BREAKING: Iranian consulate in Damascus destroyed by Israel (update). Is the shit about to hit the fan?
(www.timesofisrael.com)
💥 WWIII WATCH 💥
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (49)
sorted by:
Who can prove what? The person who asserts something is true as a positive fact has the burden of proof. The reason is that there is no logical way to prove something is not true---except to prove the converse positive fact. So, prove that Israel is using Hamas as a puppet. I have no Reason to think otherwise. (Your challenge is akin to "Prove there are no Leprechauns!" "Prove the Earth isn't flat!") You really ought to study logic. It separates real thinking from sheer foolishness.
And, puppet or not, the puppet has no reprieve from destruction if it is conducting genocide. Because, really, isn't your argument to let Hamas out of jail and have no reprisal for their crimes?
The problem with that is (as I have mentioned several times) we know for a fact israel funded hamas into existence and they have spies high up in the organization. Furthermore the absurd nature of the attack/standdown coupled with israel's history of blaming arabs for israel's false flag treachery makes it unreasonable to assume the attack was arabic. You have no evidence of that whatsoever but you are happy to blow up innocent human beings based on the illusion. It is you who has the problem understanding logic.
You said no matter who did it they should be held accountable. Considering your approval of the slaughter of palestinians then if israel did perpetrate a false flag what do you think the punishment should be?
"Known for a fact." Documented in what book?
The attack was conducted by Hamas, whether or not you want to consider them "Arabic." They are so politically toxic that the actual Arabs want nothing to do with them. If it was not Hamas, one might expect them to deny having conducted the attack---but they haven't denied it. They celebrate it and they still have hostages. You need to get a grip on reality.
As a collateral of attacking Hamas elements embedded in the civilian infrastructure, I do not condemn the results, which are entirely on Hamas' head for exploiting human shields. You seem to approve of human shields, which are forbidden by international treaty. You also seem to approve of what Hamas did, by way of saying Israel should be blamed---and the Hamas perpetrators should be disregarded. You show your hand by the reflexive collectivism in your point of view. I don't agree that "Israel" did anything amiss. But if some Israeli individuals participated in genocide against other Israelis, I think the Israeli public authorities have courts and penalties sufficiently condign for the case.
You are clearly not listening to what is being said. Don't waste my time further.
It's up to you. I'm not holding your feet to the fire. But you do have a history in this conversation of avoiding my points and reverting to insubstantial prejudices.