EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

You are confusing two entirely different arguments.
Questioning the reliability of casualty figures reported by a party to the conflict does not mean denying that Palestinians have suffered enormous losses. Of course people have diedfar too many. Their deaths matter regardless of whether the final number turns out to be 20,000, 40,000, or something else.

But acknowledging Palestinian suffering does not require treating every number coming out of Gaza as unquestionable fact. Hamas operates from within an extraordinarily dense civilian environment and has a well-documented interest in shaping international opinion. Your argument doesn't make every Palestinian casualty fabricated, Scrutinize the numbers, sure, but 10,000; or 20,000; or 40,000 deaths is too many is it not?
And the urban-warfare argument cuts both ways. Urban warfare is extraordinarily dangerous for civilians, but that fact alone doesn't establish who was responsible for each death or prove that every reported casualty was a civilian. Combatants, civilians, deaths from secondary causes, and incomplete identification all matter when assessing casualty statistics.
So no, I am not minimizing Palestinian losses. I am saying that human suffering should not be turned into a political numbers game where one side's unverified figures become unquestionable simply because they support the preferred narrative.

If you want to argue that Palestinian civilian deaths are horrific, I'm with you. If you want to argue that Hamas has contributed to putting civilians in extreme danger, that deserves discussion too. But neither argument requires pretending we know more about the precise casualty numbers than the evidence actually allows.

---

You are fully confused.

---

Now you here is an intelligent answer. Still mg

---

You need to revise your posts so another person can actually make sense of them. Then I would have something to work with. As it stands you are all over the map and not really making sense.

---

My apologies. I will try to do better.

Saudi Aramco Evacuates HQ, All Staff Put On Remote Work

"Last week, two company employees who also spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity said a tower in the headquarters was struck. The "top three floors were gone," one of them said."

- el UF

D!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

Go Bears!!

Beat the 'Hawks!!!

Viva il Donaldo!!!!

william said:

---

- el UF

D!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

Go Bears!!

Beat the 'Hawks!!!

Viva il Donaldo!!!!

---

Meh. Gotta get the vocals and marching band to get it right.

meh - I use military time on me chrono - thought it was 4 AM - instead it was 14 00

- el UF

up and adam soldiers, we've got a WAR to fight.....

somewheres ..... real or imagined.

{ sipping coffee }

D!

>>
War is at best barbarism. ... Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation.
William Tecumseh Sherman

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Ben Shapiro just dismantled the "genocide" argument masterfully

https://notthebee.com/takes/ben-shapiro-just-dismantled-the-genocide-argument-masterfully

On the idiotic accusation of genocide leveled at Israel:

Quote:

---

Is there any doubting that if given the same kind of advantages, Palestine's masters Hamas would not be so measured in their prosecution of the conflict? But leave speculation out of it, and the fact that Israel has sent its troops into dangerous urban combat rather than simply level buildings with civilians inside is all you need to know about these kinds of hyperbolic accusations.

---

Unfortunately, the antisemites and terrorist apologists won't accept the intelligence and logic of his arguments.

Bigotry is always irrational.

---

The type of argument that Shapiro's using is an old and easily recognizable one. It's called lying.

---

What particular facts did he assert that you believe are false?

Does Hamas not use "human shields?" They have a history of doing so according to just about everyone who has looked at it.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

Does genocide not actually have a definition?

You don't have to think everything the IDF does is great to see that if they wanted to carry out a genocide in Gaza they would have used very different tactics. You can be an antisemitic Nazi and still concede that war and genocide are not the same thing.

---

Who are you calling an antisemitic Nazi?

---

No one. It is an example of how even someone who was an antisemitic Nazi might still be able to understand that not all war is genocide.

---

Well, the reason I use the term is precisely that it has been carefully defined, and the same authorities that defined it have documented it in the case of Gaza.

Shapiro's lie is that the IDF doesn't routinely level buildings with civilians inside. No one with any knowledge of their tactics can possibly believe that.

---

Civilians do die in wars independent of genocide. War, as said by someone who knew, is hell. However, a force committing genocide does not sent text messages, phone calls or voicemails, or drop leaflets, or engage in "roof knocking," in advance of attacks. Additionally, a force as powerful as the IDF would have no problem killing a hell of a lot more people if they were committing genocide.

Sometimes politics rather than clear analysis comes in to play in determining whether something is or is not genocide.

---

This has been thoroughly addressed, not only by the UN but also by Israeli human rights groups. Such warnings are ineffective when there's no safe place to go, no safe passage to get there, and you're being attacked every step of the way. The main purpose of the warnings wasn't to save lives but rather to help depopulate the cities and move more Palestinians into refugee camps (where the IDF didn't hesitate to bomb them again). Even if some lives were spared, at least temporarily, it doesn't excuse attacks on those who failed to evacuate.

