Messages

I've not seen anyone giving blind support to Hamas, but in keeping with your bad faith comments.

Would you call children that are killed in war as non combatants

of course, why would anyone consider them combatants...

I haven't seen that term used for the deaths in Gaza, its generally women and children killed that has been used

true, in gaza if you are male and non combatant you don't really count. In Israel there is conscription and more Female IDF so speaking in women and children isn't as clear.

So just use it for Israeli deaths as they have conscription? If you are an unarmed woman or child from any side you are still a woman or child.

I'm an ends doesn't justify the means type person, one loss of life is one too many. So many senseless deaths here over the years hasn't really got us any further, the shift in population will, and won't cause any deaths

I've no idea how they can solve the Gaza situation as Israel won't be going anywhere and the Palestinians will rebuild and have another generation of people that have been tortured/killed and locked up, mad cycle.

Unless there is a moderate government in Israel then this won't even be fixed in our lifetime

Milltown I know you are a let the palestinans continue to suffer under their occupation until the occupier decides otherwise guy. the west donw nothing for 75 years only arm and watch on as Israel every few years 'mows the lawn'... I support international  Law ans it allows resistence and that threshold for armed resistence is clearly been met for Palestinans to rise up against their oppressor and occupier and I fully support that. ( within international law)

if you are a non combatant you are a civilian etc. which would include men, women and children. As stated if you provide women and children for the Israeli dead many will be combantants, the Israeli dead is usually provided as a total including both, Palestinians are usually provided as women and children and a total number.

I think in terms of using sticks and stones in comparison to what Israel has to use against Palestine then you can uprise to the cows come home there will be only one outcome.

Nothing will be resolved unless they sit around a table, create the conditions for that and that's the best outcome 75 years will be 150 years and so on if they do not sit and discuss

I know you are they type of guy that sits at home on a computer type of guy and wave a flag maybe not use Israeli products but that won't stop non combatants from being obliterated 

I am that guy and more and understand how little impact it has but at least I fully support all legal efforts for palestinains while you sit at home on your computer happy for them to die slowing, and stupidly not know that palestinans have numerous times sat at those tables and been offered nothing and somehow speak to me as if you have some moral superiority...

Hamas are using their own civilians as human shields

They are as just much to blame for civilian deaths as the Israelis

So it's nothing to do with the big fúcking bombs the IDF are dropping on built up areas and even refugee camps?

Are Hamas also to blame for the Palestinians being killed on the West Bank?

Sweet Jesus!

So if the Hamas operatives who perpetrated the atrocities on 10/07 are hiding out in a refugee camp are they not responsible for the inevitable bombardment that's sure to follow?

Yeh they are hiding in refugee camps, under hospitals and in churches. So if those are blown up then its at least partially Hamas's fault right - like no where should be safe. Tell me, if a Hamas militant is being treated in hospital, is it his fault if the hospital is bombed, are casualties on both sides entitled to medical treatment? Would you be ok with the Brits bombing the Falls road with hi-tech weapons from the sky during the troubles too. You can spot the man who listens to Fox news all day a mile away.

These equivalences are mad. Which event during the Troubles would you say compares to what happened on October 7th?

I've not seen anyone giving blind support to Hamas, but in keeping with your bad faith comments.

Would you call children that are killed in war as non combatants

of course, why would anyone consider them combatants...

I haven't seen that term used for the deaths in Gaza, its generally women and children killed that has been used

true, in gaza if you are male and non combatant you don't really count. In Israel there is conscription and more Female IDF so speaking in women and children isn't as clear.

So just use it for Israeli deaths as they have conscription? If you are an unarmed woman or child from any side you are still a woman or child.

I'm an ends doesn't justify the means type person, one loss of life is one too many. So many senseless deaths here over the years hasn't really got us any further, the shift in population will, and won't cause any deaths

I've no idea how they can solve the Gaza situation as Israel won't be going anywhere and the Palestinians will rebuild and have another generation of people that have been tortured/killed and locked up, mad cycle.

Unless there is a moderate government in Israel then this won't even be fixed in our lifetime

Milltown I know you are a let the palestinans continue to suffer under their occupation until the occupier decides otherwise guy. the west donw nothing for 75 years only arm and watch on as Israel every few years 'mows the lawn'... I support international  Law ans it allows resistence and that threshold for armed resistence is clearly been met for Palestinans to rise up against their oppressor and occupier and I fully support that. ( within international law)

if you are a non combatant you are a civilian etc. which would include men, women and children. As stated if you provide women and children for the Israeli dead many will be combantants, the Israeli dead is usually provided as a total including both, Palestinians are usually provided as women and children and a total number.

I think in terms of using sticks and stones in comparison to what Israel has to use against Palestine then you can uprise to the cows come home there will be only one outcome.

Nothing will be resolved unless they sit around a table, create the conditions for that and that's the best outcome 75 years will be 150 years and so on if they do not sit and discuss

I know you are they type of guy that sits at home on a computer type of guy and wave a flag maybe not use Israeli products but that won't stop non combatants from being obliterated 

I've not seen anyone giving blind support to Hamas, but in keeping with your bad faith comments.

Would you call children that are killed in war as non combatants

of course, why would anyone consider them combatants...

I haven't seen that term used for the deaths in Gaza, its generally women and children killed that has been used

true, in gaza if you are male and non combatant you don't really count. In Israel there is conscription and more Female IDF so speaking in women and children isn't as clear.

So just use it for Israeli deaths as they have conscription? If you are an unarmed woman or child from any side you are still a woman or child.

I'm an ends doesn't justify the means type person, one loss of life is one too many. So many senseless deaths here over the years hasn't really got us any further, the shift in population will, and won't cause any deaths

I've no idea how they can solve the Gaza situation as Israel won't be going anywhere and the Palestinians will rebuild and have another generation of people that have been tortured/killed and locked up, mad cycle.

Unless there is a moderate government in Israel then this won't even be fixed in our lifetime

Milltown I know you are a let the palestinans continue to suffer under their occupation until the occupier decides otherwise guy. the west donw nothing for 75 years only arm and watch on as Israel every few years 'mows the lawn'... I support international  Law ans it allows resistence and that threshold for armed resistence is clearly been met for Palestinans to rise up against their oppressor and occupier and I fully support that. ( within international law)

if you are a non combatant you are a civilian etc. which would include men, women and children. As stated if you provide women and children for the Israeli dead many will be combantants, the Israeli dead is usually provided as a total including both, Palestinians are usually provided as women and children and a total number.

I think in terms of using sticks and stones in comparison to what Israel has to use against Palestine then you can uprise to the cows come home there will be only one outcome.

Nothing will be resolved unless they sit around a table, create the conditions for that and that's the best outcome 75 years will be 150 years and so on if they do not sit and discuss

I know you are they type of guy that sits at home on a computer type of guy and wave a flag maybe not use Israeli products but that won't stop non combatants from being obliterated 

Anyone accessing this site on a phone (and most other devices) is almost guaranteed to be using Israeli developed technology somewhere along the line.

Western standards laid bare for all to see:

I'm not sure the term "Western" is appropriate, every west European country and Canada, Australia and New Zealand support the ICC.

The USA don't.

Then the post should have referred to the USA and not to "Western".

While your post shouldn't have made the claim that "every western country" supports the ICC.

The point I was making is that the "western" world were up and arms and rightly so when Russia invaded Ukraine, sanctions, diplomats getting banned etc etc, but when Israel starts slaughtering the Palestinians on a scale that would make Pol Pot blush, there's none of the same concern.

Is there any nuance at all between the two conflicts or do you reckon they're directly comparable?

The direct comparison is that innocent women and children are being killed in both.

what other nuance do you need?

So given that innocent women and children were killed in the Second World War, it must therefore be directly comparable to the conflict in Gaza?

Can you see the drawbacks of using this kind of reasoning?

And some of those who did such things in WW2 ended up at the Nuremberg trials...

Heck, even the Brits showed a bit of shame for what Bomber Harris did in Dresden but he didn't see jail time when he should have.

So you're saying you genuinely believe that the two conflicts are directly comparable and any nuances can be dismissed? I'm not sure if you're being deliberately disingenuous or just ignorant here.

Western standards laid bare for all to see:

I'm not sure the term "Western" is appropriate, every west European country and Canada, Australia and New Zealand support the ICC.

The USA don't.

Then the post should have referred to the USA and not to "Western".

While your post shouldn't have made the claim that "every western country" supports the ICC.

The point I was making is that the "western" world were up and arms and rightly so when Russia invaded Ukraine, sanctions, diplomats getting banned etc etc, but when Israel starts slaughtering the Palestinians on a scale that would make Pol Pot blush, there's none of the same concern.

Is there any nuance at all between the two conflicts or do you reckon they're directly comparable?

The direct comparison is that innocent women and children are being killed in both.

what other nuance do you need?

So given that innocent women and children were killed in the Second World War, it must therefore be directly comparable to the conflict in Gaza?

Can you see the drawbacks of using this kind of reasoning?

Western standards laid bare for all to see:

I'm not sure the term "Western" is appropriate, every west European country and Canada, Australia and New Zealand support the ICC.

The USA don't.

Then the post should have referred to the USA and not to "Western".

While your post shouldn't have made the claim that "every western country" supports the ICC.

The point I was making is that the "western" world were up and arms and rightly so when Russia invaded Ukraine, sanctions, diplomats getting banned etc etc, but when Israel starts slaughtering the Palestinians on a scale that would make Pol Pot blush, there's none of the same concern.

Is there any nuance at all between the two conflicts or do you reckon they're directly comparable?

Donegal must not be a very Irish nationalist people (as shown in my link) Now you can understand why I would never support an ROI county in football. Maybe they can go play in Connaught.

https://ibb.co/xHtQMrC

"Connaught"? What's that?

I wonder did they ever manage to drag McBrearty off the stand, wittering on for a long time.
Cringey stuff from Niblock too chuckling every time McGuinness did a fist pump.

It wouldn't surprise me if Tyrone beat Donegal in 2 weeks. No great shakes.

Also that is a very posh voice of Thomas Kane for a South Derry person.

Didn't look like they needed to be any great shakes to beat Tyrone the first time around to be honest

Celtic park seems to be lucky for Donegal, maybe because of the towns Tyrconnell history. I notice there is a street down the road from it called Tyrconnell street.

I always thought that Tir Connail was Donegal but not including the Inis Eoghain peninsula (which includes Derry City) Tir Connail & Inis Eoghain combined create Contae Dún na nGall. Is this correct??

It's not correct.

Tír Chonaill from about 1200 (when it split from Tír Eoghain) onwards did include Inishowen.

Any of you see Declan Bogues iinterview on OTB?

McGuinness still holds a grudge with him and wouldn't speak to journalists at the Ulster launch unless he left.

12 years ago and still holding a grudge he doesnt sway from his principles McGuinness.

That's ridiculous. All he did was interview a guy and write a book. McGuinness would want to wise up, its bad enough he will be remembered as the guy who destroyed football for a decade but does he want to be remembered as a bitter dick too?

Most people (who don't exclusively breath through their mouth) would probably explain to you that McGuinness didn't actually force the rest of the counties to play in any particular way, that was completely up to them.

I'd say you exclusively breath through your mouth.

Did this sound better in your head?

Any of you see Declan Bogues iinterview on OTB?

McGuinness still holds a grudge with him and wouldn't speak to journalists at the Ulster launch unless he left.

12 years ago and still holding a grudge he doesnt sway from his principles McGuinness.

That's ridiculous. All he did was interview a guy and write a book. McGuinness would want to wise up, its bad enough he will be remembered as the guy who destroyed football for a decade but does he want to be remembered as a bitter dick too?

Most people (who don't exclusively breath through their mouth) would probably explain to you that McGuinness didn't actually force the rest of the counties to play in any particular way, that was completely up to them.

Who were Donegal missing?

Armagh fans seemed to be treating that like it was an All-Ireland

NFL Division 1 top scorers from play per Gaelic Statsman on twitter

I don't get this obsession from pundits/commentators about scores from play. They all count the same.

Shane Mc Guigan leads the top scoring charts in division 1 by a clear 7 points (on 1-30).

How many from play?

Donegal must have missed five chances to win that game in the last 10 minutes

Meanwhile

Speaking on the RTÉ GAA podcast, former Fermanagh defender Ryan McCusker believes that Kevin McStay may be overly loyal to some of the more experienced players in his Mayo squad

https://twitter.com/RTEgaa/status/1760919663393878461

Just a couple more years trying Aidan O'Shea at FF. It'll come good eventually.