

  35. @philip
    A medieval welfare state is an interesting concept.
    Of course, in a sense, it was. Feudalism was an advance on the virtually tribal societies Europe had degenerated into after the Roman collapse. Which is why it replaced them. More economically efficient. You look after your peasants because they put your food on your table.
    @Steve/WB The societies came out of the middle-east are at root herding societies. Goat fuckers. Islam is a goat fucker religion. As is Judaism. They’re tribal societies where you belong to the tribe not the land you’re occupying at the moment. Because goats wander. It’s a very different mentality from the settled agriculture of Europe, where it’s in your interest to be on good terms with your neighbour. And his neighbour the other side, is effectively also your neighbour. And so on from one side of the continent to the other. Europeans don’t generally fight ethnic wars amongst themselves. Although their royalties or aristocracies may involve them in territorial wars. You are where you live.

  36. @BIS
    As i understand it the Balfour declaration was effectively a sale of land in exchange for military support. The crumbling Ottoman empire was under threat from Russia and the original land for Israel was the fee for the UK et al to stand up and say ‘mess with the Ottomans you mess with me’.

    The Roman conquerors rechristened (sic) Judea as Palestine Syria to piss the revolting Jews off, around about 20CE. Anyway it all historically belongs to the Caananites!

  37. Rather the point isn’t it, Swannypol? Where was Judea when? I don’t think it was ever contiguous with modern Israel.

  38. Personally I wouldn’t shed a tear if Israel did to Gaza what we did to Dresden. But they are being so careful to minimise civilian casualties,

    I’m conflicted. (Pun not intended)
    The Dresden Special might be quite effective at wiping out their enemies, might make some new ones.
    But we’d be deprived the entertainment of watching pagers and radios blowing up, as well as Hezbollah needing a new leader almost daily for three days and one guy refusing to do it (so he doesn’t get blown up)
    I’m so glad I stocked up on popcorn.

  39. Flubber

    A bit of context is required. Jews lived peacefully throughout the entire region for thousands of years, but over just the last few decades have largely been ethnically cleansed by Muslims, to the point that the remainder now huddle together in the tiny patch of land called Israel.

    If you ignore the context and focus exclusively on just the land that is now Israel you will come to some very strange and immoral conclusions.

  40. Flubber,

    You’re being played by the biggest cunts on the planet. And you’re just too fucking stupid to realise it.

  41. Interesting Swannypol.

    I’d always understood that the Turks decided to support Kaiser Bill and his allies in their war with the Brits, the Frogs and the Russians.

    Since they were fighting for their lives, the Brits made a deal with the Jews to let them settle in Palestine once they conquered it. Understandably the Pally’s didn’t really like this.

    So it all went downhill from there.

  42. This guy robbed and shot at me – but shooting back would be ‘disproportionate’ because the real fault lies with me *because I allowed myself to be in a position to be robbed!*

    I take it he’s on the side of the Russians too? After all, its Ukraine’s fault their security failures allowed them to be invaded.

  43. @Flubber

    You know I find it amazing the combination of brainwashing and ignorance among my fellow citizens.

    You almost all seem to think that the Israelis are peaceful, and the mussies are irredeemable scum.

    I already said that I’m no fan of Israel nor of many leading Jews.

    Ignorance wise I’ve lived and worked in the Middle East for many years.

    Including in countries which once had quite substantial Jewish populations until they were all murdered or otherwise driven out.

    ‘Mussie’ wise I have muslim family members (and no Jewish ones, as it happens), and friends.

    I don’t think ‘the mussies are irredeemable scum’; I do think they have a higher scum quotient than, say, Methodists, or Buddhists; everywhere they go does seem to end up more authoritarian, backward and, frankly, whiny than before, but that’s because their fanatics are more committed than those of other ‘faiths’, are more prepared to die for their bullshit cause, and – crucially, and increasingly – more coddled and indulged by western policymakers and useful idiots.

    Those muslims who would quite like to live peacefully alongside Christians, Jews, Sikhs etc tend to shut up if they know what’s good for them.

    In terms of the UK, I am far more likely to be blown up or stabbed by muslims than anyone else. Jews aren’t forcing teachers into hiding, murdering gays, raping girls by the thousand, or any of that so, yes, I am slightly more disposed to them generally (though I thought we were talking about Israel and Hamas etc).

    I asked a question: can you name these Israeli politicians demanding the extermination of Palestinians, whose demands you said were being ignored by the western media.

    No reply to that.

    I made the point that Israel could have killed every last Palestinian if it had wanted to, but hasn’t.

    No reply to that.

    I made the further point that Hamas and Hezbollah and their sponsors, Iran, have openly classic they want to kill all Jews.

    No reply to that.

