Again the bad faith. Everytime? Accepting a worst case scenario if nothing else is possible as necessary isn't "support".

Italy lost 500k men in WW1. Saying "it was a necessary sacrifice" doesn't mean "supporting the assassination of 500k Italian men".

You know that. So why do you frame your post like this? Why the absolute bad faith?

I support whatever set of actions guarantees Hamas eradication as the moral imperative above all in the region; among them, the set which minimizes civilian deaths.

There is NO NUMBER of civilian deaths that would make me tell "ok then let Hamas live and prosper" because we need terrorist groups to never have an option to prosper if only they get their hands on enough civilians.

And btw no amount of civilian deaths would be genocide anyway, lacking genocidal intent

Try to think larger than the fairly irrelevant (if we were all rational) IP conflict.

Think Pakistani nuclear bombs falling in the hands of terrorists, yet unable to use them. Every hour could be the last before they have access and are capable of striking with them.

Think the only option is us bombing a 1m city to dust, where the bombs are. Before they move them and/or become capable of using them.

What we are deciding now here is if we will be able to make that decision quickly without ifs and buts.

And any similar decision in the following decades

They hate the branding for some semantic reason.

On what day were the most Palestinians killed and how many were there?

Pakistan is run by terrorists and there are no nuke issues yet

Well we're used to this from Israel, the country that thinks children with stones are child soldiers and fair game for the death squad.

Not the same question as you know, and off topic.

oh yikes, now THAT might be racist. I think if you put those words in my mouth on here I'd likely be in some trouble.

It could be!

Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism refers to the involvement of Pakistan in terrorism through the backing of various designated terrorist organizations. Pakistan has been frequently accused by various countries, including its neighbours Afghanistan,[1] Iran,[2] and India,[3] as well as by the United States,[4][5] the United Kingdom, Germany,[6][7] and France,[8][9] of involvement in a variety of terrorist activities in both its local region of South Asia and beyond.[10][11] Pakistan's northwestern tribal regions along the Afghanistan–Pakistan border have been described as an effective safe haven for terrorists by Western media and the United States Secretary of Defense,[12][13][14]


According to an analysis published by the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in 2008, Pakistan was reportedly, with the possible exception of Iran, perhaps the world's most active sponsor of terrorist groups; aiding these groups that pose a direct threat to the United States. Pakistan's active participation has caused thousands of deaths in the region; all these years Pakistan has been supportive to several terrorist groups despite several stern warnings from the international community.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paki...ored_terrorism

Dunyain, first of all, I can find no credible online reference for the bolded. Second of all, this above post is riddled with Islamophobic rhetoric far past what is acceptable. Please take a timeout from this thread until 12:00 AM Eastern Time. Please be warned any further posting that violates the bigotry and racism rule for this thread will result in temp bans. Please do not disregard this message. Thank you, friend.

How is this example in any way similar to the Israeli reaction to 10/7?

Yes you can liberally open a can of worms about black sprinters, but I am off topic if I talk about aa, par for the course.

Whereas 2,000 years of being losers does, apparently. (And self-pity is always the motor of fascism.)

This example is very similar to asking to quit the war in Gaza because otherwise too many civilians die. That should never be a threshold to be considered if an actual enemy that has to be annihilated exists among civilians.

We have to credibly signal we will NOT compromise on the need to annihilate an enemy of the west even if it costs civilian lives. Taking hostages should never be rewarded. Hamas has the entire Gaza population hostage (+ a few surviving Israeli).

This isn't true. Even if Israel is not committing genocide now, there is a red line that can be crossed into genocide if the behaviors deliberately cause the destruction of persons or property and/or cause mass homelessness and famine to some scale.

A stated intent isn't necessary. Actions speak much louder than words.

They aren't losing since 1948 though

Nope. It’s on the person pulling the trigger, always. You don’t see cops leveling city blocks because murderers live there.

Straw man. I've never asked to quit the war in Gaza. I've said numerous times it that I'd stand with Israel conducting an all-out COIN mission to eliminate Hamas, secure the hostages, and rebuild the rubble created in the process, as well as extrajudicial assassinations on any soil throughout the globe, with or without the int'l community.

I assume you're joking, but obviously it's because the Jordanians and the Egyptians considered the Palestinian leadership hostile to their interests, for sufficient reason, and preferred to let the Israelis handle the tar-baby.

They can't reach Hamas in Qatar and elsewhere (the USA disagree, and there they need american help).

And they don't have the capability of targeting Hamas more surgically than they are already.

If the proposal is using American and/or German and/or Italian troops that's interesting, but I don't think that's on the table.

No, quite, massive regional nuclear superpower, invincible by any reasonable measure, and yet they still make the 'Poor little us' claim all the time.

Could point to decades of killing on either side and say the same. Surely, Hamas 2.0 will find the same justification in the future from what’s happening now. Every event needs to be evaluated for itself. Thinking you can forever avoid moral culpability because of some injury in the past is nonsense. It’s literally not different than Hamas.

Invincible in a conventional war if half of the world allows them to defend themselves (vs local enemies at least), but that's not the game that is being played.

They are targeted by terrorists many people don't want them to eradicate.

That's a big "poor us", but the solution is simple, let them eradicate Hamas, if anything let's help them any way we can.

And ofc it doesn't end with Hamas, the north of the country is under rocket attacks by yet another terrorist group.

I think most people would do a lot worse than Israel under that kind of constant threat. I know we did in Europe for many centuries.

There is no solution inside the "liberal" framework where the lives of Palestinian civilians enter the utility function. They shouldn't at all, they aren't our allies.

Our allies have to prosper and any impediment to that eliminated, that's what being an ally means.

You couldn’t be more wrong. Mossad is one of the best at forging passports and gaining entry into hostile countries in order to conduct assassinations.

I agree with the horror and I support the same

I'm 50-50 he's telling the truth (at a minimum they'll be many many similar quotes let's say), I've got to go dig through a box of books because this an (old) translation from Arabic and who knows how well the English got mapped there.

But I encourage this thread to ponder this. The official Houthis slogan is

"God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam"


So the odds that Dunyain was miles off here are decently low. The world is just this dark.

To be clear I don't care about the timeout. But I do think this is a topic we may as well be precise about since these are things that did happen and do happen.