Battle for Palestine

[Natan]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Natan, is a 30% civilian casualty rate higher than that caused by Israel? (Really a question; I don't know)

It all depends on how you define civillian: Some would say lower, some would say higher.

To kill 7 soldiers and 3 civilians by himself I'd have to assume that his prime target was the military, unlike indiscriminate suicide bombers.

There are two reasons why I think he was targetting civillians: The first is that the Fatah organization endorses attacks on Israeli civillians and carries out quite a lot of them - the bombing of that synagogue last week was done by the Fatha al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. The second and more tangible one is his method of attack, he used a sniper rifle to pick off Israelis from a distance - firing, according to witnesses, about one shot every forty five seconds.

Israel Shamir doesn't seem to be concerned about the civillians who died in that attack. But much more surprisingly, he doesn't seem to care about any of the Israeli civillians killed in the violence; suicide bombers are, in his view, counterproductive, but not evil.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Comrade, KH is a canadian.

Good for him; this is as close to a really civilized country as you can get on the North American continent.

[orange]

He means he feels that way over any deaths, as you should.

[Natan]

Originally posted by orange
He means he feels that way over any deaths, as you should.

You mean he thinks all deathes should be sung of by the bards?

[orange]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune

Talking to the wrong guy there Tribbie.

I am not sure what you mean here. Do you mean you, personally, didn´t celebrate the death of Taliban soldiers, like so many of your fellow Americans? If so, I still wonder why you don´t say similar things to Shihuangdi and others who do? The fact remains that, to most or all of you, the death of 50 Afghans or Palestinians means much less than the death of one American or Israeli. I don´t agree with that weighting. I deplore the death of a victim of Imperialism much more than the death of a soldier of Imperialism.

I was responding to this post by Comrade Tribune, Nathan.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Natan
The second and more tangible one is his method of attack, he used a sniper rifle to pick off Israelis from a distance.

And of course the IDF doesn´t use sniper rifles?

And what method should a Palestinian use to kill Israeli soldiers to get your approval?

Suicide bombers are, in his view, counterproductive, but not evil.

Saddam Hussein might have a solution to this. If you agree to lift the sanctions on Iraq we might persuade Saddam to deliver tanks, guns and a few helicopters to the Palestinians; so they don´t need to rely on suicide tactics anymore.

See: we can agree on something.

[Drake Tungsten]

I think he was referring to the fact that sniper rifles are highly accurate weapons that don't result in "collateral damage". It is almost certain that the Palestinian gunmen meant to hit the Israeli civilians, thus showing that he wasn't just out to shoot combatants.

[Natan]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
And of course the IDF doesn´t use sniper rifles?

And what method should a Palestinian use to kill Israeli soldiers to get your approval?

I suggest that you look this thread over again. My point is that the method he used shows that he intentionally chose each of his victims. He wasn't blazing away with a Kalashnikov and accidentally blasting some non-combatants, he was carefully selecting each target and spending a very long time on each one; therefore I think he must have known what he was doing.

Saddam Hussein might have a solution to this. If you agree to lift the sanctions on Iraq we might persuade Saddam to deliver tanks, guns and a few helicopters to the Palestinians; so they don´t need to rely on suicide tactics anymore.

Then the Palestinians can repeat his heroic Anfal genocide campaign against the Kurds and reenact the glorious slaughter of tens of thousands in 1991. birrouh wabiddam nafeedak ya Saddam. But they aren't forced to rely on suicide tactics, the leaders of Fatah, Hamas, etc. choose to kill civillians because it is more satisfying.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by orange
He means he feels that way over any deaths, as you should.

The problem with this viewpoint is I don´t believe anybody who says he holds it -except if he is living in a Buddhist monastery.

Why should the death of a WWII SS soldier make me feel sad? And I don´t hold those who do the dirty work for Bush and Sharon in a higher regard.

[Natan]

Originally posted by orange
I was responding to this post by Comrade Tribune, Nathan.

Oh, my mistake. I apologize.

[Natan]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Why should the death of a WWII SS soldier make me feel sad? And I don´t hold those who do the dirty work for Bush and Sharon in a higher regard.

I think you had better apologize for that. Firstly, it's absurd and you know it. Secondly, there's at least one poster who is currently serving in the US military who you have just called a Nazi.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Natan
My point is that the method he used shows that he intentionally chose each of his victims. He wasn't blazing away with a Kalashnikov and accidentally blasting some non-combatants, he was carefully selecting each target and spending a very long time on each one; therefore I think he must have known what he was doing.

First of all, prove he really *did* hit any civilians. Second, in a combat situation, with the odds 10:1 against me, I wouldn´t waste time on civilians, so it´s really unlikely he targeted them on purpose. Much more likely he used them as shields, and they got hit by the panicked Israelis; this I would find believable.

But they aren't forced to rely on suicide tactics, the leaders of Fatah, Hamas, etc. choose to kill civillians because it is more satisfying.

Don´t be silly; they do what they think is helping their cause, and within their means.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Comrade, why do you always take the side of mass murderers and homocidal maniacs? I know, you'll just say "You're American, so you ARE a mass murderer." I expect that from you, and I could easily refute it. But answer my question.

Lets see:

Saddam
Milosevic
Usama
PLO

Believe me, I think what Israel does is wrong. They are hypocrites in their own right. Yet what the PLO does is intentionally inflict as much damage on the Jewish population as they can.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Natan
Secondly, there's at least one poster who is currently serving in the US military who you have just called a Nazi.

I called no one a Nazi. I use my words with care. I said I don´t hold those who fight for Sharon and Bush in a higher regard than those who fought for Hitler. This says nothing about their ideology. Though Zionism is certainly similar to Nazism.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
Comrade, why do you always take the side of mass murderers and homocidal maniacs?

This is because the Western media make all outspoken opponents of the US (and Israel) into mass murderers and maniacs, regardless if it´s actually true or not. And I tend to side with those opponents, so I appear, in the eyes of the gullible -no offense meant! - to side with mass murderers and maniacs.