Some quotes from another Gaza thread:
Thoughts?
me said:
Revmitchell said:
me said:
Thoughts?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Proportionality and collateral damage - Gaza compared to 'Trouble' Northern Ireland
- Thread starter Matt Black
- Start date
- Status
Terrorists should never be capitulated to or bargained with. The Palestinians voted for and support Hamas. They are making their own bed.
...as did many Catholics of Northern Ireland, with financial support from Irish-Ameircans. Still want to bomb them?
During the war, England had troops along the Welsh shores to dfend against Ireland who was refueling German submarines. We still didn't attack them, but we were hot on the trigger, I will tell you.
The IRA were killing innocents almost daily at London bus stops and markets up to a couple of years ago. We sent an army to Northern Ireland, but they were even reluctant to shoot, and they were that at the request of Northern Ireland.
Still, none of these compare to the actions of the Muslims against Israel. Look how all the Arab nations attacked Israel a few years ago, but Israel proved a tough customer.
I still say the wrong thing was done when Hussein was put to death. He may have been cruel, but he did control the Middle East.
I have more use for a dog's bark than I have for the word of Hamas.
Cheers,
Jim
The IRA were killing innocents almost daily at London bus stops and markets up to a couple of years ago. We sent an army to Northern Ireland, but they were even reluctant to shoot, and they were that at the request of Northern Ireland.
Still, none of these compare to the actions of the Muslims against Israel. Look how all the Arab nations attacked Israel a few years ago, but Israel proved a tough customer.
I still say the wrong thing was done when Hussein was put to death. He may have been cruel, but he did control the Middle East.
I have more use for a dog's bark than I have for the word of Hamas.
Cheers,
Jim
Matt Black said:
Did those Catholics specifically target women and children? Did they decree that anyone proselytizing Catholics, or desiring to leave Catholicism be killed?
To turn this around: What if the use of innocent humans as shields had not been effective? What if they were killed as a matter of course from the implementation of that tactic? Would it still be used today? Only by people so corrupt and without God as we now see in these unrepentant terrorists today....IMO
Matt Black said:
Yes, they did. The Warrington bombing, for example, where the IRA exploded a bomb in a crowded shopping mall, killed a nine-year old boy, Tim Parry. I can give you many other examples,hillclimber1 said:
No, but equivalentally they would murder those from the Nationalist community whom they deemed had collaborated with the British eg: Catholic judges, one of whom was murdered as he left Mass.
Hmmm...jury's out of that one ATM, but in any event neither did we target innocents during the 'Troubles' - what's your point?hillclimber1 said:
Code:
I think the comparison between the war in Gaza in Northern Ireland is a poor one. The IRA were not representative of any government. The people of Ireland (South) never voted the IRA in, and even in the North they were a minority at the polling booths whilst their campaign was operative. The people of Gaza elected Hamas. As such, rocket launches by a democratically elected government must be deemed acts of war and terror and must be countered. Personally, I do not believe the Israelis deliberately target civilians in schools or hospitals, and whilst I appreciate innocent people are caught up in this thing, sadly that is the nature of war, and Hamas must be blamed for bringing it upon them.
This video is well worth a look: http://fun.mivzakon.co.il/flash/video/2673/26 73.html
This video is well worth a look: http://fun.mivzakon.co.il/flash/video/2673/26 73.html
hillclimber1 said:
Absolutely, they did, time and again. (google Abercorn bombing, La Mon house bombing, or bloody Friday and see). But it is mistaken to designate their campaign as a "Catholic" one. The troubles in Northern Ireland, whilst conveniently dividing along religious lines, was about politics and national identity, not religion.
My point was that we are being told that the Israeli's are as despicable in their moral character as these radical Muslims, and I want to refute that...
I am obviously ignorant of the IRA and Catholics wars, and thus should have stayed out of it.... Sorry about that...
But again, I'm tired of the world condemning Israel for defending itself...
