One civilian killed, not bad. Israel did a great job singling out exactly who planned the attack and eliminating them. People here are right, you do not care for facts civilian causalities were kept to a minimum..
Several dead, many wounded in bus attack in Israel
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
One civilian killed, not bad. Israel did a great job singling out exactly who planned the attack and eliminating them. People here are right, you do not care for facts civilian causalities were kept to a minimum..
What am I dodging here? I already responded to both you and Eaglesmack's exaggeration about who or what caused this incident..
Can you point out the exaggeration please.
Then maybe you can respond to this...
And this is the quote that has been presented to you several times now.
You can keep ignoring the facts, it just goes to show everyone, your claim of wishing to meet in the middle was disingenuous.
It isn't and never was. It was however, a **** storm for you...
Which is what you asked ES when he took the same route as you. Only on the other side.
Now, we can point out your logical inconsistency.
Although, the fact that you already used those exact words, before either of us called you on it.
I suspect you already knew you were done. You just haven't the fortitude to admit it.
.........................................
Instead of dodging.
I am so confused right now, lol
Okay, let's start off with the quote:
"There is also the possibility (although an extremely low probability) that it could have originated from Israelis themselves."
Firstly, there is nothing wrong with that quote.
There was a possibility that it could have been Israelis. I know there have been some pretty heated protests from Israelis themselves recently, so that was part in parcel with why I thought it was a possibility.
Should we move to the next question? Is this okay so far?
Okay, let's start off with the quote:
"There is also the possibility (although an extremely low probability) that it could have originated from Israelis themselves."
Firstly, there is nothing wrong with that quote.
There was a possibility that it could have been Israelis. I know there have been some pretty heated protests from Israelis themselves recently, so that was part in parcel with why I thought it was a possibility.
Should we move to the next question? Is this okay so far?
I'm not.
But that's what happens when you try to muddle the conversation, because you can't just admit an error in logic, or what have you.
If you just admitted your errors, and avoided trying to deflect and dodge, you wouldn't get confused.
But it does make for a nice escape hatch...
See ya, don't let that hatch hit ya on the head on the way out.
No, you are the one who was talking about Hamas attacking wedding parties. I just pointed out how the US has targeted wedding parties. People who live in glass houses.... I never said that is all the US targets, you did.
Oh, so you decided to stay... nice edit, yet again...
Which is what you asked eagle, when he followed the same logic as you.
No one said there was.
Sure, that would be...
Which is what you asked eagle, when he followed the same logic as you.
The US has never purposely targeted a "wedding party".
Somehow this seems like yet another condescending post.. right after I tried to logically piece things together from the beginning for the benefit of the discussion.
Thanks Bear.
Will remember that one.
Are you done editing yet?
Is it safe to reply to this post now?
Or are you planning on faining that my last post was an out of context attack?
Is it safe to reply to this post now?
Or are you planning on faining that my last post was an out of context attack?
No he inferred that I could imply it was possible that a plane other than an Israeli plane dropped bombs on Gaza just as I questioned the possibility of Hamas attacking Israeli forces.
This is wrong.
It was certain before and during the bomb dropping that those were Israeli planes.
It was not certain at the time that the Israeli forces were under attack, that it was by Hamas.
I took offense to his implication that both scenarios were the same, thereby "proving" some sort of hypocrisy on my part.
How so?
According to who?
That's not what he said. And he was still using your logic.
He didn't prove your logical inconsistency. You did when you asked...
Read the updated edit, Bear.
How did that statement prove a logical inconsistency?
No. Where did I say that?
Look, the long and short of it is.. if he was pretending that I would actually believe the Israeli planes dropping bombs on Gaza might not be Israeli planes - then he's wrong. There is no doubt that it was Israelis dropping ze bombs.
How did that statement prove a logical inconsistency?
No. Where did I say that?
Look, the long and short of it is.. if he was pretending that I would actually believe the Israeli planes dropping bombs on Gaza might not be Israeli planes - then he's wrong. There is no doubt that it was Israelis dropping ze bombs.
Last edited:
I did.
There are two questions in that post, that you ignored. Please answer them or tell me you won't, and we'll go from there.
You're really making this unnecessarily tedious, mang.
Why don't you just say what you mean?
Did you state it was a possibilty? trying to find out what as you say the shxtstorm is about.
Yes, at the time of the attack, I stated it was a possibility. As I mentioned to Bear earlier, there's been protests by Israelis themselves against their own government. It was one possibility that they would attack their own military personnel - perhaps out of spite, perhaps out of pure anger. Who knows. There was also the possibility that Mumbarak followers could have done it. And of course, obviously, it could be Hamas as well.
You spelled thorough wrong.
I did, I am. I also ask questions I need/would like answers to, to move on in the conversation.
Why won't you answer the questions, or tell me you won't?
Why don't you rephrase them again in a paragraph, without the cut+paste of my quotes. It would be a really nice, constructive favour, pal.