Canadian Politics Redux

HughFreakingDillon

what did I say that was incorrect? I too was victim to it. I'll give you an example: after 9/11 I was 100% behind the Iraq invasion. Why? EMOTION. I was fucking mad at what happened and wanted blood. Then a friend of mine opened my eyes to it, and I became more objective to the truth. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

what did I say that was incorrect? I too was victim to it. I'll give you an example: after 9/11 I was 100% behind the Iraq invasion. Why? EMOTION. I was fucking mad at what happened and wanted blood. Then a friend of mine opened my eyes to it, and I became more objective to the truth. 

I assume you meant Afghanistan? If so, please, what do you mean your eyes were opened?  I ask because maybe you know some facts of which I am unaware (admittedly it will need to be some clear proofs because to this day I support the invasion of Afghanistan and think Canada still has a debt to that country since we pulled out well before we had completed the job of securing and rebuilding the country). I didn't want blood, I wanted the threat eliminated and (as much as possible) the perpetrators brought to justice. Was I feeling many of the same emotions you were at the time?  Absolutely,  but I also think that that's the time it's most important to take a step back. 

Another caveat I should probably clearly state is that,  to a certain extent I make allowances for the so-called fog of war. It doesn't make those incidents acceptable but it needs to be acknowledged just how messy (a poor word) warfare is.

When it comes to the invasion of Iraq, I actually opposed it at the time and was glad to see the Liberal government of the day (under Chretien I believe) keep us out of that war, even though Harper wanted us to join in. 

I still think the one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter speaks more to human nature and us all being the heroes of our own stories than it does to any indoctrination.  You disagree,  fine.

HughFreakingDillon

no, I said the invasion of Iraq. By the US. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

no, I said the invasion of Iraq. By the US. 

Ok, thank you for clarifying. Fortunately in my head our country’s hands are clean on that one, and therefore it’s been far easier for me to be objective in assessing it.

You yourself admit that your support for that invasion stemmed more from emotion than indoctrination, although your emotions could easily be laid at the feet of indoctrination if one wanted to.

For me there is a difference between the long-term effects of indoctrination and emotions in the heat of the moment. However I do also believe that essentially every single person on this planet is indoctrinated to one extent or another, certainly we’re indoctrinated into believing that democracy is the best system with a good helping of free market capitalism, lol.

cincybearcat

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

HughFreakingDillon

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

yes, hamas do that. they are fucking evil pieces of shit. but sorry, when your enemy uses an innocent life as a shield, you don't fire. PERIOD. I do, believe, however, that this is a convenient excuse for the Israeli government. I think they'd be blowing up hospitals even if hamas wasn't there. they've proven the last 30 years they have no issue with indiscriminately murdering innocents. 

DarthMaeglin

Thank you, Trudeau Liberals.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-government-reject-toronot-decriminalization-1.7208335

DarthMaeglin

Elect a clown, you get a clown show.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/speaker-fergus-faces-new-calls-to-resign-after-partisan-language-used-in-ad-for-local-event

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

yes, hamas do that. they are fucking evil pieces of shit. but sorry, when your enemy uses an innocent life as a shield, you don't fire. PERIOD. I do, believe, however, that this is a convenient excuse for the Israeli government. I think they'd be blowing up hospitals even if hamas wasn't there. they've proven the last 30 years they have no issue with indiscriminately murdering innocents. 

I totally agree with all of that.

DarthMaeglin

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

yes, hamas do that. they are fucking evil pieces of shit. but sorry, when your enemy uses an innocent life as a shield, you don't fire. PERIOD. I do, believe, however, that this is a convenient excuse for the Israeli government. I think they'd be blowing up hospitals even if hamas wasn't there. they've proven the last 30 years they have no issue with indiscriminately murdering innocents. 

I totally agree with all of that.

We’ve established what Israel CANNOT do, could someone, anyone, say what they CAN do to respond to the barbarism of October 7th?

Edit: Here’s my answer. At this point, given the parameters set (so far) on Israel in this very thread, they only have one option as I see it: full-scale land invasion with martial law declared as the surface is secured first then the tunnels. It will be an even bloodier event (I suspect) with fighting happening house-to-house and room-to-room. Once a government is in place that will be a true partner in peace is when Israel relinquishes control of the territory of Gaza.

