Brave IDF caught on tape using human shield

[Logic 7]

---------------------------------------LOGIC 7-----------------------------------------------------------

It's not a fairy tale bible story.

When the jews made the sandbox more arable and more habitable you'll notice how
much immigration (rather than the fairy tale muslims subscribe to) increased into the
land of Judea, Samaria, Israel.

Fairy tail yes, facts are facts, in the beginning of20th century, there was 700 000 peoples in palestine, 45000 were jews, and the rest were mostly muslims, that is a fact, the trouble started when zionist from all over europe started to immigrated in palestine.

But this argument on both sides contains truths and falsehoods.

Yet both sides think the other side has no case.

Israel has no case at all, unless you are a religious/christian or jews freaks

Let's say that the Palestinians would do better if they'd stop their righteous attacks.

This is just as stupid as saying, well if the jews wanted to stop massacres from the nazi, they should have stoped stealing business to german peoples.

Let's say they shouldn't have to be the ones to do this stopping of the cycle of violence.

But let's say that if they do, their situation and economy would blossom beyond that of
Syria's or Jordans, because it wouldn't be their Arab brothers who provide the jobs
and infrastructure, it would be the Jews

Of course if there is nothing left in palestine, it will be the jews who will give them jobs,normal, it is israel who destroyeed everything, pretty synical from you, get your facts straight, once for all.

 

[CDNBear]

So if a group of people who immigrate from europe, pretend to own the land you live, because of a fairy tail bible story, use helicopter, rocket laucherr, 30 bn of USA help in weapony every year, killing thousands of thousands of innoncent, destroyed most of the schools, most of the infrastructure that sorrounds you, what would you do?

You are ready to give muslim a hell of a time, based on speculations, imagine if you were a palestinians, you would be 1000 times worst than hamas could have wish to be.

So can all the people who immigrated from Europe to say...Canada, please leave this occupied territory, the Natives want it back now. B-bye Logic.

That is exactly what you are doing in here, since you register.

 

[earth_as_one]

So can all the people who immigrated from Europe to say...Canada, please leave this occupied territory, the Natives want it back now. B-bye Logic.

Colonization of Palestine isn't that different from colonization of North America. Basically foreigners showed up, claimed the land as they own and killed any natives who had a problem with being ethnically cleansed off the land. Might makes right wasn't fair or just back in 1492 and it still isn't fair or just today.

But there are differences between the First Nation people's experience and the Palestinian experience.

One difference is North America's colonization is historical, while Palestine's colonization is ongoing. Few First Nation's people alive today can claim they have suffered the level of oppression or injustice suffered by Palestinians. Many Palestinians ethnically cleansed off the land are still alive today. Some were just ethnically cleansed off their land yesterday. A bunch more were probably ethnically cleansed off their land today. Even those living in the poverty and squalor of UN refugee camps are within a generation or two of people who were ethnically cleansed off the land in 1948 or 1967. Most ethnic cleansing in North America took place more than 100 years ago. Relatively minor injustices still exist, many land claims remain unresolved and many First Nation's rights have yet to be defined.... but no one is shooting First Nation schoolchildren on their way to school, First Nation's leaders aren't being abducted, imprisoned or tortured and First Nation homes aren't being bulldozed to make way for new colonies of foreigners...

Another difference is that First Nation's people have special rights and priviliges regarding natural resources, taxes and trades while enjoying all the same rights of citizenship as immigrants. Palestinians have no rights, no citizenship and are currently under seige by hostile immigrants who want nothing less than everything they own. Every day Palestinians loose a little more land, a few more homes are bulldozed and a few more colonies are built on what used to be their land....

I'm not sure if you noticed CB, but people who are aware of the oppression and injustice suffered by Palestinians are the often the same people who recognize First Nation's land claims and special rights. If anything, First Nation's people should also understand the plight of Palestinians more than anyone else. That's why I find your unconditional support for the colonizers in this case so paradoxical. If it wasn't right when hostile foreigners cleansed natives off their land in North America, then why is it right now for hostile foreigners to cleanse the natives off their land in Palestine????

