Bomb attacks

nimbleranger19 said:Way off base.☕

To guys like Samuel Brown90 and analogfalcon38, suicide bombers are just regular folks—freedom fighters, equality advocates, and all that other nonsense.🤮

Actually, those so-called "freedom fighters" are nothing more than Zionist occupation forces that have been mistreating the Palestinian people for years—not to mention the CIA, which operates all over the world causing all sorts of trouble. That’s the side you support, and you think it’s totally fine. Give me a break, that's just pure garbage.🤮🤮

velvetmarlin24 said:Yeah, right. I can't imagine anyone else saying that besides analogfalcon38. It’s just empty rhetoric at this point. Maybe things would actually get sorted out if those Islamic extremists would just leave everyone alone.

And what exactly do you think you know about the atrocities committed by Zionists against Muslims in Palestine???
What could you possibly know about the crimes committed by the USA against the rest of this planet? (think Iraq, Afghanistan, the USA, Somalia, Sudan, Vietnam, Japan, and so on)

Sure, why don't you just invite those same people into your own house to torment you and the rest of your family (including those arrogant ones mentioned in analogfalcon38's previous post)? Then, you can sit there and comment, "Yes, I deserve this because I dared to resist." Just relax and let them beat you, humiliate you, kick you out of your home, and strip away your access to food, your freedom of movement, and even your basic RIGHT TO LIFE... and maybe then they'll finally STOP!!!!
Do you even have the slightest clue what you're talking about???

frozendrifter7 said:Your attempt to lump air strikes together with suicide bombers or car bombs is—to put it mildly—completely off base.

Well, sure... because apparently a multi-ton aerial bomb is somehow more "humane" than a bus bomb or a desperate suicide operative.

Granted, one shouldn't conflate the two; after all, we're talking about conventional ordnance designed to leave craters a hundred meters wide when they hit the dirt.

But let's not pretend there isn't a certain irony here. Perhaps the West is just jealous of the ingenuity shown by Islamist bombers—maybe soon they'll start dropping cars rigged with parachutes over Baghdad or the Gaza Strip, since their own tonnage seems insufficient compared to those improvised masterpieces.

Who knows....

They’re both idiots, plain and simple. Honestly, I don't think the victims care whether they got hit by an airstrike or some moron who strapped five kilos of TNT to his own chest. As far as I'm concerned, Palestinians haven't really earned a state of their own until things actually settle down. The second they were handed any kind of autonomy, Hamas and Fatah just started playing tug-of-war with each other.

velvetmarlin24 said:Yeah, right. I can't imagine anyone else saying that besides analogfalcon38. It’s just empty rhetoric at this point. Maybe things would actually get sorted out if those Islamic extremists would just leave everyone alone.

It wasn't just analogfalcon38 telling you that; it was the British Independent and the Washington Post too.

velvetmarlin24 said:Yeah, right. I can't imagine anyone else saying that besides analogfalcon38. It’s just empty rhetoric at this point. Maybe things would actually get sorted out if those Islamic extremists would just leave everyone alone.

Things would definitely be fixed if the Jews stopped stealing other people's land and went back to where they swindled their way in from 60 years ago.

Like what we can read in the Independent's article—the biggest problem is the Jewish immigrants. That means the highest percentage of Israeli Jews.
They’re easily the most extreme evil in that whole region.

frozendrifter7 said:Your attempt to lump air strikes together with suicide bombers or car bombs is—to put it mildly—completely off base.

What comparison? I just said they both fall under the category of bombing attacks. Obviously, they aren't exactly the same thing. An airstrike can drop tons of explosives, so yeah, an air raid is way worse than a single suicide bomber...☕

analogfalcon38 said:It wasn't just analogfalcon38 telling you that; it was the British Independent and the Washington Post too.

Things would definitely be fixed if the Jews stopped stealing other people's land and went back to where they swindled their way in from 60 years ago.

Like what we can read in the Independent's article—the biggest problem is the Jewish immigrants. That means the highest percentage of Israeli Jews.
They’re easily the most extreme evil in that whole region.

