Get Real:
 

Israel and Palestinians are often the subject of discussion on this board as it was last night. Sides are taken and barbs are slung.

#1: Israel is occupying land that the Palestinians consider to be their land.

#2: Israel has a military with sophisticated weapons of war supplied by the US.

#3: The Palestinians do not have a military and do not have sophisticated weapons of war.

#4: The Palestinians wage war against Israel in an effort to regain what they consider to be their land in the only way they can. Not having a military and weapons of war they use human weapons.

#5: Israel and most of the world bemoan the suicide bomber attacks on their civilian populace. Does anyone think their anger would be any less if the suicide attacks were against their soldiers. Does anyone think that if the airplanes that were flown into the WTC would have been flown into military barracks at Fort Bragg, or anyother military base, without civilians aboard, that our anger would have been any less because it was only soldiers that were killed.

#5: Civilians are killed in all wars, as collateral damage, but also are specifically targeted.

#6. In our own wars (including the civil war) we purposely targeted civilians and during the Second World War we targeted civilians on a massive scale. In the Korean war we purposely targeted civilians in some circumstances and in Vietnam we did the same.

My point is; this is the real world and real bad things happen in the real world. Throwing barbs back and forth does not solve anything, and in case of the warring factions, it just increases tensions, and tit for tat responses, where lives are lost, just increases the hatred.

WEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.... here we go again...

heheh.. i wish you could ignore thread subjects instead of, or as well as individuals.

yahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhnnnnnn .... can I test my sig here ??

I agree - thats an original thread subject :winkwink:

So - Pathfinder - what you are saying is actually...

#1: side A has overpowered side B
#2: side A is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than side B
#3: side B is actually a shitty little side who?s got no power
#4: side B - contrary to all logic - is trying to turn the table on side A using immoral and inhumane (according to side A,C,D,E...) tactics ? basically starting an all-out-WAR on side A
#5: even if side A would make his immoral tactics a little more morale (by attacking side A's power centers) sides C,D,E... would still regard it horrible and inhumane.
#6: you are in side C - which happens to be a VERY POWERFUL side (who allegedly supports side A in making him powerful) - and YOU admit side C is kicking the hell of side B's llok-alikes and even much better ones

DID I GET IT RIGHT?

SO WHY THE FUCK ANYONE (not you) AT SIDE D,E,F,G,.... and especially side C would criticize side A for its actions? (especially if side A is mainly kicking side B?s immoral power centers??

So - again - Pathfinder - is that what you are saying?

Hell -
I dont know who side A, B, C, D.... are
but I think
#1 - side A is a jerk not to obliterate side B,
#2 - Side B is a stupid fuck who should try to make friends with side A
#3 - It wont surprise me if Side C supports side A all the way - otherwise I would think they are hypocrit SOBs
#4 - It also wont surprise me if Sides D,E,F,... supports side A for trying to defend itself against side B's immoral attacks
#5 - As anomalies are not that rare - it WONT surprise me to see a side - maybe somewhere after the single letter sides end - say, side EU or side UN who are stupid fucks which will be the first against the wall if (accidentaly) side B's revolution is successful.
:1orglaugh

Pathfinder.. What is this fiction story you were telling us all?
Sounds to strange to be real :thumbsup