Bottom line, there's a difference between issuing evacuation orders before entering urban combat according to accepted rules of war and issuing evacuation orders before engaging in indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Shapiro would have you believe Israel only does the former, but he knows that isn't true.

---

Evacuation orders are just that. You choose to stay in the war zone after being alerted to an attack, you either become a combatant or you have been coerced into staying by your local leaders. It does not fit the definition of genocide that you want it to so badly.

---

"In its previous report the Commission has found that the Israeli security forces intended to target and attack Palestinian civilians, including children, women, persons with disabilities and older persons, during their evacuation, within the designated safe zones and in shelters."

---

Apparently it was so pervasive that a high percentage of the Palestinian population died. But wait…

And can you link the report you are quoting so we can read the whole thing for ourselves?
Not a summation, but the actual report with names signed to it.

---

At least 5 percent as of 2025. I would argue 10 percent or more by now.

https://www.mpg.de/25778228/gaza-study-reveals-unprecedented-losses-of-life-and-life-expectancy

---

Your article is more about a study of Gaza life expectancy using models in place of unattainable hard data. It protects itself by stating,
". As genocide is a very specific legal term, certain additional criteria must be met for it to be applicable. This was not the focus of this study."

If we use the higher educated guess through modeling of 100,000 deaths - the Gaza authorities don't even claim that many and most of their claimed population loss is by displacement even as their numbers don't add up well - that is still less than 5 percent of the best guess of 2.13 million living in the Gaza Strip presently. The study the article is about won't claim an Israeli genocide and even speaks to the problem of the legal definition of the term. The deaths are attributed to conflict, which means it must include Hamas purges along with the collateral loss from the conflict being mostly in the Gaza Strip. Gaza even now still has the highest birth rate among Palestinian controlled areas, even with all the reported loss of food security, hospital care, child education, and housing.

The reports that support any talk of genocide by Israel are relying heavily on stats from the Palestinian Central Bureau.

https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/en/post-details/?postId=23319

---

There are many articles about the genocide. This one is about depopulation, in response to your point above. It's worth mentioning even though it's not strictly relevant (genocide is defined by actions and intent, not necessarily results).

Genocide deniers object to the casualty estimates mainly on two grounds -- either they rely too heavily on numbers from the Gaza Ministry of Health, or they don't rely on them heavily enough. You've managed to incorporate both complaints into your post, so I'll address them one at a time.

1) The widely cited number of 75K was first released about 16 months into the war. Since then the ability of health authorities to keep accurate records has greatly diminished as a result of Israeli attacks, so even those reports are long out of date (which begs the question, if they were making up numbers all along, why they didn't just keep doing so). 2) We also know that the rate of civilian casualties in Gaza is astronomically high compared to other wars, so the argument that the deaths consist largely of Hamas militants is not plausible.

In the absence of complete data, we're left with a combination of available records, scientific models, and ongoing recovery efforts (for example, a funeral for 75 newly recovered victims was held a few days ago). This is what is to be expected if you're trying to get the best estimate possible under the circumstances. Finally, it should be noted that the figures in the article are not the highest educated guess. On the contrary, they represent a minimum based on available evidence.

---

1) The point is the widely cited numbers came from one side in the conflict, the Palestinian Central Bureau. Their reports read like a full on propaganda peace, but somehow their numbers - which don't match up with the current population numbers - are taken as plausible. History says Palestinian stats are overblown. History also says how much Hamas likes to put civilians in harms way to influence world opinion in their favor. People who swallow these numbers are enabling a weird sort of genocide that you aren't talking about.

2) This is not even close to true. Especially for urban war. Yet you still swallow it.

---

"During the anti-ISIS campaign, the battles of Mosul and Raqqa were considered some of the fiercest urban fighting since the Second World War. Afterwards, the UN declared that the cities were practically uninhabitable, with at least 80 percent of the city of Mosul almost entirely destroyed.

"Throughout the report, these two battles are used as points of comparison for the rates of harm in Gaza."

historian said:

---

That's one of countless examples. The Hitler speech was one of his more radical rants. They had his teleprompter humming! IIRC, that one had less gibberish bug it was scarier because of the paranoid fantasies and extreme projection.

---

That was a dual Trump reference kid

william said:

---

>>
War is at best barbarism. ... Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation.
William Tecumseh Sherman

---

"War is hell."
William Tecumseh Sherman

Not really.
Fascists always project their fascism onto others.

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Ben Shapiro just dismantled the "genocide" argument masterfully

https://notthebee.com/takes/ben-shapiro-just-dismantled-the-genocide-argument-masterfully

On the idiotic accusation of genocide leveled at Israel:

Quote:

---

Is there any doubting that if given the same kind of advantages, Palestine's masters Hamas would not be so measured in their prosecution of the conflict? But leave speculation out of it, and the fact that Israel has sent its troops into dangerous urban combat rather than simply level buildings with civilians inside is all you need to know about these kinds of hyperbolic accusations.

---

Unfortunately, the antisemites and terrorist apologists won't accept the intelligence and logic of his arguments.

Bigotry is always irrational.

---

The type of argument that Shapiro's using is an old and easily recognizable one. It's called lying.

---

What particular facts did he assert that you believe are false?

Does Hamas not use "human shields?" They have a history of doing so according to just about everyone who has looked at it.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

Does genocide not actually have a definition?

You don't have to think everything the IDF does is great to see that if they wanted to carry out a genocide in Gaza they would have used very different tactics. You can be an antisemitic Nazi and still concede that war and genocide are not the same thing.

---

Who are you calling an antisemitic Nazi?

---

No one. It is an example of how even someone who was an antisemitic Nazi might still be able to understand that not all war is genocide.

---

Well, the reason I use the term is precisely that it has been carefully defined, and the same authorities that defined it have documented it in the case of Gaza.

Shapiro's lie is that the IDF doesn't routinely level buildings with civilians inside. No one with any knowledge of their tactics can possibly believe that.

---

Civilians do die in wars independent of genocide. War, as said by someone who knew, is hell. However, a force committing genocide does not sent text messages, phone calls or voicemails, or drop leaflets, or engage in "roof knocking," in advance of attacks. Additionally, a force as powerful as the IDF would have no problem killing a hell of a lot more people if they were committing genocide.

Sometimes politics rather than clear analysis comes in to play in determining whether something is or is not genocide.

---

This has been thoroughly addressed, not only by the UN but also by Israeli human rights groups. Such warnings are ineffective when there's no safe place to go, no safe passage to get there, and you're being attacked every step of the way. The main purpose of the warnings wasn't to save lives but rather to help depopulate the cities and move more Palestinians into refugee camps (where the IDF didn't hesitate to bomb them again). Even if some lives were spared, at least temporarily, it doesn't excuse attacks on those who failed to evacuate.

Bottom line, there's a difference between issuing evacuation orders before entering urban combat according to accepted rules of war and issuing evacuation orders before engaging in indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Shapiro would have you believe Israel only does the former, but he knows that isn't true.

---

Evacuation orders are just that. You choose to stay in the war zone after being alerted to an attack, you either become a combatant or you have been coerced into staying by your local leaders. It does not fit the definition of genocide that you want it to so badly.

---

"In its previous report the Commission has found that the Israeli security forces intended to target and attack Palestinian civilians, including children, women, persons with disabilities and older persons, during their evacuation, within the designated safe zones and in shelters."

---

Apparently it was so pervasive that a high percentage of the Palestinian population died. But wait…

And can you link the report you are quoting so we can read the whole thing for ourselves?
Not a summation, but the actual report with names signed to it.

---

At least 5 percent as of 2025. I would argue 10 percent or more by now.

https://www.mpg.de/25778228/gaza-study-reveals-unprecedented-losses-of-life-and-life-expectancy

---

Your article is more about a study of Gaza life expectancy using models in place of unattainable hard data. It protects itself by stating,
". As genocide is a very specific legal term, certain additional criteria must be met for it to be applicable. This was not the focus of this study."

If we use the higher educated guess through modeling of 100,000 deaths - the Gaza authorities don't even claim that many and most of their claimed population loss is by displacement even as their numbers don't add up well - that is still less than 5 percent of the best guess of 2.13 million living in the Gaza Strip presently. The study the article is about won't claim an Israeli genocide and even speaks to the problem of the legal definition of the term. The deaths are attributed to conflict, which means it must include Hamas purges along with the collateral loss from the conflict being mostly in the Gaza Strip. Gaza even now still has the highest birth rate among Palestinian controlled areas, even with all the reported loss of food security, hospital care, child education, and housing.

The reports that support any talk of genocide by Israel are relying heavily on stats from the Palestinian Central Bureau.

https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/en/post-details/?postId=23319

---

There are many articles about the genocide. This one is about depopulation, in response to your point above. It's worth mentioning even though it's not strictly relevant (genocide is defined by actions and intent, not necessarily results).

Genocide deniers object to the casualty estimates mainly on two grounds -- either they rely too heavily on numbers from the Gaza Ministry of Health, or they don't rely on them heavily enough. You've managed to incorporate both complaints into your post, so I'll address them one at a time.

1) The widely cited number of 75K was first released about 16 months into the war. Since then the ability of health authorities to keep accurate records has greatly diminished as a result of Israeli attacks, so even those reports are long out of date (which begs the question, if they were making up numbers all along, why they didn't just keep doing so). 2) We also know that the rate of civilian casualties in Gaza is astronomically high compared to other wars, so the argument that the deaths consist largely of Hamas militants is not plausible.

In the absence of complete data, we're left with a combination of available records, scientific models, and ongoing recovery efforts (for example, a funeral for 75 newly recovered victims was held a few days ago). This is what is to be expected if you're trying to get the best estimate possible under the circumstances. Finally, it should be noted that the figures in the article are not the highest educated guess. On the contrary, they represent a minimum based on available evidence.

---

1) The point is the widely cited numbers came from one side in the conflict, the Palestinian Central Bureau. Their reports read like a full on propaganda peace, but somehow their numbers - which don't match up with the current population numbers - are taken as plausible. History says Palestinian stats are overblown. History also says how much Hamas likes to put civilians in harms way to influence world opinion in their favor. People who swallow these numbers are enabling a weird sort of genocide that you aren't talking about.

2) This is not even close to true. Especially for urban war. Yet you still swallow it.

---

"During the anti-ISIS campaign, the battles of Mosul and Raqqa were considered some of the fiercest urban fighting since the Second World War. Afterwards, the UN declared that the cities were practically uninhabitable, with at least 80 percent of the city of Mosul almost entirely destroyed.

"Throughout the report, these two battles are used as points of comparison for the rates of harm in Gaza."

---

https://www.rand.org/nsrd/projects/when-isil-comes-to-town/case-studies/mosul.html

Population

"ISIL attempted to prevent residents of Mosul from fleeing its caliphate, with limited success. Researchers used the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's ORNL LandScan estimates of Mosul's population in 2008, 2015, and 2016 to explore the extent to which Mosul's population fluctuated in response to ISIL's takeover of the city. This analysis was restricted to the urban core of Mosul as opposed to its full environs, so total population figures might fall slightly below other published estimates.

Pre-ISIL estimates of Mosul's population show that nearly 1.2 million people inhabited the urban core of the city in 2008. By February 2015, we estimate, the city's population fell by more than 300,000 people after only a year of ISIL control over the city, or nearly 30 percent of its pre-ISIL population. Between mid-2015 and mid-2016, researchers estimate, an additional 220,000 people fled Mosul. Combined, our most-recent estimates suggest that Mosul's population was nearly cut in half under ISIL's reign, even before massive flows of internally displaced persons began during Mosul's liberation. It suggests that despite ISIL's efforts to limit population movements out of the city, Mosul's residents still fled in the hundreds of thousands while the group retained total control of the city."

Mosul and immediate suburbs district in 2016 had over 1900 square miles and estimates of 800,000 to 1.2 million in population. Core city population is estimated above, and dropped dramatically during the urban fighting. Compared to Gaza, the Mosul population was very dispersed into an accessible land area over 10 times the size.

The Gaza Strip has 140 square miles and in 2023 had 2.1 - 2.4 million estimated population in that small space, depending on the source. It now has an estimated…. 2.1 million people according to the Palestinian authorities.

While Mosul was brutal with around 10,000 civilian deaths, much of its population was able to flee the core city into the suburbs.
By comparison, Gaza's civilians could not get out of their core urban area as that's all they have. Plus Hamas had decades to place military infrastructure like their well known hardened tunnels under civilian buildings throughout the Gaza Strip.
Sadly, both Gaza and Mosul civilians sometimes faced execution from authorities if they did not stay put as human shields in areas prone to attack.

Also, the same groups claiming genocide in Gaza complained that the Iraqi coalition forces including the US were using too powerful weapons to attack ISYL, and were… you guessed it… purposely killing civilians placed as human shields.

59 years ago, @Israel forces attacked the U.S. Navy ship USS Liberty in international waters during the Six-Day War, killing 34 Americans and wounding 171. We will never forget their sacrifice.

The attack was carried out by Israeli jets and torpedo boats that struck a clearly… pic.twitter.com/f1fwU8LKcn

— 51stState🐦🌹 End The #GenocideInRealTime 💔 (@Fifty1stState) October 23, 2026

More perfidious behavior from our "greatest ally"

It's been reported by the Telegraph that Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered Israel to support Argentina on the Falklands over Britain.

Why should Britain be expected to defend Israel's national interests if Israel's leadership refuses to respect ours?

Britain is not obliged to give…

— Rupert Lowe MP (@RupertLowe10) October 24, 2026

Exactly. Israel is no friend of the UK, or arguably any Western nation.

Everything they do is for their own benefit. They expect unconditional support while providing nothing in return.

Britain first - Britain only!

— David (@TrueBritVoice) October 24, 2026

HIGH ALERT:

AMERICA AT WAR.

WAR.

>>
Chilling US intelligence memo warns Iran's plots to assassinate American officials are in 'advanced stages'...as diplomats are pulled from Middle East embassies

A new memo circulated by US intelligence claims that Iran is in the 'advanced stages' of plots to kill American officials in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The news comes amid another spike in oil prices and rumors that Donald Trump may resume strikes on Tehran after the midterm elections.

The memo, written by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton and addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, suggests the information should be used as part of a continued effort to draw down personnel at US embassies.

Clayton said his teams 'have received intelligence that Iran has substantially increased efforts to target US personnel.'

'The lethal plotting efforts by the Iranians against US citizens have reached advanced stages in both the Middle East and certain other countries,' Clayton wrote.

Three US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, confirmed to the Associated Press that the memo was sent to Rubio in his capacity as secretary of state and national security adviser.

The memo emerged shortly after the State Department announced it is reducing staff at the US embassies in Jordan, Lebanon, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

The three officials said the threats from Iran and Yemen's Iranian-backed Houthi rebels are related to the staffing changes.

The embassies involved are all under what is known as 'restricted operations' status that has already reduced the size of their personnel footprints.

The embassies will remain open.

However, unlike in Saudi Arabia, where nonessential US personnel and their families were ordered Wednesday to leave the country, staff in the other four countries are not compelled to depart.

In announcing the staffing drawdowns this week, the State Department pointed specifically to increased threats from Yemen's Houthi rebels and did not mention threats to US personnel directly from Iran.

There has been a resurgence of fighting between a Saudi-led coalition and the Houthis, with the militant group launching missile and drone strikes against Saudi Arabia.

US officials have adamantly denied the drawdowns are tied to any potential new US and Israeli strikes on Iran.

The Daily Mail has reached out to the White House and the State Department for comment.

Oil prices spiked on Thursday after a report revealed Donald Trump and Israel have drawn up plans to unleash new attacks on Iran once the midterm elections are over.
<<

WAR.



- el UF

DEVELOPING!

WAR!!

- el UF

D!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

Go Bears!!

Beat the 'Hawks!!!

Viva il Donaldo!!!!

william said:

---

HIGH ALERT:

AMERICA AT WAR.

WAR.

>>
Chilling US intelligence memo warns Iran's plots to assassinate American officials are in 'advanced stages'...as diplomats are pulled from Middle East embassies

A new memo circulated by US intelligence claims that Iran is in the 'advanced stages' of plots to kill American officials in the Middle East and elsewhere.

The news comes amid another spike in oil prices and rumors that Donald Trump may resume strikes on Tehran after the midterm elections.

The memo, written by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton and addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, suggests the information should be used as part of a continued effort to draw down personnel at US embassies.

Clayton said his teams 'have received intelligence that Iran has substantially increased efforts to target US personnel.'

'The lethal plotting efforts by the Iranians against US citizens have reached advanced stages in both the Middle East and certain other countries,' Clayton wrote.

Three US officials, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, confirmed to the Associated Press that the memo was sent to Rubio in his capacity as secretary of state and national security adviser.

The memo emerged shortly after the State Department announced it is reducing staff at the US embassies in Jordan, Lebanon, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

The three officials said the threats from Iran and Yemen's Iranian-backed Houthi rebels are related to the staffing changes.

The embassies involved are all under what is known as 'restricted operations' status that has already reduced the size of their personnel footprints.

The embassies will remain open.

However, unlike in Saudi Arabia, where nonessential US personnel and their families were ordered Wednesday to leave the country, staff in the other four countries are not compelled to depart.

In announcing the staffing drawdowns this week, the State Department pointed specifically to increased threats from Yemen's Houthi rebels and did not mention threats to US personnel directly from Iran.

There has been a resurgence of fighting between a Saudi-led coalition and the Houthis, with the militant group launching missile and drone strikes against Saudi Arabia.

US officials have adamantly denied the drawdowns are tied to any potential new US and Israeli strikes on Iran.

The Daily Mail has reached out to the White House and the State Department for comment.

Oil prices spiked on Thursday after a report revealed Donald Trump and Israel have drawn up plans to unleash new attacks on Iran once the midterm elections are over.
<<

WAR.



- el UF

DEVELOPING!

WAR!!

---

Everyone in the Trump admin should resign and apologize for placing Israel's interests above the interests of the American people.... then and only then will I care if Iran assassinates any of them.

I need to see some contrition first for betraying their voters to serve Israel.

Iran would love to spark a resumption of US attacks right now. They're trying really hard with what they have.

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Ben Shapiro just dismantled the "genocide" argument masterfully

https://notthebee.com/takes/ben-shapiro-just-dismantled-the-genocide-argument-masterfully

On the idiotic accusation of genocide leveled at Israel:

Quote:

---

Is there any doubting that if given the same kind of advantages, Palestine's masters Hamas would not be so measured in their prosecution of the conflict? But leave speculation out of it, and the fact that Israel has sent its troops into dangerous urban combat rather than simply level buildings with civilians inside is all you need to know about these kinds of hyperbolic accusations.

---

Unfortunately, the antisemites and terrorist apologists won't accept the intelligence and logic of his arguments.

Bigotry is always irrational.

---

The type of argument that Shapiro's using is an old and easily recognizable one. It's called lying.

---

What particular facts did he assert that you believe are false?

Does Hamas not use "human shields?" They have a history of doing so according to just about everyone who has looked at it.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

Does genocide not actually have a definition?

You don't have to think everything the IDF does is great to see that if they wanted to carry out a genocide in Gaza they would have used very different tactics. You can be an antisemitic Nazi and still concede that war and genocide are not the same thing.

---

Who are you calling an antisemitic Nazi?

---

No one. It is an example of how even someone who was an antisemitic Nazi might still be able to understand that not all war is genocide.

---

Well, the reason I use the term is precisely that it has been carefully defined, and the same authorities that defined it have documented it in the case of Gaza.

Shapiro's lie is that the IDF doesn't routinely level buildings with civilians inside. No one with any knowledge of their tactics can possibly believe that.

---

Civilians do die in wars independent of genocide. War, as said by someone who knew, is hell. However, a force committing genocide does not sent text messages, phone calls or voicemails, or drop leaflets, or engage in "roof knocking," in advance of attacks. Additionally, a force as powerful as the IDF would have no problem killing a hell of a lot more people if they were committing genocide.

Sometimes politics rather than clear analysis comes in to play in determining whether something is or is not genocide.

---

This has been thoroughly addressed, not only by the UN but also by Israeli human rights groups. Such warnings are ineffective when there's no safe place to go, no safe passage to get there, and you're being attacked every step of the way. The main purpose of the warnings wasn't to save lives but rather to help depopulate the cities and move more Palestinians into refugee camps (where the IDF didn't hesitate to bomb them again). Even if some lives were spared, at least temporarily, it doesn't excuse attacks on those who failed to evacuate.

Bottom line, there's a difference between issuing evacuation orders before entering urban combat according to accepted rules of war and issuing evacuation orders before engaging in indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Shapiro would have you believe Israel only does the former, but he knows that isn't true.

---

Im curious, so what would the IDF need to do then, to avoid your ire. As long as 1 civilian fails to evacuate, not fight back in a war clearly started by a horrendous, terrorist foe?

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Iran would love to spark a resumption of US attacks right now. They're trying really hard with what they have.

---

This is quite possibly the stupidest post i've ever seen on this board.

The Iranian leadership has been completely killed off, thousands of civilians dead, large swaths of the population left without water and electricity...

Israel would love nothing more than to resume the Iran war, specifically Satanyahu. Israeli elections are next week and he would love an excuse to declare martial law and freeze the elections.

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Ben Shapiro just dismantled the "genocide" argument masterfully

https://notthebee.com/takes/ben-shapiro-just-dismantled-the-genocide-argument-masterfully

On the idiotic accusation of genocide leveled at Israel:

Quote:

---

Is there any doubting that if given the same kind of advantages, Palestine's masters Hamas would not be so measured in their prosecution of the conflict? But leave speculation out of it, and the fact that Israel has sent its troops into dangerous urban combat rather than simply level buildings with civilians inside is all you need to know about these kinds of hyperbolic accusations.

---

Unfortunately, the antisemites and terrorist apologists won't accept the intelligence and logic of his arguments.

Bigotry is always irrational.

---

The type of argument that Shapiro's using is an old and easily recognizable one. It's called lying.

---

What particular facts did he assert that you believe are false?

Does Hamas not use "human shields?" They have a history of doing so according to just about everyone who has looked at it.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

Does genocide not actually have a definition?

You don't have to think everything the IDF does is great to see that if they wanted to carry out a genocide in Gaza they would have used very different tactics. You can be an antisemitic Nazi and still concede that war and genocide are not the same thing.

---

Who are you calling an antisemitic Nazi?

---

No one. It is an example of how even someone who was an antisemitic Nazi might still be able to understand that not all war is genocide.

---

Well, the reason I use the term is precisely that it has been carefully defined, and the same authorities that defined it have documented it in the case of Gaza.

Shapiro's lie is that the IDF doesn't routinely level buildings with civilians inside. No one with any knowledge of their tactics can possibly believe that.

---

Civilians do die in wars independent of genocide. War, as said by someone who knew, is hell. However, a force committing genocide does not sent text messages, phone calls or voicemails, or drop leaflets, or engage in "roof knocking," in advance of attacks. Additionally, a force as powerful as the IDF would have no problem killing a hell of a lot more people if they were committing genocide.

Sometimes politics rather than clear analysis comes in to play in determining whether something is or is not genocide.

---

This has been thoroughly addressed, not only by the UN but also by Israeli human rights groups. Such warnings are ineffective when there's no safe place to go, no safe passage to get there, and you're being attacked every step of the way. The main purpose of the warnings wasn't to save lives but rather to help depopulate the cities and move more Palestinians into refugee camps (where the IDF didn't hesitate to bomb them again). Even if some lives were spared, at least temporarily, it doesn't excuse attacks on those who failed to evacuate.

Bottom line, there's a difference between issuing evacuation orders before entering urban combat according to accepted rules of war and issuing evacuation orders before engaging in indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Shapiro would have you believe Israel only does the former, but he knows that isn't true.

---

Im curious, so what would the IDF need to do then, to avoid your ire. As long as 1 civilian fails to evacuate, not fight back in a war clearly started by a horrendous, terrorist foe?

---

Fighting the wars they start without my country's involvment using their own money, weapons, and blood.

Islamic WAR in Jordon:

>>
JERUSALEM (AP) A survivor of a deadly attack on a church in Jordan described people crawling for their lives and watching the gunmen return to fire more bullets into the dying as well as at the church facade. The death toll rose to nine on Saturday, a day after the attack, with nearly 40 others wounded.


The motivation was still unknown for the shooting at a Greek Orthodox church in Karak, about 90 kilometers (55
miles) south of the capital, Amman. Karak is home to a minority Christian population.

There was still no claim of responsibility, and no armed group has been accused of the attack that Jordan's government described as a "terrorist" act.

King Abdullah II directed authorities to respond with "an iron fist" against what he called the outlaws of Islam and anyone attempting to undermine the unity of the Jordanian people.

Friday's attack happened as people had gathered for a funeral. Some people were chatting outside the church when something sounded like an engine backfiring.

"All of a sudden, three masked men appeared, armed with automatic weapons, and began firing indiscriminately at those of us standing outside," witness Saed al-Halaseh recalled.

"Even then, they weren't finished; they came and stood right here, firing at the facade of the church, this part right here," he added.

Al-Halaseh described how people he knew were shot in the head or the back as others tried to flee. He dropped to the ground and crawled behind a nearby car, which he said saved him.

Jordan, and especially Karak, has been seen as a symbol of religious coexistence, al-Halaseh said.

"The sense of security we once had, the very foundation we grew up with, has, sadly, vanished," he added. "They were simply mourners at a funeral. I cannot fathom what the perpetrators could have possibly wanted from them. I don't believe any religion in the world could condone what happened. It was truly a massacre."

And "they weren't satisfied with just the initial casualties. They went back and fired on everyone again. They returned to finish off those who had already been hit," he said.

The_barBEARian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

Ben Shapiro just dismantled the "genocide" argument masterfully

https://notthebee.com/takes/ben-shapiro-just-dismantled-the-genocide-argument-masterfully

On the idiotic accusation of genocide leveled at Israel:

Quote:

---

Is there any doubting that if given the same kind of advantages, Palestine's masters Hamas would not be so measured in their prosecution of the conflict? But leave speculation out of it, and the fact that Israel has sent its troops into dangerous urban combat rather than simply level buildings with civilians inside is all you need to know about these kinds of hyperbolic accusations.

---

Unfortunately, the antisemites and terrorist apologists won't accept the intelligence and logic of his arguments.

Bigotry is always irrational.

---

The type of argument that Shapiro's using is an old and easily recognizable one. It's called lying.

---

What particular facts did he assert that you believe are false?

Does Hamas not use "human shields?" They have a history of doing so according to just about everyone who has looked at it.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

Does genocide not actually have a definition?

You don't have to think everything the IDF does is great to see that if they wanted to carry out a genocide in Gaza they would have used very different tactics. You can be an antisemitic Nazi and still concede that war and genocide are not the same thing.

---

Who are you calling an antisemitic Nazi?

---

No one. It is an example of how even someone who was an antisemitic Nazi might still be able to understand that not all war is genocide.

---

Well, the reason I use the term is precisely that it has been carefully defined, and the same authorities that defined it have documented it in the case of Gaza.

Shapiro's lie is that the IDF doesn't routinely level buildings with civilians inside. No one with any knowledge of their tactics can possibly believe that.

---

Civilians do die in wars independent of genocide. War, as said by someone who knew, is hell. However, a force committing genocide does not sent text messages, phone calls or voicemails, or drop leaflets, or engage in "roof knocking," in advance of attacks. Additionally, a force as powerful as the IDF would have no problem killing a hell of a lot more people if they were committing genocide.

Sometimes politics rather than clear analysis comes in to play in determining whether something is or is not genocide.

---

This has been thoroughly addressed, not only by the UN but also by Israeli human rights groups. Such warnings are ineffective when there's no safe place to go, no safe passage to get there, and you're being attacked every step of the way. The main purpose of the warnings wasn't to save lives but rather to help depopulate the cities and move more Palestinians into refugee camps (where the IDF didn't hesitate to bomb them again). Even if some lives were spared, at least temporarily, it doesn't excuse attacks on those who failed to evacuate.

Bottom line, there's a difference between issuing evacuation orders before entering urban combat according to accepted rules of war and issuing evacuation orders before engaging in indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Shapiro would have you believe Israel only does the former, but he knows that isn't true.