Part of the problem might be that you believe that the Jewish immigrants were the original inhabitants who are returning home to their land. Perhaps their struggle to reclaim their ancestral lands provides hope that one day the historical injustices suffered by the First Nations might be addressed in a fair and just way.

In some cases that, it may be true that some of these Jewish immigrants are returning to their ancestral lands. But many Jews who have immigrated to Israel cannot trace ancestors back to Palestine. Under Israeli law Jews regardless of their ancestry are welcome while Palestinians many of whom can trace their ancestors in Palestine to pre-biblical times are not.

For example, why should Sephardic Jews (most of whom descend from Europeans who converted to Judaism) have more right to Palestine than Palestinians? Should decendants of Spanish Christians have as much right to Palestine as descendants of Spanish Jews? Is this about ancestry or religion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sephardi_Jews

How about if I (ancestors are mixed European) convert to a First Nation religion. Would that give me more ancestral rights than a native who converted to Christianity?

Also, many people who have been ethnically cleansed from Palestine descend from people who acquired land by purchase from Jewish, Muslim or Christian Palestinians. Why do Spanish Jews have more rights to their land than the people who acquired the land legally?

Genetically most Palestinians (Muslim, Christian and Jew) share common ancestors. That proves many Muslim, Christian and Jewish Palestinians can all claim to ancestral rights to Palestine.

Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese
Science Daily —

If a common heritage conferred peace, then perhaps the long history of conflict in the Middle East would have been resolved years ago. For, according to a new scientific study, Jews are the genetic brothers of Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese, and they all share a common genetic lineage that stretches back thousands of years...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm

The Origin of Palestinians and Their Genetic Relatedness With Other Mediterranean Populations

Palestinians are nowadays thought to come

from the Egyptian garrisons that were abandoned to their
own fate on the Canaan land by 1200 years BC (Figure
1) and had to manage to construct or reinforce or rebuilt
some ancient Canaanite city-states, together with the old
autochthonous tribes [6]. Otherwise, the ancient
Palestinians might have come from Crete or its empire
[7]. Israelites could also stem from autochthonous
Canaanite tribes that were agglutinated by a group of
people led by Moses to fight against other Canaanites,
including Philistines and finally set up ancient Israel [6-
8]. By 1000 BC, and after warring with Philistines and
other Canaanites, an Israelite state was founded by king
Saul [6].
Palestinians held five important city-states when the
fighting with Israel began (after 1200 BC): Gaza, Ash
kelon, Ashod, Ekron and Gath (Figure 1). They won
several battles and the time that they were in control of
all Canaan, west to the Jordan river...​

...Ancient Canaan (Palestine in Middle Age and modern times) has sequentially belonged to the Roman-Byzantine empire, to
Egyptian Muslim Mammeluks, to the European crusaders
and finally to the Ottoman-Empire [9] since the XVI
century. In 1918 British led mixed Arab-British troops
seized the region. Palestine had 750,000 inhabitants in
1919 [9] and only 70,000 were Jewish....​

http://kinoko.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~dura...ness_With_Other_Mediterranean_Populations.pdf​

Even if ancestral rights were sufficient grounds to ethnically cleanse Palestine, to be consistent, the people doing the ethnic cleansing would have to prove that the Palestinians don't have the same ancestral rights. The evidence shows that at least some of the people Israel has ethnically cleansed share the same ancestors as Jews. Some Palestinians can actually claim their ancestors have been in Palestine since before Judaism.

