Comments by "" (@bdinaz) on "Israel ‘can’t use the excuse of fighters to starve civilians’: Kenneth Roth" video.

Replies being censored if they don't fit the party line.
2
Replies defending the west are being censored.
1
AL Jazeera is censoring replies.
1
@user-kb1rl5qy1k Hamas stopped wearing their snazzy green uniforms on 7 October. Now they wear civilian clothes while firing RPGs. When they die they are counted as civilians.
1
@user-kb1rl5qy1k Since the Hammy sstopped wearing their uniforms and started fighting in Civilian clothes, what did they THINK was going to happen?
1
@Badgerbeard Have the Hammys come out in the open in uniform to fight, Declare Rafah and Khan Yunis as open cities. And the civilian deaths will stop. But you won't be willing to see the Hammys get ground up. So it sadly continues.
1
@Badgerbeard occupation? Well, the IDF moved into Gaza after an illegal invasion of southern Isreal on 7 October. Thats called war.
1
@Badgerbeard What international law is that? Are you familiar with the Law of Land Warfare?
1
@Badgerbeard Please find me the portion of the LoLW that indicates occupation in time of war is illegal.
1
@luizantoniodossantosdossan4839 Hate to break it to you, but the UN does not have the power to pass anything more than resolutions. It is a political organization. Can the UN pass a law that says the US must turn over Arizona to Mexico on spite of the Gadsden Purchase at the treaty of messilla?
1
@luizantoniodossantosdossan4839 Would you have preferred the UK to have turned all of TransJordan to the Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan in 1948?
1
@luizantoniodossantosdossan4839 My reply explaining the UN is a political rather than legal organization and is limited to passing non binding resolutions, keeps getting censored.
1
@luizantoniodossantosdossan4839 which of two previous posts?
1
You kill 31 of us on 7 October and we are supposed to reward you?
1
@luizantoniodossantosdossan4839 Please justify the use of the term Genocide. In WWII the US killed 3.17 million Japanese. Was that a Genocide?
1
@aceheart5828 Oh good the leftists have arrived with their Soviets inspired "the Japanese were gonna surrender anyway" argument. Hate to break it to you, but the japanese i have talked to of the appropriate age were planning to attack the US landing beaches with everything to include school children. The intent was to cause so many US casualties that the US will to fight would be broken. Sound familiar? When it became obvious that we could simply lay back and pummel at will with no appreciable loss- that's what caused them to give in. Bt the way, massive losses are not an indicator of Genocide.
1
@aceheart5828 Wait■ Lately the Pally enthusiasts have been saying that all of the Israeli civilian casualties on 7 October were caused by the IDF. And that the Hammys were just innocent bystanders. Then, the next argument is that all of the casualties of the hostages were not caused by the Hammys, but rather caused by some peculiar IDF bloodlust to kill the hostages, presumably for the infraction of being taken hostage in the first place. Now you are saying that the HaMmys killed the six hostages as a reprisal for the killings? How does any of this make any sense...?
1
@aceheart5828 wait■ Lately the Pally enthusiasts have been saying that all of the Israeli civilian casualties on 7 October were caused by the IDF. And that the Hammys were just innocent bystanders. Then, the next argument is that all of the casualties of the hostages were not caused by the Hammys, but rather caused by some peculiar IDF bloodlust to kill the hostages, presumably for the infraction of being taken hostage in the first place. Now you are saying that the HMmys killed the six hostages as a reprisal for the killings? How does any of this make any sense.
1
@aceheart5828 Sadly I am being censored on this. Will break into numbered paragraphs to see what offends the censored.
1
@aceheart5828 1.) Good to see the leftists have arrived with their Soviet inspired "the Japanese were going to surrender because the Mighty Red Army claim.
1
@aceheart5828 2.) If you talk to Japanese of the appropriate Ge they will tell you the war council was planning to attack the US landings with eveything up to and including children armed with sticks.
1
@aceheart5828 3.) The goal was to cause so many US casualties, the weak willed US would surrender.
1
@aceheart5828 4.( what broke the Japanese was that the US could simply lay back and paste the Empire at will with no appreciable losses.
1
@aceheart5828 5.) Oh, and massive losses in and of themselves are not a genocide indicator
1
@aceheart5828 paragraphs 1& 2 keep getting censored for stating the historical fact that the notion the Japanese nation was willing to surrender pre-atom bomb is revisionist history. This was presented largely by the sovs to provide a greater justification for their efforts on Manchuria than the actually deserved.
1
@aceheart5828 some how the censorship is worse on MEE and AL Jazeera. I never seem to get censored on western pages for same traffic.
1
@aceheart5828 The ICJ and ICC are political entities and provide politically influenced decisions. As a retired professional soldier I fall back on the Law of Land Warfare, particularly the US/NATO version FM 27-10. It is a guide to what and what is not legal in war time. Few people have actually read it other than professional soldiers and it is not open to the whims and vaguerries of the political winds as the ICJ and ICC are.
1
@aceheart5828 i have been trying to post paragraphs 1 and 2 explaing the revisionist history regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but no matter how I do so it gets censored.
1
 @AnimalsLiberationNow When the Hoots sink a US Merchant ship, what will Jill Stein do?
1