I am obviously ignorant of the IRA and Catholics wars, and thus should have stayed out of it.... Sorry about that...
But again, I'm tired of the world condemning Israel for defending itself...
I don't object to Israel defending herself; this thread is about the methodology of that defence.
Maybe at the macro (Ulster-wide) level but my point is more applicable at the more micro (community) level eg: in the 70s, most of the inhabitants of Derry's Bogside and Creggan housing estates (that's Housing Projects for those on the other side of the Pond) at least tacitly if not actively supported the IRA, certainly after Bloody Sunday, and voted Sinn Fein. I ask again: should the RAF have carpet bombed the Bogside and Creggan, and should the British army have sent in tanks to 'pacify' those neighbourhoods?Ulsterman said:
hillclimber1 said:
Which no comparison can be made to the conflict between Idrael and Hamas.
The difference is that the IRA killled more people than Hamas has and the British killed fewer IRA members and civilian 'collaterals' than Israel has. So, you're right re the lack of similarity, but not I expect in the way you want to be. It's that very lack of similarity which I am highlighting in this thread.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Matt Black said:
If rocket launchers were being fired from the Bogside and Creggan than yes, full scale attacks should have been launched to destroy the rocket launchers. The the bogsiders had been foolish enough to let civilians suffer through these attacks then that would have been their choice and their fault.
Why the difference between rocket launchers and explosive devices? And I think you know that the issues in the Bogside were not as clear-cut as to justify the level of civilian casualties envisaged.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Matt Black said:
The Bogside was not nearly as clear cut of a military target as the rocket launchers in Gaza, so no - this type of military action would not have been justified. That is my point. These are two separate scenarios.
In Gaza there are clear military targets which pose a threat to Israel. The IRA threat was much more widespread through out the whole if the island of Ireland. The British military did not have these clear cut targets.
But if they had?
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Fair question.
However there is still a major difference. The British militray and the RUC had free regin in Derry. They did not need to invade the city because they already controlled it. Israel do not have that same access to Gaza.
To make this applicable you would have to have an elected IRA governement in Eire and attacks being made across the border into Northern Ireland. In that kind of situation were in existance I think the UK would have had to consider serious retaliation such as Israel is taking now.
Lets say for example that it is 1978. Sinn Fein are in government in Dublin with the backing of the IRA. There is a known bomb factory in Cavan and IRA members have been sneaking across the border to use these bombs on Northern Irish targets. The Dublin government and the residents of Cavan have been warned over and over again that action will be taken. The Dublin Sinn Fein government do nothing to stop the bomb making.
Would it be right to fire on Cavan? I think a case could be made that is would be justifiable.
However there is still a major difference. The British militray and the RUC had free regin in Derry. They did not need to invade the city because they already controlled it. Israel do not have that same access to Gaza.
To make this applicable you would have to have an elected IRA governement in Eire and attacks being made across the border into Northern Ireland. In that kind of situation were in existance I think the UK would have had to consider serious retaliation such as Israel is taking now.
Lets say for example that it is 1978. Sinn Fein are in government in Dublin with the backing of the IRA. There is a known bomb factory in Cavan and IRA members have been sneaking across the border to use these bombs on Northern Irish targets. The Dublin government and the residents of Cavan have been warned over and over again that action will be taken. The Dublin Sinn Fein government do nothing to stop the bomb making.
Would it be right to fire on Cavan? I think a case could be made that is would be justifiable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Your point is well-taken, but surely that sort of thing is a job for Special Forces? I think we would have sent in an SAS raid, after intelligence gathering, rather than get the RAF to launch air strikes Cavan town and send in the tanks thereafter, which sounds to me like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - back to proportionality again: why did Israel not (initially at least) use the Sayeret Matkal?
Also, your analogy would have been more accurate had the British government also imposed a blockade on a Sinn Fein-led Eire...which it wouldn't have done.
Also, your analogy would have been more accurate had the British government also imposed a blockade on a Sinn Fein-led Eire...which it wouldn't have done.
- Status