If someone who can trace their Palestinian ancestors back 3200 years can be ethnically cleansed off the land by someone whose ancestors converted to Judaism 600 years ago in Spain or Russia, that proves this dispute isn't about ancestral homelands...​

 

[earth_as_one]

Back on Topic:

IDF use of human shields was reported back in Amnesty International's 2005 Annual Report:

Israel and the Occupied Territories
Covering events from January - December 2004

The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force. Palestinian armed groups killed 109 Israelis — 67 of them civilians and including eight children — in suicide bombings, shootings and mortar attacks. Stringent restrictions imposed by the Israeli army on the movement of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories caused widespread poverty and unemployment and hindered access to health and education facilities. The Israeli army destroyed several hundred Palestinian homes, large areas of agricultural land, and infrastructure networks. Israel continued to expand illegal settlements and to build a fence/wall through the West Bank, confining Palestinians in isolated enclaves cut off from their land and essential services in nearby towns and villages. Israeli settlers increased their attacks against Palestinians and their property and against international human rights workers. Certain abuses committed by the Israeli army constituted crimes against humanity and war crimes, including unlawful killings; extensive and wanton destruction of property; obstruction of medical assistance and targeting of medical personnel; torture; and the use of Palestinians as “human shields”. ...

http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/isr-summary-eng

 

[CDNBear]

Relatively minor injustices still exist, many land claims remain unresolved and many First Nation's rights have yet to be defined.... but no one is shooting First Nation schoolchildren on their way to school, First Nation's leaders aren't being imprisoned and First Nation homes aren't being bulldozed to make space for new colonies of foreigners...

And ya know why???

Because First Nations people don't launch rockets into Non Native communities and First Nations leaders don't preach nazi hate to their followers.

Other then that, the racism still abounds, look at posts in this forum and many others. Look at the Non Native aggitators drawn to Caledonia.

If we started using the tactics of your nazi Arab brothers and sisters, we would be just as beaten down.

Deal with it occupier.

 

[L Gilbert]

So if a group of people who immigrate from europe, pretend to own the land you live, because of a fairy tail bible story, use helicopter, rocket laucherr, 30 bn of USA help in weapony every year, killing thousands of thousands of innoncent, destroyed most of the schools, most of the infrastructure that sorrounds you, what would you do?

They wouldn't have to use weapons on me. I'd be neighborly and welcome them to the neighborhood. So I answered your question. You gonna answer mine?

You are ready to give muslim a hell of a time, based on speculations, imagine if you were a palestinians, you would be 1000 times worst than hamas could have wish to be.

Nope. Most Muslim are fine. It's just the terrorist orgs I don't like and that includes the IDF these days. But you think that because I condemn the Hizbollah et al I'm defending the Israelis. So that just makes you narrowminded and wrong.

 

[L Gilbert]

Of course if there is nothing left in palestine, it will be the jews who will give them jobs,normal, it is israel who destroyeed everything, pretty synical from you, get your facts straight, once for all.

The Usraeli destroyed everything? Yeah, I guess all those suicide bombers only killed civilians; those rockets the Hizbollah keeo lobbing into cities don't do any damage. :roll: Get your medulla oblongata out of your duodenum and look at the picture from outside your childish biases and you's realize that neither side are saints.

 

[L Gilbert]

Back on Topic:

IDF use of human shields was reported back in Amnesty International's 2005 Annual Report:

So that makes it ok for the Hizbollah to lob rockets at Israel from Lebanese houses. I see.

 

[earth_as_one]

The topic is Israeli Defence Force soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields.

What does Lebanon's Hezbollah have to do with that subject? But if you want me to comment on that completely different and unrelated topic, then I will agree that Hezbollah rocket attacks on innocent Israeli civilians were war crimes. But that war crime was in response to Israel's bombing of innocent Lebanese civilians which was also a war crime. Hezbollah only attacked innocent Israeli civilians after Israel had already killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians. Given a choice between doing nothing as Israel kills hundreds of innocent people and retaliating with your own weapons, I don't see that Hezbollah had much choice.

If a hostile nation was killing hundreds of innocent Canadian civilians, I would expect the Canadian military to target that nation's innocent civilian in response just as Hezbollah did.

But I would not want Canada to cross that line first and initiate the killing of innocent civilians like Israel did. As far as I'm concerned the leaders on both sides should be held accountable for their actions.

Now back on subject.

What is you opinion about IDF soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields? Please try to stay on subject...

