Debunking myths about Israel

[sirs]

like they have alot of support among the butchers and thieves at the UN

They aren't the ones Israel need to worry about.

They need to worry about the "middle Americans" who accept without question the US's support of Israel and all it does.

Not a problem apparently.

[BT]

Give it time. Shooting unarmed protestors sooner or later will affect the polling.

[sirs]

Yea, it might even drop to 60% support of Israel's right in defending itself, by whatever means necessary

[BT]

It might stay high as 60%, probably won't, but if there is one thing i know about Americans is they have an innate sense of fair play. And shooting unarmed protestors doesn't meet that criteria.

Now you may think that shooting unarmed protestors is the right thing to do, but my suspicion is you would be in the minority with that opinion.

[sirs]

It might stay high as 60%, probably won't, but if there is one thing i know about Americans is they have an innate sense of fair play.

Agreed.....and folks illegally crossing into another's territory, risking the repercussions in those actions, protesting a position that is completely implausible, provides a perspective of truth when deciding on that sense of fair play.  Here's a hint, its a minority of folks who believe that Israel needs to lose as many lives as Palestinians, if not more, in order to be "fair".  That's not what war is, as you've referenced yourself.  In war, you get the other side to lose their life

[BT]

It might stay high as 60%, probably won't, but if there is one thing i know about Americans is they have an innate sense of fair play.

Agreed.....and folks illegally crossing into another's territory, risking the repercussions in those actions, protesting a position that is completely implausible, provides a perspective of truth when deciding on that sense of fair play.  Here's a hint, its a minority of folks who believe that Israel needs to lose as many lives as Palestinians, if not more, in order to be "fair".  That's not what war is, as you've referenced yourself.  In war, you get the other side to lose their life

Spin it anyway you like, but shooting unarmed protestors is not the best way to make friends and influence people. And sooner or later that will reflect in the polls.

[sirs]

No spin.....the truth is on Israel's side

[BT]

No spin.....the truth is on Israel's side

What truth?

[Xavier_Onassis]

sirs would not recognize the truth if it bit him on the *&*^.

[sirs]

No spin.....the truth is on Israel's side

What truth?

asked and answered already

[BT]

No spin.....the truth is on Israel's side

What truth?

asked and answered already

Which has little to do with the truth of whether Israel overreacted by shooting 20 unarmed protestors.

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is no justification at all for shooting 20 unarmed protesters. It merely makes Israel look bad.

The key to bringing justice to the Palestinians is passive resistance and civil disobedience. Blocking roads so that Jews are inconvenienced as the Israelis inconvenience Palestinians on a daily basis, that sort of thing.

[sirs]

Sure there is.......when they were warned, when they then CHOSE to ILLEGALLY cross into another country's territory.  And what they are protesting is largely a moot point.  The land is Israel's, just as much, if not more than California is the U.S.'s.  Sure, they could have used lesser force, but the force used DEFINATELY makes further mass illegal crossing a little less likely.

Minus yours & Bt's opinion of over-reaction vs merely using more force than they could have, though still justified, the truth is the truth.  Sorry, if that rubs some folks the wrong way

[BT]

Minus yours & Bt's opinion of over-reaction vs merely using more force than they could have, though still justified, the truth is the truth.  Sorry, if that rubs some folks the wrong way

Yes. They used more force than they needed and or could have.

What is interesting is you seem to think nuking both parties if the eventual peace treaty is abridged is non proportional to the transgression, but you have no problem lining up unarmed protestors in your sights and blowing their heads off, as if having your head blown away when you pose no serious threat to the sovereignty of Israel is a proportional response.

Consistency please.

[sirs]

Minus yours & Bt's opinion of over-reaction vs merely using more force than they could have, though still justified, the truth is the truth.  Sorry, if that rubs some folks the wrong way

Yes. They used more force than they needed and or could have.

Yes, I think we've addressed that already

What is interesting is you seem to think nuking both parties if the eventual peace treaty is abridged is non proportional to the transgression, but you have no problem lining up unarmed protestors in your sights and blowing their heads off, as if having your head blown away when you pose no serious threat to the sovereignty of Israel is a proportional response.

Minus the grotesque irrational hyperbole, one is defending one's country, the other is a rather ridiculous (IMHO) non starter of mass killing, of even those who were attacked in the 1st place. 

It's an apples oranges thing again