Just Sayin....

[sirs]

Killing them on purpose is terrorism.  Dying in collateral damage while trying to kill the enemy, who largely hides among civilian men, women, and children, is hardly terrorism, in the standard definition of the term. If we're going to use it the term willy nilly, having to pay higher taxes to support Obamacare is terrorism

There's a specificity to the use of the word terrorism, H.  It's much like racism.  And if we just start using it anywhere that we personally want to apply it to, its meaning & importance becomes ever more watered down. 

[Xavier_Onassis]

The Israelis killed far more people in "collateral damage" than Hamas has killed intentionally. I don't think the Israelis do much to prevent killing civilians. if they were in the right mood, they might refrain from bombing a kindergarten.

[sirs]

sorry...not going to play your game of trying to conflate war with acts of terrorism

[Xavier_Onassis]

Hamas shoots rockets at Israel and most of them hit nothing.  And that is evil and baad because it is terrorism
The Israeli Army invades Gaza and destroys buildings and kills hundreds. But that's okay because it is war.

War is always okay.

[sirs]

Hamas, ISIS, Hezbollah, AlQeada, ALL shoot whatever they can with the hope of hitting and killing anyone and everyone

ISREAL SIMPLY DEFENDS ITSELF WHEN ATTACKED. 

IN OTHER WORDS, IF HAMAS WERE TO LAY DOWN THEIR ARMS, THERE'D BE PEACE.  IF ISREAL WERE TO LAY DOWN THEIR ARMS, THEY'D BE INVADED, AND EVERY MAN WOMAN & CHILD WOULD BE SLAUGHTERED

[Xavier_Onassis]

That does not change the fact that  Israeli invasions of Gaza  are acts of terrorism.

They are not much more effective than Hamas's stupid rockets. Neither side can win this with bullets, and everyone knows this by now.

Hamas cannot exterminate Israelis, Israelis cannot exterminate Gazans. Partial attempts have only served to make the opponents more fanatical.

[sirs]

Your opinion that they are acts of terrorism, has been weighed, measured, and found severely wanting

[Christians4LessGvt]

Hamas cannot exterminate Israelis, Israelis cannot exterminate Gazans.

You are correct Hamas can not exterminate Israelis....but they would if they could.
You are wrong about Israelis being able to exterminate Gazans, because they could, but they don't.

Just like all the bluster we hear from Iran.

Iran does not have the capability to make the United States cease to exist.
The US DOES have the capability to make Iran cease to exist.
If the US so chose, Iran would cease to exist this weekend.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The US DOES have the capability to make Iran cease to exist.
If the US so chose, Iran would cease to exist this weekend.


===================================================
This is simply not true.
We could never kill all Iranians or make the entire nation uninhabitable.

The Israelis would suffer serious repercussions if they tried to exterminate the Gazans. Nuclear weapons would be a very bad idea, being as Gaza is so close to Israel.

No one is exterminating anyone.

[sirs]

The point being that if Israel layed down their arms, as in stopped defending themselves, they would indeed be exterminated by the likes of Hamas & co.  If the U.S. layed down their arms, and we didn't defend ourselves, those that did not convert or agreed to be sujegated, would be exterminated by the likes ISIS & co.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Israel does not have to invade Gaza and destroy it to defend themselves. Netanyahu probably does need to do this to get reelected, but that is not  the issue.

[sirs]

Yes, they did.  They were attacked, and as a result of defending thesmelves, took lands to better defend themselves. 

The point being that if Israel layed down their arms, as in stopped defending themselves, they would indeed be exterminated by the likes of Hamas & co.  If Hamas & Co were to lay down their arms, there'd be peace

[Plane]

The US DOES have the capability to make Iran cease to exist.
If the US so chose, Iran would cease to exist this weekend.


===================================================
This is simply not true.
We could never kill all Iranians or make the entire nation uninhabitable.

It is totally true.

Depending on what you mean.

There is no technical problem , we have the means to kill almost the whole population of them in minutes, and cleanly .

There is no real problem with the opprobrium of other nations, once we demonstrated willingness to be that sort of ruthless , we would receive practically no criticism at all.

There is a real problem with the American people , who would need a lot of motive to support such an action, much more than the ordinary outrages that we are getting accustomed to.

It might even be smart of us to destroy Iran. That is the backbone of terrorism , and we owe then a hit for all the backstab we got in Iraq.  Waiting till they have a lot of atomic weapons increases the cost to us of the fight, sooner is better.Remember the choice that President Truman had , he could have won that war with a conventional invasion of Japan, and held a super secret weapon in reserve. He had also the choice of exploding the bomb in the sight of a city , but not near enough to cause so much damage, a demo.

Truman had a lot to consider , one of the things he considered was that holding the weapon back would cost the US a lot of lives , and refraining from using it on a populated area would cost the US a lot of credibility.

How different is now? Using WMD to halt their WMD program seems hypocritical , but it has advantage in every other respect.

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is no technical problem , we have the means to kill almost the whole population of them in minutes, and cleanly .

No, we don't. We just don't. And we would never do it if we could, but that point is moor, because we can't.

It might even be smart of us to destroy Iran. That is the backbone of terrorism , and we owe then a hit for all the backstab we got in Iraq.  Waiting till they have a lot of atomic weapons increases the cost to us of the fight, sooner is better.Remember the choice that President Truman had , he could have won that war with a conventional invasion of Japan, and held a super secret weapon in reserve. He had also the choice of exploding the bomb in the sight of a city , but not near enough to cause so much damage, a demo.

Iran the "backbone of terrorism" There were no Iranians involved in 9-11. Al Qaeda and the Taliban arte all Sunnis, Iranainas are Shia.

Iran has not engaged in terrorism against anyone in the US.

They did not stab us in the back in Iraq. There was no agreement that they supported the US invading Iraq. Iran was allied with Reagan for a brief time in bringing down Carter, but other than that, Iran has been seen as an enemy mostly because they dislike Israel.

The idea that somehow Japan had to be invaded is also bogus. We had a navy, Japan could have been blockaded.

But Truman did not try to eradicate all Japanese from the planet. He did not even nuke Tokyo.

[sirs]

Actually we do.......Professor literal though is trying to use the likelyhood that perhaps a few dozen or more might survive a mass carpet nuking.  The point Plane was making though, is while we could, we wouldn't.  While Isreal could seriously bring an end to Iran, they wouldn't.  While if the likes of Hamas and iran had their ways, they would seriously try, starting with Israel, and working towards the U.S.

Nor is this about Iran and 911.  That'd be Dr deflection yet again trying to argue a point, no one is making.  Presently, Iran is sponsoring/supporting terrorist actions across the globe, specifically aimed at Israel and anything associated with U.S. interests.  This isn't about Iran directly attacking the continental U.S.  It's about Iran attacking anything associated with the U.S., in which case, they are attacking the U.S.

And while hypothetically a "blockade" of Japan may have eventually brought about the end of WWII, it could have also dragged on the war many more years, and would have been at the cost of thousands upon thousands of more American lives.  Invasion was the only other viable option, however another option presented itself.  Enough American lives had been lost, and there was an avenue to bring it to a abrubt end, using the 2 nuclear weapons that were dropped.  And America is better for having done it