 

[L Gilbert]

The topic is Israeli Defence Force soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields.

Yup. I was just saying they learned from the best: Hizbollah.

What does Lebanon's Hezbollah have to do with that subject?

See the above reply.

But if you want me to comment on that completely different and unrelated topic,

Unrelated? aaaaaaaaaaahahahahah

then I will agree that Hezbollah rocket attacks on innocent Israeli civilians were war crimes..............

Good now we're in agreement that BOTH sides are f'd up.

If a hostile nation was killing hundreds of innocent Canadian civilians, I would expect the Canadian military to target that nation's innocent civilian in response just as Hezbollah did.

But I would not want Canada to cross that line first and initiate the killing of innocent civilians like Israel did. As far as I'm concerned the leaders on both sides should be held accountable for their actions.

I wouldn't. If they did I would be thoroughly disgu sted with it.

Now back on subject.

What is you opinion about IDF soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields? Please try to stay on subject...

As I said a long time ago, while you were ignoring what I was saying, I'm not happy with the IDF either. Please try and pay attention next time so I don't have to keep repeating myself.

 

[earth_as_one]

I'm sorry but I must have missed your post commenting on the IDF's use of child soldiers. As far as I know you approve of this tactic.

Also, it appears you claim that Hezbollah has abducted children at gunpoint as used them as human shields like the IDF has. Can you reference a reputable source backing up that opinion?

Meanwhile here is some logic regarding whether or not Hezbollah uses human shields:

The “Human Shield” LIE Exposed



On the heels of Israel's horrendous massacre of more than 60 civilians in Qana, among them OVER 40 CHILDREN, I will lay to rest once and for all, the colossal lie presented in unison by these mass murderers and their accomplices, in defense of the indefensible - the position that Hizbullah uses civilians as "human shields" against overwhelming Israeli aggression.

Nothing could be more illogical or absurd. Let's examine it carefully.

When someone uses another human being as a "shield," under the plain meaning of the word, it is understood to be a method to deter aggression by adversaries. In order for that objective to be achieved, crucial premises must first exist.

The party who employs the human shield MUST assume that their adversary will hesitate to fire against those shields for fear of harming them.

But in order for that to happen, the adversary must first CARE about the welfare of the so-called "human shields."

If the opposing party DOES NOT CARE about their welfare, then the alleged objective of deterring aggression falls apart.

For example, in the United States, a bank robber might take a hostage to deter the use of overwhelming force by police. In every case, the police DO NOT fire for fear that they might jeopardize the life of the hostage.

Indeed, Israelis frequently take civilians hostage to use as human shields because Hamas fighters are reluctuant to fire on them.



On the other hand, Israel has proved time and again, beyond ANY reasonable doubt, that they ARE NOT deterred in any manner whatsoever from employing overwhelming force against whatever target they see fit, regardless of whether civilians are in the area.

Israel's routine AFTER-THE-FACT attempts to characterize civilian victims of their ruthless aggression as Hizbullah's "human shields" is nothing less than a diabolical effort to twist the meaning of the phrase beyond all recognition.

Once we dispense with this bogus "shield" theory, the only alternative Israel presents in its favor is the outrageous suggestion that Hizbullah fired from near civilian areas for the purpose of proving that Israel DOES NOT CARE about massive civilian deaths. In other words, not as a method to deter aggression but as a method to win the PR war against Israel. If believed, then indeed Hizbullah succeeded in proving that Israel DOES NOT CARE ONE IOATA about the lives of innocent Arab civilians.

Under such an outrageous theory, civilians cannot be characterized as "human shields," but instead must be called "human sacrifices" for the purpose of exposing Israeli savagery.

If accepted, this theory cannot prove that Hizbullah is cynically using innocent civilians without FIRST establishing that Israelis are savage barbarians.

Hizbullah can only prove about Israel that which is already TRUE.

In such a scenario, Hizbullah's alleged cynicism cannot be a cause in fact of civilian deaths without an intervening and proximate cause - the depraved indifference by Israelis to massive loss of innocent civilian lives.

