Comments by "" (@colby25) on "Triggernometry" channel.

@sombra1111 Wikipedia states facts thats why its takes on the conflict may well fall in israels favour. Since when has the united nations, made up of many muslim/arab nations snd its allies anyway, been representative of humanity?
2
@sombra1111 You tell me as you seemingly support hamas here. Colateral damage/civilian casualties in times of conflict have been happening ever since human life began. Its alway the civilians who suffer the most in wartime. Thats why civilised people try their utmost to avoid wars. So who started this one? On a nation that has already repelled previously 3 wars/invasions declared on it. Which might explain some of its harsh responses, at times, to any threats on its existance or civilians.
2
@sombra1111 Maybe if hamas hadnt suicide bombed israeli civilians for several years then the need for checkpoints, walls, fences and tight security might have been averted. So hamas turned to continually firing rockets indiscriminately instead. Israel then responded to that with the iron dome. So then hamas upped their terror to full on invasion with ethnic cleansing. So thats suicide bombings, indiscriminately fired rockets and ethnic cleansing. All targetting civilians. All despicable war cimes/crimes against humanity. So not surprisingly israel responded to all of the above, as they are allowed to by international law,.Its called national security or the protection of its own citizens. Proportionality of the targetted military response is the only thing that israel has to answer for. And that is very debatable as has been seen in the past with fallujah and putin with grozny, aleppo and mariupol. Plus the NATO bombing in former yugoslavia. The geneva convention also mentions the parties involved must attempt to warn and prevent civilian casualties as much as possible. Israel has been warning and leafletting palestinians in gaza for 3 weeks now to move south of the wadi gaza. Plus israel are sacrificing their own soldiers in a ground invasion to prevent civilian losses. None of this was done in the earier conflict resolutions i mentioned above. The thing that i really want to know though, is what is the palestinian end game here supposed to be? When hamas charter clearly states this....Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea” — i.e., the annihilation of Israel. The charter says: “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them.” So no negotiation and 2 state solution. So please describe to me your alternative? Also please describe to me why i, who supports a 2 state solution, should support that end game method?
1