Someone is carefully avoiding answering regarding History. So before separating and founding a new country you have a free license for terrorism. You can later be at the head of the new country and even be awarded Nobel Peace!!! Not using emojis does not make more fair in the debate.
I wonder who took time to read the full text of warrants here?
>Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
>
>Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(I);
>
>Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(I);
>
>Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(I);
>
>Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
>
>Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
>
>Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).
www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-icc-prosecutor-karim-khans-application-for-arrest-warrants/
>Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
>
>Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(I);
>
>Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(I);
>
>Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(I);
>
>Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
>
>Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
>
>Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).
www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-icc-prosecutor-karim-khans-application-for-arrest-warrants/
I did, indeed, respond to your discussion of 1946, @bfchessguy (a time before Israel even existed). It isn't me who is not really responding to most of what has been said.
Israel is a real nation, almost a CENTURY OLD. Indeed, I'll guess that Israel is much older than you are. Starting wars to try to drive Isarel away is just causing needless suffering and death FOR BOTH SIDES. Israel is not going to disappear. MOST of the countries in the region get that and accept it, and we were on the brink of a lasting peace before October 7.
Shouting "from the river to the sea" just SCARES people because it suggests that people WANT Israel to disappear. Such chants DON'T tend to bring on peace. But -- are they even intended to do that? Really?
The Jews have already endured one Holocaust. They are not likely to put up with another. The Holocaust was nothing to laugh at and neither are ANY of the deaths in this war.
Israel is a real nation, almost a CENTURY OLD. Indeed, I'll guess that Israel is much older than you are. Starting wars to try to drive Isarel away is just causing needless suffering and death FOR BOTH SIDES. Israel is not going to disappear. MOST of the countries in the region get that and accept it, and we were on the brink of a lasting peace before October 7.
Shouting "from the river to the sea" just SCARES people because it suggests that people WANT Israel to disappear. Such chants DON'T tend to bring on peace. But -- are they even intended to do that? Really?
The Jews have already endured one Holocaust. They are not likely to put up with another. The Holocaust was nothing to laugh at and neither are ANY of the deaths in this war.
>I did, indeed, respond to your discussion of 1946, @bfchessguy (a time before Israel even existed). It isn't me who is not really responding to most of what has been said.
Yes, all those terrorists die the 1st second the country was born. No terrorist has been Prime Minister on the new country. Ofc you answered by ignoring it .
Tell me did you read the warrants full text? If the answer is yes, why are you carefully avoiding the subject of
>starvation of civilians as a method of warfare
??
P.S. No need to shout in this debate. ;-P
www.businessemailetiquette.com/is-this-shouting-too/
Yes, all those terrorists die the 1st second the country was born. No terrorist has been Prime Minister on the new country. Ofc you answered by ignoring it .
Tell me did you read the warrants full text? If the answer is yes, why are you carefully avoiding the subject of
>starvation of civilians as a method of warfare
??
P.S. No need to shout in this debate. ;-P
www.businessemailetiquette.com/is-this-shouting-too/
In your #57 in this thread, you write (in pertinent part): " ... you're also taking the side of deniers who pretend terrorists are bad..."
Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
Do you actually think otherwise? Or do you just not know.
But this is a war. A war Israel didn't start. I believe that on October 7, there was already a cease fire in place. Why did that cease fire get broken? Israel didn't break it. You know that, right? Did breaking that ceasefire help Palestinians? Really? Or did it just cause still more death, misery and suffering.
Bestowing "laugh" emojis doesn't confuse people: they can tell an emoji from an actual argument. You'll notice that I don't have to respond with emojis. But you do you, my friend.
Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
Do you actually think otherwise? Or do you just not know.
But this is a war. A war Israel didn't start. I believe that on October 7, there was already a cease fire in place. Why did that cease fire get broken? Israel didn't break it. You know that, right? Did breaking that ceasefire help Palestinians? Really? Or did it just cause still more death, misery and suffering.