Make no mistake, Israelis are not only remorseless mass murderers, they are unrepentant liars - the most evil combination known to man.

________
UPDATE:

For clarification, I categorically reject the ridiculous assertion that Hizbullah uses their families' lives as pawns in a PR game to prove a point that is already CRYSTAL CLEAR from how Israel conducts itself in Palestine.

The TRUTH is that Hizbullah fights from their neighborhoods. They have no other option. After all, it is their country and they are defending it.

ISRAEL could invade the border with ground forces and attempt to attack Hizbullah selectively with very little Lebanese civilian casualties. But, that course of action results in high Israeli military casualties, which Israel is not willing to suffer.

Instead, they engage in a twisted racist and depraved cost/benefit analysis wherein they choose to KILL HUNDREDS of innocent Arab civilians by using overwhelming arial force rather than risk dozens of Israeli military lives.

One can only conclude that Israelis are craven and depraved cowards, who consider the lives of their military men more precious than the lives of innocent unarmed Arab civilians.

And the WORLD knows this as sure as they know that the sun rises from the east.

Israel, you cannot escape the TRUTH.

http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/07/human-shield-lie-exposed.html

Can't argue with that logic, perhaps you might like to try....

 

[L Gilbert]

I'm sorry but I must have missed your post commenting on the IDF's use of child soldiers. As far as I know you approve of this tactic.

Well, now you know better. 1st page in this thread, 3rd post from the bottom I implied I don't see any difference between Hizbollah terrorisam and Israeli terrorism.

Also, it appears you claim that Hezbollah has abducted children at gunpoint as used them as human shields like the IDF has. Can you reference a reputable source backing up that opinion?

Kids live in houses. Hizbollah uses houses to fire rockets from. Um, 1+1=2

Ok. Here's more logic, besides the bit above. The Hizbollah don't give a crap about who gets killed because of them, they have demonstrated that many times by their use of suicide bombs. Hence, they can make the Israelis look bad when they do things to urge the Israelis to attack: things like attacking the Hizbollah when they fire rockets from houses and amongst buildings.

If your heroes are so honorable, why don't they come out and fight like a real army instead of sneaking around in towns?

 

[earth_as_one]

My main reason for posting here is to try to compensate for the pro-Israel misinformation/propaganda which pretends to be news. If I was to choose sides, it would be the side of innocent victims, not Hezbollah.

How about you? What is your opinion about the IDF using Palestinian children as human shields? Do you approve of this routine IDF procedure? You've hinted and you've danced around a direct answer, but you've never actually came out and made a clear statement like I did about Hezbollah's targetting of innocent Israeli civilians.

Are you able to make a clear statement about your IDF heros using Palestinian children as human shields?

 

[L Gilbert]

My main reason for posting here is to try to compensate for the pro-Israel misinformation/propaganda which pretends to be news. If I was to choose sides, it would be the side of innocent victims, not Hezbollah.

That's like my reason for posting here. It seemed to be you and your puppy on one side and Bear on the other. Thought I'd even up the numbers and explain that one side is as bad as the other.

How about you?

Yerah, how bout me? Pretty cool huh.

What is your opinion about the IDF using Palestinian children as human shields? Do you approve of this routine IDF procedure? You've hinted and you've danced around a direct answer, but you've never actually came out and made a clear statement like I did about Hezbollah's targetting of innocent Israeli civilians.

Aw, poor baby doesn't understand the implications. Ok, I think both sides are f'ked up. Just as I said in my first post of this page. Duh.

Are you able to make a clear statement about your IDF heros using Palestinian children as human shields?

IDF aren't my heroes, FYI. See the above comment.

 

[earth_as_one]

I still don't have anything I can quote you on. Are you a politician?

You said that if a hostile foreign nation was killing innocent Canadian citizens, you would not support targetting innocent civilians on the other side. I never said I would support that either. I just said I would expect our government to respond in kind.

But I am curious about what kind of a response you would support.

