Israel Palestine

[~RustyGunZ~]

Uh oh, would it be justified for the national guard to kill antifa members?

[Amen]

Originally Posted by Innovator

I’ll mix it up

Please do. Lol.

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by boof

same source says 0 of them were armed. so... still worthy of being murdered from 600 yards away?

u think most of the 2,000 shot were hamas as well?

u never responded to me mentioning that palestinians have been protesting the landgrab since before hamas. you make it seem like you think this is only because of them

like water, food, electricity, jobs, losing their land, forced to not come back, isn't enough to protest?

you are confusing protesting with the action of attempting to breach a defensive barrier. you continue to paint them as harmless victims. you refuse to look at the issue from the other side. you say yourself hamas is a terrorist organization earlier in the thread, this entire event (the violence, not the normal protesting) was sponsored and ordered by hamas to breach the defensive fence and take back "their homes". how many protestors were killed today? 0. why? maybe because kites with molotov cocktails ain't being flown in, maybe because hamas wasn't employing children to roll tires up to the fence and burn them as a smokescreen so others can cut their way through? explain to me how that is an unarmed protest?

Originally Posted by boof

because defending yourself with unarmed protest isn't wrong?

i would agree, if it was an unarmed protest.

Originally Posted by Knucklehead

Uh oh, would it be justified for the national guard to kill antifa members?

goofy question. i could make up a scenario where it would be justified. but just antifa rioting because milo fagadopolis is in town? of course not. but i wouldn't fault a shop owner protecting his establishment.

also booth, remember that this entire thread is predicated on the fact that i don't understand the rights viewpoint on this matter, because of what you think im ignoring. you are ignoring that the thread is based off that. i don't agree with israels actions in the past at all, i don't even agree with israel as a nation. but it is. the shit happened. palestinians sold or were displaced. 60 years ago. in those 60 years you could fill tons of books on what has happened since from both sides. its a complicated issue, so to see you just spewing what the media is force feeding the public is disheartening. you don't want to see the other sides point of view. fair?

[Amen]

Exterminate those infadels.

Someone post videos so boof can cry himself to sleep after eating his vegan microwave dinner.

[~RustyGunZ~]

Its an organization that has been physically violent and is against the state. Most fitting example to compare to America and as much at fault as you seem to think the Palestinian people are.

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by Knucklehead

Its an organization that has been physically violent and is against the state. Most fitting example to compare to America and as much at fault as you seem to think the Palestinian people are.

false equivalence. stop it.

if antifa was threatening the lives of the national guard and the lives of americans, with the intent of overthrowing the government and displacing all of us, than of course i would be for them being met with force.

antifa is nothing like hamas, so i will reiterate its a goofy question and i have to put out make believe scenarios to justify the use of lethal force

israel can be seen as justified because the palestinians and mainly hamas burn the border through which israel provides them with aid, regularly sends in rocket attacks, and organizes events with the sole purpose of reclaiming the land that is now israel. they do not want the land israel took in wars and through other means after israel already existed, they want israel itself. they already pushed the israeli's out of gaza, they want them out of israel as well.

hamas is smart enough to put women and children in the line of fire, with the hopes they are cut down so they can continually portray themselves as the victims in the media, they refuse to live in peace, because they can't know peace with israels existence. the media feeds this narrative by painting them as harmless victims and they get more and more support.

there are victims, regular every day palestinians, alot of those protesters injured were some as well. but to me its very easy to see that those victims are caught between 2 evils. to only blame the hammer and leave out the anvil makes no sense to me.

[~RustyGunZ~]

You compared the situation to two dogs fighting but I’m goofy for comparing it to a relevant situation in our country? You know antifa wants to overthrow our government right?

[bleak]

[boof]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

you are confusing protesting with the action of attempting to breach a defensive barrier. you continue to paint them as harmless victims. you refuse to look at the issue from the other side. you say yourself hamas is a terrorist organization earlier in the thread, this entire event (the violence, not the normal protesting) was sponsored and ordered by hamas to breach the defensive fence and take back "their homes". how many protestors were killed today? 0. why? maybe because kites with molotov cocktails ain't being flown in, maybe because hamas wasn't employing children to roll tires up to the fence and burn them as a smokescreen so others can cut their way through? explain to me how that is an unarmed protest?


i would agree, if it was an unarmed protest.



goofy question. i could make up a scenario where it would be justified. but just antifa rioting because milo fagadopolis is in town? of course not. but i wouldn't fault a shop owner protecting his establishment.

also booth, remember that this entire thread is predicated on the fact that i don't understand the rights viewpoint on this matter, because of what you think im ignoring. you are ignoring that the thread is based off that. i don't agree with israels actions in the past at all, i don't even agree with israel as a nation. but it is. the shit happened. palestinians sold or were displaced. 60 years ago. in those 60 years you could fill tons of books on what has happened since from both sides. its a complicated issue, so to see you just spewing what the media is force feeding the public is disheartening. you don't want to see the other sides point of view. fair?

i don't understand. the person YOU cited to convince me that they are mostly terrorists also specifically said that nobody was armed. you can't pick and choose what you believe from the source you're using against me?