Bestowing "laugh" emojis doesn't confuse people: they can tell an emoji from an actual argument. You'll notice that I don't have to respond with emojis. But you do you, my friend.
@Noflaps said in #75:
> In your #57 in this thread, you write (in pertinent part): " ... you're also taking the side of deniers who pretend terrorists are bad..."
>
> Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
>
> They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
>
> Do you actually think otherwise? Or do you just not know.
Ok, dude you're putting yourself above ICC who obviously think there is enough evidence to proceed with warrants. You're so much smarter than everyone. Rotfl
I do think terrorists are bad. Isn't what ICC is thinking by the way e.g. that both sides are bad? Unlike like you who think one side has a free license for committing war crimes.
Keep denying and pretend Begin was not a terrorist and that many Israelis are not celebrating the terrorists. In fact for deniers like you Likud Party never existed.
So I doubt you really think all terrorists are bad. When it suits your fallacious narrative you have no issue to be on their side.
Rotfl
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likud
P.S. Keep focussing on emojis, the more you think it is a big deal the more it disserves you.
> In your #57 in this thread, you write (in pertinent part): " ... you're also taking the side of deniers who pretend terrorists are bad..."
>
> Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
>
> They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
>
> Do you actually think otherwise? Or do you just not know.
Ok, dude you're putting yourself above ICC who obviously think there is enough evidence to proceed with warrants. You're so much smarter than everyone. Rotfl
I do think terrorists are bad. Isn't what ICC is thinking by the way e.g. that both sides are bad? Unlike like you who think one side has a free license for committing war crimes.
Keep denying and pretend Begin was not a terrorist and that many Israelis are not celebrating the terrorists. In fact for deniers like you Likud Party never existed.
So I doubt you really think all terrorists are bad. When it suits your fallacious narrative you have no issue to be on their side.
Rotfl
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likud
P.S. Keep focussing on emojis, the more you think it is a big deal the more it disserves you.
@Noflaps said in #75:
> [...] But you do you, my friend.
Why are you pretending I'm your friend??? I'm not. Stop that. First and last warning. Go it?
> [...] But you do you, my friend.
Why are you pretending I'm your friend??? I'm not. Stop that. First and last warning. Go it?
@Noflaps said in #75:
>[...]
> Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
>
> They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
> [...]
Again , no need to shout here.
www.businessemailetiquette.com/is-this-shouting-too/
>[...]
> Nobody is just "pretending" that terrorists are bad, @bfchessguy. They actually ARE bad. Do you actually disagree?
>
> They ARE bad. Like starting wars. I've seen no dependable evidence that Israel WANTS to starve or otherwise kill civilians. They've given warnings before shelling. They've allowed humanitarian aid into the country.
> [...]
Again , no need to shout here.
www.businessemailetiquette.com/is-this-shouting-too/
I don't think emoji's are "a big deal," @bfchessguy. I think they are sometimes used because no logical counterargument comes to mind, but the responder still wants to respond and have, in essence, a last word.
But nothing discussed has been at all funny. It is all tragic. So, a "laughing" emoji seems, to me at least, out of place. There is the "thumbs down" emoji already available to indicate disagreement. And of course, we are all free to agree or disagree, and I do not resent good faith disagreement. I can always be mistaken, and I don't think otherwise.
By the way, capitalizing a single word for emphasis (since we cannot use our voices to provide such emphasis while typing, right?) is not "shouting." Nor is capitalizing a word "a big deal."
But nothing discussed has been at all funny. It is all tragic. So, a "laughing" emoji seems, to me at least, out of place. There is the "thumbs down" emoji already available to indicate disagreement. And of course, we are all free to agree or disagree, and I do not resent good faith disagreement. I can always be mistaken, and I don't think otherwise.
By the way, capitalizing a single word for emphasis (since we cannot use our voices to provide such emphasis while typing, right?) is not "shouting." Nor is capitalizing a word "a big deal."
Why are you pretending I'm your friend??? I'm not. Stop that. First and last warning. Go it?
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.