Ghost has asked you a question twice. Are you gonna answer it or just advocate for policies that will render Israel indefensible?
The New Lounge
- Thread starter hpnole
- Start date
Hamas uses people like you. That’s why it uses its population as human shields. Israel has two options: do nothing and no civilians are killed, yet Hamas is unaffected.
Option 2 Attack Hamas, civilians are killed, and the Left can manufacture that Israel is committing genocide. But Israel is safer in the process.
You prefer the Hamas option. I prefer what’s best for Israel
Another giveaway is that you claim that Israel’s policies have “fueled the violence”. This is another common anti Israel refrain, ignoring that radical Islamists have killed Jews for centuries. They’re commanded to do in the Quran. It has little to do with Israel’s policies. This is part of the never ending blame Israel game.
You say Israel has the right to defend itself against Hamas… unless Hamas uses human shields or are around an area “packed with civilians”.
Which is nearly always the case.
So in reality you’re saying Israel doesn’t have the right to defend itself.
This is an extremely complicated conflict with no silver bullet. I’m not omnipotent, and I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But what’s clear is that the current strategy—bombing dense civilian areas, maintaining siege conditions, and treating the entire population as complicit—hasn’t worked. It won’t work. And continuing down this path will only make things worse for everyone involved.
Israel has tried disengagement, blockades, large-scale military operations, and temporary ceasefires. None have dismantled Hamas or delivered lasting peace. What hasn’t been meaningfully pursued is a political and strategic plan focused on long-term stability rather than short-term destruction.
That could start with a negotiated, multilateral ceasefire tied to clear benchmarks: release of hostages, end of rocket fire, and international monitoring. Not vague promises—measurable, enforced steps.
It could include phased easing of the blockade, allowing critical supplies and limited movement under third-party oversight, in exchange for verified demilitarization efforts. Civilians need a reason to invest in a future that isn’t run by Hamas.
A serious plan to rebuild Gaza’s civil infrastructure—healthcare, education, basic services—would require sidelining Hamas through political alternatives, not more rubble. That means supporting transitional governance with regional and international backing, not filling the void with more force.
And beyond that, a political horizon has to exist. There is no endgame in perpetual siege and occupation. Long-term peace will require a negotiated resolution—maybe not now, maybe not easily—but refusing to even make space for that possibility guarantees more war.
Security matters. But treating millions as enemies won’t bring it. The only way out is a strategy that aims to break the cycle, not repeat it.
You’re using a gish gallop—throwing out rapid claims to dodge real accountability. That’s not debate.
No one denied that adult men are among the dead. The point is simple: being male and of military age doesn’t make someone a combatant. That’s a legal standard, not a talking point.
Yes, Hamas hides among civilians. That doesn’t remove Israel’s responsibility to distinguish targets and avoid disproportionate harm. Civilian deaths caused by reckless strikes aren’t just “mistakes”—they’re violations. Ignoring that doesn’t make anyone safer. It just guarantees more war, more radicalization, and fewer options for anything better.
You’ve already had answers on proportionality, combatant status, and civilian protection. Ignoring them doesn’t make your point stronger.
Proportionality isn’t some anti-IDF buzzword—it’s a basic rule of war, applied to every military claiming legitimacy. Saying it only comes up with Israel is either selective memory or bad faith.
Claiming it’s impossible to tell who’s a combatant doesn’t justify abandoning all restraint. If you can’t distinguish, you don’t get to default to lethal force. That’s not idealism—it’s the legal and moral floor.
You’ve already been shown that “do nothing” vs. “kill civilians” is a false choice. Rejecting mass civilian death isn’t siding with Hamas—it’s rejecting failed tactics.
Hamas uses civilians, yes—but that doesn’t excuse ignoring distinction or proportionality. That’s not self-defense. It’s how wars drag on and legitimacy erodes.
Saying Israeli policy has fueled violence isn’t anti-Israel—it’s reality. Extremism doesn’t emerge from thin air. Long-term blockade, displacement, and occupation create the conditions Hamas thrives in. Explaining that isn’t excusing it.
Blaming centuries-old religious hatred avoids accountability. This is a political conflict. Pretending otherwise guarantees it never ends.
So, if you were correct and Israel was treating the entire population as complicit, there would actually be a genocide. But there's not, and though maybe Israel should, they don't treat the entire population as complicit.
And in respect for you, I believe that you have these feelings with a good heart. But I don't think you respect how impossible it is for Israel and Palestine to coexist and who is at fault for that. Israel is not perfect and that shows. But they are fighting for their existence against an enemy who doesn't want them to exist. Hamas is fighting against who they consider to be their enemy who just wants to live in peace.