Just to build upon what you mentioned...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYuWO...eature=related

Gregory Kelly3 said:Just to build upon what you mentioned...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYuWO...eature=related

It’s worth pointing out that all those Jewish settlers—who happen to be the most extreme and the largest group within the Jewish population in the state of Israel, by the way—are armed and incredibly aggressive.

Samuel Brown90 said:What comparison? I just said they both fall under the category of bombing attacks. Obviously, they aren't exactly the same thing. An airstrike can drop tons of explosives, so yeah, an air raid is way worse than a single suicide bomber...☕

First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

analogfalcon38 mentioned that both the British Independent and the Norwegian New York Times are reporting this.

So, suddenly these foreign outlets are reliable sources for you? I guess they aren't just tools for mass brainwashing Westerners anymore? Is this because the article happens to favor your side, or did the author or the owner just decide to switch teams?

Gregory Kelly3 said:And what exactly do you think you know about the atrocities committed by Zionists against Muslims in Palestine???
What could you possibly know about the crimes committed by the USA against the rest of this planet? (think Iraq, Afghanistan, the USA, Somalia, Sudan, Vietnam, Japan, and so on)

Sure, why don't you just invite those same people into your own house to torment you and the rest of your family (including those arrogant ones mentioned in analogfalcon38's previous post)? Then, you can sit there and comment, "Yes, I deserve this because I dared to resist." Just relax and let them beat you, humiliate you, kick you out of your home, and strip away your access to food, your freedom of movement, and even your basic RIGHT TO LIFE... and maybe then they'll finally STOP!!!!
Do you even have the slightest clue what you're talking about???

He doesn't know. He's too blinded by hate.😂

frozendrifter7 said:First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Oh yeah? Then how do you explain a Jewish criminal breaking into a house and murdering three or four kids for no reason? Did you even read the post about what these Jewish criminals do to children?👎 That can only be called a war crime and genocide, just like what Hitler did to the Jews.

It could be madness, a sickness—because, frankly, I don’t think anyone truly sane and healthy can stomach killing children—vengeance, perhaps he lost a family member to a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus or something similar, and there are plenty of other reasons. Breaking into someone's home and murdering civilians caught in the crossfire is a war crime; I agree with you there, and it absolutely deserves condemnation. But what about these terrorists and suicide bombers lugging around five or six kilos of explosives? To me, they are nothing more than criminals, yet you and people like you view them as heroes, martyrs, or freedom fighters. It sickens me—just as it sickened me two years ago when I watched the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.

frozendrifter7 said:It could be madness, a sickness—because, frankly, I don’t think anyone truly sane and healthy can stomach killing children—vengeance, perhaps he lost a family member to a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus or something similar, and there are plenty of other reasons. Breaking into someone's home and murdering civilians caught in the crossfire is a war crime; I agree with you there, and it absolutely deserves condemnation. But what about these terrorists and suicide bombers lugging around five or six kilos of explosives? To me, they are nothing more than criminals, yet you and people like you view them as heroes, martyrs, or freedom fighters. It sickens me—just as it sickened me two years ago when I watched the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.

Show me where I ever did that. If you can actually point to a time I treated any of them like heroes, then fine, you're right. Otherwise, you're just a liar. I would never, ever support killing civilians, especially children. In our culture, that's a massive sin.

frozendrifter7 said:It could be madness, a sickness—because, frankly, I don’t think anyone truly sane and healthy can stomach killing children—vengeance, perhaps he lost a family member to a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus or something similar, and there are plenty of other reasons. Breaking into someone's home and murdering civilians caught in the crossfire is a war crime; I agree with you there, and it absolutely deserves condemnation. But what about these terrorists and suicide bombers lugging around five or six kilos of explosives? To me, they are nothing more than criminals, yet you and people like you view them as heroes, martyrs, or freedom fighters. It sickens me—just as it sickened me two years ago when I watched the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.