 I now await a better option if there is one. And believe me, I would love to hear something practical that would achieve peace.

HughFreakingDillon

the US proved they can find and eliminate the most wanted and most protected man on the planet, without bombing the shit out of the entire place (which they tried, and failed). So yes, it's not ideal, and it's not easy, but the best solution never is. 

HughFreakingDillon

and what makes you think Israel wants peace that doesn't include the total elimination of the Palestinian people? they've shown absolutely no regard for them as a people or a nation so far. The US government has proven that installing a government that you think is going to work with you ends up as an utter failure eventually. You can't force democracy. And when you've been murdering the citizens for 3 decades because of your claim to land based on a fairy tale, no installed government is going to be your friend, at least not for very long. 

Parksy

DarthMaeglin said:

Thank you, Trudeau Liberals.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-government-reject-toronot-decriminalization-1.7208335

If you read the article that you posted... I don't see how on earth you blame (or thank) Trudeau for this. Read the article. Call me crazy, but I don't think you read it... I think you just follow or subscribe to conservative talking points. Pierre Polievre's in particular. Please fully read the article. I hate to seem judgmental but I cannot see how one correlates the article you posted to having anything to do with 'Trudeau liberals.'  They followed the advice of health departments, health ministers, doctors, and the Toronto Police Service. 

Pierre is (once again) using this as a political talking point and making it seem like Trudeau is a monster for this which is the furthest thing from the truth. Be skeptical of someone or something who is desperately trying to sell you bull shit. 

Those who do their homework understand that the only feasible solution to the opioid crisis is funding. I'm not saying (at all) that Trudeau or the liberals are taking any wins here. It's fucked.  But I also understand that Conservative governments and public funding generally don't go hand in hand. 

Pierre may want to steer clear of this as an election issue. 

Parksy

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

DarthMaeglin said:

When a large part of the discussion is the proportionality of a response and numbers have been used, when those numbers change significantly, then I do see that as absolutely germane to the discussion.

It’s sad that I seemingly need to point everyone back to the last line of my post introducing the revised numbers. The line where I clearly acknowledge that civilian deaths in a war zone have always been and will always be a tragedy.

However, until warfare becomes so targeted that it all occurs via nanobots, there WILL be civilians killed in war.

Is there an equal cry to make us (Canada) face justice for the civilian deaths we caused in Afghanistan? Why not?

there absolutely fucking should be. I have always maintained that our participation in any activity in the mid east that directly caused civilian deaths should be investigated, and prosecuted if applicable. 

Israel has been actively engaged in genocide for decades. But it's somehow ok because you aren't allowed to criticize anything linked to Israel without being called a bigot. 

this conflict did not start on Oct 7. 

So was October 7th a legitimate military operation?  Did it break an existing ceasefire? What would you have Israel do?

And how would you have seen Canada react to 9/11?

I believe these are fair and reasonable questions.

I don't think anyone's called anyone a bigot in this thread thus far so I don't see any relevance in the suggestion. 

it's funny what some people consider terrorism, others consider legitimate military operations. all depends which side you're on. 

the entire reason this occupation is allowed to stand is because of so-called anti-semitism and the west's need for a powerful ally in the mid east. that's it. everyone says how complicated it is (for those not Israeli/Palestinian). it's not. it's those two reasons. if israel were in africa, not surrounded by countries rich in resources, no one would give a flying fuck about them. zero. nada. zilch. 

With no clarification I have to read your first statement here as legitimizing the October 7th attack. Legitimate military operations do not target civilians intentionally,  full stop. 

Your second statement seems to be saying that the establishment of the state of Israel (more or less in line with its biblical borders) had little to nothing to do with the slaughter of 6 million Jews but was rather a cynical ploy to further destabilize the region? And we've only helped deter the genocide of Israel by its neighbours only because of the access it gives us to oil? Seriously,  please clarify what you mean. 

I'm not legitimizing anything. it's all action/reaction. so was 9/11. was the slaughter of thousands of american citizens justified? nope. but I understand why it happened. 

I give no credence to anything that uses the bible as a reference. 

No one is stopping Israel from peacefully being its own state except Israel. the continued genocide of the Palestinian people is what keeps all progress at zero. 

When you say one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter I believe you have misquoted. I'm thought it was one person's rebel is another's freedom fighter.  They stop being freedom fighters or rebels when they intentionally target civilians. Then they are terrorists no matter how just (or understandable) the cause may seem. 

You seem to be ignoring quite a bit on the other side of this conflict and only condemning one side here (you're hardly the only one). Which side has openly called for the genocide of the other?  Hint, it's not Israel. 

If you can't accept a reference that includes the Bible that's irrelevant,  what is relevant in this case was the beliefs of the Jewish people.  With the benefit of hindsight,  what was appropriate way to compensate the Jewish people for the extreme suffering that was inflicted on them by the Nazis and their allies? Cash settlement? The establishment of a Jewish homeland doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or is the better question where would you have put Israel? 

What's stopping Israel from existing peacefully is exactly the several calls for their obliteration in my opinion. 

I see many references to Israel's genocide,  yet no one's really made the case. 

Where are the equally loud calls for Hamas to face justice for their numerous war crimes?  As the legitimate government of Gaza, they should be being held to the same standards as the other government involved,  regardless how our own government has labeled them. 

my issue (and the issue of many others) is that israel's actions keep getting excused no matter what atrocities they perform. "Israel has a right to defend itself". do you consider bombing hospitals and intentionally murdering palenstinian civilians defending itself? bulldozing private property? stealing land and evicting the owners? it's preposterous to me that not only in the face of PROOF of war crimes, and crimes prior to Oct 7 that go against international agreements, people not only excuse it, but celebrate it. it's disgusting. 

defending Palestinians does not equal defense of hamas. Yes, they elected hamas in a free election. So did american of GWB Jr.  who just so happened to be the murderer of a million iraqi civilians. do I blame all americans for not immediately removing him from office? of course not. that's impossible and absurd. people blaming the murder of Palestinians on their own vote is abhorrent. 

Hey Hugh....I know I'm kinda jumping in here, but do you not believe that Hamas builds military installations above, in and under schools, hospitals etc?  Do you not believe that they fire rockets from "safe zones"?

I'm very torn on this whole thing...but if you enemy is fighting by using human shields etc....I am really unsure what I expect the other side to do.  It feels like the difference between guerilla warfare and traditional line warfare...if you don't change, you have no shot.

So none of this speaks to the political nature of this issue nor the history, etc.  But just in the retaliation attacks by Israel against Hamas.  Hamas attacked civilians.  Hamas killed, raped, tortured and captured civilians.  They aren't freedom fighters by any stretch of that definition.  How is Israel to respond?

yes, hamas do that. they are fucking evil pieces of shit. but sorry, when your enemy uses an innocent life as a shield, you don't fire. PERIOD. I do, believe, however, that this is a convenient excuse for the Israeli government. I think they'd be blowing up hospitals even if hamas wasn't there. they've proven the last 30 years they have no issue with indiscriminately murdering innocents. 

I totally agree with all of that.

This is what I meant earlier in terms of drawing comparisons.  I'm no scholar... and I honestly lack the time and energy to educate myself proper... but we simply haven't seemed to learn from all of our past mistakes regarding responses. 

We have the blueprint, we just don't use it. 

The proper, measured response is a democratic one. It's an agreed upon one. We have the U.N. for this very reason, but we have a history of acknowledging that the U.N. can be ignored without consequence so long as you're the big dog at the table (America, China, etc.) 

What seriously complicates this.. is the human element.  I cannot sit here and say with honesty that my response to wrong doing would be democratic and measured. Hugh mentioned this regarding emotions. 

But I can only do so much with my hands....  nations with nuclear weapons, drones, ICBMs, etc. ... the need for them to show restraint is extremely important these days. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

the US proved they can find and eliminate the most wanted and most protected man on the planet, without bombing the shit out of the entire place (which they tried, and failed). So yes, it's not ideal, and it's not easy, but the best solution never is. 

So are you suggesting that surgical raids is Israel’s only real option? Like they did in at least one raid on a hospital? I’m honestly trying to understand what you’re saying there.

HughFreakingDillon said:

and what makes you think Israel wants peace that doesn't include the total elimination of the Palestinian people? they've shown absolutely no regard for them as a people or a nation so far. The US government has proven that installing a government that you think is going to work with you ends up as an utter failure eventually. You can't force democracy. And when you've been murdering the citizens for 3 decades because of your claim to land based on a fairy tale, no installed government is going to be your friend, at least not for very long. 

Here’s the strong accusations again, many have died but the label of murder implies intent which is impossible to prove given the fog of war and threats of genocide under which Israel has existed its entire time.

If we dismiss Israel’s claim because it’s based on a fairy tale then every claim everywhere is dismissed because virtually every culture follows their own “fairy tales”. That you so easily condescend on religious beliefs is actually disrespectful, I don’t know if you realize, kind of gets in the way of rational discussion.

DarthMaeglin

Parksy said:

DarthMaeglin said:

Thank you, Trudeau Liberals.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-government-reject-toronot-decriminalization-1.7208335

If you read the article that you posted... I don't see how on earth you blame (or thank) Trudeau for this. Read the article. Call me crazy, but I don't think you read it... I think you just follow or subscribe to conservative talking points. Pierre Polievre's in particular. Please fully read the article. I hate to seem judgmental but I cannot see how one correlates the article you posted to having anything to do with 'Trudeau liberals.'  They followed the advice of health departments, health ministers, doctors, and the Toronto Police Service. 

Pierre is (once again) using this as a political talking point and making it seem like Trudeau is a monster for this which is the furthest thing from the truth. Be skeptical of someone or something who is desperately trying to sell you bull shit. 

Those who do their homework understand that the only feasible solution to the opioid crisis is funding. I'm not saying (at all) that Trudeau or the liberals are taking any wins here. It's fucked.  But I also understand that Conservative governments and public funding generally don't go hand in hand. 

Pierre may want to steer clear of this as an election issue. 

I guess I wasn’t clear that that was an acknowledgment that the federal government didn’t pursue a policy I don’t agree with. It was genuine thanks. I did read the article, thanks, I don’t post a link without having read it in full, I thought that was how it works here.

I completely agree that addiction is an incredibly complex issue with no easy solutions but based on events around safe injection sites here in Toronto (an innocent passerby was killed), and the reports and reversal in the wake of Vancouver’s attempt at decriminalization don’t make me favour the more permissive approaches. Do I have a suggestion or idea? Not one.

As far as me labelling them the Trudeau Liberals I do that purely because the current Liberal Party bears no resemblance to the party prior to the moron taking charge. I honestly look forward to the day when I can again call them the Liberal Party of Canada.

HughFreakingDillon

it's not a "strong accusation". if you've been paying attention the last 30 years, its unequivocal fact. 

I couldn't give two flying fucks if I offend anyone with my dismissal of religion. Religion is a cancer. Religion's dismissal, and persecution, of subsequent murder of, those who didn't fall in line with their "beliefs", is far worse than anything I could ever dismiss. The fact you are concerned about "rational discussion" in the same sentence as me being respectful of the flying fucking spaghetti monster is pretty goddamn rich. 

DarthMaeglin

HughFreakingDillon said:

it's not a "strong accusation". if you've been paying attention the last 30 years, its unequivocal fact. 

I couldn't give two flying fucks if I offend anyone with my dismissal of religion. Religion is a cancer. Religion's dismissal, and persecution, of subsequent murder of, those who didn't fall in line with their "beliefs", is far worse than anything I could ever dismiss. The fact you are concerned about "rational discussion" in the same sentence as me being respectful of the flying fucking spaghetti monster is pretty goddamn rich. 

Show me Israel’s stated, clear, open policy of genocide for the Palestinians? Have attacks constantly come from the Palestinian territories and civilians on both sides caught in the crossfire? For roughly half the time you cite (in a region with millennia of history) Hamas has been in charge of Gaza and threatening to commit the very genocide you lay at Israel’s feet.

Again, how is Israel to respond in the face of such a threat and the massacre committed on October 7th? Why won’t you directly answer this question?

If we’re not here for rational and respectful discussion then boy, have I been holding back in error, lol!

HughFreakingDillon

AGAIN. THIS DIDN'T START ON OCT 7. 

Israel needs a documented policy of genocide for you to see that it's the truth? good god. 

I have answered it. I don't have the answer. I know what isn't the answer. And it's what they're doing now. 

HughFreakingDillon

and I never said we shouldn't be having rational discussion. I was laughing at your criticism of dismissal of religion as not being a part of rational discussion. there's nothing rational about a god who impregnates a woman to birth himself so he can be sacrificed to himself to shield himself from the sins of the people he created and wants to save.