  44. Interested @ 4.41 “Those muslims who would quite like to live peacefully alongside Christians, Jews, Sikhs etc tend to shut up if they know what’s good for them. .

    I saw an article a couple of weeks ago about a moslem bloke who spent ten years in a Saudi chokey because he said that Jews, moslems and Christians were equal…….

  45. Can’t quite see why these Zionists are so keen to flood Europe with Muslims, many of whom end up murdering Jews. Is it all a plot to get Europe’s remaining Jews to move to Israel? Or just cover for some other dastardly banking/blood-drinking/world domination plot?

    The world domination can’t be going well if they can’t even keep European Jews safe. Perhaps they are just a bit rubbish at it. After all, look at the mess they are making of genociding the ‘Palestinians’. Almost as if they are not trying….

  46. I take it he’s on the side of the Russians too? After all, its Ukraine’s fault their security failures allowed them to be invaded.

    Russia is minimising civilian casualties, and has been since 2022. Israel is not minimising civilian deaths, they’re bombing the fuck out of densely populated urban areas with complete impunity.

    Israel has killed several times more civilians since Oct 7th than Russia has killed in the whole of the Ukraine war to date.

  47. Russia is minimising civilian casualties, and has been since 2022. Israel is not minimising civilian deaths, they’re bombing the fuck out of densely populated urban areas with complete impunity.

    Lol, Russia doesn’t give a shit about civilian casualties – as was seen in Mariupol. The only reason the figures aren’t worse is because Ukraine evacuates urban populations before Russian mass destruction combat hits those areas. Conversely, Hamas deliberately place their weapons and fighters amongst civilians as a policy to maximise their own civilian deaths for sympathy propaganda purposes (which works fantastically on gullible twats). In Lebanon we see thousands of secondary explosions going off after Israel hits ammo dumps and missile launchers that Hezbollah have placed in town buildings.

    Armed forces from around the world send teams to Israel to learn how to fight in urban areas with minimum collateral damage. They certainly don’t go to fucking Russia for that.

  48. I was wondering when you’d show up to repeat things you “learned” from the media, PJF.

    Total pish, of course. The IDF has such a laissez-faire approach to civilian casualties they’ve already killed several Israeli hostages and bombed residential tower blocks in Lebanon to get at a couple of Hezbollah guys.

    It’s not Ukraine that’s at pains to reduce civilian casualties, but Russia. The single largest destination for Ukrainian refugees is Russia. Ukraine has been doing stupid shit like bombing civilians in Belgorod, and of course they’ve been happily bombing Ukranian civilians in the Donbass since 2014.

    But then, what does one expect from Nazis?

  49. Lol, Russia doesn’t give a shit about civilian casualties

    Name me a government that does.
    We’ve invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as military ops elsewhere. These activities have killed many people.

    Governments don’t give a shit. They’ll steamroll anyone they need to to complete their objectives.
    When governments make a show about how they’re avoiding civvy casualties, it’s all just to control the narrative to keep their population mollified so they don’t cause trouble. “Look, we aren’t the bad guys! Nothing to see here.”

    Our government is actively making us poorer and weaker by banning cars, gas boilers and inflicting unreliable ‘green’ generation and heat pumps on us while taxing us to buggery and taking winter fuel payments off the oldies so they freeze to death.
    Now tell me again that they care about not killing a few foreigns a few thousand miles away…

  50. . . . Nazis

    Oh dear, we’re obviously in the mad part of your cycle. Let’s try again when you’ve calmed down.

  51. Name me a government that does.
    We’ve invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as military ops elsewhere. These activities have killed many people.

    You’re conflating two things – taking military action which will kill some people, and not caring about how many people are killed. So to answer your question topically, Israel and Ukraine. They are both forced to take military action against their attackers but do so with care.

  52. @PJF
    That’s a good one.
    When we do it, we’re taking military action that will kill some people.
    When they do it, they don’t care about how many people are killed.

    My point was that neither side particularly care about the people and I strongly contest that Ukraine is actively trying to avoid excess casualties. Countries that care about civilian casualties don’t forcibly sweep people from the streets, stick a gun in their hands and throw them onto the front the next day to get killed. Quite a few articles even in the western msm now acknowledging this little inconvenient truth. Unless you’re counting them as military casualties, so it’s ok that those poor sods who didn’t want to get blown up did?
    Israel quite happily targets things that will cause civilian casualties – and I don’t blame them either.
    Russia is claiming that it was also forced into taking this military action by the West’s expansion. So the casualties in Ukraine are ok then, by your logic…

  53. When we do it, we’re taking military action that will kill some people.
    When they do it, they don’t care about how many people are killed.

    That’s not at all what I said (amazingly, it seems that you don’t understand what conflating means).

    Try this:
    Some countries / entities will take military action but attempt to minimise civilian casualties.
    Some countries / entities will take military action with total disregard for civilian casualties.
    Some countries / entities will take military action deliberately maximising civilian casualties.