How pathetic. You're using double standards. You condemn one group (rightfully so) but then start making excuses for others—saying maybe it was revenge or they were sick or whatever. If you want anyone to take you seriously as a conversationalist, you should probably apply the same rules to everyone. And hiddengardener84 is right to demand proof that anyone here actually glorifies them (specifically him); otherwise, everyone is just going to see you as a liar.

frozendrifter7 said:First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Oh, so now we're playing semantics? Anyone with half a brain knows a bomb attack covers any strike involving some kind of explosive...

frozendrifter7 said:First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

A pilot targets enemy soldiers? Is that what British pilots were doing when they bombed Dresden? Targeting soldiers? Because their "targeting" sure looked bad when they left tens of thousands of civilians dead in the crossfire...🤣

BTW, what dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombs too. Were pilots just aiming at military targets there?

frozendrifter7 said:First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

Talk about cynicism.
Even thirty years ago, the big players—especially the USA—were bragging about having such surgical precision with their missiles that they could hit an enemy right in the teeth. That was three decades ago. Given where military tech stands today, even talking about its "precision" feels kind of pointless.
And honestly? Claiming that pilots dropping cluster bombs, napalm, white phosphorus, or even those massive 7-ton payloads on cities with millions of people don't intend to kill civilians... that’s just plain stupid.

All this lethal, banned stuff I just mentioned that the USA and its little lapdogs use all over the globe? It’s basically New Year's Eve firecrackers compared to the uranium bombs that have been used en masse in most places where Westerners were busy defending their sick interests over the last few decades.
I guess we’re just waiting for someone to try and convince us that using weapons which keep killing for decades after the initial blast isn't designed to endanger civilians, but just the guys carrying guns.

Warning: Not for the faint of heart!!

frozendrifter7 said:First off, we’re talking about semantics here. A "bomb attack" is fundamentally different from an "airstrike." You have Google at your fingertips—just type in "bomb attack" and see how many results link it directly to airstrikes? Absolutely none.

Second—and this is the crux of it—it’s about intent. A pilot or a munitions expert is targeting enemy combatants or terrorists; they aren't out there looking to slaughter pregnant women, children, or the elderly—the civilians. Suicide bombers and terrorists, however, go out of their way to kill civilians. They couldn't care less if they blow up a commuter bus full of people heading to work, or trap a crowd in a theater with explosives, or—heaven forbid—capture a soldier just to decapitate him and mail his head back to his mother.

You're comparing apples to oranges.

It wouldn't be quite so bad if the Western media actually reported on these things realistically and bothered to mention who was actually on those buses.
Take New York City or Washington, D.C., for example.

Not a single major Western outlet ever reported that the public transit systems there were being used daily by British and Spanish officers, soldiers, and other military personnel.
-👎
Conce. The Abu Ghraib camp and everything that went down there is pretty much known to the world, more or less.
It’s no secret that everything happening at Abu Ghraib was planned down to the last detail at the Pentagon and the White House—straight from the "brains" of the world's biggest "democracy."
-👎

velvetmarlin24 said:analogfalcon38 mentioned that both the British Independent and the Norwegian New York Times are reporting this.

So, suddenly these foreign outlets are reliable sources for you? I guess they aren't just tools for mass brainwashing Westerners anymore? Is this because the article happens to favor your side, or did the author or the owner just decide to switch teams?

Look, most Western media outlets are definitely just propaganda machines. Just look back at the whole hype machine they built right before the invasion of Iraq.

"In just 45 minutes, Saddam Hussein could have his nuclear missiles ready to wipe most European capitals off the face of the earth."

I was living out West back then. I saw firsthand how much people were being played. The media had a complete stranglehold on the public consciousness.

But hey, sometimes the facts are so damn heavy that even the biggest liars don't have a choice but to report on what's actually happening—they just spin it enough to make it suit their own agenda.

hiddengardener84 said:Oh yeah? Then how do you explain a Jewish criminal breaking into a house and murdering three or four kids for no reason? Did you even read the post about what these Jewish criminals do to children?👎 That can only be called a war crime and genocide, just like what Hitler did to the Jews.

Fact is, kids are the biggest victims among Palestinian civilians. It’s also a Fact that 80% of them get taken out by a sniper. And we all pretty much know what a sniper is. For those who don't—it's a rifle with a high-end scope that lets you aim at a fly from hundreds of yards away.
So, an Israeli soldier killing a kid playing right in front of their house? Most of the time, they're looking them straight in the eyes while they do it.