Your last paragraph. Wow. Blindly, I see you referencing Palestine. But I know you are talking about Israel. 2 million Muslims live freely as Israeli citizens. More as legal residents. How many Jews live freely in Gaza or the West Bank? Israel banned its Jewish citizens from audibly praying at the Temple Mount even though that is a Jewish holy site. How many religions concessions have the Palestinians made to Israel? Who views who as enemies? You have stated multiple times that 'one wrong doesn't justify another' but you seem to only hold Israel accountable for their wrongs.
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.
“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!
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.
Honest question, without a military presence in Gaza, do you honestly think Jews would be safe walking in the streets, let alone living there?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
“Saying most Muslims want Israel gone is an overreach”
65% of young British Muslims oppose Israel's right to exist
Two-thirds of young British Muslims believe Israel should not exist as a Jewish homeland, according to a major new poll. Based on a survey of 1000 British Muslims, an astonishing 65% of the religious group aged 18-24 said they did not believe Israel has a right to exist. Within the 45-54...
unherd.com
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.
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’ll go ahead and write off the kids taught in schools in “Palestine”
Palestinian education
No child is born a terrorist: How the Palestinian Authority’s Education System is Grooming the Next Generation of Extremists
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.
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.
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?
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
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?
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 not about feelings. It's about international law.
Everything you say about this is compromised by feelings. You fight back against the notion that it's a complex situation, as if matching your emotion is a minimum requirement.
Total crap response. Rights have limits. You know this. He has stated that Israel has the right to defend itself and all you can respond with is "Nuh-uh!"
I’m in no way saying Israel hasn’t made mistakes over the years in dealing with these savages. But, it’s real easy to sit in our cozy homes and point our fingers at them. Must suck to be surrounded by who they’re surrounded by.
If Hamas would put down their guns, they’d be no more conflict. If Israel did it though, there’d be no more Israel.
If Hamas would put down their guns, they’d be no more conflict. If Israel did it though, there’d be no more Israel.
He conceded that right if Hamas didn’t use human shields or embed its operations in heavily populated areas.
Since this is precisely how Hamas fights, for all intents and purposes, he is saying that Israel can’t defend itself given the realities of the situation.
Israel doesn’t have the luxury of hypotheticals on a message board.
Very mature post though. Thank for the contribution
International law? Calling a terrorist who masterminded a bus bombing and a civilian who was kidnapped, sexually abused, and starved for a year and a half both hostages as if there’s no moral distinction between the two is telling.
Not surprisingly you accept the same type wording that Al Jazeera and the BBC use referring to these as hostage swaps, and come after me for objecting
You are morally adrift
To suggest that I’ve endorsed an “anything goes” policy of self defense is a gross distortion of my posts. This is what the Left does however. By constantly criticizing Israel’s behavior as disproportionate, etc. you’re simply encouraging Hamas to continue to use its population as human shields in the future. Not only is Hamas not condemned for its tactics, it’s rewarded for them by the Left’s vilification of Israel.
Sad you don’t see the results of your self righteous finger pointing
You’re not saving “Palestinian” lives in the future. You’re actually condemning them
You keep implying I’m excusing Hamas, even though I’ve repeatedly condemned them—clearly and without hesitation. I’ve also pointed out that the current approach isn’t working. It’s failed before, it’s failing now, and it’s fueling a cycle of violence that traps civilians and strengthens extremists.
That’s not “vilification.” It’s recognizing that force without strategy doesn’t bring peace—it brings more bloodshed. And I haven’t just criticized—I’ve made it clear that I believe there’s a better path forward, one that protects both Israelis and Palestinians. I’ve laid that out in earlier posts, but you keep circling back to the same tired arguments.
Do you not want this war to end? Do you not want people to stop dying? What’s your best-case outcome here?
I’ve shown you nothing but respect throughout this entire exchange. I haven’t resorted to personal attacks or dismissed your views based on ideology—I’ve engaged with your arguments directly, in good faith. Meanwhile, you’ve defaulted to snide remarks and mischaracterizations rather than responding to the actual points I’ve made. That doesn’t make your position stronger—it just signals that you’re more interested in posturing than having a serious discussion.
You mischaracterize my position? I call you out.
You use offensive pro Hamas language like hostage swaps, I’ll call you out for that as well. I’ve responded to many of your points. Sorry I haven’t responded to each and every one.
You say you want a good faith dialogue right before using words like snide, defaulting, posturing.
So you claim to be balanced, but your word choice betrays who you really are. Datt may give you an attaboy, but the rest of us see through your charade.
Force without strategy? You actually think Israel is without a strategy? Wow. They’re winning the war, Hamas is being dismantled piece by piece, and there have been no more Oct 7ths. Let’s not get too carried away.
I'm not sure the conflict over there will ever end. It only fuels Hamas though when people somewhat take their side by criticizing Israel. I'll say it again, that it's real easy for people that are thousands of miles away, throwing around words like International Law, and criticizing them.
Drink your lattes in comfort fellas.
Drink your lattes in comfort fellas.
Last edited:
