Israel Declares War
- Thread starter ThereRoseaLamb
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
So you have a condition to agreeing not to obliterate civilians... Interesting, I expected a non-answer but not that. 
I can't expect terrorists to follow international law, but I should be able to expect a legitimate state (Israel) to follow it.
I can't expect terrorists to follow international law, but I should be able to expect a legitimate state (Israel) to follow it.
How many civilians were killed in the Gulf War?
Most of the fatalities were American, while 47 British personnel died. According to the Imperial War Museum, between 20,000 and 35,000 Iraqi soldiers died during the ground war. Civilian deaths resulting from the conflict are estimated at between 100,000 and 200,000.
I do. I'm pro-life. It makes no difference which nation does it... it's a sin in our Heavenly Father's eyes. Children are the most vulnerable people and need to be protected. Not just American children, Japanese children, Israeli children, Palestinian children, etc... If we put a condition as to not obliterate them, we are lost.
-
1
- Show all
Well, this kinda sort of maybe goes back to the part of the convo earlier when a couple of people were trying to say how anti-Semitism should not be considered as aimed at Jews, or does not apply only to Jews, simply because Jews and Arabs share a common ancestor who spoke the same language. And it is true that Isaac and Ishmael share the same earthly father, but that does not mean their progeny ever were or became the same nation of people, so those who pretend they should be considered that way are pushing a false narrative. Even Jacob and Esau engendered different nations, and they were bona fide twins with the same mother and father. Mohammedans claim Ishmael as an ancestor and assert he was the child of promise and not Isaac. That's why their ideal man/hero is an adulterous war-mongering pedophile despite God calling Isaac Abraham's only son, more than once. Any other political or hidden meaning in what you said may have been lost on me LOL. I am at work and fairly busy...
If we use this analogy, then the surgical oncologist used a chainsaw to cut out the cancer instead of a more appropriate tool which caused the death of the unborn baby. This gives credence that the doctor didn't really care about the unborn life or he would have used a more viable option. You can ask me "which tool should the surgeon have used", I don't know. I'm not a surgeon, but surely there was something better than a chainsaw.
Also, would you agree or disagree that the term "collateral damage" dehumanizes the life of the unborn? Maybe it's just me, but it is disturbing.
Also, would you agree or disagree that the term "collateral damage" dehumanizes the life of the unborn? Maybe it's just me, but it is disturbing.
-
1
- Show all
Your deceptive thread completely ignores addressing why we need to account for the 1000+ innocent Israeli civilians that were murdered to substantiate the claim that Israel wants as few civilian casualties as possible. Not to mention, you compared my analogy with something entirely different. I genuinely didn't expect that from you.
Hopefully you'll just explain here.
Hopefully you'll just explain here.
-
1
- Show all
It's difficult to determine which is the best plan which yields limited civilian casualties. However, I can unequivocally state obliterating civilians (many of which are children) with airstrikes is not on my list of potential strategies. Then again, using nuclear atomic bombs wouldn't have been my plan at the end of WWII after Germany already surrendered, but many here think it was the best choice.
If you believe this, can you admit and say explicitly, "It is better to airstrike Hamas terrorists even though we know it will end up killing more innocent Palestinian civilians rather than choosing an alternative plan which discriminately target Hamas terrorists and minimizes Palestinian civilians."?
One side says it doesn't matter, bomb them in hopes you get the Hamas terrorists and if you kill Palestinian civilians, they are just "collateral damage".
To answer your question, it's difficult to do remotely. Bombs don't know if someone is a Hamas terrorist or if it's a husband and wife covering their children in a desperate attempt to protect them. Humans and drones would be better at determining if someone is an armed terrorists or just an unarmed father trying to protect his family. Humans can use physical force a lot more discriminately than airstrikes on densely populated civilian neighborhoods.
To answer your question, it's difficult to do remotely. Bombs don't know if someone is a Hamas terrorist or if it's a husband and wife covering their children in a desperate attempt to protect them. Humans and drones would be better at determining if someone is an armed terrorists or just an unarmed father trying to protect his family. Humans can use physical force a lot more discriminately than airstrikes on densely populated civilian neighborhoods.