They kill them wherever they find them. In homes, on the street, in schools, in preschools. Anywhere.
Honestly, I think Israel is the only place on Earth today where people kill other people like it's some kind of competitive sport.

Bullet

frozendrifter7 said:It could be madness, a sickness—because, frankly, I don’t think anyone truly sane and healthy can stomach killing children—vengeance, perhaps he lost a family member to a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus or something similar, and there are plenty of other reasons. Breaking into someone's home and murdering civilians caught in the crossfire is a war crime; I agree with you there, and it absolutely deserves condemnation. But what about these terrorists and suicide bombers lugging around five or six kilos of explosives? To me, they are nothing more than criminals, yet you and people like you view them as heroes, martyrs, or freedom fighters. It sickens me—just as it sickened me two years ago when I watched the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.

It’s not some kind of madness or a sickness. It’s a program. Pure and simple.
Look, if you really dig into the blueprint for how Israel operates today, it’s pretty intense. We're talking about massive black holes on the face of the earth. That’s just how it went down—they carved out a state through that exact kind of maneuvering, all while getting the green light from the West.

frozendrifter7 said:It could be madness, a sickness—because, frankly, I don’t think anyone truly sane and healthy can stomach killing children—vengeance, perhaps he lost a family member to a Palestinian suicide bomber on a bus or something similar, and there are plenty of other reasons. Breaking into someone's home and murdering civilians caught in the crossfire is a war crime; I agree with you there, and it absolutely deserves condemnation. But what about these terrorists and suicide bombers lugging around five or six kilos of explosives? To me, they are nothing more than criminals, yet you and people like you view them as heroes, martyrs, or freedom fighters. It sickens me—just as it sickened me two years ago when I watched the Israeli strikes on Lebanon.

Honestly, I have no clue who you are. Are you a Mexican or an American?
Whatever, it doesn't even matter. Let's just say you're an American.

Just picture this scenario for a second. Imagine some group from the other side of the planet starts flooding into America in massive numbers. And get this—all the biggest global superpowers are actually backing them. Why? Because apparently, they messed up big time in some old war, and now the world decided the only way to make things right is to force us to foot the bill. Yeah, they’re basically making us pay the price for someone else's mistakes. Just wild, right?
So, you've got several million people just moving in, right? And then they have the nerve to declare a whole new state right in your own backyard, acting like you don't even exist there. It’s wild. Then, because they've got the big superpowers backing them up, they go ahead and build an army. Fast forward a bit, and that military turns out to be way more extreme and fascist than the ones that were actually fighting against them in some war halfway across the world. Just another day in history, I guess.

That army is basically becoming a shield for millions of refugees just like them—people your people push out of their own homes every single day on purpose. You’re turning them into eternal nomads, forcing them to rot in displacement camps for decades to come.

Take a look at this one case—it’s from an article in The Wall Street Journal. The headline basically says: Immigrants are moving into Palestinian homes.

Look, this is just one more house among countless others where Jewish settlers have moved in after kicking out the original Palestinian owners. It’s not like these settlers are living there full-time, either—they just drift in and out whenever they feel like it. I’ve heard stories about people breaking into these places and trashed everything while the actual owners were still right there. They’ve even seized local shops that used to belong to Palestinians, most of which were shut down by the Israeli military before being snatched up. Just another day in the neighborhood, I guess.
Word on the street is that most of these houses have been turned into homes for young Jewish couples now. That’s just what the old, lively town of Hebron looks like these days. As for the Palestinians who haven't had their shops snatched away yet? They aren't even getting permits to open up businesses anymore. Everything's changed.

The Wall Street Journal

analogfalcon38:
So these are the civilians you're talking about? Give me a break. Just take a second to actually look at the numbers—how many Jews have moved into Palestine from the former USSR and other parts of the world over the last sixty years? Just think about that. Didn't have a clue. So, let me get this straight... someone gets killed or kicked out just so they can move right into their house or take over their land? Real classy stuff. Just a total land grab, plain and simple.