can you show me videos of what you're describing? i'm pretty sure there were zero israeli injuries right? how did 40,000 armed people with molotov kites and burning tires and pipe bombs and grenades and whatever else you're saying not hurt 1 israeli? how is this even a clash? the "violence" is only being committed by one side bro

i'd suggest from here on out we just post video footage to back up our sides because everything else seems ineffective at this point

[Immolate]

based off news id say that israel has offered some 2-state peace solutions but pali don't want none of that. they want the whole pie. couple days ago they tried to attack the israeli border, bunch of em got killed. don't know what they really expected. niggas like "why not peacefully subdue them" like war don't breed savagery out here..

my fam buncha christians who support israel. it's hard to care about it when like Africa has a ton of civil wars nobody care and they way more savage. same for south america. and hell, even some of the islands..

[boof]

for every video posted of palestinians attacking the border the other day i will post 3 of israeli snipers opening fire on peaceful protesters

[Amen]

So ATTACKING a boarder is peaceful?

[veritas]

It is mental insanity and spiritual abomination to blame Israel or trump for this

[Clout]

Originally Posted by Knucklehead

They’re racist, the Jews net more positives for mixed up white conservatives. Also ISIS ya know.

Neither are real whites but at least the Jews ain’t brown people har har har - uhohs boss

Huh? I know alot of ethnic non-white looking jews. Emanuelle chriqui from don't mess with zohan is a Moroccan - Sephardic Jew. She's quite sun kissed my friend =). Alot of Ashkenazim Jews are very white in appearence though.

[~RustyGunZ~]

Originally Posted by Clout

Huh? I know alot of ethnic non-white looking jews. Emanuelle chriqui from don't mess with zohan is a Moroccan - Sephardic Jew. She's quite sun kissed my friend =). Alot of Ashkenazim Jews are very white in appearence though.

Most pointless post in this thread lmao wtf

[Clout]

Originally Posted by Knucklehead

Most pointless post in this thread lmao wtf

ahh i see sorry early in AM here. You pretending to mimic uhoh.

[boof]

Originally Posted by Amen

So ATTACKING a boarder is peaceful?

define attacking bro. or post a video of it from the other day.

again, my stance is there was 40,000 people and i've heard at most that 9 of them had some sort of bullshit bootleg "weapon". people had tennis rackets to deflect tear gas cannisters. a man in a wheelchair had a sling in a rock. if they were ATTACKING wouldn't there be literally ANY injuries on the israeli side?

the high high majority were peaceful. i know there was a buffer zone between palestinians and the israeli border. i know people were getting shot from 600 yards away.

so how is it possible to define what 40,000 unarmed people 600 yards away from the border were doing as ATTACKING?

this the same shit as standing rock. media paints it as a bunch of wylie coyote's when 0 people were armed at the protests. one guy brings a rifle & points it at the cops and suddenly all 10,000 people are worthy of losing arms and being shot point blank with rubber bullets and being hosed down with water cannons in freezing temperatures.

[~RustyGunZ~]

Originally Posted by boof

define attacking bro. or post a video of it from the other day.

again, my stance is there was 40,000 people and i've heard at most that 9 of them had some sort of bullshit bootleg "weapon". people had tennis rackets to deflect tear gas cannisters. a man in a wheelchair had a sling in a rock. if they were ATTACKING wouldn't there be literally ANY injuries on the israeli side?

the high high majority were peaceful. i know there was a buffer zone between palestinians and the israeli border. i know people were getting shot from 600 yards away.

so how is it possible to define what 40,000 unarmed people 600 yards away from the border were doing as ATTACKING?

this the same shit as standing rock. media paints it as a bunch of wylie coyote's when 0 people were armed at the protests. one guy brings a rifle & points it at the cops and suddenly all 10,000 people are worthy of losing arms and being shot point blank with rubber bullets and being hosed down with water cannons in freezing temperatures.

But if one chihuahua bites a pit bull should the pit bull not kill all chihuahuas???

[Enbombz]

Your wasting your breath on these guys boof.

[Amen]

Originally Posted by boof

define attacking bro. or post a video of it from the other day.

again, my stance is there was 40,000 people and i've heard at most that 9 of them had some sort of bullshit bootleg "weapon". people had tennis rackets to deflect tear gas cannisters. a man in a wheelchair had a sling in a rock. if they were ATTACKING wouldn't there be literally ANY injuries on the israeli side?

the high high majority were peaceful. i know there was a buffer zone between palestinians and the israeli border. i know people were getting shot from 600 yards away.

so how is it possible to define what 40,000 unarmed people 600 yards away from the border were doing as ATTACKING?

this the same shit as standing rock. media paints it as a bunch of wylie coyote's when 0 people were armed at the protests. one guy brings a rifle & points it at the cops and suddenly all 10,000 people are worthy of losing arms and being shot point blank with rubber bullets and being hosed down with water cannons in freezing temperatures.

Lol post videos

Bro the word is capitalized and bolded for a reason.

at·tack
əˈtak
verb
take aggressive action against (a place or enemy forces).