Only by you and your ilk.

peek-a-boo:
The statement isnât in dispute
clearly it is.
one side saying one thing.
the saying another.
No Allan, itâs you who is saying the other thing.

one side saying one thing.
the saying another.
Hamas propaganda doesnât count.

Only if it is only a hospital.
fake hospitals, full of fake sick children.
Allan

fake hospitals, full of fake sick children.
Allan
Hamas control centers disguised as hospitals. I donât doubt there was a medical staff on sight and that there were patients. But that wasnât the primary purpose.
If you put soldiers with weapons in a hospital and they arenât wounded guess what? You lose your Geneva protections.

If you put soldiers with weapons in a hospital and they arenât wounded guess what? You lose your Geneva protections.
Iâm sure thatâs of great comfort to the patients wounded and killed.
Which goes to the point of the thread: this smug callousness is what is turning people against Israel.
When you are in a war you got to do some things that are pretty callous to win.
Unless you think we fought WWII all wrong or something? Israel has been much more kind to Gazan civilians than we ever were to German or Japanese civilians. We burned 100,000 Japanese civilians alive in March of 1945. What room do we have to criticize?
WWII is irrelevant.
People today are upset about what is happening, and no amount of clever logic and smug sophistry will elide that.

Samm:
Only if it is only a hospital.
fake hospitals, full of fake sick children.
Once it becomes a Hamas command post, it ceases to be a hospital per the Genieva Convention. The kids should have been evacuated when the IDF warned them. But then as we noted, dead babies make the best martyrs.

biggestal99:
fake hospitals, full of fake sick children.
Allan
Hamas control centers disguised as hospitals. I donât doubt there was a medical staff on sight and that there were patients. But that wasnât the primary purpose.
No ⌠They were real hospitals, before Hamas used them as military command posts and defensive fire points.

TheRedComet:
If you put soldiers with weapons in a hospital and they arenât wounded guess what? You lose your Geneva protections.
Iâm sure thatâs of great comfort to the patients wounded and killed.
Which goes to the point of the thread: this smug callousness is what is turning people against Israel.
What should Israel have done?
What should Hamas have done?

WWII is irrelevant.
People today are upset about what is happening, and no amount of clever logic and smug sophistry will elide that.
Itâs not at all irrelevant. The same rules applied in WWII that apply in Gaza. Use of hospitals for military purposes other than care of patients is against the rules. Conducting military operations behind the cover of civilians is against the rules. And attacking the enemy engaged in those illegal practices is not against the rules.

What should Israel have done?
What should Hamas have done?
Well, if they donât care about American public opinion (the point of the thread) nothing different

Supreme_War_Pig:
WWII is irrelevant.
People today are upset about what is happening, and no amount of clever logic and smug sophistry will elide that.
Itâs not at all irrelevant. The same rules applied in WWII that apply in Gaza. Use of hospitals for military purposes other than care of patients is against the rules. Conducting military operations behind the cover of civilians is against the rules. And attacking the enemy engaged in those illegal practices is not against the rules.
No, not at all relevant. To most, if not all of these respondents, WWII is ancient history.
And in any event, they arenât comparing the two wars, they are watching Israeli conduct, and they disapprove.

Samm:
What should Israel have done?
What should Hamas have done?
Well, if they donât care about American public opinion (the point of the thread) nothing different
Samm:
Supreme_War_Pig:
WWII is irrelevant.
People today are upset about what is happening, and no amount of clever logic and smug sophistry will elide that.
Itâs not at all irrelevant. The same rules applied in WWII that apply in Gaza. Use of hospitals for military purposes other than care of patients is against the rules. Conducting military operations behind the cover of civilians is against the rules. And attacking the enemy engaged in those illegal practices is not against the rules.
No, not at all relevant. To most, if not all of these respondents, WWII is ancient history.
And in any event, they arenât comparing the two wars, they are watching Israeli conduct, and they disapprove.
Itâs not about WWII, itâs about the rules of âcivilizedâ war.
It is noteworthy however, that people who have never experienced war who are the loudest critics.
WWII will never be irreverent. Hell this entire â â â â show between Israel and the Palestinians can be dated back to World War I.
Theyâre respondents in a poll, not protestors an a campus. Not only is that not noisy, itâs anonymous.
These people have a severe lack of imagination then.

WWII will never be irreverent. Hell this entire â â â â show between Israel and the Palestinians can be dated back to World War I.
Sure. And these people donât give a rip about any of that.
Nor do they need to in order to disapprove of Israelâs conduct

These people have a severe lack of imagination then.
How much imagination is required to disapprove of killing civilians?