Lies 
; Claims No Christians Present in Gaza, Justifies Slaughtering Children and 
https://x.com/lbc/status/1737015437966086404
'There are no churches in Gaza…’
— LBC (@LBC) December 19, 2023
Deputy Mayor of Jerusalem Fleur Hassan-Nahoum responds to reports the IDF have targeted a Catholic Church in Gaza. pic.twitter.com/8yuyzUnAoy
Church? There are no Churches in Gaza so I don't know where the report is talking about” “There are no Christians in Gaza….”. “Well I don't know… I didn't see the report, I don't know”.
https://x.com/BaderRifat/status/1736837819589410891
Reminder to all you 
that they'd be happy to kill you too if you ever left the gooncave in your parent's basement.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Psycho modern state logic, and ancient tribal warfare logic, do not supercede the teachings of Christ. You are asking Jews to not convert to Christianity, because if they did they would have to follow the teachings of Christ, which necessarily preclude a mass bombing campaign that primarily kills women and children, and from which there is no safe place to escape.
The human shield argument is psycho state logic. When you act, you must consider the primary consequences of your actions. If a murder suspect runs into a kindergarten, you are not free to blow up the kindergarten. The morality cannot change just because the kindergarteners are not "your people."
Consider also that Israel's actions are diametrically opposed to the stated goal of freeing the hostages. "Hamas targets" are exactly where the hostages are! If they cared even about their own people they would be responding with troops on the ground who are (at least possibly) able to distinguish combatants from civilians from their own captive citizens (of course, even when Israel does this they shoot their own citizens). Israel's response is simply meant to punish a population they see as collectively guilty. It is the very same logic that Hamas followed in the original attack.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah Christian countries throughout history are famous for not killing and just not responding if someone wants to kill them, just like Jesus intended.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Few "Christian" political leaders follow Christ. Not a new criticism. Mass bombing is in fact a pretty new sort of crime, though. Killing prior to the 20th century was generally done with killing intent by individual people against individual people they could see. There was always the possibility for mercy, you could always stay your hand, you could always draw a distinction between an enemy soldier and a baby. Bombing strips away even that.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Neighbour mass starvation, burning and hurling diseased corpses into enemy cities is a tradition as old as time.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Sorry didn't realize you were a different dude than the first guy I was arguing with. Are you a Christian? If so, do you support or oppose such tactics? Why?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Also, if Christians had maintained your high "moral" standards, there would be no Christianity today. Which now that they've become less Christian, ironically they actually do sort of maintain these standards and now soon enough Europe might be Muslim.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Christianity wins by subverting societies, not conquering them. We're supposed to work like people think the Jews do.
Prior to the modern state of Israel, Jews survived almost 2000 years without ever being a majority or wielding state power, and they don't even proselytize. I think we'd have survived.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah, you'd have "survived" like the Middle Eastern Christians of today. Were you very successful at subverting those societies or did you spend one and a half millennia being massacred, r*ped and extorted while dwindling from a n overwhelming majority to a tiny minority?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Christianity obviously did not come to prominence in the Roman Empire by violently conquering it, and current historiography emphasizes the bottom-up aspect of its growth (ie. it did not "win" just because of a few converts who forced it on the masses by state power; growth rates were broadly stable over time).
The difficulties came after: can you remain just and righteous after "winning"? History suggests this is much harder.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I'm a secularcel. These tactics are inherently part of war. War is bad, yes. "Civilized wars" are by far the exception to the norm and sometimes happen between Europeans in small wars with limited stakes for the past ~300 years. Wars are still unfortunately necessary, such as when, just for example, the enemy does 12th century Mongol style raids on your civilian population.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Your pulitzer's in the mail
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context