Its very simple There is no serious International law of war that Israel is being questioned on... Before they attack drop pamphlets, make phone calls, send texts and email warning the citizens where they are bombing and what time... Hamas does not, They put live babies in ovens
Next time when someone asks you if you approve of assault rifle ownership, be sure to clearly tell them about your favorite sandwich. Don't hold back.
Another speech. Who is defending Hamas here? Nobody Funny how you have to keep bringing up a terrorist organization to defend Israel's actions. Because you have no answers when it comes to mass murder of children while you call yourself 'pro life'
Why cant you understand. I am against the misuse and illegal use of all weapons Some one with comprehension would understand that to mean the legality of guns should be about the use and not the ownership If you understand my answer then you just reached grade 5 in reading comprehension.
This is the first line from my answer There is no serious violation of International law of war that Israel is being questioned on...
That’s a non-statement if anyone has ever been made. I’m against the misuse of nuclear weapons so they should be legal.
Your answer is irrelevant, nobody asked your opinion on international law. Thousands of children are dead from constant bombing of basically a land locked prison and you can't even bring yourself to say anything about it as a pro life absolutist other than legalese that no one asked for.
So let's outline a equivalent scenario. Mexico is taken over by a cartel terrorist gang as their government. The terrorists start launching rockets over the U.S border killing civilians in the U.S. Then one day the terrorists in Mexico invade the U.S., brutally kill thousands of our civilians and kidnap hundreds as hostages who are dragged back to Mexico. Do you really think the U.S. military under direction of our government would not invade Mexico to stop the terrorism, end the rocket launches and attempt to get our citizens back? Let's say the terrorists were using Mexican civilians as human shields and not allowing them to leave the conflict area. Do you really think this would cause the U.S. to re-think militarily invading Mexico to end the threat in the least bit? Even if there were Mexican civilian casualties? We would do our best to minimize them but it would not change to focus to finish the job of completely eliminating the terrorists in Mexico.