While the president has stood strongly behind Israel since Hamas attacked, he said on “60 Minutes” that a new occupation of Gaza would “be a big mistake.”
I don’t have a row to hoe in any of this but that alone tells me you’re full of shit and apologizing for some evil asshole somewhere in the conflict. The past is always gonna matter whether you want it to or not.
Clearly you don’t understand what I mean, since you’re not that knowledgeable in this conflict.
Palestinians’ leaders final goal is to get the 48 borders back. Nothing less and nothing more. And to that I said that it’s been 70 years, and you’ll need to grab it by conquest to get it, since the people lived there an entire life, and will never give it up. The leaders from both sides need to understand that any further border change between them will only make things worse, and the ones who started wanting to conquer was Palestinians. Now Israel is doing the same, but after many years, in which they got more right wing and more national, because of course they will when their busses are bombed by terrorists on the other side. I’m not saying Israel is clear of charge, I just say that they started better than Palestinians, then got more national as time went, because obviously - their enemies are murdering rapists. Palestinians are consistent with their desire to destroy Israel, Israelies have been building up to it (talking about each of their leaders, a.k.a the ones who matter).
*The distant past. A.k.a, the 48 past.
So much has changed since then, including the people themselves. People should act based on how to improve their present and future, not how to improve (avenge) their past.
Which is a petty act that does nothing but derail the conversation, but do go ahead and prove my point that you’re here to argue in bad faith by quibbling over the use of a word instead of focusing on what really matters: the morality of the Israel/Hamas conflict.
I don’t have a row to hoe in any of this but that alone tells me you’re full of shit and apologizing for some evil asshole somewhere in the conflict. The past is always gonna matter whether you want it to or not.
Clearly you don’t understand what I mean, since you’re not that knowledgeable in this conflict. Palestinians’ leaders final goal is to get the 48 borders back. Nothing less and nothing more. And to that I said that it’s been 70 years, and you’ll need to grab it by conquest to get it, since the people lived there an entire life, and will never give it up. The leaders from both sides need to understand that any further border change between them will only make things worse, and the ones who started wanting to conquer was Palestinians. Now Israel is doing the same, but after many years, in which they got more right wing and more national, because of course they will when their busses are bombed by terrorists on the other side. I’m not saying Israel is clear of charge, I just say that they started better than Palestinians, then got more national as time went, because obviously - their enemies are murdering rapists. Palestinians are consistent with their desire to destroy Israel, Israelies have been building up to it (talking about each of their leaders, a.k.a the ones who matter).
So in other words you really really want me to reject the notion that the past matters, and therefore you can be dismissed outright.
*The distant past. A.k.a, the 48 past. So much has changed since then, including the people themselves. People should act based on how to improve their present and future, not how to improve (avenge) their past.
An eye for an eye leaves Israel/Palestine a smoldering hole in the ground…
No, I think I got that wrong. How does it go?
Another retarded thought-terminating cliche that is making me think you are more and more sus.
What do you stand to gain from trying to manipulate someone like me?
Come on, english is a very large language full of other words you can use besides slurs.
Now you know how I feel when you dumbasses insinuate that the past doesn’t matter.
I didn’t do that which you can easily tell by reading the conversation up to this point.
I jumped in to comment on your usage of slurs for no reason.
Which is a petty act that does nothing but derail the conversation, but do go ahead and prove my point that you’re here to argue in bad faith by quibbling over the use of a word instead of focusing on what really matters: the morality of the Israel/Hamas conflict.
Here, go ahead, retard. The floor is yours:
I said my piece, that there’s no need to use slurs when you can use many other words that convey the same meaning.