    Those three approaches are not the same.

    . . . forcibly sweep people from the streets, stick a gun in their hands and throw them onto the front the next day to get killed.

    Can you link to one of the articles that supposedly describe this?

    So the casualties in Ukraine are ok then, by your logic…

    I’m not sure that you understand logic. You certainly don’t understand mine.

  54. Ukraine doesn’t allow its citizens in the four contested oblasts, heck anywhere, the right to bear arms.
    That’s a bit inconvenient because if it did then it may find a lot of the citizens who they claim to be theirs would be using them against Ukraine.
    Time for a truce roughly along the current line of contact and let Ukraine be nazi, socially ethnically and linguistically, on its side, and Russia to pay to rebuild the cities that ended up on its side, and the rest of the world have that useful cheap gas again.
    Imv, of course.

  55. @PJF

    I do know what conflating means.

    That isn’t the case.
    I’m saying that
    1. Neither side ‘cares’ about civilian casualties and will cause them if it furthers their aims.
    2. You appear to have double standards. Russia isn’t deliberately targeting civilians but they are prepared to cause them if necessary (same as every other government, which is my point, so we can’t point fingers as it’s hypocritical). According to a quick internets search we’re looking at approximately 12,000 civvies killed and circa 25,000 wounded (UN figures), so 37,000 casualties. Compare with the UAF casualties, which is somewhere between 70,000 (US figure – seems low) and 500,000 (Russian figure – seems high). If Russia was deliberately targeting civvies, that first figure would be much higher.

    Can you link to one of the articles that supposedly describe this?
    Here you go
    https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/conscription-tactics-get-dirty-as-war-weary-ukrainians-defy-draft-8zb26rt2p
    Oh dear. Dragging people off who are supposed to be medically exempt? Doesn’t inspire confidence.
    But don’t worry, the Ukrainians are proudly and bravely advancing backwards at speed as we speak…

    And I do understand logic.

    You’re saying Ukraine and Israel have been forced into military action to defend themselves and will cause civilian casualties but try not to, so while not great, it’s ‘acceptable’ for them to do so.
    I’m saying that since Russia feels forced into military action to defend itself and will cause civilian casualties but doesn’t appear to be trying to, then, by your own logic, it is ‘acceptable’ for them to do so.

    Whether you believe either side or not is a different argument.

    To be clear, no side should have carte blanche to use The Dresden Special at will. The fact that we did is a source of national shame. It also shows what happens when militaries and governments actively try to cause civilian casualties. In approximately two days, 25,000 people were killed. That’s double the number of Ukrainian civilians so far in two years

  56. Here you go

    Brilliant. You’ve linked to a story behind a firm paywall. Can you at least copy the text that matches your “forcibly sweep people from the streets, stick a gun in their hands and throw them onto the front the next day to get killed.”

    I can read in the three lines the Times lets me see that someone supposedly exempt from service phoned from a training camp the day after being picked up. If the desperate scenario you described was mentioned in the body of the text I rather think the article would lead with that instead. So I’d bet money that this is just another report on the harsh and sometimes corrupt pressgang consciption enforcement happening in the country (such reports have been discussed in these comments several times; they’re nothing new). Your version is at best hysterical melodrama but more likely just another lie.

    If Russia was deliberately targeting civvies . . .

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13941879/Human-safari-Russia-Ukrainian-civilians-drone-bombs-dog.html

    As well as these local initiatives, Russia does indeed have a policy of targetting civilians and civilian infrastructure. It’s actually helpful since every missile strike on a block of flats or a hospital is one less strike on Ukraine’s military logistics. Meanwhile Russian civilians can go on holiday to Crimea.

    . . . the Ukrainians are proudly and bravely advancing backwards at speed as we speak…

    The Ukrainians are retreating slowly exchanging land for tens of thousands of dead Russian troops and divisions worth of military vehicles.

  57. Nearly 50,000 Palestinians dead…representing about 2% of the population. If it’s a genocide then it’s a shit one.
    Contrast that with the claims of …what… 70% destruction of the infrastructure? I’d love to hear the critics of Israel explain that difference. If Israel truly wanted those folks dead, they’d be dead.

    Apparently, according to the great Google, there were people speaking a form of Hebrew and circumcising boys back in the Iron Age ( lord knows how they figured that – I didn’t think discarded foreskins would make it into the fossil record). If that’s true, then I think the Jews will win the “we wuz here first” pissing contest.

    Finally.. Assyrians, Persians, Romans, Turks, Babylonians, Egyptians, various Caliphates, the Crusaders…that area has been under various thumbs all through its sorry history. Fixating on 1948 or the end of WW1 is just selective bollocks that disregards most of recorded history.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *