christophero said:

Watching Nights in Rodanthe, the romance about two middle aged people in bad marriages who find each other in a beach hotel during a hurricane. It's pretty good mostly due to Dianne Lane and Richard Gere, but Nicolas Sparks' books/films tend to be emotionally manipulative and plays like catnip for bored middle aged housewives. My favorite Sparks book and film is still his first; Message in a Bottle.

Click to expand...

Let me add that Dianne Lane is a good actress and a smart and well rounded person

Watching Nights in Rodanthe, the romance about two middle aged people in bad marriages who find each other in a beach hotel during a hurricane. It's pretty good mostly due to Dianne Lane and Richard Gere, but Nicolas Sparks' books/films tend to be emotionally manipulative and plays like catnip for bored middle aged housewives. My favorite Sparks book and film is still his first; Message in a Bottle.

Th0r said:

Whatever makes you feel better.

Click to expand...

No. That doesn't make me feel better. It frustrates me. But I have no reason not to show you respect, so I will respectively bow out. We obviously support different grievances.

It’s late, and we’re going in circles. I’ve laid out my argument without attacking either of you. If disagreement alone is enough to set you off, that’s on you—not me. Thanks for the conversation.

GhostOf301 said:

I feel like I am talking to a bot.

Click to expand...

Whatever makes you feel better.

Th0r said:

No, Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza today—and they weren’t on October 6th either. That reality isn’t in dispute. But it doesn’t prove that indefinite blockade or military control is the answer. It reflects how far the situation has deteriorated after years of war, siege, and political failure.

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown—not a justification for repeating the same failed strategy. If the goal is real security, it won’t come from doing more of what’s already led to permanent crisis.

Click to expand...

You seem to dismiss entirely the role of antisemitism in all this. If your above theories are true, why are Jews targeted by Muslims all over the world for hate crimes? Muslims who have never set foot in Gaza or the West Bank but have been raised in Western countries?

KDSTONE said:

For the last time, the standard you are holding Israel to makes it impossible to get rid of Hamas. If the Idf waits until Hamas is not hiding behind civilians or in heavily populated centers, this war will last forever, which is exactly what you claim not to want. We’ve discussed many things on this board lately. I find it interesting that you only show up to first pretend to be a neutral observer but then when that jig is up you eventually reveal your true motives: the usual anti-Israel comments we could find in the comments section on most any pro Hamas Facebook page. Well played sir

Click to expand...

That’s a dishonest take. I’ve clearly called out Hamas and its tactics. Holding Israel to the laws of war isn’t bias—it’s basic accountability.

If you’ve got a real argument, make it. Otherwise, stop deflecting

Th0r said:

No, Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza today—and they weren’t on October 6th either. That reality isn’t in dispute. But it doesn’t prove that indefinite blockade or military control is the answer. It reflects how far the situation has deteriorated after years of war, siege, and political failure.

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown—not a justification for repeating the same failed strategy. If the goal is real security, it won’t come from doing more of what’s already led to permanent crisis.

Click to expand...

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown.
Or it could be that they just really hate Jews, but it’s always Israel’s fault right?

Th0r said:

No, Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza today—and they weren’t on October 6th either. That reality isn’t in dispute. But it doesn’t prove that indefinite blockade or military control is the answer. It reflects how far the situation has deteriorated after years of war, siege, and political failure.

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown—not a justification for repeating the same failed strategy. If the goal is real security, it won’t come from doing more of what’s already led to permanent crisis.

Click to expand...

I feel like I am talking to a bot.

Th0r said:

No, Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza today—and they weren’t on October 6th either. That reality isn’t in dispute. But it doesn’t prove that indefinite blockade or military control is the answer. It reflects how far the situation has deteriorated after years of war, siege, and political failure.

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown—not a justification for repeating the same failed strategy. If the goal is real security, it won’t come from doing more of what’s already led to permanent crisis.

Click to expand...

Wrong again. Jews wouldn’t have been safe in 1900, 1940, or 2023. It’s because they hate Jews. It’s why they supported the Nazis before Israel was even partitioned.

GhostOf301 said:

Okay. I made an obvious mistake and gave you an easy out. On October 6th, 2023, do you think it was safe for Jews in Gaza?

Click to expand...

No, Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza today—and they weren’t on October 6th either. That reality isn’t in dispute. But it doesn’t prove that indefinite blockade or military control is the answer. It reflects how far the situation has deteriorated after years of war, siege, and political failure.

The lack of safety is a symptom of that breakdown—not a justification for repeating the same failed strategy. If the goal is real security, it won’t come from doing more of what’s already led to permanent crisis.

Th0r said:

These aren’t just opinions—they’re established legal standards: proportionality, distinction, and the prohibition of collective punishment. You may disagree with how they’re applied, but they’re not made up.

Yes, Hamas fighters disguised themselves on October 7. That’s a war crime. It doesn’t justify abandoning the laws of war in response. When identification is difficult, the obligation is to protect civilians—not assume everyone is a target.

Saying Israeli policy fuels extremism isn’t blaming Jews or asking anyone to roll over. It’s recognizing that strategy has consequences. If the goal is real security, not just retaliation, those choices matter.


Genocide has a legal threshold. Large-scale civilian targeting and deprivation may not meet it, but they can still be war crimes. The absence of total extermination doesn’t mean there’s no wrongdoing.

Hamas stealing aid is real and indefensible. But it doesn’t justify cutting off food, water, and medicine for millions. That’s collective punishment—and it backfires by strengthening the very group it’s meant to weaken.

Hostage mistreatment shows the need for better monitoring of aid, not a reason to block it entirely.


Saying Israel has the right to defend itself and must follow the laws of war isn’t a contradiction—it’s the standard every military is held to. That includes distinguishing civilians, avoiding disproportionate force, and not punishing entire populations.

Attacking me or trying to paint me as someone who denies Israel’s right to exist is disingenuous. I’ve been clear from the start: defense is justified—indiscriminate tactics aren’t. If you think “defense” means anything goes, that’s not a right. That’s a blank check.


The repeated personal attacks don’t strengthen your argument—they just signal you’re not engaging in good faith. Calling me naïve doesn’t change the facts.

Radicalization exists, but it’s not genetic or cultural—it’s political, generational, and driven by lived experience. If extremism were inherent, there’d be no point in diplomacy, policy shifts, or even ceasefires. But history shows people can change when conditions change. Writing off an entire population because of their religion or birthplace isn’t strategy—it’s prejudice.

Click to expand...

I’ll go ahead and write off the kids taught in schools in “Palestine”

Th0r said:

These aren’t just opinions—they’re established legal standards: proportionality, distinction, and the prohibition of collective punishment. You may disagree with how they’re applied, but they’re not made up.

Yes, Hamas fighters disguised themselves on October 7. That’s a war crime. It doesn’t justify abandoning the laws of war in response. When identification is difficult, the obligation is to protect civilians—not assume everyone is a target.

Saying Israeli policy fuels extremism isn’t blaming Jews or asking anyone to roll over. It’s recognizing that strategy has consequences. If the goal is real security, not just retaliation, those choices matter.


Genocide has a legal threshold. Large-scale civilian targeting and deprivation may not meet it, but they can still be war crimes. The absence of total extermination doesn’t mean there’s no wrongdoing.

Hamas stealing aid is real and indefensible. But it doesn’t justify cutting off food, water, and medicine for millions. That’s collective punishment—and it backfires by strengthening the very group it’s meant to weaken.

Hostage mistreatment shows the need for better monitoring of aid, not a reason to block it entirely.


Saying Israel has the right to defend itself and must follow the laws of war isn’t a contradiction—it’s the standard every military is held to. That includes distinguishing civilians, avoiding disproportionate force, and not punishing entire populations.

Attacking me or trying to paint me as someone who denies Israel’s right to exist is disingenuous. I’ve been clear from the start: defense is justified—indiscriminate tactics aren’t. If you think “defense” means anything goes, that’s not a right. That’s a blank check.


The repeated personal attacks don’t strengthen your argument—they just signal you’re not engaging in good faith. Calling me naïve doesn’t change the facts.

Radicalization exists, but it’s not genetic or cultural—it’s political, generational, and driven by lived experience. If extremism were inherent, there’d be no point in diplomacy, policy shifts, or even ceasefires. But history shows people can change when conditions change. Writing off an entire population because of their religion or birthplace isn’t strategy—it’s prejudice.

Click to expand...

For the last time, the standard you are holding Israel to makes it impossible to get rid of Hamas. If the Idf waits until Hamas is not hiding behind civilians or in heavily populated centers, this war will last forever, which is exactly what you claim not to want. We’ve discussed many things on this board lately. I find it interesting that you only show up to first pretend to be a neutral observer but then when that jig is up you eventually reveal your true motives: the usual anti-Israel comments we could find in the comments section on most any pro Hamas Facebook page. Well played sir

I am a huge fan of Scheyer. And was surprised, but open to the idea of him being Duke's next coach. This year aside, in both of his first two seasons, the team was better in February than they were in December. Pro and con type years. The pros were better than the cons despite what the haters will say. So to me, with that in mind, I feel like that will lead to more confidence. And this year shows that. We don't know if Duke will play their last game on Saturday or Monday. But damn I want them to win and Scheyer to have this achievement in only 3 years. I don't want him to be the guy who is always chasing it.

KDSTONE said:

“To dodge real accountability”. Wut?
I’ve been given answers? Wut? I thought they were opinions.
And you’ve already been shown that distinguishing between civilians and combatants is often impossible. Most of the perps on Oct 7 were dressed as civilians. It’s in Hamas’ interest to keep the war going. That’s how they get rich, the ones that can stay alive anyway.
Saying Israeli policy has fueled extremism may be true. Damn those Jews for having the audacity not to just roll over and be slaughtered!

Click to expand...

These aren’t just opinions—they’re established legal standards: proportionality, distinction, and the prohibition of collective punishment. You may disagree with how they’re applied, but they’re not made up.

Yes, Hamas fighters disguised themselves on October 7. That’s a war crime. It doesn’t justify abandoning the laws of war in response. When identification is difficult, the obligation is to protect civilians—not assume everyone is a target.

Saying Israeli policy fuels extremism isn’t blaming Jews or asking anyone to roll over. It’s recognizing that strategy has consequences. If the goal is real security, not just retaliation, those choices matter.

KDSTONE said:

The absence of full scale genocide. So there’s a partial genocide?
Limiting aid. Uh, yeh, because most of it’s confiscated by Hamas.
Released hostages state that their captors ate from food boxes marked USAID while they subsisted on less than 200 c a day for a year and a half.

Click to expand...

Genocide has a legal threshold. Large-scale civilian targeting and deprivation may not meet it, but they can still be war crimes. The absence of total extermination doesn’t mean there’s no wrongdoing.

Hamas stealing aid is real and indefensible. But it doesn’t justify cutting off food, water, and medicine for millions. That’s collective punishment—and it backfires by strengthening the very group it’s meant to weaken.

Hostage mistreatment shows the need for better monitoring of aid, not a reason to block it entirely.

KDSTONE said:

Israel has the right to defend itself, but…..
You clearly don’t think Israel has a right to defend itself so don’t insult everyone here by continuing to say it.

Click to expand...

Saying Israel has the right to defend itself and must follow the laws of war isn’t a contradiction—it’s the standard every military is held to. That includes distinguishing civilians, avoiding disproportionate force, and not punishing entire populations.

Attacking me or trying to paint me as someone who denies Israel’s right to exist is disingenuous. I’ve been clear from the start: defense is justified—indiscriminate tactics aren’t. If you think “defense” means anything goes, that’s not a right. That’s a blank check.

KDSTONE said:

You’re naive and underestimate how ingrained radical Islam is in this culture. You act like Israel is dealing with Swedes. Muslims who have never set foot in Gaza are just as radicalized

Click to expand...

The repeated personal attacks don’t strengthen your argument—they just signal you’re not engaging in good faith. Calling me naïve doesn’t change the facts.

Radicalization exists, but it’s not genetic or cultural—it’s political, generational, and driven by lived experience. If extremism were inherent, there’d be no point in diplomacy, policy shifts, or even ceasefires. But history shows people can change when conditions change. Writing off an entire population because of their religion or birthplace isn’t strategy—it’s prejudice.

A lot of sloppiness....

But damn if the talent possessed by both brothers is not immense and evident!

Th0r said:

The fear and trauma Israelis live with is real. I haven’t denied it, and acknowledging Palestinian suffering doesn’t erase Israeli pain.

I don’t downplay threats—Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are serious. Israel has the right to defend itself. But that right doesn’t override legal and moral responsibility. Power still comes with limits.

This isn’t about blaming Israel for everything. It’s recognizing that decades of occupation, blockade, and settlement growth haven’t brought peace—they’ve hardened the conflict. That’s not justification for violence; it’s a call to reassess what clearly isn’t working.

Saying most Muslims want Israel gone is an overreach. Hostility is real in some places, but public opinion shifts when trust is built. Israel has made peace before. It’s not impossible—it’s just not happening with the current approach.

Click to expand...

“Saying most Muslims want Israel gone is an overreach”

So only half want Israel annihilated. I stand corrected. You’ve had some interesting points, and clearly have all the requisite lingo down: proportionate, occupation, not a full scale genocide, but you clearly don’t understand Islam and have never read the Quran. Read it sometime and get back to us. Saying it’s a political struggle, not a religious one, is a convenient way to focus on Israeli policy and not have to discuss that Big Ass elephant in the room

Th0r said:

Right now, no—Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza. But that’s the result of years of war, siege, and mutual dehumanization—not some inherent truth about Palestinians.

Gaza is not safe for anyone, including most of the people who live there. The solution isn’t indefinite military control or isolation—it’s building a political future where coexistence isn’t unthinkable. That won’t happen overnight. But accepting permanent hostility as a given only guarantees more violence on both sides.

Click to expand...

Okay. I made an obvious mistake and gave you an easy out. On October 6th, 2023, do you think it was safe for Jews in Gaza?

Th0r said:

Right now, no—Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza. But that’s the result of years of war, siege, and mutual dehumanization—not some inherent truth about Palestinians.

Gaza is not safe for anyone, including most of the people who live there. The solution isn’t indefinite military control or isolation—it’s building a political future where coexistence isn’t unthinkable. That won’t happen overnight. But accepting permanent hostility as a given only guarantees more violence on both sides.

Click to expand...

You’re naive and underestimate how ingrained radical Islam is in this culture. You act like Israel is dealing with Swedes. Muslims who have never set foot in Gaza are just as radicalized

Th0r said:

The fear and trauma Israelis live with is real. I haven’t denied it, and acknowledging Palestinian suffering doesn’t erase Israeli pain.

I don’t downplay threats—Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are serious. Israel has the right to defend itself. But that right doesn’t override legal and moral responsibility. Power still comes with limits.

This isn’t about blaming Israel for everything. It’s recognizing that decades of occupation, blockade, and settlement growth haven’t brought peace—they’ve hardened the conflict. That’s not justification for violence; it’s a call to reassess what clearly isn’t working.

Saying most Muslims want Israel gone is an overreach. Hostility is real in some places, but public opinion shifts when trust is built. Israel has made peace before. It’s not impossible—it’s just not happening with the current approach.

Click to expand...

Israel has the right to defend itself, but…..
You clearly don’t think Israel has a right to defend itself so don’t insult everyone here by continuing to say it.

GhostOf301 said:

Honest question, without a military presence in Gaza, do you honestly think Jews would be safe walking in the streets, let alone living there?

Click to expand...

Right now, no—Jews wouldn’t be safe walking the streets of Gaza. But that’s the result of years of war, siege, and mutual dehumanization—not some inherent truth about Palestinians.

Gaza is not safe for anyone, including most of the people who live there. The solution isn’t indefinite military control or isolation—it’s building a political future where coexistence isn’t unthinkable. That won’t happen overnight. But accepting permanent hostility as a given only guarantees more violence on both sides.

^ Thanks for Sharing Blue. Awesome Stuff!

KDSTONE said:

A well reasoned statement. Unfortunately, you downplay the psychological effects of daily terrorist attacks on the Israeli people. All of your sympathy seems to go one way. We’re all guilty of that at times. Do you have any idea how many terrorist attacks are thwarted? The fact that you constantly downplay the threats Israel faces. We haven’t even discussed the attack by Iran in April or the hundreds of rockets fired into Israel by Hezbollah.
You clearly blame Israel for everything, that if only its policies were different, there might be peace while ignoring the fact that most Muslims want Israel annihilated period.
Israelis no longer have trust in any peace process. Been down that road too many times, only to get very little in return.

Click to expand...

The fear and trauma Israelis live with is real. I haven’t denied it, and acknowledging Palestinian suffering doesn’t erase Israeli pain.

I don’t downplay threats—Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are serious. Israel has the right to defend itself. But that right doesn’t override legal and moral responsibility. Power still comes with limits.

This isn’t about blaming Israel for everything. It’s recognizing that decades of occupation, blockade, and settlement growth haven’t brought peace—they’ve hardened the conflict. That’s not justification for violence; it’s a call to reassess what clearly isn’t working.

Saying most Muslims want Israel gone is an overreach. Hostility is real in some places, but public opinion shifts when trust is built. Israel has made peace before. It’s not impossible—it’s just not happening with the current approach.

Th0r said:

Blocking movement, limiting aid, destroying infrastructure, and broadly targeting dense civilian areas are all forms of collective punishment, regardless of intent. The absence of full-scale genocide doesn’t erase those actions or their impact.

Coexistence isn’t impossible—it’s been actively undermined. By Hamas, by extremist Israeli factions, and by decades of violence, occupation, and political failure. Saying it’s impossible is giving up on any alternative to permanent war.

Yes, many Arab citizens live in Israel. But formal citizenship doesn’t erase systemic inequality—in land policy, education, policing, and political representation. That imbalance exists. And while no Jews live in Gaza today, that’s not because they’d be denied civil rights—it’s because Israel withdrew and maintains a military blockade, not because of any functioning Palestinian civil system that could guarantee safety or coexistence.

Religious access is shaped by power. Israel controls access to nearly all major religious sites. The Temple Mount restrictions are part of a longstanding political agreement to prevent escalation. Palestinians also face regular restrictions on access to Al-Aqsa, especially during Ramadan. Neither side holds a monopoly on religious grievance.

I’ve consistently condemned Hamas. Expecting Israel to follow international law doesn’t excuse Hamas—it’s a call for accountability from a state that claims the moral high ground.

Click to expand...

The absence of full scale genocide. So there’s a partial genocide?
Limiting aid. Uh, yeh, because most of it’s confiscated by Hamas.
Released hostages state that their captors ate from food boxes marked USAID while they subsisted on less than 200 c a day for a year and a half.