---

Im curious, so what would the IDF need to do then, to avoid your ire. As long as 1 civilian fails to evacuate, not fight back in a war clearly started by a horrendous, terrorist foe?

---

Fighting the wars they start without my country's involvment using their own money, weapons, and blood.

---

That's certainly a valid argument. It's one thing to contribute towards defense, but we make enough mistakes ourselves, so when we pay for others' wars, we have actually no control over what happens, and who dies.

But off topic, has nothing to do with what I posted.

william said:

---

Islamic WAR in Jordon:

>>
JERUSALEM (AP) A survivor of a deadly attack on a church in Jordan described people crawling for their lives and watching the gunmen return to fire more bullets into the dying as well as at the church facade. The death toll rose to nine on Saturday, a day after the attack, with nearly 40 others wounded.


The motivation was still unknown for the shooting at a Greek Orthodox church in Karak, about 90 kilometers (55
miles) south of the capital, Amman. Karak is home to a minority Christian population.

There was still no claim of responsibility, and no armed group has been accused of the attack that Jordan's government described as a "terrorist" act.

King Abdullah II directed authorities to respond with "an iron fist" against what he called the outlaws of Islam and anyone attempting to undermine the unity of the Jordanian people.

Friday's attack happened as people had gathered for a funeral. Some people were chatting outside the church when something sounded like an engine backfiring.

"All of a sudden, three masked men appeared, armed with automatic weapons, and began firing indiscriminately at those of us standing outside," witness Saed al-Halaseh recalled.

"Even then, they weren't finished; they came and stood right here, firing at the facade of the church, this part right here," he added.

Al-Halaseh described how people he knew were shot in the head or the back as others tried to flee. He dropped to the ground and crawled behind a nearby car, which he said saved him.

Jordan, and especially Karak, has been seen as a symbol of religious coexistence, al-Halaseh said.

"The sense of security we once had, the very foundation we grew up with, has, sadly, vanished," he added. "They were simply mourners at a funeral. I cannot fathom what the perpetrators could have possibly wanted from them. I don't believe any religion in the world could condone what happened. It was truly a massacre."

And "they weren't satisfied with just the initial casualties. They went back and fired on everyone again. They returned to finish off those who had already been hit," he said.

---

Pure evil, we can all agree.

War.

JUST IN: 🇬🇧🇮🇱 UK MP Rupert Lowe calls to end "unconditional" political and military support to Israel.

"Why should Britain be expected to defend Israel's national interests if Israel's leadership refuses to respect ours?" pic.twitter.com/RaG68vUbCR

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) October 24, 2026

Netanyahu is grossly mistaken if he believes he has any say over the future of the Falklands.

The people of the Falklands determine their future, and they have been clear: it is a British one. https://t.co/X77GKrVU5h

— Alicia Kearns MP (@aliciakearns) October 24, 2026

Israel is stating it will back Argentina against the Brits over the Falklands.

They sent them arms in the last war too.

If you're a White man on the right with British ancestry but continue to support Israel, I curse you.

The Brits are our friends and loyal allies. pic.twitter.com/xyoQR5Cn7v

— Michael WildHorse 🪶🇺🇸 (@Wild_Horse) October 24, 2026

The_barBEARian said:

---

Israel is stating it will back Argentina against the Brits over the Falklands.

They sent them arms in the last war too.

If you're a White man on the right with British ancestry but continue to support Israel, I curse you.

The Brits are our friends and loyal allies. pic.twitter.com/xyoQR5Cn7v

— Michael WildHorse 🪶🇺🇸 (@Wild_Horse) October 24, 2026

---

To be fair, the Brits declined to be much help in dealing with Iran.

Argentina isn't going to do anything.

D. C. Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Israel is stating it will back Argentina against the Brits over the Falklands.

They sent them arms in the last war too.

If you're a White man on the right with British ancestry but continue to support Israel, I curse you.

The Brits are our friends and loyal allies. pic.twitter.com/xyoQR5Cn7v

— Michael WildHorse 🪶🇺🇸 (@Wild_Horse) October 24, 2026

---

To be fair, the Brits declined to be much help in dealing with Iran.

Argentina isn't going to do anything.

---

Why do you believe that?

They already fought one war over the islands.

The_barBEARian said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

The_barBEARian said:

---

Israel is stating it will back Argentina against the Brits over the Falklands.

They sent them arms in the last war too.

If you're a White man on the right with British ancestry but continue to support Israel, I curse you.

The Brits are our friends and loyal allies. pic.twitter.com/xyoQR5Cn7v

— Michael WildHorse 🪶🇺🇸 (@Wild_Horse) October 24, 2026

---

To be fair, the Brits declined to be much help in dealing with Iran.

Argentina isn't going to do anything.

---

Why do you believe that?

They already fought one war over the islands.

---

Probably because of how that war worked out for them.