So hypothetically, if some country bombed Pearson International, took out ever bridge and overpass in the metropolitan Toronto region and killed several hundred innocent Canadian civilians... What would be an appropriate response?

 

[L Gilbert]

I still don't have anything I can quote you on. Are you a politician?

It's easy: there's a little yellow flag up in the top right corner of everyone's posts that says, "quote". Just click on it and then start typing.

You said that if a hostile foreign nation was killing innocent Canadian citizens, you would not support targetting innocent civilians on the other side. I never said I would support that either. I just said I would expect our government to respond in kind.

Good for you. So?

But I am curious about what kind of a response you would support.

Then ask.

So hypothetically, if some country bombed Pearson International, took out ever bridge and overpass in the metropolitan Toronto region and killed several hundred innocent Canadian civilians... What would be an appropriate response?

Go after the perps and thump em.

 

[L Gilbert]

I think both sides are f'ked up. Just as I said in my first post of this page. Duh.

Funny, the quote button works for me.
Anyway, "both" means one side AND the other. Get it?

 

[CDNBear]

The topic is Israeli Defence Force soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields.

As does the Hezbollah, hence their repeated presence here.

What does Lebanon's Hezbollah have to do with that subject?

Since they set the RoE for this engagement, they can take center stage with the IDF.

But if you want me to comment on that completely different and unrelated topic, then I will agree that Hezbollah rocket attacks on innocent Israeli civilians were war crimes.

Yes indeed they are.

But that war crime was in response to Israel's bombing of innocent Lebanese civilians which was also a war crime. Hezbollah only attacked innocent Israeli civilians after Israel had already killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians. Given a choice between doing nothing as Israel kills hundreds of innocent people and retaliating with your own weapons, I don't see that Hezbollah had much choice.

That's only your opinion, based on your biased interpretation of the informationa and facts at hand. Those innocents you claim were killed by Israel first, were in direct response to attacks, regardless of whether or not the attacks by the Hezbollah, ended with dead Isareli's, they were attacks. They were attacks originated in residential areas. Since the Hezbollah, have no concern for their own people and wish to use their dead bodies for their other military action, the media blitz, the IDf is more then willing to retaliate in kind. Just because the actions of the IDF generates more dead then those of the Hezbollah, does not negate the primary actions of the Hezbollah. That is the biggest flaw in you thinking.

If a hostile nation was killing hundreds of innocent Canadian civilians, I would expect the Canadian military to target that nation's innocent civilian in response just as Hezbollah did.

I would not expect the Canadian Armed Forces to target civilians ever, that is what seperates us from the Hezbollah and the IDF. That is also what seperates you, a nazi, from the rest of us, none of us ever find it acceptable to target civilians. You condone it. It matters not, that someone does it first, doing it at any time is wrong. Thanx for exposing more of that Arab nazi mentality you have.

But I would not want Canada to cross that line first and initiate the killing of innocent civilians like Israel did. As far as I'm concerned the leaders on both sides should be held accountable for their actions.

Need I state the same thing again.

Now back on subject.

Which would be what? Dance a lil dance with earth, as earth ignores the facts.

What is you opinion about IDF soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields?

It's deplorable. What is your opinion of the Hezbollah using humanshields, as they attack Israel from residential areas?

Please try to stay on subject...

We've been dead on topic the whole time, you just don't like that the topic includes examining your love of the Hezbollah.

I'm sorry but I must have missed your post commenting on the IDF's use of child soldiers. As far as I know you approve of this tactic.

The IDF does not use "child Soldiers".

Also, it appears you claim that Hezbollah has abducted children at gunpoint as used them as human shields like the IDF has. Can you reference a reputable source backing up that opinion?

No one has claimed that. I challlenge you to prove anyone has. We have claimed that the Hezbollah uses hundreds of people as human shields, at a time, getting hundreds kiled, at a time. While the IDF, illegally uses a handful of human shields, which do not always end up dead. This, if we use your system of measure(remember all your posts about the disproportionate number of Palestinian dead and destroyed homes?), should be well within your tolerable levels, as less civilians die as IDF human shield, then as Hezbollah human shields.

Meanwhile here is some logic regarding whether or not Hezbollah uses human shields:

This is only logical, if you are a supporter of the Arab nazi party, as you are. The Hezbollah loves dead Lebonese and Palestinians. They make for great weapons in on their other military front, the media blitz.

But you know what? That piece you C&P'd, is rather interesting. Seeing as it states, that...

When someone uses another human being as a "shield," under the plain meaning of the word, it is understood to be a method to deter aggression by adversaries. In order for that objective to be achieved, crucial premises must first exist.

The party who employs the human shield MUST assume that their adversary will hesitate to fire against those shields for fear of harming them.

I guess Lebonese lives aren't worth much to the Hezbollah, or they are the dumbest fu*ks on the planet, seeing as they use Lebones and Palestinian people as human shields, knowing full well, that the IDF is using the RoE of their aggressors.

Can't argue with that logic, perhaps you might like to try....

I wouldn't suspect you would.

My main reason for posting here is to try to compensate for the pro-Israel misinformation/propaganda which pretends to be news. If I was to choose sides, it would be the side of innocent victims, not Hezbollah.

That's funny, my main reason for continuing my participation in your's or Illogic 7's threads is to privide the real facts and counter your obvious support of the Arab nazi party.

How about you? What is your opinion about the IDF using Palestinian children as human shields? Do you approve of this routine IDF procedure?

Asked and answered.

You've hinted and you've danced around a direct answer, but you've never actually came out and made a clear statement like I did about Hezbollah's targetting of innocent Israeli civilians.

The only thing you've made clear, is that you support nazism and the targetting of civilians.

Are you able to make a clear statement about your IDF heros using Palestinian children as human shields?

I think LG was quite clear, you just don't like his answer and just like you filter your facts, those that don't jive with your bigotry, don't make it past the swaztika.

I still don't have anything I can quote you on. Are you a politician?

So unless he/we drop all our morals and values and stand firm with you, we aren't being clear?

You said that if a hostile foreign nation was killing innocent Canadian citizens, you would not support targetting innocent civilians on the other side.

No he didn't, he as I have stated we would fight back. Blatant targetting of civilians, is a crime under any circumstance.

I never said I would support that either. I just said I would expect our government to respond in kind.

That's supporting it!!! Are you that daft, that you can not see that?

But I am curious about what kind of a response you would support.

A proportionate response. Seeing as the Hezbollah use human shields to hide behind in every single attack they launch, the IDF has no choice, but to retaliate against civilian locations. That isn't their fault and as much as I find it sickening, the Hezbollah has set the RoE, then why are you whining about it?

So hypothetically, if some country bombed Pearson International, took out ever bridge and overpass in the metropolitan Toronto region and killed several hundred innocent Canadian civilians...

Had Canada declared war on that Nationa and kidnapped two of its Soldiers to use as hostages, launched attack after attack from civilian residential areas. A military response on the identified launching points would be justied, attacks on Airports, bridges and other key structures, is a normal FACT and TACTIC of war, don't like it? Stop supporting the Hezbollah.

What would be an appropriate response?

First, we are a civilized Nation, we do not employ the tactics of the Hezbollah, so most of what you threw up, would not happen. But seeing as you are attempting to get us to agree with your support of targetting Israeli civilians, something you said before you do not support, but in fact do, and are now trying to have validated. But to answer your assinine question directly, the appropriate respoce would be to target the aggressors, wherever they are hiding. Get it???

But I could be wrong...

And you are!!! Often even!!!

Funny, the quote button works for me.
Anyway, "both" means one side AND the other. Get it?

No earth doesn't!!!

 

[earth_as_one]

...I would not expect the Canadian Armed Forces to target civilians ever, that is what seperates us from the Hezbollah and the IDF. That is also what seperates you, a nazi, from the rest of us, none of us ever find it acceptable to target civilians. You condone it. It matters not, that someone does it first, doing it at any time is wrong. Thanx for exposing more of that Arab nazi mentality you have....

Nice fantasy CB, but the Canadian military has already targetted civilians in past wars.

...Doug Harvey states in the film that the "morality of altitude" relieved him and his fellow airmen of such troublesome considerations. They were, as the film repeatedly acknowledges, patriotic and courageous young men applying their skills over the night skies of Germany under terrifying conditions. The `rightness' or `wrongness' of the policy they were committed to carry out was not a question that could or should have been of concern to the rank-and-file crewman.

Canadian Bomber Command navigator John Harding agrees. "I didn't give [German civilians] a second thought, I was worried about my own neck; were we going to get there, were we going to get back?... [Besides] you never really saw them dying. It maybe would have had a much greater effect on you. You might not have been able to stick it out."10


And, says Canadian bomb-aimer Dallas Laskey: "In those days right and wrong were more clear cut than they are now... At the time it didn't bother me much. Later I thought about it and thought that was a horrible thing... but I think the idea that the Germans had started it and we're going to finish it prevailed. It's strange for me now, it's a very strange mindset to be in, but we were very quickly manipulated into that at the time, even though a lot of us thought we were sort of objective."11...

http://www.valourandhorror.com/P_Reply/BC.php

...[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In February, 1942, Harris replaced J. E. Baldwin as head of RAF Bomber Command. Under his leadership the policy of area bombing (known in Germany as terror bombing) was developed. Harris fought against all attempts to persuade him to switch to precision bombing and for a while resisted the formation of the Pathfinder Force in 1942.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Harris argued that the main objectives of night-time blanket bombing of urban areas was to undermine the morale of the civilian population and attacks were launched on Hamburg, Berlin, Cologne, Dresden and other German cities. This air campaign killed an estimated 600,000 civilians and destroyed or seriously damaged some six million homes...[/FONT]

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWharris.htm

Did Canadian bombers target German civilians during WW II?

Any country whose civilians have beed deliberately attacked like Lebanon's has the right to target civilians in response. That's why Israel should not have crossed that line first.

Israel authorizes 'severe' response to abductions
Thursday, July 13, 2006

...Maj. Gen. Udi Adam, head of Israel's Northern Command, said he has "comprehensive plans" to battle Hezbollah throughout Lebanon, not just in its southern stronghold.

"This affair is between Israel and the state of Lebanon," Adam said. "Where to attack? Once it is inside Lebanon, everything is legitimate -- not just southern Lebanon, not just the line of Hezbollah posts." (Watch as Israeli forces enter Lebanon -- 2:29)

Earlier, Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, told Israel's Channel 10, "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years."...

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/12/mideast/

...THURSDAY 13 JULY

After a night of Israeli air raids across southern Lebanon, Israeli jets strike the runways at Beirut's international airport in the morning, forcing the airport to close. Reports emerge of significant numbers of civilian casualties in Lebanese towns and villages close to Israeli targets, with at least 35 people reported killed.

In pictures: Lebanon strikes

As Israel announces an air and sea blockade of Lebanon, insisting that Hezbollah will not be allowed to return to its former position along the international border, world powers react to the escalating crisis.

The US president defends Israel's right to defend itself from attack, but France, Russia and the EU are all critical of a "disproportionate" use of force.
As night falls a rocket hits Israel's third-largest city, Haifa, although Hezbollah denies responsibility...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5179434.stm

By the time Hezbollah launched its first rocket at Israeli civilians, Israel had already bombed Lebanon from one end to the other, killing hundreds of innocent Lebanese civilians.

 

[earth_as_one]

Hezbollah tolerated nearly two days of attacks on Lebanese civilians before they declared they would also target civilians.

Saturday, 15 July 2006
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has promised "open war" against Israel, in an address broadcast shortly after his Beirut offices were bombed by Israel.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5182048.stm

Nations which target innocent civilians should expect that their civilians will be similarly targeted. Israel should not have crossed that line first.

That statement does not support targetting of Israeli or Lebanese civilians. Its just an observation.